Site Ratings & Reviews - need some critique for a site

Author

need some critique for a site

Tony Cortese

2004-08-25, 4:34 am

I would like to receive some constructive critique for this site in terms
of proper browser rendering, layout, user interface & navigation, clear
unambigious content, ease of use ... etc.

http://www.big-discount-hosting.com

Tony Cortese
--
Send camera phone photos straight to your online photo album plus a loaded
web hosting package for only $4.95/month - No other Fees
http://www.big-discount-hosting.com

The Doormouse

2004-08-25, 4:34 am

Tony Cortese <bigdiscounthosting@gmaildotcom> wrote:

> http://www.big-discount-hosting.com

100 errors, some severe.
http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=h...w.big-discount-
hosting.com%2F

FOR EXAMPLE:
end tag for element "TR" which is not open <- SEVERE ERROR

The visual design is every bit as bad due to the poor font choices and
misspellings.

You desperately need both a spellchecker and a page validator.

The Doormouse

--
The Doormouse cannot be reached by e-mail without her permission.

Tony Cortese

2004-08-25, 4:34 am

On Thu, 19 Aug 2004 14:01:37 -0400, Neal wrote:

> On Thu, 19 Aug 2004 10:45:38 -0700, Tony Cortese
> <bigdiscounthosting@gmaildotcom> wrote:
>
>
> The "html stuff" affects what the user sees, hmm? Some of the errors can
> cause your site to fail for some users. Some reduce usability. Really,
> start there. There's no sense in painting a broken chair. Fix the chair
> first, then we make it pretty. Function before form.
>
>
> Randomly chosen:
>
> .text-8 {
> FONT-SIZE: 8px;
> FONT-FAMILY: Verdana,Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;
> color: #000;
> }
>
> Never set font-size in pixels. Especially this small, which is illegible
> for many. IE cannot resize it. Therefore, people cannot read the content,
> and you lose business.
>
> Use % for font-size units, and think carefully about going below 100% as
> if the user has set their preference, that'd be it.

I'll experiment with that. Although using pixels is very common.

>
> Verdana is not a good choice for general text unless you use a large fnt
> size. What if Verdana is not available? Experiment: try uninstalling
> Verdana from your machine, or stripping it out of the CSS temporarily. See
> how it gets rendered with the second choice Arial.

That's why there's a font family with different fonts. I am not specifying
verdana only. The site looks very similar under arial and sans serif. I use
Windows so I don't have helvetica

>
> http://www.xs4all.nl/~sbpoley/webmatters/verdana.html for more detail on
> the unsuitability of Verdana for most WWW use.

That's debatable.

In general, the site will be improved but right now it's a new design and
wanted the site out and I am targetting the general population. Overtime,
the little stuff will come in, better usability for the visually impaired
and such.

It seems many people here are hung up in html detail only. I would like to
get feedback in user usability. Is it easy to navigate? Do you have a
frustrating experience..why?
If you're looking for a web hosting company or already a customer for a
host, does the content in my site offer the kind of information you need?
Is something missing?

Stuff that you read in Neilson's books and books like "don't make me think'
and the likes?
Maybe I am in the wrong NG, is this NG specific to html only? I know it's
under alt.html. Any recommendations to where "usability experts" hang out?
:)

Tony Cortese
--
Send camera phone photos straight to your online photo album plus a loaded
web hosting package for only $4.95/month - No other Fees
http://www.big-discount-hosting.com

Neal

2004-08-25, 4:34 am

On Thu, 19 Aug 2004 07:07:00 -0700, Tony Cortese
<bigdiscounthosting@gmaildotcom> wrote:

>
>
> I would like to receive some constructive critique for this site in terms
> of proper browser rendering, layout, user interface & navigation, clear
> unambigious content, ease of use ... etc.
>
> http://www.big-discount-hosting.com

See
http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=h...-hosting.com%2F
.. You need to fix 100 errors before anyone can meaningfully check your
code.

Tony Cortese

2004-08-25, 4:34 am

On Thu, 19 Aug 2004 14:45:47 GMT, The Doormouse wrote:

> Tony Cortese <bigdiscounthosting@gmaildotcom> wrote:
>
>
> 100 errors, some severe.
> http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=h...w.big-discount-
> hosting.com%2F
>
> FOR EXAMPLE:
> end tag for element "TR" which is not open <- SEVERE ERROR
>
> The visual design is every bit as bad due to the poor font choices and
> misspellings.
>
> You desperately need both a spellchecker and a page validator.

I am more interested in the user experience and what a human eye sees. I
will fix the html stuff later.

What's wrong with the font choices?
A spellchecker was used during the creation of each page. I will use a site
checker to see what other errors are.

--
Tony Cortese
--
Send camera phone photos straight to your online photo album plus a loaded
web hosting package for only $4.95/month - No other Fees
http://www.big-discount-hosting.com

Neal

2004-08-25, 4:34 am

On Thu, 19 Aug 2004 10:45:38 -0700, Tony Cortese
<bigdiscounthosting@gmaildotcom> wrote:

> I am more interested in the user experience and what a human eye sees. I
> will fix the html stuff later.

The "html stuff" affects what the user sees, hmm? Some of the errors can
cause your site to fail for some users. Some reduce usability. Really,
start there. There's no sense in painting a broken chair. Fix the chair
first, then we make it pretty. Function before form.

> What's wrong with the font choices?

Randomly chosen:

..text-8 {
FONT-SIZE: 8px;
FONT-FAMILY: Verdana,Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;
color: #000;
}

Never set font-size in pixels. Especially this small, which is illegible
for many. IE cannot resize it. Therefore, people cannot read the content,
and you lose business.

Use % for font-size units, and think carefully about going below 100% as
if the user has set their preference, that'd be it.

Verdana is not a good choice for general text unless you use a large fnt
size. What if Verdana is not available? Experiment: try uninstalling
Verdana from your machine, or stripping it out of the CSS temporarily. See
how it gets rendered with the second choice Arial.

http://www.xs4all.nl/~sbpoley/webmatters/verdana.html for more detail on
the unsuitability of Verdana for most WWW use.

Neal

2004-08-25, 4:34 am

On Thu, 19 Aug 2004 15:17:14 -0700, Tony Cortese
<bigdiscounthosting@gmaildotcom> wrote:

> On 19 Aug 2004 19:28:23 GMT, Els wrote:
>
>
> I guess it should have said I have missing quotes upfront. Thanks for the
> catch.

It can't tell you exactly what to do. It simply reports when it notices a
problem. The lack of quotes didn't cause an error until that point later
on.

While most validation errors are easy to figure out, this is an example of
where the thing that causes the error can't be seen by the validator.

Neal

2004-08-25, 4:34 am

On Thu, 19 Aug 2004 14:01:37 -0400, Neal <neal413@yahoo.com> wrote:

> On Thu, 19 Aug 2004 10:45:38 -0700, Tony Cortese
> <bigdiscounthosting@gmaildotcom> wrote:
>
>
> The "html stuff" affects what the user sees, hmm? Some of the errors can
> cause your site to fail for some users. Some reduce usability. Really,
> start there. There's no sense in painting a broken chair. Fix the chair
> first, then we make it pretty. Function before form.

I forget to add: you specifically requested advice on "proper browser
rendering". Invalid HTML will cause rendering problems, so it's always
wise to correct that first.

