The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
www.skipwortharms.com
What do you all think? The news and contact pages are not yet done, as I am currently coding the PHP for them, but the HTML Pages are done.
I am espescially interested in hearing people who use other browsers other than IE and with an 800x600 screen res. And, most importantly, load times in seconds for each page from 56kers.
Thanks in advance.
Dan.
What do you all think? The news and contact pages are not yet done, as I am currently coding the PHP for them, but the HTML Pages are done.
I am espescially interested in hearing people who use other browsers other than IE and with an 800x600 screen res. And, most importantly, load times in seconds for each page from 56kers.
Thanks in advance.
Dan.
Page:
he he, leave me alone.
You can blame me for your crappy 1mb connection anyway. It takes 4 seconds on my 512, it takes 33seconds on 28.8k over in Russia :p.
I asked someone on 56k and they sey it takes about 15-20seconds per page.
Besides, I asked what people thought of the site, not the code. Code can be corrected, but I put this all together in a rush. Those 4 pages took me no more than an hour.
You can blame me for your crappy 1mb connection anyway. It takes 4 seconds on my 512, it takes 33seconds on 28.8k over in Russia :p.
I asked someone on 56k and they sey it takes about 15-20seconds per page.
Besides, I asked what people thought of the site, not the code. Code can be corrected, but I put this all together in a rush. Those 4 pages took me no more than an hour.
taka-Q wrote:
> I see not. He's used a strange syntax organisation there.
body { background-color: #F9F9F9 }
Thats not CSS, that, well, I'm not actually sure, I feel dirty just looking at it!
> I see not. He's used a strange syntax organisation there.
body { background-color: #F9F9F9 }
Thats not CSS, that, well, I'm not actually sure, I feel dirty just looking at it!
danieldone wrote:
> Take a jigsaw, or a slowly unfolding piece of paper with a message on
> it. The human mind has a huge f---up called curiosity. That
> 10/15seconds rules only applies to users who dont see the information
> that they want in that time.
Trust me, when it comes to websites, you've got 10 secs, beleive me on this, I've spent enough time studying HCI and Web Interaction.
> With this site slowly unfolding or jigawing together, it'll keep
> users waiting for it to load to see the final outcome.
Trust me, it won't.
> Besides, once
> they have visited it once, its more than instant next time.
Only if their cache is set high, but you should rely on that at all. My cache is set to 500k and flushes evertime I shutdown, som in my instance, this isn't the case. I'm also on a 1Mb conection here, and it's slow on that!
> Take a jigsaw, or a slowly unfolding piece of paper with a message on
> it. The human mind has a huge f---up called curiosity. That
> 10/15seconds rules only applies to users who dont see the information
> that they want in that time.
Trust me, when it comes to websites, you've got 10 secs, beleive me on this, I've spent enough time studying HCI and Web Interaction.
> With this site slowly unfolding or jigawing together, it'll keep
> users waiting for it to load to see the final outcome.
Trust me, it won't.
> Besides, once
> they have visited it once, its more than instant next time.
Only if their cache is set high, but you should rely on that at all. My cache is set to 500k and flushes evertime I shutdown, som in my instance, this isn't the case. I'm also on a 1Mb conection here, and it's slow on that!
well, I am a design noob by the looks of it. My CSS is crap admittidly. But, as I have stated previously, im paying some dude to clean it all up.
Miserableman wrote:
> taka-Q wrote:
> I haven't bothered to read his CSS coding so I may be wrong...
>
> You're not missing much :O)
I see not. He's used a strange syntax organisation there.
> taka-Q wrote:
> I haven't bothered to read his CSS coding so I may be wrong...
>
> You're not missing much :O)
I see not. He's used a strange syntax organisation there.
taka-Q wrote:
> I haven't bothered to read his CSS coding so I may be wrong...
You're not missing much :O)
> I haven't bothered to read his CSS coding so I may be wrong...
You're not missing much :O)
Tyla wrote:
> ONe other thing, with code
> that bad, you'll have anight mare getting it to rank high in search
> engines.
My HTML is crap on my site, yet it comes up super well in searches.
Goto Google.com and search for 'free funny videos.' I'm quite impressed with that one.
danieldone wrote:
> With this site slowly unfolding or jigawing together, it'll keep
> users waiting for it to load to see the final outcome. Besides, once
> they have visited it once, its more than instant next time.
Reminds me of communism, good in theory, crap in practice.
I got bored of the loading and just clicked onto the next page, then I remembered that I was meant to test it and let it all load!
> ONe other thing, with code
> that bad, you'll have anight mare getting it to rank high in search
> engines.
My HTML is crap on my site, yet it comes up super well in searches.
Goto Google.com and search for 'free funny videos.' I'm quite impressed with that one.
danieldone wrote:
> With this site slowly unfolding or jigawing together, it'll keep
> users waiting for it to load to see the final outcome. Besides, once
> they have visited it once, its more than instant next time.
Reminds me of communism, good in theory, crap in practice.
I got bored of the loading and just clicked onto the next page, then I remembered that I was meant to test it and let it all load!
Miserableman wrote:
> EDIT: also, there is text at the bottom that is impossible to see
> without highlighting, as it's white on white.
I think thats for browsers which don't support CSS, but I haven't bothered to read his CSS coding so I may be wrong...
> EDIT: also, there is text at the bottom that is impossible to see
> without highlighting, as it's white on white.
I think thats for browsers which don't support CSS, but I haven't bothered to read his CSS coding so I may be wrong...
Nice looking site, but horrible use of images. http://www.skipwortharms.com/images/home3_01.jpg on its own is a crime against the internet, and it's the first image on your website!
EDIT: also, there is text at the bottom that is impossible to see without highlighting, as it's white on white.
EDIT: also, there is text at the bottom that is impossible to see without highlighting, as it's white on white.
Tyla wrote:
> danieldone wrote:
> I dont see that it will be much of a problem to be honest.
>
> Cue Tyla and his HUGE usability/accessibility speech... Second
> thoughts, lets not. It's a HUGE problem. ONe other thing, with code
> that bad, you'll have anight mare getting it to rank high in search
> engines.
Meh, It'll be alrite after this guy tidies it up for me in a few months. No rush really.
> danieldone wrote:
> I dont see that it will be much of a problem to be honest.
>
> Cue Tyla and his HUGE usability/accessibility speech... Second
> thoughts, lets not. It's a HUGE problem. ONe other thing, with code
> that bad, you'll have anight mare getting it to rank high in search
> engines.
Meh, It'll be alrite after this guy tidies it up for me in a few months. No rush really.
Page: