hey ya'll, heres a preview of the new website that i will be unviewling hopefully by Easter!!
http://www4.99k.org
Full Version: Preview Of Fantastic Website...
Very nice, Im not just sayign that because i helped, but because its a very nice layout, the contrast between colors, and very VERY nice job on the header, and the overall layout is a good start. hoping to see ALOT of potential out of that :-) good luck man,
meh, generic boxy layout with square corners. Why did you code it using tables rather than divs? I'm getting sick of seeing that same diagonal stripe pattern used all over the place. Why is the text part of the images rather than just having the images and the text seperate? The spacing of the boxes seems awkward and the striped gray tops and bottoms of each box seem to contrast too much with the white centers. The layout does not appear to allow for actual content, just boilerplate stuff. The site does not have a nice flow to it.
QUOTE(bezz @ Mar 13 2008, 01:13 PM) 
meh, generic boxy layout with square corners. Why did you code it using tables rather than divs? I'm getting sick of seeing that same diagonal stripe pattern used all over the place. Why is the text part of the images rather than just having the images and the text seperate? The spacing of the boxes seems awkward and the striped gray tops and bottoms of each box seem to contrast too much with the white centers. The layout does not appear to allow for actual content, just boilerplate stuff. The site does not have a nice flow to it.
I agree.. wasn't really that Fantastic..
Layout seems to break apart a bit in Firefox (2.0.0.12 - Linux)? Some white gaps which look like they shouldn't be there. It lacks colour, making it fairly dull to look at. The text on the footer is overly faint, and the lack of any rollover states for the links are anti-intuitive.
As to the markup, not sure what's going on there, two "<html>"s, two "<head>"s... Check out how it validates, and look up semantic markup for a bit of help improving it.
As to the markup, not sure what's going on there, two "<html>"s, two "<head>"s... Check out how it validates, and look up semantic markup for a bit of help improving it.
QUOTE
meh, generic boxy layout with square corners. Why did you code it using tables rather than divs? I'm getting sick of seeing that same diagonal stripe pattern used all over the place. Why is the text part of the images rather than just having the images and the text seperate? The spacing of the boxes seems awkward and the striped gray tops and bottoms of each box seem to contrast too much with the white centers. The layout does not appear to allow for actual content, just boilerplate stuff. The site does not have a nice flow to it.
agreed.
QUOTE
Layout seems to break apart a bit in Firefox (2.0.0.12 - Linux)?
Im on windows with the latest version of FF and its dead aswell. Weird spacing between boxes, some of them are not even aligned. And the site never ends loading, i still have the loading bar
____
My personal review :
i think the site seems lost, its like the site is in the middle of.. nowhere , also your site doesnt work on FF so its lost and borken. The layout itself is not bad at all but is really messy, coding and design. I think the stripes are to regular for a "fantastic" layout.
Needs improvment.
Definitely shouldn't use strict validation, if you're trying to use inline styling 
^
In FireFox 3b4 it appears to be loading for a loooong time.
Also, in IE8, it appears to be "waiting" for quite a while (I think it times out, actually)
It's a decent layout, but a lot of coding problems need to get fixed *shrug*
And some more color wouldn't hurt
^In FireFox 3b4 it appears to be loading for a loooong time.
Also, in IE8, it appears to be "waiting" for quite a while (I think it times out, actually)
It's a decent layout, but a lot of coding problems need to get fixed *shrug*
And some more color wouldn't hurt
It is too simple and understyled. The code needs some work too.
umm.. well guys its not entiretly finished. i agree it has alot of work ahead but dont think this is the final version its just a "alpha" for now.. alot of changes are to come. and im sure uncled knows this too.
thanks guys for the comments, i dont care if their harsh, just keep them coming... like, whats wrong with the coding exactly??
ok, it is updated... please critique!
Looks better, but i'm still not really liking it. Here's some quick changes I thought could help:
Click to view attachment
Click to view attachment
Do you know how small your fonts are on resolutions 1280x1024 and up? It's a struggle to read man...
A note to web developers:
STOP USING FIXED FONT SIZES ON WEB PAGES!!!
There\s a little CSS trick:
That way it will always scale to 80% of the screen resolution.
A note to web developers:
STOP USING FIXED FONT SIZES ON WEB PAGES!!!
There\s a little CSS trick:
CODE
body {
font: normal 80% Tahoma,sans-serif;
color: #somehexvalue;
}
font: normal 80% Tahoma,sans-serif;
color: #somehexvalue;
}
That way it will always scale to 80% of the screen resolution.
ooh, thanx ulrich!
UPDATED: almost done. 4 more pages to go.
To be honest, that page looks fantastic, easy, but very good, and NOT hard to find the navigation.
Keep the good work
Keep the good work
i like bezz's retouch. Bg colors white and light grey, it gives a path to your layout.. i mean its kind of lost right now.
Right now, i suggest puting the bg colors and make it larger.
I do not know if people realize but 500 / 800 width layout IS small, use to be good when everybody had 17screens and running 1024x768 but now that there are 19, 20, 21 22 24 screens and a larger resolution the 500 / 800 are TINY.
Try to do like the zymic site, to goes larger with a larger screen. Or i dunno, set it to 900 at least. Just a suggestion because its like we don't even want to visit your site when we are on a huge screen.
Right now, i suggest puting the bg colors and make it larger.
I do not know if people realize but 500 / 800 width layout IS small, use to be good when everybody had 17screens and running 1024x768 but now that there are 19, 20, 21 22 24 screens and a larger resolution the 500 / 800 are TINY.
Try to do like the zymic site, to goes larger with a larger screen. Or i dunno, set it to 900 at least. Just a suggestion because its like we don't even want to visit your site when we are on a huge screen.
its not bad, but ya it could use a little touch up in parts
ok, main site is complete. going to start adding little features. fell free to sign-up!
How can it be called complete at this stage? There is zero content.
looks good 
the main coding is complete, just adding the features now. FULL system wont be ready for awhile.
Can't be viewed at FF (at me), in IE works good, but don't really like that matrix thingy.. And when I click on a link in menu, the black content boxes get smaller? Good job coding, atleast, much better than what I can achieve :P
Working fine for me on FF, Same problem with the content boxes though.
lol, didnt expect people to post in this topic.. lol um, ill check out the black box's. and what black box's are you talking about?
Yea the flash header doesn't load for me in Firefox on linux
ok, ill check it out.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.