|
Posted by SpaceGirl on 10/08/07 15:17
On Oct 8, 3:56 pm, "Jonathan N. Little" <lws4...@centralva.net> wrote:
> Travis Newbury wrote:
> > On Oct 8, 5:26 am, Chaddy2222 <spamlovermailbox-sicur...@yahoo.com.au>
> > wrote:
> >>http://www.mortgagenews2.com
> >> It's from the same company that SpaceGirl gave the previous example
> >> from. It's a shocker though, I mean it should have been done in HTML +
> >> CSS for style + PHP / some other server side language for the user
> >> account stuff.
>
> > A "Shocker" Hardly.
>
> > Should have? We can not tell because we do not know the audience well
> > enough to make that decision.
>
> > Could have, absolutely. The company and developers need to understand
> > what their visitors want. You don't know, there may have been a
> > calling for this.
>
> BS. Nearly 4 minutes before I could see anything. As a client I assume I
> would be interested in mortgages, not dancing animated squirrels or
> whatever. So while I'm watching a progress bar instead of getting
> mortgage rates I can get the info awww.lendingtree.comin 24 seconds.
>
> Now I if I cannot read the text on mortgagenews2.com, well I'm screwed.
> lendingtree.com also has stupid pixel-fixed design, but with
> lendingtree.com I can dump their lousy CSS and bump the font size up and
> read it if I wish.
>
> Yes the deziner does not have ultimate control of the styling as with
> flash, but then a potential customer doesn't have to be driving away
> because of some poor design decisions made by the said deziner!
Well I agree. Bad design is bad design!
[Back to original message]
|