My website is http://www.utilitynerd.com is basically just a html / css coded site aimed for usability and easy navigation. It is used mostly for the purpose of hosting my software. Let me know what you think
The site is quick to load, has a pleasant use of colour and is a good starting point.
My most important criticism is that it says they are java applets, but not what platforms they will run on? What platforms have they been tested on? In particular, if they CAN run on mobile/tablet platforms, the site should be mobile friendly rather than fixed-width. Indeed, given the low graphical content of the site, this would be an excellent opportunity to learn how to build a mobile-friendly site anyway.
However, before you put more work into the site, are you sure you have the basic structure right? E.g. Why have separate "software" and "download" sections? Isn't that a bit clunky? Surely it would make more sense if people could select download from the "software" page(s)?
Also, I note that the software images were not optimised. Given the small size of the graphics that is not a major issue, but, for example the bhd-small.png (15.5K) can be optimised to:
- bhd-small80.jpg (7.7K at 80% quality).
- bhd-small16.gif (3.2K at color depth of 16).
Lastly, I'd suggest brightening up the home page by including one or two pictures of your apps.
However, the criticisms I've made do not detract from the good work you have put in. Well done.
I found a online optimizer and optimized my images, i think it went from around 760kb to about 540kb so pretty good compression and i see what you mean about the download and software i should just combine them.
I personally think you are either a coder/web developer or a graphic artist. Very rare for a person to be both IMHO.
What i'm saying is that you don't need to be able to design and make websites pretty to be a web developer. Do as i do and pay someone else to do the artistry while focusing yourself upon the functionality!
Lol im coder/web developer, and i know what you mean its rare to find both i wish i was good at the graphic part would make my website nice and pretty lol but for now i just have to do my best to design all my graphics if it wasnt more of a personal website i would hire a designer to help me out
One thing I've noticed on the BCD converter - hexadecimal is spelt wrong. i.e. there is an "a" after the "x", not an "i". Also, I've been experimenting with the compression of the larger graphics, and I find 256 color GIF to be more successful than 80% JPG.
But either way, remember to keep master copies of the PNG files. JPG, in particular, is lossy, i.e. every time you edit a JPG file it degrades irreversibly. That is not the case with GIF, but if you reduce the color palette that is irreversible.