Tony Cortese

2004-08-25, 4:34 am

On Thu, 19 Aug 2004 14:04:35 -0400, Neal wrote:

> On Thu, 19 Aug 2004 14:01:37 -0400, Neal <neal413@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
> I forget to add: you specifically requested advice on "proper browser
> rendering". Invalid HTML will cause rendering problems, so it's always
> wise to correct that first.

I have tested the page under a few browsers and it worked fine (with the
broken html).
What you suggest is valid but I came across situations where a valid html
caused the page to render differently and sometimes very broken. Sometimes
you need to twist an html to make it render well on many browsers.
I would rather have some broken html that renders well everywhere than
valid html that doesn't render well everywhere.. in situations where it
can't be fixed other way.

--
Tony Cortese
--
Send camera phone photos straight to your online photo album plus a loaded
web hosting package for only $4.95/month - No other Fees
http://www.big-discount-hosting.com

Els

2004-08-25, 4:34 am

Tony Cortese wrote:

> On Thu, 19 Aug 2004 13:33:18 -0400, Neal wrote:
>
>
>
> Not every error it reports is valid. It reports errors on
> dynamic javascript simply because it's not "smart". Plus
> it's reporting errors that I can'd find like a </head> that
> has no corresponding opening tag. I have a <head> and a
> </head> so I am not sure what it's complaining about.
>
> Please ignore the html validation part. I mean I can find
> this stuff myself. There are tons of html validators out
> there.

Yep, but as you just stated, you don't understand the errors
it comes up with. Also, this group is called
alt.html.critique. This means it is to critique html. Not
design as such :-)

For instance the error of the meta that can't go there and the
<head> that had a missing tag: that's because you didn't put
quotes on the values of type and rel in the <link> element.

> I am really interested in the human experience. If you, as
> a human, is affected by an html error, yes then it's a
> problem.

Only a matter of time before your code starts to effect humans
;-)

--
Els http://locusmeus.com/
Sonhos vem. Sonhos vão. O resto é imperfeito.
- Renato Russo -
Now playing: Magnum - Born To Be King

Neal

2004-08-25, 4:34 am

On Thu, 19 Aug 2004 12:29:43 -0700, Tony Cortese
<bigdiscounthosting@gmaildotcom> wrote:

> On Thu, 19 Aug 2004 14:01:37 -0400, Neal wrote:
>
> I'll experiment with that. Although using pixels is very common.

Sadly, so much of what is commonly done in web desigh is ill-advised. This
is an example. Serving text that is legible is one of the most important
parts of havinbg a webpage. If they can't read the content, you lose. More
and more authors are getting it, though, and I suspect within the next 5
years we'll see a lot less px font use.

>
> That's why there's a font family with different fonts. I am not
> specifying
> verdana only. The site looks very similar under arial and sans serif. I
> use
> Windows so I don't have helvetica

Yes. You'll note that while Verdana is legible at a small size, Arial at
that same size is not legible. Reason: the x-height is so large on Verdana
as compared to Arial that Arial appears smaller than Verdana at the same
font-size. So if Verdana is specified at a small font size, you risk that
any user without Verdana will not be able to read it.

BTW, it's quite likely your default sans-serif font is Arial, so no wonder
they look similar. ;)
>
>
> That's debatable.
>
>
> In general, the site will be improved but right now it's a new design and
> wanted the site out and I am targetting the general population. Overtime,
> the little stuff will come in, better usability for the visually impaired
> and such.

But it's not even them. People with keen eyesight can have problems with
8px fonts. It's just too damn small.

> It seems many people here are hung up in html detail only.

The name of the place is alt.html.critique - that kinda sets the tone.

> I would like to
> get feedback in user usability. Is it easy to navigate? Do you have a
> frustrating experience..why?
> If you're looking for a web hosting company or already a customer for a
> host, does the content in my site offer the kind of information you need?
> Is something missing?
>
> Stuff that you read in Neilson's books and books like "don't make me
> think'
> and the likes?
> Maybe I am in the wrong NG, is this NG specific to html only? I know it's
> under alt.html. Any recommendations to where "usability experts" hang
> out?
> :)

I'm trying to impress upon you that small fonts is a big usability killer.
But you want more... Ok. New windows break the back button. Get rid of the
new windows on the links.

Tony Cortese

2004-08-25, 4:34 am

On Thu, 19 Aug 2004 22:20:59 GMT, Beauregard T. Shagnasty wrote:

> Quoth the raven Tony Cortese:
>
>
> Somehow that comment made me think of lemmings.
>
> I am willing to guess that most sites designed using pixel sizes for
> fonts are done with a WYSIWYG editor that is lacking in clues, by
> authors that are not aware of the ramifications of doing it.

I use Dreamweaver but I can't blame it because the options it offer when
you create a font in css have all the available css options for font size.
I have looked at many sites' source and the majority use pixels.

>
> Another point I don't think anyone as made yet. In my 1024x768 browser
> window, there is a lot of white space on either side of your content.
> Why not take advantage of it? Your middle column should float with the
> browser window size.

That was intentional. I use 1024x768 too. I used a template to create the
page and to make everything float without breaking anything required a
major rework. I intentionally used little content in general so that the
web pages don't look too busy

> http://www.allmyfaqs.com/faq.pl?AnySizeDesign
>
> This one as well:
> http://www.allmyfaqs.com/faq.pl?Tableless_layouts
>
> Your image-swapping stuff doesn't work if JavaScript is turned off or
> unavailable.

That's fine. If you don't have Javascript enabled, static images show up.

>
> Opening new windows is a Bad Ideaâ„¢. Newbie users get lost when they
> find their Back button is now broken.

The idea was to use it for links that go to external sites in order to have
a window that's in house if they wander off. I took the new window off from
the 'tell me more' link because in this case, the back button is needed to
get back.

>
> ...
>
> The alt.html.* groups are adequate for asking about usability.
>
> I'm wondering why you refute all the suggestions given you by the
> professional authors who have responded.

I don't have to believe every idea that's thrown to me is a valid one and
as one side of a discussion, I can bring in my ideas and reasining.

Plus what makes someone a professional? Who's a pro and who's not to me in
this NG? I can't tell.

If one pro says use Arial as your default font and another pro says use
"Trebuchet MS", which pro should I listen to?

If you go back to my site, you'll notice that I have already implemented
many suggestions already!

--
Tony Cortese
--
Send camera phone photos straight to your online photo album plus a loaded
web hosting package for only $4.95/month - No other Fees
http://www.big-discount-hosting.com

Ben Measures

2004-08-25, 4:34 am

Tony Cortese wrote:
> On Thu, 19 Aug 2004 13:33:18 -0400, Neal wrote:
>
>
> Not every error it reports is valid. It reports errors on dynamic
> javascript simply because it's not "smart".

What makes you think browsers' html parsers are any "smarter"?

> Please ignore the html validation part. I mean I can find this stuff
> myself. There are tons of html validators out there.

Then there's no good reason for you not checking for errors.

> I am really interested in the human experience. If you, as a human, is
> affected by an html error, yes then it's a problem.

The browser will present your website based on the code you write. If
what you write is imprecise, so the presentation will be.

--
Ben M.

