Velocity Reviews

Velocity Reviews (http://www.velocityreviews.com/forums/index.php)
-   HTML (http://www.velocityreviews.com/forums/f31-html.html)
-   -   need an advice ( new site ) (http://www.velocityreviews.com/forums/t162484-need-an-advice-new-site.html)

uriel@spreha.net 08-17-2005 01:04 PM

need an advice ( new site )
 
First I would like you to check the site I need help with...

its on Croatian, but since I am concerned with the design that should
not be a problem :)

link: www.spreha.net


now.... the site is about nightlife in my city, and some topics for
young people... nothing fancy :)

my question is... is the design a bit to static or boring?

i was thinking, maybe it is a bit too static and that I should make
some changes...

would a width of 1024 pixels be to much? ( 800 now) I want to get some
space for one column on the right, so I can put some more stuff.
i was also thinking to put some suptile flash animation in it to make
it a bit less static. For example, animate the logo to burn (the
burning smiley with horns :) ).

Thanks in advance to anyone who helps.


Barbara de Zoete 08-17-2005 01:26 PM

Re: need an advice ( new site )
 
On 17 Aug 2005 06:04:12 -0700, <uriel@spreha.net> wrote:

> <http://www.spreha.net/>


That page has some problems:

1. It is nearly a 100kB whithout the external images that is. Just the text and
markup. That is waaaaaayy too much, believe me. Anyone on dial-up could have
told you so.
2. It relies heavily on javascript. An increasingly large amount of people does
not have javascript active while browsing. One of the important visitors
whithout it is Google BTW.
3. It has a fixed width design. See
<http://www.google.com/search?q=fluid+OR+liquid+design>
4. It abused tables for lay out. See
<http://www.google.com/search?q=tablesless+design>
5. When opened whithout images, all the visitor gets to see it a viewport with
many images that don't mean a thing because there is no alt text. Presuming the
visitor waited for the entire large page to load, s/he has to scroll down to
find out what it's all about.
6. It also fails to valid, but with only two exceptions that's because of all
the missing als texts.

Now, deal with these first. Only then spice up the page a bit. If you do it the
other way around, chance is that any visitors you might attract in the mean
time, will never come back because of usability problems, accessibility problems
and too long a download time.

--
,-- --<--@ -- PretLetters: 'woest wyf', met vele interesses: ----------.
| weblog | http://home.wanadoo.nl/b.de.zoete/_private/weblog.html |
| webontwerp | http://home.wanadoo.nl/b.de.zoete/html/webontwerp.html |
|zweefvliegen | http://home.wanadoo.nl/b.de.zoete/html/vliegen.html |
`-------------------------------------------------- --<--@ ------------'


Stimp 08-17-2005 01:40 PM

Re: need an advice ( new site )
 
On Wed, 17 Aug 2005 Barbara de Zoete <b_de_zoete@hotmail.com> wrote:
> On 17 Aug 2005 06:04:12 -0700, <uriel@spreha.net> wrote:
>
>> <http://www.spreha.net/>

>
> That page has some problems:
>
> 3. It has a fixed width design. See
><http://www.google.com/search?q=fluid+OR+liquid+design>


What's wrong with fixed-width design?!?!

Plenty of good sites use it, and some designs will only work well with a
fixed width design
--

"I hear ma train a comin'
.... hear freedom comin"

Barbara de Zoete 08-17-2005 01:51 PM

Re: need an advice ( new site )
 
On 17 Aug 2005 13:40:10 GMT, Stimp <ren@spumco.com> wrote:

> On Wed, 17 Aug 2005 Barbara de Zoete <b_de_zoete@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>> 3. It has a fixed width design. See
>> <http://www.google.com/search?q=fluid+OR+liquid+design>

>
> What's wrong with fixed-width design?!?!
>
> Plenty of good sites use it, and some designs will only work well with a
> fixed width design


Did you check any of the links from the Google SERP that comes with the above
search query? Read them and you'll have your answer.







