The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only.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.
Hello,
It would be greatly appreciated if feedback was given on http://devbytes.net, due to DNS servers updating you may have to access the site using this URL http://www.cpradio.net/devbytes.
Thanks alot
Matthew Stronge - DevBytes Web Development
It would be greatly appreciated if feedback was given on http://devbytes.net, due to DNS servers updating you may have to access the site using this URL http://www.cpradio.net/devbytes.
Thanks alot
Matthew Stronge - DevBytes Web Development
Page:
You dont need to scroll to read it, but the scroll bar looks a bit pap..
Brio wrote:
> OK, I'm using IE 6 if this makes any diference (which it shouldn't!)
>
> At 800x600 the screen scrolls sideways. At 1024x768 it's fine. I think
> you should check it as it does look untidy like that.
Interesting... I have IE6 also, and at 800x600 I have minimal sideways scrolling; I don't need to scroll to read anything!
> OK, I'm using IE 6 if this makes any diference (which it shouldn't!)
>
> At 800x600 the screen scrolls sideways. At 1024x768 it's fine. I think
> you should check it as it does look untidy like that.
Interesting... I have IE6 also, and at 800x600 I have minimal sideways scrolling; I don't need to scroll to read anything!
Though, I only viewed on IE at 1024x768 and 800x600...
I did have a few problems at 800x600 (horizontal scroll bar, slightly off new title bar)... stuff everyone else has already said...
I wasnt sure why you gave an option to change font size?
There were a couple of spelling/sentence construct errors (like I'm one to type) and although I don't know who your marketing toward, maybe a more formal MSN than fuzzball?
And I wasn't sure why you were pushing the founders rather than the business?
Other than that, I really liked the look of the site a lot though... seemed clean, well coordinated...
I did have a few problems at 800x600 (horizontal scroll bar, slightly off new title bar)... stuff everyone else has already said...
I wasnt sure why you gave an option to change font size?
There were a couple of spelling/sentence construct errors (like I'm one to type) and although I don't know who your marketing toward, maybe a more formal MSN than fuzzball?
And I wasn't sure why you were pushing the founders rather than the business?
Other than that, I really liked the look of the site a lot though... seemed clean, well coordinated...
I think enough has been said on the layout.
I like the Portfolio page, looks nice except for the images, I don't like the fact that I can see all the programs your running and your systray..etc
I like the Portfolio page, looks nice except for the images, I don't like the fact that I can see all the programs your running and your systray..etc
I'm going to try and offer some consructive critisim here, but from a professional pov.
OK... Looks good in IE, but...
N6.22 on 56K Nice loading times, but theres a huge problem with the page layout. I'm looking at it on 1026 and the horizontal scroll is bad! I mean really bad... Could be down to
OK... Looks good in IE, but...
N6.22 on 56K Nice loading times, but theres a huge problem with the page layout. I'm looking at it on 1026 and the horizontal scroll is bad! I mean really bad... Could be down to
as this is an IE tag not 100% supported in NS or Moz.
It couls also be that you have set every table at 100%, but havent dictated a max % for the holding cells? NS and Moz will just guess the maths from here on.
Before I go any further... shorten you meta data, there is way to much there to serve any real purpose, especially the Keywords and the Content.
The CSS should really live in an external file especially if it's effects are site wide apart from cutting down DL time, it'll make changes much easier. A lotof your "Form elements" CSS wo't work in older browsers either. It's much more sensible to actually apply these direct tot he form elements instead of a CSS declaration to avaoid problems in legacy browsers.
For accessability, may I suggest "title=" on your links?
BTW, it doesn't validate as xHTML transitional, which could also cause problems in Moz on NS due tot he DTD not serving correctly.
* Line 5, column 29:
Error: required attribute "content" not specified
* Line 16, column 50:
... ) 1 and 2, multimedia development using Flash 5.0 & MX, Photoshop 7, a ...
Error: character "&" is the first character of a delimiter but occurred as data
* Line 16, column 50:
... ng Flash 5.0 & MX, Photoshop 7, and Fireworks 4.0 & MX.
Error: character "&" is the first character of a delimiter but occurred as data
* Line 332, column 50:
... 103px" alt="DevBytes" src="images/index.php?id=01&type=0" width="425px ...