Inger Helene Falch-Jacobsen

2004-08-25, 4:34 am

SpaceGirl

2004-08-25, 4:34 am

Neal wrote:

> There's no sense in painting a broken chair. Fix the chair

Brilliant!!! I have to remember that analogy :)

--

x theSpaceGirl (miranda)

# lead designer @ http://www.dhnewmedia.com #
# remove NO SPAM to email, or use form on website #

jake

2004-08-25, 4:34 am

In message <ky4rk2necoo1.w89dnrdz3nut.dlg@40tude.net>, Tony Cortese
<bigdiscounthosting@gmaildotcom.?.invalid> writes
>
>
>I would like to receive some constructive critique for this site in terms
>of proper browser rendering, layout, user interface & navigation, clear
>unambigious content, ease of use ... etc.
>
>http://www.big-discount-hosting.com
>
>
>
>Tony Cortese
>--
>Send camera phone photos straight to your online photo album plus a loaded
>web hosting package for only $4.95/month - No other Fees
>http://www.big-discount-hosting.com

Go through your site and make sure that all images have the appropriate
'alternative text' set.

It's important to people looking at your site with either images
switched off, text-only browsers, etc.

It's especially important for links. Without alternative text, there is
no way to access items in your main heading:

http://www.gododdin.demon.co.uk/ng/BG01X.JPG (64k)

Because of the large repetitive menus on each page, you could do with a
'skip to main content' link at the start of the page.

Also, some people have Javascript switched off; so any function that
relies on JS should ensure there's an alternative method available e.g.
access to the Live Chat page.

regards.
--
Jake

Tony Cortese

2004-08-26, 12:26 pm

On 19 Aug 2004 19:28:23 GMT, Els wrote:

> Tony Cortese wrote:
>
>
> Yep, but as you just stated, you don't understand the errors
> it comes up with. Also, this group is called
> alt.html.critique. This means it is to critique html. Not
> design as such :-)

I mentioned this point in my post :)

>
> For instance the error of the meta that can't go there and the
> <head> that had a missing tag: that's because you didn't put
> quotes on the values of type and rel in the <link> element.

I guess it should have said I have missing quotes upfront. Thanks for the
catch.

>
>
> Only a matter of time before your code starts to effect humans
> ;-)

I was trying to find out if it affects humans... NOW. :)

--
Tony Cortese
--
Send camera phone photos straight to your online photo album plus a loaded
web hosting package for only $4.95/month - No other Fees
http://www.big-discount-hosting.com

Beauregard T. Shagnasty

2004-08-26, 12:26 pm

Quoth the raven Tony Cortese:

> I'll experiment with that. Although using pixels is very common.

Somehow that comment made me think of lemmings.

I am willing to guess that most sites designed using pixel sizes for
fonts are done with a WYSIWYG editor that is lacking in clues, by
authors that are not aware of the ramifications of doing it.

Another point I don't think anyone as made yet. In my 1024x768 browser
window, there is a lot of white space on either side of your content.
Why not take advantage of it? Your middle column should float with the
browser window size.
http://www.allmyfaqs.com/faq.pl?AnySizeDesign

This one as well:
http://www.allmyfaqs.com/faq.pl?Tableless_layouts

Your image-swapping stuff doesn't work if JavaScript is turned off or
unavailable.

Opening new windows is a Bad Idea™. Newbie users get lost when they
find their Back button is now broken.

....
> Maybe I am in the wrong NG, is this NG specific to html only? I
> know it's under alt.html. Any recommendations to where "usability
> experts" hang out? :)

The alt.html.* groups are adequate for asking about usability.

I'm wondering why you refute all the suggestions given you by the
professional authors who have responded.

--
-bts
-This space intentionally left blank.

Els

2004-08-26, 12:26 pm

Tony Cortese wrote:

>
> I mentioned this point in my post :)

I saw it in your other post after I posted this one, must have
missed it if you wrote it here too.

>
> I guess it should have said I have missing quotes upfront.

That's what we're here for: help you understand the errors ;-P

> Thanks for the catch.

If you would just make the effort to solve the coding errors,
you'd get a) a lot of help here, b) a quick lesson in how to
code right, and c) a better site.

>
> I was trying to find out if it affects humans... NOW. :)

Well, as you can read in my other post, it does. It makes me
get closer to the monitor to read it. I don't like that :-)

--
Els http://locusmeus.com/
Sonhos vem. Sonhos vão. O resto é imperfeito.
- Renato Russo -
Now playing: Mirah - Stop and Think It Over

Neal

2004-08-26, 12:26 pm

On Thu, 19 Aug 2004 15:23:07 -0700, Tony Cortese
<bigdiscounthosting@gmaildotcom> wrote:

> Are you not able to read my content?

I can but I'm not using IE. That's the point.

> What percentage of web users do you
> think change their browser's default font size?

I couldn't offer an accurate number, but certainly enough to merit caution.

> If verdana and arial are not good for small size, which one do you
> recommend. At what point a font is considered small size?

Arial's fine. Helvetica's fine. TNR and all. The default font in nearly
every browser has x-height in the ballpark of .5, so that's what replaces
your choice. Avoid fonts with an x-height below .4 or above .6, you'll do
fine.

And the size at which a font goes from legible to not is different for
every user/monitor/computer/browser combination. We simply cannot
determine this number in absolute terms.

The only way we can possibly guarantee that the font will be rendered
legibly is to assume the user has either set the browser to their
preferred font size, or the default browser font size is not so inadequate
that the user has felt a need to try to change it. In this event,
font-size: 100%; is guaranteed to be legible.

One also should assume that, in order to get as much content above the
fold as possible, those who have set a fontsize have it reasonably close
to as small as they can read. Therefore, 100% is the smallest size we can
safely use for general content. Smaller sizes should be avoided, and
reserved solely for content we don't mind some users not being able to
access.

Beauregard T. Shagnasty

2004-08-26, 12:26 pm

Quoth the raven Tony Cortese:

> Are you not able to read my content?

I increased it by 20% so I could read it.

> What percentage of web users do you think change their browser's
> default font size?

Not many. Most all of your visitors will either suffer with the
microfonts, or go to the next web-hosting site - one they can read.

> I am not saying here that my use of pixels is necessarily correct.

That's good... :-)

> If verdana and arial are not good for small size, which one do you
> recommend. At what point a font is considered small size?

Arial is fine. It's the Verdana that is wrong. I use this style with
good luck:

font-family: "Trebuchet MS", Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;
font-size: 100%;

--
-bts
-This space intentionally left blank.

Tony Cortese

2004-08-26, 12:26 pm

On Thu, 19 Aug 2004 18:22:58 -0400, Neal wrote:

> On Thu, 19 Aug 2004 15:17:14 -0700, Tony Cortese
> <bigdiscounthosting@gmaildotcom> wrote:
>
>
> It can't tell you exactly what to do. It simply reports when it notices a
> problem. The lack of quotes didn't cause an error until that point later
> on.
>
> While most validation errors are easy to figure out, this is an example of
> where the thing that causes the error can't be seen by the validator.

Although putting quotes is a good practice, I am not sure it causes
problems for any browser. Do you know of some html cleanup tool that will
add quotes where they are missing? It's too labor intensive to go through
tens of pages.

--
Tony Cortese
--
Send camera phone photos straight to your online photo album plus a loaded
web hosting package for only $4.95/month - No other Fees
http://www.big-discount-hosting.com

Neal

2004-08-26, 12:26 pm

On Fri, 20 Aug 2004 03:30:13 GMT, kate.simpson
<kate.simpson@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

> Tony:
> Hello!
> I see no errors...simple, clean layout...
> I like all the resources listed in the index file...
> Good times!

Tony, don't take much from this. She says this about EVERY site.

