dcsimg
www.webdeveloper.com
Results 1 to 5 of 5

Thread: Review of our website's new 3D widget

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    2

    Review of our website's new 3D widget

    Hello All,

    I'm glad I came across this forum as I could use some help. My website is www.storyleather.com and I work as a Community Manager there with a very small team. We're still in start up mode and we recently revamped our site to include a 3D modeling tool.

    I know the site has some problems with IE and we're looking into it, but I'm more concerned about how intuitive the site is. Any feedback is appreciated because A lot of time went into this and we want to get it right.

    Thank you in advance.

  2. #2
    This might be a silly question, but where is it on that site? I followed the customization links and in EVERY browser here I'm getting a blank white area at the top of the page when I get to where I THINK it should be:

    http://www.cutcodedown.com/for_others/jly009/broken.jpg

    That said, just getting to that point sucked thanks to the site itself being knee deep in endless "gee ain't it neat" scripttardery for nothing, and two major /fail/ at web design; inaccessible fixed width layout and absurdly undersized fixed metric fonts. Those alone make it an example of how not to build a website, before we even talk the gibberish heading orders and lack of a rational document structure...

    Much less the absurd half a minute page-load thanks to the grape-ape ridiculous 181 files totaling 2 megabytes compressed, 4.3 megabytes uncompressed... and FOR WHAT?!? A flat white fixed width layout?

    The 24 stylesheets doing the job of maybe TWO files, with 293k of CSS doing the job of probably 30k? Not good... then the scripting... mein gott all the "JS for nothing" coming to an over-the-top 2.2 MEGABYTES of code to be run in 52 separate files?

    The file count alone -- 181 files, on pages that by my estimate shouldn't even be taking a fifth that? Every file request means a handshake -- overhead SEPARATE from the transfer. 181 files means a minimum of 9 seconds first-load, a "real world" average of 34 seconds, and a worst case scenario of almost 3 minutes depending on one's geographical location in relation to your hosting!

    I would HIGHLY suggest pitching the entire site in the trash as an accessibility train wreck and a laundry list on how NOT to build a website. There is little if anything I'd try to salvage from that as it's fat, bloated, slow, inaccessible, etc, etc... it reeks of being built by people who don't know enough HTML or CSS to be building websites, and diving for endless pointless "JS for nothing"

    JS for nothign and your scripts for free... That ain't working, that's not how you do it.

    Throwing even more code at it in what I would assume is webGL (though it not working here nor even showing up in your code...) is NOT the answer here -- you're only making an already painful to use site harder and more painful to use.

    Apologies if that seems harsh, but the truth often is -- I would NEVER have even considered deploying that mess based on it's file sizes and file counts ALONE; much less the accessibility failings that make sites like this USELESS to me as a visitor since I dive for the zoom and am then confronted with a broken layout that doesn't fit the screen... or a layout that starts out too big for my screen while still having uselessly small fonts as I do on my tablet/netbook/phone/etc.

    Site like that? Unless the product was really, REALLY, REALLY interesting to me (it isn't) as a visitor to sites I'm pretty much a guaranteed bounce as I wouldn't even normally wait for it to finish loading. Much less that given it's raw size I'd be shocked if you're ranking in search engines either since they started penalizing slow loading sites...
    Last edited by deathshadow; 09-02-2014 at 10:15 PM.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    2
    Thank you for the feedback. Harsh or not, valuable feedback is much appreciated. Do you mind if I ask what browser you're using or what you think might be the contributing cause to why our widget comes up blank? I would definitely want to know in case our users are experiencing the same problem.

  4. #4
    I just tracked it down -- for some reason bitdefender was blocking it. Whitelisting your page as a false positive... it just loads even more slow loading and painful scripting.

    On the whole the site isn't even usable for me, even when it is "working".

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    Clintonville, OH
    Posts
    4
    Hi I actually thought it was nice, yeah it was a bit over the top but I really like simple websites. Hey are you available to help me design a simple sight? I am in Ohio and from reading your comments (something out of the HBO's comedy Silicon Valley) you know this stuff. Can you contact me or am I being too presumptive?
    ohiocda@yahoo.com

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

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

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