(Hint: my screen has a resolution of 1024x768, but the viewport I use to browse
in is 655x436. What does that do to your design you think? It means a large part
of your page is hidden and can only be reached by using the scrollbar for
horizontal scroll. I hate that. And with me, many others will not stay with your
pages unless that _have_ to. They'll find a page that adapts to their viewport
in stead of them having to adapt their viewport to yout page.)

--
,-- --<--@ -- PretLetters: 'woest wyf', met vele interesses: ----------.
| weblog | http://home.wanadoo.nl/b.de.zoete/_private/weblog.html |
| webontwerp | http://home.wanadoo.nl/b.de.zoete/html/webontwerp.html |
|zweefvliegen | http://home.wanadoo.nl/b.de.zoete/html/vliegen.html |
`-------------------------------------------------- --<--@ ------------'


Stimp 08-17-2005 02:54 PM

Re: need an advice ( new site )
 
On Wed, 17 Aug 2005 Barbara de Zoete <b_de_zoete@hotmail.com> wrote:
> On 17 Aug 2005 13:40:10 GMT, Stimp <ren@spumco.com> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 17 Aug 2005 Barbara de Zoete <b_de_zoete@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> 3. It has a fixed width design. See
>>> <http://www.google.com/search?q=fluid+OR+liquid+design>

>>
>> What's wrong with fixed-width design?!?!
>>
>> Plenty of good sites use it, and some designs will only work well with a
>> fixed width design

>
> Did you check any of the links from the Google SERP that comes with the above
> search query? Read them and you'll have your answer.
>
> (Hint: my screen has a resolution of 1024x768, but the viewport I use to browse
> in is 655x436. What does that do to your design you think? It means a large part
> of your page is hidden and can only be reached by using the scrollbar for
> horizontal scroll. I hate that. And with me, many others will not stay with your
> pages unless that _have_ to. They'll find a page that adapts to their viewport
> in stead of them having to adapt their viewport to yout page.)


to be honest, you're in a tiny minority of net users.

Most people can use the 800 x 600 layouts without a problem.
--

"I hear ma train a comin'
.... hear freedom comin"

Els 08-17-2005 02:59 PM

Re: need an advice ( new site )
 
Stimp wrote:

> On Wed, 17 Aug 2005 Barbara de Zoete <b_de_zoete@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> On 17 Aug 2005 13:40:10 GMT, Stimp <ren@spumco.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Wed, 17 Aug 2005 Barbara de Zoete <b_de_zoete@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> 3. It has a fixed width design. See
>>>> <http://www.google.com/search?q=fluid+OR+liquid+design>
>>>
>>> What's wrong with fixed-width design?!?!
>>>
>>> Plenty of good sites use it, and some designs will only work well with a
>>> fixed width design

>>
>> Did you check any of the links from the Google SERP that comes with the above
>> search query? Read them and you'll have your answer.
>>
>> (Hint: my screen has a resolution of 1024x768, but the viewport I use to browse
>> in is 655x436. What does that do to your design you think? It means a large part
>> of your page is hidden and can only be reached by using the scrollbar for
>> horizontal scroll. I hate that. And with me, many others will not stay with your
>> pages unless that _have_ to. They'll find a page that adapts to their viewport
>> in stead of them having to adapt their viewport to yout page.)

>
> to be honest, you're in a tiny minority of net users.
>
> Most people can use the 800 x 600 layouts without a problem.


How do you know that? Does your access log tell you how wide the
window is that people use to look at your site? Does it tell you what
it was that made the visitor give up after a short while? Do you have
a script on your page that magically tells you which of your visitors
went to visit a different site after spending a short time on yours?

Have you also thought about the people with bad eyesight who need to
increase the font size, and get really short sentences cause your page
doesn't wanna go wider than 800px, even though they have bought a
large 23inch monitor set to 1600x1200?