Tony Cortese

2004-08-26, 12:26 pm

On Thu, 19 Aug 2004 21:58:05 +0100, jake wrote:
> It's especially important for links. Without alternative text, there is
> no way to access items in your main heading:

Fixed. Thanks. There are alternate links to the same areas from the nav
bar.

> Because of the large repetitive menus on each page, you could do with a
> 'skip to main content' link at the start of the page.

I am assuming you're talking about the pages from the 'tell me more' links.
These page have little content. Without the nav bar, the page will look too
empty.
It's a nav bar so I am not sure why you think it's repetitive.

>
> Also, some people have Javascript switched off; so any function that
> relies on JS should ensure there's an alternative method available e.g.
> access to the Live Chat page.

The live chat page links to a third party site which supplied the link. I
don't think it works without it.

Thanks for your input.

--
Tony Cortese
--
Send camera phone photos straight to your online photo album plus a loaded
web hosting package for only $4.95/month - No other Fees
http://www.big-discount-hosting.com

Tony Cortese

2004-08-26, 12:26 pm

On Thu, 19 Aug 2004 21:56:11 +0100, SpaceGirl wrote:

> Neal wrote:
>
>
> Brilliant!!! I have to remember that analogy :)

Doesn't always work :) Some people stain their roofs before selling the
house even though the shingles need replacing.

--
Tony Cortese
--
Send camera phone photos straight to your online photo album plus a loaded
web hosting package for only $4.95/month - No other Fees
http://www.big-discount-hosting.com

Tony Cortese

2004-08-26, 12:26 pm

On Thu, 19 Aug 2004 22:49:56 +0200, Inger Helene Falch-Jacobsen wrote:

> Tony Cortese wrote:
>
> Hi Tony,
> I can't see that anyone else has commented on your
> banner. It looks totally f***ed up in my browser
> (Mozilla Firefox).

The only problem I saw was the images in the header weren't aligned in 800
x 600. I did test before with Firebox in 1024 x 786 (my screen size) and it
looked good and made a bad assumption it would be ok in 800 x 600. Other
than that I can't see anything wrong. What OS and screen size you're using?

> All the Tell Me More's shouldn't be there, instead
> let the items in the list be links.

I found out that people click on these links more than if the text itself
was a link. "Tell me more' is more tempting.

> What you have in your Webmaster Toolbox is exactly
> what webmasters don't need: Photo Images - we use
> our own photos; Dividers/Bars,
> Backgrounds/Textures, Buttons, Bullets - we don't
> use them; Fonts - our visitors can't use them;
> Sounds, Midi, WYSIWYG HTML Editors, Web Templates,
> Animated Gifs - we hate them...

These are geared toward newbie webmasters.
Now it sounds more like your own personal opinion.
Many pros use Dreamweaver. I can't agree with everything you say.

> But I wish you the best of luck on your project!
Thanks.

--
Tony Cortese
--
Send camera phone photos straight to your online photo album plus a loaded
web hosting package for only $4.95/month - No other Fees
http://www.big-discount-hosting.com

Ben Measures

2004-08-26, 12:26 pm

Tony Cortese wrote:
> On Thu, 19 Aug 2004 21:56:11 +0100, SpaceGirl wrote:
>
> Doesn't always work :) Some people stain their roofs before selling the
> house even though the shingles need replacing.

That's clearly because they're not going to keep it. I assume you're
going to keep your site?

--
Ben M.

Ben Measures

2004-08-26, 12:26 pm

Tony Cortese wrote:
> Beauregard T. Shagnasty wrote:
>
> I have looked at many sites' source and the majority use pixels.

^^ says it all really.

>
> That's fine. If you don't have Javascript enabled, static images show up.

If you it in CSS it will work regardless of whether or not JS is enabled.

>
> If one pro says use Arial as your default font and another pro says use
> "Trebuchet MS", which pro should I listen to?

What if they are all recommending you not use Verdana, as they are now?

--
Ben M.

Beauregard T. Shagnasty

2004-08-26, 12:26 pm

Quoth the raven Tony Cortese:

> On Thu, 19 Aug 2004 22:20:59 GMT, Beauregard T. Shagnasty wrote:
>
>
> I use Dreamweaver

We knew that...

> but I can't blame it because the options it offer when you create a
> font in css have all the available css options for font size. I
> have looked at many sites' source and the majority use pixels.

Yes they do, but we're here trying to change that to the new era.

>
> That was intentional. I use 1024x768 too. I used a template to
> create the page and to make everything float without breaking
> anything required a major rework. I intentionally used little
> content in general so that the web pages don't look too busy

Sure. We all use templates. Make your template an anysizedesign
template. What if my browser is.. 600 px wide? 1132 px wide? Monitor
resolution is irrelevant.

>
> That's fine. If you don't have Javascript enabled, static images
> show up.

Ok, so long as the site continues to work without it.

>
> The idea was to use it for links that go to external sites in order
> to have a window that's in house if they wander off. I took the
> new window off from the 'tell me more' link because in this case,
> the back button is needed to get back.

The problem is when the newbie has his browser maximized, and you
issue another fullsize window, the newb doesn't realize your site is
still underneath because there is no working Back button in the new
window. I've watched newbs do this: re-enter google.com in the address
bar and look for a new site 'cause yours is gone. Sometime later -
usually when they've finished surfing, they close the browser and find
your site's window underneath.

>
> I don't have to believe every idea that's thrown to me is a valid
> one and as one side of a discussion, I can bring in my ideas and
> reasining.

It seemed as if you were disputing all the advice.

> Plus what makes someone a professional? Who's a pro and who's not
> to me in this NG? I can't tell.

You can probably tell by the delivery.

> If one pro says use Arial as your default font and another pro
> says use "Trebuchet MS", which pro should I listen to?

I think all the pros said "don't use Verdana" rather than "use Arial"
or "use Trebuchet MS."

> If you go back to my site, you'll notice that I have already
> implemented many suggestions already!

I see you've added
FONT-FAMILY: "Trebuchet MS",Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;
to just about every item in your CSS. That isn't necessary; just use
it once for the body { }.

For some reason, your page seems to be loading the style sheet three
times (or at least my Mozilla developer toolbar displays it three
times). Never seen that before. I haven't figured why yet.

These will help:
http://validator.w3.org/
http://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/validator-uri.html
http://www.htmlhelp.com/cgi-bin/csscheck.cgi

You should specify a background-color for every color, too.

--
-bts
-This space intentionally left blank.

Tony Cortese

2004-08-26, 12:26 pm

On Fri, 20 Aug 2004 01:27:52 GMT, Ben Measures wrote:

> Tony Cortese wrote:
>
> ^^ says it all really.
>
>
> If you it in CSS it will work regardless of whether or not JS is enabled.

I am not exactly fond of image swicthovers but that Javascript was in the
template and I left it plus I don't know how to do the same effect with
css.

>
>
> What if they are all recommending you not use Verdana, as they are now?

I took away Verdana even though I like it. :)

--
Tony Cortese
--
Send camera phone photos straight to your online photo album plus a loaded
web hosting package for only $4.95/month - No other Fees
http://www.big-discount-hosting.com

Tony Cortese

2004-08-26, 12:26 pm

On Fri, 20 Aug 2004 01:27:27 GMT, Beauregard T. Shagnasty wrote:

> Quoth the raven Tony Cortese:
>
>
> We knew that...

from MM_ prefixes?