Error: unknown entity "type"
* Line 332, column 50:
... x" alt="DevBytes" src="images/index.php?id=01&type=0" width="425px" /> ...
Error: reference not terminated by refc delimiter
* Line 333, column 50:
... x" alt="DevBytes" src="images/index.php?id=02&type=0" width="375px" /> ...
Error: reference not terminated by refc delimiter
* Line 361, column 14:
Select a Font Size:
Error: there is no attribute "WIDTH" for this element (in this HTML version)
Your using a lot of different CSS classes too from 1 2 and 3, 1 Is widely supports, 2 is only really V5+ and 3 is still in its infancy, so i'd avoid anything that relys on 3 and often most os CSS2!
No disrespect here, in IE the site looks great, but you need to widen your test platform.. I test on Mozilla, NS4.79, NS6.22, Opera5 and IE4/5.5/6 Mac and PC...
Which brings me to another point... the Text resizer... great idea, but not on a Mac as the screen rez is very different and gives different results from a PC. If doing so, I'd use Points not Pixles to dictate the size.
I like the colours and love the design, but I think you've tried to hard to show off without actually thinking about it. Your target audience here is prospective customers and you've made the assumption that all will use IE, though in most cases this is true, you should still be prepared for Mr.X and his NS4.5! (I'll kill him one day!)
I could go onto usability, but I wont... There is huge room for improvement on this site, and personally, I'd take the time to test it vigourously and iron all the bugs out...
Ditch the
It couls also be that you have set every table at 100%, but havent dictated a max % for the holding cells? NS and Moz will just guess the maths from here on.
Before I go any further... shorten you meta data, there is way to much there to serve any real purpose, especially the Keywords and the Content.
The CSS should really live in an external file especially if it's effects are site wide apart from cutting down DL time, it'll make changes much easier. A lotof your "Form elements" CSS wo't work in older browsers either. It's much more sensible to actually apply these direct tot he form elements instead of a CSS declaration to avaoid problems in legacy browsers.
For accessability, may I suggest "title=" on your links?
BTW, it doesn't validate as xHTML transitional, which could also cause problems in Moz on NS due tot he DTD not serving correctly.
* Line 5, column 29:
Error: required attribute "content" not specified
* Line 16, column 50:
... ) 1 and 2, multimedia development using Flash 5.0 & MX, Photoshop 7, a ...
Error: character "&" is the first character of a delimiter but occurred as data
* Line 16, column 50:
... ng Flash 5.0 & MX, Photoshop 7, and Fireworks 4.0 & MX.
Error: character "&" is the first character of a delimiter but occurred as data
* Line 332, column 50:
... 103px" alt="DevBytes" src="images/index.php?id=01&type=0" width="425px ...
Error: unknown entity "type"
* Line 332, column 50:
... x" alt="DevBytes" src="images/index.php?id=01&type=0" width="425px" /> ...
Error: reference not terminated by refc delimiter
* Line 333, column 50:
... x" alt="DevBytes" src="images/index.php?id=02&type=0" width="375px" /> ...
Error: reference not terminated by refc delimiter
* Line 361, column 14:
Error: there is no attribute "WIDTH" for this element (in this HTML version)
Your using a lot of different CSS classes too from 1 2 and 3, 1 Is widely supports, 2 is only really V5+ and 3 is still in its infancy, so i'd avoid anything that relys on 3 and often most os CSS2!
No disrespect here, in IE the site looks great, but you need to widen your test platform.. I test on Mozilla, NS4.79, NS6.22, Opera5 and IE4/5.5/6 Mac and PC...
Which brings me to another point... the Text resizer... great idea, but not on a Mac as the screen rez is very different and gives different results from a PC. If doing so, I'd use Points not Pixles to dictate the size.
I like the colours and love the design, but I think you've tried to hard to show off without actually thinking about it. Your target audience here is prospective customers and you've made the assumption that all will use IE, though in most cases this is true, you should still be prepared for Mr.X and his NS4.5! (I'll kill him one day!)
I could go onto usability, but I wont... There is huge room for improvement on this site, and personally, I'd take the time to test it vigourously and iron all the bugs out...
