www.webdeveloper.com

View Poll Results: Do you like my website?

Voters
5. You may not vote on this poll
  • Hell yeah!

    2 40.00%
  • yes..

    1 20.00%
  • meh.

    1 20.00%
  • it's horrible.

    1 20.00%
Results 1 to 6 of 6

Thread: Boss CSS at my site

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    2

    Cool Boss CSS at my site

    I have put countless hours of hard work into my website, for years now...Please let me know what you think!
    @thorfrederickson.com

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    1,643
    It took too long to load. I aborted it, because I'm always woried about what it is downloading to my machine when it takes too long...

    Why is the link in the format of an email address???

  3. #3
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    1,020
    As Jedaisoul said, it's painful to watch load -- and really it is chock full of accessibility issues and bad design choices.

    One of the worst design choices is that "parallax scrolling" nonsense, that just makes sites harder to use no matter how "pretty" an effect it is. Likewise doing sites that way dumps WAY too much content into a single page -- or worse spreads it out so much that visitors cannot find the forest for all the trees -- and of course the speed penalty of swapping out those massive background images sure doesn't help.

    Accessibility issues abound -- the ultra-thin webfont is effectively useless for me even when zoomed in, and I DO have to zoom thanks to the undersized fixed metric fonts. There are several sections like the menu or that "sky's the limit" parallax block where the color contrasts are far below accessibility minimums -- I couldn't even see there WAS a menu at first. The contrasts need to be even higher too when you have alternating dark and light backgrounds, as when most of the screen is white, that black menu bar becomes invisible. (Google fell into this trap a few years ago, and finally gave in to complaints about how useless it was -- finally kicking to the curb their "design experts" claims of how much more important "style" and "art" is.)

    The speed problems are simple - it's FIVE MEGABYTES in 42 files... to deliver 5k of plaintext and maybe a half dozen images that I'd even consider to be content. That's easily 40 times larger than I'd allow an entire page on a site to reach (not counting social media plugins) unless it was something like a gallery of three or four dozen thumbnails (in which case it's only five times larger).

    Between the massive images for nothing, massive scripting for nothing, and "gee ain't it neat" design choices, it's a slow loading usability mess. Even the heading orders don't make sense, which is laughable on a single-flow non-columnar layout. Multiple H1 that don't even follow the (rubbish) HTML 5 conventions, empty H1, h4 without h3 or h2 before them, you pull up a document outline and it's non-navigable gibberish.

    ... and that's before I even look under the hood at the markup.

    jQuery for nothing, that steaming pile known as bootstrap (which just makes more work and a less responsive design, despite the wild claims to the contrary), endless pointless DIV for nothing, endless pointless classes for nothing, presentational use of classes (thanks bootcrap!) little if anything remotely resembling semantic markup, endless pointless webfonts, horizontal rules when there's no topic change, static scripting in the markup, Multiple headings on single sections, abuse of button tags outside of forms (which is the only place they belong), static style in the markup, and endless pointless javascript and jquery on a page that to be frank, I'm not sure should even have JS on it. Hence your 33k of markup to deliver 5k of plaintext and a half dozen content images -- as much as three times the code as should have been necessary.

    Though to be brutally frank, it's very much what I've come to expect when I see a HTML 5 doctype, jQuery, and the train wreck known as bootstrap. It reeks of focusing on form instead of function, and it's really just a laundry list of how not to build a website because of it. It's slow, it's hard to use, it doesn't gracefully degrade, and it has major accessibility failings.
    Last edited by jedaisoul; 07-19-2014 at 08:24 AM. Reason: irrreelevant comments deleted
    Java is to JavaScript as Ham is to Hamburger.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    13

    front page

    if I go to the front page from somewhere I would never know this is a JavaScript forum, that's really bad for you

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    13
    you need that categories section that is!

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Posts
    6
    Hey Thor,

    I like the site design, instead of going technical about code or anything. It loaded up fast for me.

    I took some time to help with the messaging for the site. I tend to go for "conversion orientated" design.

    In your case you have a lot of good copy on the page but it's all separated. You need to condense your entire message into one or two sentences.

    And then display it in the header (above the fold) -- you lost interested fast if someone is trying to figure it out what it is you provide.

    I made a mockup in Photoshop so you can see what I mean. Basically add your photo, your services, your phone number, address and social links above the fold.

    That will make it so much easier for someone to within a few seconds understand what the deal is.

    Check out what I propose you try and do for the header: http://cl.ly/image/313k350n3x0o

    Thanks and keep on rockin'

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
HTML5 Development Center



Recent Articles