>
>
> Yes they do, but we're here trying to change that to the new era.
>
>
> Sure. We all use templates. Make your template an anysizedesign
> template. What if my browser is.. 600 px wide? 1132 px wide? Monitor
> resolution is irrelevant.

Anything 800 and above will work. For now below 800 will have to scroll but
you're correct. The site needs to resize properly and be fluid regardless
of screen resolution. Due to time constraint, I couldn't work on every
little detail. I had to work on all the programming on the backend also.
I am like the pregnant woman at 8 months who just wants the baby out :)

>
>
> Ok, so long as the site continues to work without it.
>
>
> The problem is when the newbie has his browser maximized, and you
> issue another fullsize window, the newb doesn't realize your site is
> still underneath because there is no working Back button in the new
> window. I've watched newbs do this: re-enter google.com in the address
> bar and look for a new site 'cause yours is gone. Sometime later -
> usually when they've finished surfing, they close the browser and find
> your site's window underneath.

That's the effect I wanted. If they wander off, I am still there :)
I took that effect away in the links where the people might not be able to
go back to the site.

>
>
> It seemed as if you were disputing all the advice.

I want people to hear my side of the story also. They understand how other
webmaster work.

>
>
> You can probably tell by the delivery.
>
>
> I think all the pros said "don't use Verdana" rather than "use Arial"
> or "use Trebuchet MS."
>
>
> I see you've added
> FONT-FAMILY: "Trebuchet MS",Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;
> to just about every item in your CSS. That isn't necessary; just use
> it once for the body { }.

I replaced verdana with "Trebuchet MS".

>
> For some reason, your page seems to be loading the style sheet three
> times (or at least my Mozilla developer toolbar displays it three
> times). Never seen that before. I haven't figured why yet.
>
> These will help:
> http://validator.w3.org/
> http://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/validator-uri.html
> http://www.htmlhelp.com/cgi-bin/csscheck.cgi
>
> You should specify a background-color for every color, too.

Because the home page has some include files some of which had a css link.
Fixed.

Thanks for the suggestions.

--
Tony Cortese
--
Send camera phone photos straight to your online photo album plus a loaded
web hosting package for only $4.95/month - No other Fees
http://www.big-discount-hosting.com

Tony Cortese

2004-08-26, 12:26 pm

On Fri, 20 Aug 2004 01:12:37 GMT, Ben Measures wrote:

> Tony Cortese wrote:
>
> That's clearly because they're not going to keep it. I assume you're
> going to keep your site?

Good point too :)

--
Tony Cortese
--
Send camera phone photos straight to your online photo album plus a loaded
web hosting package for only $4.95/month - No other Fees
http://www.big-discount-hosting.com

Ben Measures

2004-08-26, 12:26 pm

Tony Cortese wrote:
> Ben Measures wrote:
>
> Because browser can interpret javascript and run it while the validators
> can't. If I have any html tag in a script, the validator doesn't know that
> and will report an error.

The browser parses the HTML first /then/ passes JS code to the
interpreter, not the other way around.

>
> No true.
> A house can be missing a truss, a beam, few boards but is still livable and
> usable.

A missing floorboard has hardly the same effect as a missing <table>
tag. Whilst I'd hope the page is still useable, it would not be
presented as you intended.

--
Ben M.

lime

2004-08-26, 12:26 pm

> > Because of the large repetitive menus on each page, you could do with a
>
> I am assuming you're talking about the pages from the 'tell me more'
links.
> These page have little content. Without the nav bar, the page will look
too
> empty.
> It's a nav bar so I am not sure why you think it's repetitive.

Jake always tests sites by "listening" to them - so the repetitiveness he
speaks of means that each page will have the nav bar read out, so he is
suggesting that you add a 'skip to main content' link at the start of the
page.

Neal

2004-08-26, 12:26 pm

On Thu, 19 Aug 2004 19:52:46 -0700, Tony Cortese
<bigdiscounthosting@gmaildotcom> wrote:

> On Fri, 20 Aug 2004 01:27:27 GMT, Beauregard T. Shagnasty wrote:
>
>
> I replaced verdana with "Trebuchet MS".
>

What he's saying is if you set the font-family in body, all the descendent
elements will automatically inherit that style. If you want a particular
section to have a different font, just change it for that section.

It's good CSS practice to set styles on as high a parent as practical,
rather than repeat them in numerous descendants.

Beauregard T. Shagnasty

2004-08-26, 12:26 pm

Quoth the raven Tony Cortese:

> On Fri, 20 Aug 2004 01:27:27 GMT, Beauregard T. Shagnasty wrote:
>
>
> from MM_ prefixes?

Of course. <g>

>
> Anything 800 and above will work. For now below 800 will have to
> scroll but you're correct. The site needs to resize properly and be
> fluid regardless of screen resolution. Due to time constraint, I
> couldn't work on every little detail. I had to work on all the
> programming on the backend also. I am like the pregnant woman at 8
> months who just wants the baby out :)

Seems to me it would have been just as easy and quick to create a
flexible template with CSS than to create a fixed one with tables.
There is also less code with a CSS-designed layout.

>
> That's the effect I wanted. If they wander off, I am still there :)
> I took that effect away in the links where the people might not be
> able to go back to the site.

The problem is not that your site is still there. It is that when they
had no Back button, they went back to Google (in your new window),
found another web host company, and placed an order. So... when they
finally find yours underneath, they no longer need your services.
You've lost a sale.

>
> I want people to hear my side of the story also. They understand
> how other webmaster work.

Ok...

> I replaced verdana with "Trebuchet MS".

Just a Find and Replace. Ok, remember to clean it all up later.

>
> Because the home page has some include files some of which had a
> css link. Fixed.

No, I don't think so. I am still getting the triple-load of the style
sheet. Both the Mozilla Developer extension toolbar show the CSS three
times, and the JavaScript Console Privacy tab, under External Loaded
Documents, lists it three times. Yes, I have closed and refreshed your
page.

> Thanks for the suggestions.

You're welcome.

--
-bts
-This space intentionally left blank.

kate.simpson

2004-08-26, 12:27 pm

Tony:
Hello!
I see no errors...simple, clean layout...
I like all the resources listed in the index file...
Good times!
Ginae
http://www.ginae.us

"Tony Cortese" <bigdiscounthosting@gmaildotcom> wrote in message
news:ky4rk2necoo1.w89dnrdz3nut.dlg@40tude.net...
>
>
> I would like to receive some constructive critique for this site in terms
> of proper browser rendering, layout, user interface & navigation, clear
> unambigious content, ease of use ... etc.
>
> http://www.big-discount-hosting.com
>
>
>
> Tony Cortese
> --
> Send camera phone photos straight to your online photo album plus a loaded
> web hosting package for only $4.95/month - No other Fees
> http://www.big-discount-hosting.com

Beauregard T. Shagnasty

2004-08-26, 12:27 pm

Quoth the raven kate.simpson:

> Tony:
> Hello!
> I see no errors...simple, clean layout...
> I like all the resources listed in the index file...
> Good times!
> Ginae
> http://www.ginae.us

Jeez. It really *is* a bot! The bot has not read the rest of the
thread at all!

--
-bts
-This space intentionally left blank.

Tony Cortese

2004-08-26, 12:27 pm

On Fri, 20 Aug 2004 02:51:15 GMT, Ben Measures wrote:

> Tony Cortese wrote:
>
> The browser parses the HTML first /then/ passes JS code to the
> interpreter, not the other way around.