--
Els http://locusmeus.com/
Sonhos vem. Sonhos vo. O resto imperfeito.
- Renato Russo -
Now playing: Blondie - Atomic

Hywel Jenkins 08-17-2005 03:25 PM

Re: need an advice ( new site )
 
In article <opsvnl9sazx5vgts@zoete_b>, b_de_zoete@hotmail.com says...
> On 17 Aug 2005 06:04:12 -0700, <uriel@spreha.net> wrote:
>
> > <http://www.spreha.net/>

>
> That page has some problems:
>
> 1. It is nearly a 100kB whithout the external images that is. Just the text and
> markup. That is waaaaaayy too much, believe me. Anyone on dial-up could have
> told you so.


Hmmm. I suspect the creators of Doom 3 were thinking along similar
lines when they were working, too. "See, boyo, we've got to think about
shitty old PCs that are still running at 100mHz. Can't make use of
newer technologies because there's someone out in Back'o'beyond that
hasn't upgraded from Windows 3.0 yet."


> 2. It relies heavily on javascript. An increasingly large amount of people does
> not have javascript active while browsing.


Statistics? Lies? Evidence?


> One of the important visitors
> whithout it is Google BTW.


It uses JS for image rollovers. I tried it with Firefox, JS-disabled,
and it seemed fine.


> 4. It abused tables for lay out. See
> <http://www.google.com/search?q=tablesless+design>


Yawn.



--
Hywel
http://kibo.org.uk/

Hywel Jenkins 08-17-2005 03:31 PM

Re: need an advice ( new site )
 
In article <opsvnnfzujx5vgts@zoete_b>, b_de_zoete@hotmail.com says...
> On 17 Aug 2005 13:40:10 GMT, Stimp <ren@spumco.com> wrote:
>
> > On Wed, 17 Aug 2005 Barbara de Zoete <b_de_zoete@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> 3. It has a fixed width design. See
> >> <http://www.google.com/search?q=fluid+OR+liquid+design>

> >
> > What's wrong with fixed-width design?!?!
> >
> > Plenty of good sites use it, and some designs will only work well with a
> > fixed width design

>
> (Hint: my screen has a resolution of 1024x768, but the viewport I use to browse
> in is 655x436.


That means you can't see your own site:
http://home.wanadoo.nl/b.de.zoete/html/vliegen.html


> What does that do to your design you think?


Dunno. What does it do to yours?


--
Hywel
http://kibo.org.uk/

Barbara de Zoete 08-17-2005 03:42 PM

Re: need an advice ( new site )
 
On Wed, 17 Aug 2005 16:31:28 +0100, Hywel Jenkins <hywel.jenkins@gmail.com>
wrote:

> In article <opsvnnfzujx5vgts@zoete_b>, b_de_zoete@hotmail.com says...
>>
>> (Hint: my screen has a resolution of 1024x768, but the viewport I use to
>> browse in is 655x436.

>
> That means you can't see your own site:
> http://home.wanadoo.nl/b.de.zoete/html/vliegen.html
>


So? 'Sinning' against a good principle doesn't make the principle less good. It
just means I'm a 'sinner'.

--
,-- --<--@ -- PretLetters: 'woest wyf', met vele interesses: ----------.
| weblog | http://home.wanadoo.nl/b.de.zoete/_private/weblog.html |
| webontwerp | http://home.wanadoo.nl/b.de.zoete/html/webontwerp.html |
|zweefvliegen | http://home.wanadoo.nl/b.de.zoete/html/vliegen.html |
`-------------------------------------------------- --<--@ ------------'


Leif K-Brooks 08-17-2005 03:54 PM

Re: need an advice ( new site )
 
Stimp wrote:
> Most people can use the 800 x 600 layouts without a problem.


Do you think I have a 1280px-wide browser window because I want to have
480px of wasted space?


All times are GMT. The time now is 12:55 AM.

Powered by vBulletin®. Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
SEO by vBSEO ©2010, Crawlability, Inc.