|
|
Posted by Jonathan N. Little on 01/19/07 23:41
aa wrote:
> "Jonathan N. Little" <lws4art@centralva.net> wrote in message
> news:d242a$45b0e6af$40cba7c2$17462@NAXS.COM...
>> Beauregard T. Shagnasty wrote:
>>> aa wrote:
>>>
>>>> I have hit conters on my pages.
>>> It appears they require JavaScript to be 'counted'. You would not know
>>> then that I visited. Both pages.
>> Ditto!
>>
>> Unfortunately, You, aa, base your reasoning on flawed assumptions.
>
> Probably. But after Beauregard placed a screenshot of my site the counter
> incremented (BTW, if I had his URL I could have his design in similar
> presentation in no time).
> Perhaps it is a coincedence, but perhaps your assumptions do flaw
> To understand what you consider good, I clicked a link to your site. I was
> testing my page for high res and had 1280x1024 at that moment.
> Your home page - the quality of the graphics is impressive - I mean it. Yet
> to mine mind the page is far from being user-friendly. I never do
> generalies. If I critisize I do details:
> 1. That red-yellow fonts on the tombstone are very cute but practically
> unreadable. So after several seconds of straining my eyes I just conceded.
> As I said quality should match the purpose. If these words are not supposed
> to be read, but are just decorations, then I withdraw this comment
> 2. I tried to go past Home Page but it was un-clickable with no apparent
> navigation. It took me several moments to realise that one should hit that
> little spinning disk. True, there is a text instruction in small prints
> there to click the disk. But this type of navigation is only good for the
> author. If navigation needs text instruction then it is not a navigation.
> You probably are aware of the reserches showing that a surfing visitor
> spends not more then 2-3 seconds to decide whether to get into a site or
> surfe elsewhere.
> With that sort of home page a surfer might get pissed off well before those
> 2-3 secs.
> Unless he/she is mesmerized by the tombstone per ce which as I said is cool
> 3. As I said the picture of the tombsone is made professionaly. But it
> puzzles. I thought you are in Undertaker's business. Or do graphic design
> for funerals.
> 4. After all these talks about resolution I was not impressed that at
> 1280x1024 the whole page collapsed into the upper half of the screen leaving
> the bottom half look like a black hole.
> Again this is just my personal opinion, but unlike yourself I will not get
> pissed off is you ignore it
Fair enough. Splash pages are obsolete and I have considered dropping
it, maybe next revision. It remains at present for the same reason as
many legacy things hang around. The site within works basically
resolution independent considering the graphic-oriented nature of my
business.
--
Take care,
Jonathan
-------------------
LITTLE WORKS STUDIO
http://www.LittleWorksStudio.com
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|