Nothing I have said suggested that Javascript runs before the parsing.
The validators should ignore what's inside the script tags and the code
inside the events. If I concatenate strings that contain html tags in my
script code, the validator should just move on. That's what I mean they are
not smart enough.

<snip>

--
Tony Cortese
--
Send camera phone photos straight to your online photo album plus a loaded
web hosting package for only $4.95/month - No other Fees
http://www.big-discount-hosting.com

Tony Cortese

2004-08-26, 12:27 pm

On Fri, 20 Aug 2004 03:30:13 GMT, kate.simpson wrote:

> Tony:
> Hello!
> I see no errors...simple, clean layout...
> I like all the resources listed in the index file...
> Good times!
> Ginae
> http://www.ginae.us

Thanks!

--
Tony Cortese
--
Send camera phone photos straight to your online photo album plus a loaded
web hosting package for only $4.95/month - No other Fees
http://www.big-discount-hosting.com

AyntRyte

2004-08-26, 12:27 pm

* nGalelry Photo Album

Is that a correct spelling?
--
\\// Robert

Dave Patton

2004-08-26, 12:27 pm

Tony Cortese <bigdiscounthosting@gmaildotcom> wrote in
news:sa60d06cxhc0.17zbqogp10xjp.dlg@40tude.net:

> The links that go to
> external sites are opened in a new window.

Not when the site visitor has disabled that 'feature'.

--
Dave Patton
Canadian Coordinator, Degree Confluence Project
http://www.confluence.org/
My website: http://members.shaw.ca/davepatton/

The Doormouse

2004-08-26, 12:27 pm

Tony Cortese <bigdiscounthosting@gmaildotcom> wrote:

> What and how many spelling
> errors you found that make you say the visual design is bad?

I saw one gross spelling error without even looking, and it is STILL THERE.
If you have not found it, you are not trying very hard.

Why should I try hard to critique your page if you will not also try hard
to fix it?

The Doormouse

--
The Doormouse cannot be reached by e-mail without her permission.

Inger Helene Falch-Jacobsen

2004-08-26, 12:27 pm

Tony Cortese wrote:
> On Thu, 19 Aug 2004 22:49:56 +0200, Inger Helene Falch-Jacobsen wrote:

>
> The only problem I saw was the images in the header weren't aligned in 800
> x 600. I did test before with Firebox in 1024 x 786 (my screen size) and it
> looked good and made a bad assumption it would be ok in 800 x 600. Other
> than that I can't see anything wrong. What OS and screen size you're using?

Hmm... It looks good today, but yesterday it was a
mess... So, forget it, sorry.

> Many pros use Dreamweaver. I can't agree with everything you say.

OK,.WYSIWYG is generally a bad choice, but
Dreamweaver is an exeption to the rule...

--
Inger Helene Falch-Jacobsen
http://home.online.no/~ingerfaj/

Els

2004-08-26, 12:27 pm

Tony Cortese wrote:

> On Fri, 20 Aug 2004 03:32:54 GMT, Beauregard T. Shagnasty
> wrote:
>
>
> Well.. I like also the non html purists point of view.
> Things need to get balanced.

"kate" is not a "non html purist".
"she" says the same to everyone, doesn't even read the
questions people ask. Don't remember which post unfortunately,
but the other day someone posted their site for a review,
asking for a view on a specific problem they had. All "kate"
said was "looks good, no errors, ginae!"

I think Beauregard is right, it's a bot.

--
Els
http://locusmeus.com/
Sonhos vem. Sonhos vão. O resto é imperfeito.
- Renato Russo -

Spartanicus

2004-08-26, 12:27 pm

Inger Helene Falch-Jacobsen <Inger@neseblod.invalid> wrote:

>OK,.WYSIWYG is generally a bad choice, but
>Dreamweaver is an exeption to the rule...

It isn't.

--
Spartanicus

Toby Inkster

2004-08-26, 12:27 pm

Tony Cortese wrote:
> On Fri, 20 Aug 2004 03:13:25 GMT, Beauregard T. Shagnasty wrote:
>
> If I removed the prefix, would you still know Dreamweaver was used?

Yes -- there's a post on Google Groups from you saying "I use Dreamweaver".

--
Toby A Inkster BSc (Hons) ARCS
Contact Me ~ http://tobyinkster.co.uk/contact

jake

2004-08-26, 12:27 pm

In message <opsc0m59f46v6656@news.individual.net>, Neal
<neal413@yahoo.com> writes
>On Fri, 20 Aug 2004 03:30:13 GMT, kate.simpson
><kate.simpson@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>
>
>
>Tony, don't take much from this. She says this about EVERY site.

..... just trying to spread a little light and happiness in an otherwise
dark and unfriendly world ........ ;-)

--
Jake

jake

2004-08-26, 12:27 pm

In message <1kiya5jfrt731$.1umnr08upqops.dlg@40tude.net>, Tony Cortese
<bigdiscounthosting@gmaildotcom.?.invalid> writes
>On Thu, 19 Aug 2004 21:58:05 +0100, jake wrote:
[skip]

>
>
>I am assuming you're talking about the pages from the 'tell me more' links.
>These page have little content. Without the nav bar, the page will look too
>empty.
>It's a nav bar so I am not sure why you think it's repetitive.
>
>
[skip]

OK. Let's say that the user of a screen-reader or talking browser want's
to listen to 'Latest Announcements'. When they get there, they have to
listen to a lot of repetitive stuff before they can listen to what
they've visited the page for.

This is a transcript from a talking browser (with a few added notes) so
that you can see what I mean:
http://www.gododdin.demon.co.uk/ng/BDH.TXT

If there was an invisible link at the start of the page, then the user
could go straight to the main content.

regards.
[color=darkred]
>

--
Jake

Andrew D

2004-08-26, 12:27 pm

In article <1tdqdkp99azuz.1r95o1cmm5dih$.dlg@40tude.net>, Tony Cortese
<bigdiscounthosting@gmaildotcom> wrote:

[snip]
> It seems many people here are hung up in html detail only. I would like to
> get feedback in user usability. Is it easy to navigate? Do you have a
> frustrating experience..why?

I think a few people are having a frustrating experience, though not with
your site as such ;)

--
Andy D.
http://members.westnet.com.au/andydolphin/
Fine art gallery - online, Western Australia
Landscapes, seascapes and still life paintings in oils.

Andrew D

2004-08-26, 12:27 pm

In article <1tdqdkp99azuz.1r95o1cmm5dih$.dlg@40tude.net>, Tony Cortese
<bigdiscounthosting@gmaildotcom> wrote:

> On Thu, 19 Aug 2004 14:01:37 -0400, Neal wrote:
[snip]
[color=darkred]
> I'll experiment with that. Although using pixels is very common.

Drinking and driving is very common too.

--
Andy D.
http://members.westnet.com.au/andydolphin/
Fine art gallery - online, Western Australia
Landscapes, seascapes and still life paintings in oils.

Beauregard T. Shagnasty

2004-08-26, 12:27 pm

Quoth the raven Tony Cortese:

> On Fri, 20 Aug 2004 03:13:25 GMT, Beauregard T. Shagnasty wrote:
>
>
> If I removed the prefix, would you still know Dreamweaver was used?
>
Of course. <g> Those same four functions appear in almost every
Dreamweaver site I ever looked at.

On your main page, the function MM_preloadImages() { //v3.0
is sent twice, once in the <head> and once in the <body> with the others.

>
> The template was not made by me.