Ditch the
it'll give you headaches
Ditch the xHTML DTD and go for DTD 4.01 Trans instead (Your not parsing XML so no need for xHTML)
Assign some Cell widthst to contain the tables
and put the CSS into an external sheet
Finally...
Test, evaluate, test again and evaluate and try W3C's validation tools.
Just in case you were wondering... I'm actually a creative developer (Web designer for those who don't know)for a huge publishing house, some examples of my work:
http://wip.polity.co.uk (still in development)
http://wip.blackwellpublishing.com (again, still in DEV)
http://www.blackwell-synergy.com (some major bugs)
http://www.polity.co.uk/giddens
http://www.tyla.org.uk/new
Good luck with your business, hope you do well.
Ty
Ditch the xHTML DTD and go for DTD 4.01 Trans instead (Your not parsing XML so no need for xHTML)
Assign some Cell widthst to contain the tables
and put the CSS into an external sheet
Finally...
Test, evaluate, test again and evaluate and try W3C's validation tools.
Just in case you were wondering... I'm actually a creative developer (Web designer for those who don't know)for a huge publishing house, some examples of my work:
http://wip.polity.co.uk (still in development)
http://wip.blackwellpublishing.com (again, still in DEV)
http://www.blackwell-synergy.com (some major bugs)
http://www.polity.co.uk/giddens
http://www.tyla.org.uk/new
Good luck with your business, hope you do well.
Ty
OK, I'm using IE 6 if this makes any diference (which it shouldn't!)
At 800x600 the screen scrolls sideways. At 1024x768 it's fine. I think you should check it as it does look untidy like that.
I do like the overal design and it looks very tidy.
I would recommend removing the font size option thing, and just don't use absolute sizes, so that people can use the function on their browser instead (in IE the View - Text Size option)
And as you stated below that you want the site to be quick loading, why not transfer the style sheet into an external css file to speed it up a bit?
At 800x600 the screen scrolls sideways. At 1024x768 it's fine. I think you should check it as it does look untidy like that.
I do like the overal design and it looks very tidy.
I would recommend removing the font size option thing, and just don't use absolute sizes, so that people can use the function on their browser instead (in IE the View - Text Size option)
And as you stated below that you want the site to be quick loading, why not transfer the style sheet into an external css file to speed it up a bit?
Fog wrote:
> That must have been some speedy typing.
Every page has the same layout so the same template was used for each one.
> That must have been some speedy typing.
Every page has the same layout so the same template was used for each one.
Lord H wrote:
> Of course, my site took me roughly an hour to do
That must have been some speedy typing.
> Of course, my site took me roughly an hour to do
That must have been some speedy typing.
Of course, my site took me roughly an hour to do and isn't selling anything. It for me and my group of friends. It's never gonna win awards for design. I was just posting it because Dev said he wanted to see a site I'd done......
Dev, mate, I didn't mean poorly designed, I just meant that you haven't tested it properly. I use Mozilla and in order to see the whole page I have to scroll horizontally a long way for some reason. I'm sure it's really a great site but I didn't really have a proper look because I wasn't in the mood for scrolling.
It was supposed to be constructive critism(sp)! :-)
Dev, mate, I didn't mean poorly designed, I just meant that you haven't tested it properly. I use Mozilla and in order to see the whole page I have to scroll horizontally a long way for some reason. I'm sure it's really a great site but I didn't really have a proper look because I wasn't in the mood for scrolling.
It was supposed to be constructive critism(sp)! :-)
WòókieeMøn§†€® wrote:
> when I view the page they are thing borders,
Erm... I meant THIN borders, obviously!
> when I view the page they are thing borders,
Erm... I meant THIN borders, obviously!
Page:
Freeola & GetDotted are rated 5 Stars
Check out some of our customer reviews below:
Best Provider
The best provider I know of, never a problem, recommend highly
Simple, yet effective...
This is perfect, so simple yet effective, couldnt believe that I could build a web site, have alrealdy recommended you to friends. Brilliant.
It appears you are using an old browser, as such, some parts of the Freeola and Getdotted site will not work as intended. Using the latest version of your browser, or another browser such as Google Chrome, Mozilla Firefox, or Opera will provide a better, safer browsing experience for you.