OIC.

>
> I don't know why. I will check this later.

There is occasionally some other funny stuff going on. In Mozilla,
when I pick the View CSS from the developer toolbar, your page seems
to reload forever. The Stop button is active and won't stop the
progress bar at the bottom of my browser. I don't see how this could
be a fault of my browser, as I've never seen it occur with other sites.

Something for you to test?

--
-bts
-This space intentionally left blank.

Neal

2004-08-26, 12:27 pm

On Fri, 20 Aug 2004 08:47:44 +0100, Spartanicus <me@privacy.net> wrote:

> Inger Helene Falch-Jacobsen <Inger@neseblod.invalid> wrote:
>
>
> It isn't.
>

I'd qualify it like this: WYSIWYG editors are only useful for creating
excellent pages when the user could do it without using a WYSIWYG editor.

They're time-saving tools, but the quality of the coding depends on the
user's expertise. No editor will think for you.

Tony Cortese

2004-08-26, 12:27 pm

On Fri, 20 Aug 2004 10:58:10 +0100, jake wrote:
[color=darkred]
> In message <1kiya5jfrt731$.1umnr08upqops.dlg@40tude.net>, Tony Cortese
> <bigdiscounthosting@gmaildotcom.?.invalid> writes
> [skip]
>
> [skip]
>
>
> OK. Let's say that the user of a screen-reader or talking browser want's
> to listen to 'Latest Announcements'. When they get there, they have to
> listen to a lot of repetitive stuff before they can listen to what
> they've visited the page for.
>
> This is a transcript from a talking browser (with a few added notes) so
> that you can see what I mean:
> http://www.gododdin.demon.co.uk/ng/BDH.TXT
>
> If there was an invisible link at the start of the page, then the user
> could go straight to the main content.
>
> regards.
>

Valid point but talking browsers are not one of my targets.

--
Tony Cortese
--
Send camera phone photos straight to your online photo album plus a loaded
web hosting package for only $4.95/month - No other Fees
http://www.big-discount-hosting.com

Inger Helene Falch-Jacobsen

2004-08-26, 12:27 pm

Spartanicus wrote:

> Inger Helene Falch-Jacobsen <Inger@neseblod.invalid> wrote:
>
>
>
>
> It isn't.

Then I will never again recommend DW to anyone.
Good to know! It's expensive too...

--
Inger Helene Falch-Jacobsen
http://home.online.no/~ingerfaj/

Chris Beall

2004-08-26, 12:27 pm

Tony Cortese wrote:
>
> I would like to receive some constructive critique for this site in terms
> of proper browser rendering, layout, user interface & navigation, clear
> unambigious content, ease of use ... etc.
>
> http://www.big-discount-hosting.com

Tony,

You indicate that you are most interested in the user experience, with
under-the-covers stuff to be addressed later. I have looked at your
site with IE 5.5 and NN 7.1 at a full-screen resolution of 600 X 800 and
did not first look at the comments of others or at the source code. I
had JavaScript enabled. I have normal vision and motor skills. I looked
at the site on 20 Aug about 1:00p.m. EDT, so some things may have
changed from when you initially requested a review.

First across-the-room impressions: Very 'busy', with lots of stuff on
the home page. Turns me off, as I interpret it as a site that is trying
to be everything for everybody (and, from my experience, thus becomes
nothing-of-value-to-anyone). Colors are LOUD, a feature I associate with
crass commercialism, like the used-car salesman on TV who always shouts
at you. Here's what really happened when I looked at the page: I saw the
banner "Big Discount Hosting" and immediately concluded that the URL in
your post was incomplete and that I'd been taken to your hosting
service's default page, rather than the page you wanted me to evaluate.

Second impressions, looking at content: OK, it's all about web hosting,
perhaps worth another look. Navigation is a bit scattered. There are
four choices in the bar across the top, a different four groups of
choices down the left and right sides (is the right-side group
semantically different from those on the left side?. If not, why is it
alone on the right?) Domain lookup is a whole separate box, rather than
an item in the Resources or Links list. List of features down the middle
with nice "Tell me more" links for each one, which I like. But that
accounts for much of the clutter.

The page serves two purposes: it's a focal point for existing customers,
taking them to various tools and reference information AND it's an
advertisement trying to entice new customers. There's lots of overlap in
the categories as a result. I would separate the two, leaving the home
page for existing users (who will return often) and putting a teaser ad
on it to catch prospective customers and link them to a page with all
the come-on stuff on it. That lets you better tailor each page to its
intended audience.

Details:
- I found the font used for the horizontal navigation to be
distracting. Uppercase M looks italic; no crossbar on uppercase A;
uppercase L looks bent; P and R missing a line segment. This contrasts
with other characters, which appear normal.
- The ampersand character in the main text looked odd. At first I
though it was two characters scrunched together.
- It's easy to use the provider logos as links to their technologies
(right-hand column), but it looks like advertisements (which I've
trained myself to completely ignore) rather than links to technologies
you support. I'd replace the images with plain text.
- In the center and left-hand columns, there are leading bullets ahead
of each item. I finally figured out that the bullets are vertically
centered on each item's text, but my initial impression was that they
were sort of randomly dispersed along the list. I'd suggest that each
bullet be aligned with the FIRST LINE of text it is associated with.
- I like the alternating background color for items in the
center-column list, which makes it easier to distinguish where an item
starts and ends (um, especially with the strangely-positioned bullets...)
- When hovering over the left-column entries from the top through
"Free Online Virus Scan", the entry changes to blue and an underline
appears. For all the entries below that in the list:
In IE 5.5, nothing happens.
In NN7.1, the blue underline appears, but the text remains black.
- In the center features list:
youdomainname.com should be yourdomainname.com
nGalelry should be NGallery

All of the preceding comments resulted from looking ONLY at the home
page. Browsing around at other pages, I noticed the following:
- domainname.asp: I believe dns should be DNS, as it is an acronym.
- yourdomainname.asp: in the example that shows that 'www' is
optional, shouldn't "domain.com" be "yourdomainname.com"? (and I
wouldn't have thought of this as a marketable feature; IMO every server
should be set up this way)
- setupfee.asp: dns -> DNS, ip -> IP, "ping ww.domainname.com" ->
"ping www.domainname.com", uploaded -> upload.
- instantsetup.asp: ftp -> FTP, setting -> settings. I don't know what
the current thinking on 'email' is, but I prefer e-mail or E-mail. It's
not a full acronym, but it isn't a word either.
- diskspace.asp: "Our FAQ page explains the extra fee..." The link
actually takes you to the knowledgebase, with FAQ being one of four
entries that the user has to select. That takes you to a page with 12
selections, none of which (based on their titles) explains the fee for
extra disk space. traffic.asp has the same problem. I didn't follow any
other links.

If I reduced the browser window to less than 600 X 800 full screen,
horizontal scrolling was required in order to see the entire screen. If
I changed screen resolution to 1024 X 768, the page was centered on the
screen and bordered on the left and right by a significant amount of
unused white space, with all text and images correspondingly reduced in
size.

I ran the video tutorial for FTP, which worked fine, although it
required both vertical and horizontal scrolling to see all of it.

Now I'll go see what others have posted...

Regards,
Chris Beall

Neal

2004-08-26, 12:27 pm

On Fri, 20 Aug 2004 09:51:40 -0700, Tony Cortese
<bigdiscounthosting@gmaildotcom> wrote:

> ... talking browsers are not one of my targets.

Huh?? "Hell, no, I don't wanna sell no webspace to dem blind folks..."

Why not? Don't the blind use webpages? Don't you want their business?

Are you in business, or just screwing around? If it's business, there's no
extra cost and a great deal of benefit in creating pages that are
accessible. If you're just screwing around, fine.

Chris Beall

2004-08-26, 12:27 pm

Tony Cortese wrote:

> I don't know why you think I need to seperate these or even how. There's
> nothing that would say if you are a current customer go here, if you are a
> prospective customer go here. Every link I have is beneficial to either
> type. Do you have examples on applying your idea?

Tony,

I looked at the revised page. I think you've cleaned it up enough so
that I would no longer recommend separation.

Regards,
Chris Beall

Chris Beall

2004-08-26, 12:27 pm

Geoff Hague wrote:

>
> WOW! When I finally finish up my band-related website (within a week,
> hopefully), this is *exactly* the kind of critique I'd *love* to have done
> to it!
> Chris, I'll be looking out for you when I finally post my link :-)

Geoff,

Thank you.

I tend to pop in and out of here on a very irregular basis, but I'll try
to check back and watch for your site.

Regards,
Chris Beall

Tony Cortese

2004-08-26, 12:27 pm

On Fri, 20 Aug 2004 22:25:55 GMT, The Doormouse wrote:

> Tony Cortese <bigdiscounthosting@gmaildotcom> wrote:
>
>
> I see that it has not been fixed yet. :)

It has been updated along with other enhancements.

--
Tony Cortese
--
Send camera phone photos straight to your online photo album plus a loaded
web hosting package for only $4.95/month - No other Fees
http://www.big-discount-hosting.com

The Doormouse

2004-08-27, 12:16 pm

Tony Cortese <bigdiscounthosting@gmaildotcom> wrote:

> On Thu, 19 Aug 2004 23:47:43 -0500, AyntRyte wrote:
>
>
> No. Thanks.

I see that it has not been fixed yet. :)

The Doormouse

--
The Doormouse cannot be reached by e-mail without her permission.

The Doormouse

2004-08-27, 12:16 pm

Neal <neal413@yahoo.com> wrote:

> WYSIWYG editors are only useful for creating
> excellent pages when the user could do it without using a WYSIWYG editor.

Score a point for Neal!

The Doormouse

--
The Doormouse cannot be reached by e-mail without her permission.

Chris Beall

2004-08-27, 7:17 pm

Tony Cortese wrote:

> Why do you they say it's too busy? There's the blurp which is a few lines.
> The full list of features and a nav bar. The only thing that I see is busy
> is the right column.

I agree. It's the right-column logos that contribute most to my
impression. We probably have a different view of what constitutes
'busy'. The Google home page is probably the best example I can think of
as 'not busy'. Compare that to yours and you will understand my comment.
Or look at a site I did long ago: augustgold.com, which I think is
'not busy'.

>I tried to make the site as simple as possible. I
> stayed away from Flash and dhtml or anything fancy. When I came to thr
> right column column, I didn't have make to say anymore so I wanted to
> mention the products I support. I ended up just putting images to the
> products and links to them. It ended up as you say a collection of banner
> ads. Which is not the my purpose at all but that what they look like. I
> agree. I am think of doing away with them and just highligh some features
> in text.

I think that will help a lot.

> I am not sure what you mean by inomplete. The url and the title of the site
> is big discount hosting. It's about web hosting. I wanted people to
> evaluate the site but most important the home page. I am not sure what you
> are confused about.

I was simply describing my confusion. Most of the people who put sites
up for review are NOT ISPs. Often, however, people make errors in
posting their own URLs. When that happens, I sometimes end up at the
domain of their ISP, with a page that says something like "we don't know
what you are looking for" or "would you like to buy this URL". I
mistakenly THOUGHT that was what had happened when I first went to your
page. I don't think there's anything you could do to eliminate my
confusion, which was brief.

> The left side is grouped into 3 categories. The links that are related if
> you are a current customer. A group about us. A group about external links
> that can be beneficial to you as a site owner and webmaster. The right
> column is unrelated to the left column. They are a list of product and
> technologies support as indicated by the column header.

OK, I get it now.

> If the 'tell me
> more' is causing clutter, I can decrease the size of the font which it was
> earlier but some people it was too small. I kinda like to keep these links
> as is because people tend to click on them more than if the text were
> links. I might change that.

I actually like the "Tell me more" links. And don't mess with the font
size; as others have pointed out, 100% is good and 90% is the minimum
you should consider.

>
>
> The feature list is both benefical to current customers and new. I
> purposely had all the features listed upfront so that people don't have to
> find them. In many other hosts, you have to find the web hosting section,
> then you get a list of plans then you have to click on a plan and then get
> the info. In my case, you don't have to click on anything to get what you
> need to know. it's all in the home page. Once you are a customer, you
> really don't come back to my site. Customer usually will bookmark the
> webmail and control panel pages because that what they will use most often.
> Since I don't offer web design, reseller packages, web promotion..etc, I
> don't have many links like many hosts do. So it's actually a little
> struggle to fill out the home page.

I stand by my original opinion: separate the page for your two
audiences. Even if the content on the two pages is similar, you can
alter the presentation for each audience. You don't need to "struggle to
fill out the home page". If you only have a little bit to say, why would
you want to say more? Blank space can be a useful tool. This goes back
to the 'busy' issue.

> I had a gfx person do the logo, the buttons in the horizonal
> nav bar and the gfx which states the plan price and the frame around the
> feature list. I told him I didn't like the font.

There's no need to use graphics on the nav bar anyway. Just pick an
attractive font and use the same colors, all easily done with CSS.

>
>
> That's because the default font used is "Trebuchet MS" as suggested by a
> member here yesterday. It has an odd representation of the ampersand
> character. I didn't notice this. I might end up switching to Arial. The
> reason I used Trebuchet MS because it spread the characters apart and made
> the text clearer.

Consider using 'and' instead of the ampersand. Or (more work) code the
ampersand in a more attractive font.

> I am not sure if it works very well cause it increased
> the height of the page.

So what? Aha, I sense that you are trying to make everything 'fit'
within some predefined space. BUT, as others have pointed out, you don't
know how big that space will be at the user's end. What screen
resolution will they use? Will the browser window occupy the entire
screen or will it be reduced to fill only part of that screen? What size
text will the user select? You don't want your vertical height to go on
like a roll of toilet paper, and you DO want the most important stuff to
be at the top of the page; other than that you should relax about it.
You and your users will both be happier.

>
>
> Yes.. but the colors are hard coded which means if I want to delete or
> insert new items, I might have to fix the alternation of the colors.
> Because it's a static page, I don't know if there' a wany to dynamically
> alternate the colors.

If the list won't change often, no problem. If it WILL change often,
look into a preprocessor like PPWIZARD, which can be used to automate
this sort of thing.

>
>
> The page is fixed for 800 width screens. If you go lower it will make you
> scroll. I am aware of this and it requires some big rework because if the
> width is not set, things will break.

The details are too much to put here, but it should not be hard to make
the center column a flexible width equal to, say, 50% of the window
width. This would address both the scrolling and white-margin problems.
Look for stuff on CSS three-column layout. It may be possible to do
this without discarding your table-based layout, but I've forgotten how
to do that.

> Thanks for all the input and the time you have spent on this. Most
> valuable.

You are welcome. That's what we do here.

Chris Beall