• Please use real names.

    Greetings to all who have registered to OPF and those guests taking a look around. Please use real names. Registrations with fictitious names will not be processed. REAL NAMES ONLY will be processed

    Firstname Lastname

    Register

    We are a courteous and supportive community. No need to hide behind an alia. If you have a genuine need for privacy/secrecy then let me know!
  • Welcome to the new site. Here's a thread about the update where you can post your feedback, ask questions or spot those nasty bugs!

New website

John Siewert

New member
I got my online portfolio up and running recently. I'd appreciate some input on the design. It's through microsoft office live, and unfortunately I got in on the beta version. So microsoft in their infinite wisdom decided they would make the sites fully viewable only on IE7, so my portfolio slideshow only works on IE untill they make changes next month. Alhough any input you folks offer would be appreciated.

- John Siewert

www.siewertphoto.com
 

Asher Kelman

OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
Well, I guess not!


I wonder whether IE from my G5 would work on the Intel Mac?

Asher

Microsoft website said:
INTERNET EXPLORER FOR MAC NO LONGER AVAILABLE FOR DOWNLOAD

In June 2003, the Microsoft Macintosh Business Unit announced that Internet Explorer for Mac would undergo no further development, and support would cease in 2005. In accordance with published support lifecycle policies, Microsoft ended support for Internet Explorer for Mac on December 31st, 2005, and is not providing any further security or performance updates.

Accordingly, as of January 31st, 2006, Internet Explorer for the Mac is no longer available for download from Microsoft. It is recommended that Macintosh users migrate to more recent web browsing technologies such as Apple's Safari.
 

Cem_Usakligil

Well-known member
Asher Kelman said:
Well then, I guess I'll have download IE, LOL!

Asher

Hi John,

Like Asher, I don't use IE. So I could not see your portfolio on your site. The "About Us" page is also displayed/rendered rather badly using an Opera browser. It is a pity really. If I had been a potential customer, I would now go away and not come back. This I am writing with the best interest in the success of your business obviously so please don't get me wrong :).

Cheers,

Cem
 

Ray West

New member
Hi John,

I've run it under ie, (found it especially for you ;-) - the following are my thoughts, fwiw -

1) Slide shows - boring - I want to flick through find an image, study it, not be led through in your sequence/speed - use thumbnails.

2) M$ do their own thing wrt web design - dump it. (Their Java is not Java). Folk are moving from ie.

3) I do not see the point of mentioning Lego (tm or otherwise, Meccano was far better). More interest on your thoughts, what you try to extract, etc.

4) there are some large numbers at top rhs of pages.

5) I agree with Cem - it will put folk off.

6) It is quite tricky crafting sites viewable in all browsers, most folk get something wrong, unless they keep it basic, and hand crafted in raw html.

It may help, when developing web sites, to call the index.htm page something else, then you can tell folk how to get to your pages, without the general public knowing. Just shove a 'coming soon' message on the index.htm page, for the gp, and rename when tested - decipher what I mean

Best wishes,

Ray
 
I like the basic look, it is simple and clean. I somewhat dislike the edge between the lighter and darker greys behind the phone numbers as it makes them harder to read.

But, the choice of fonts is horrible from my perspective. I use a larger than normal font size on all web pages (normal fonts at 1600x1200 on a 21" screen are too small for comfortable reading even though those fonts are fine at 1024x768 on a 17" display. Because of this change in font size, some of your text simply runs off of the page. Using simple tools like you are using I would suggest looking into using wider margins.

The image gallery does not work in Firefox which mixed with Mac issues means losing 15-20% of the web audience. In IE, the gallery is okay, but has issues. I feel violated by people who think I want a slideshow of images rather than being able to click next when I am done viewing each image. I am either done with an image in 0.25 seconds or it takes many seconds or minutes. 1 second per image is too fast to view the images. So I would turn off the automatic slideshow on startup if you can. I would also changed Best viewed with Microsoft Internet Explorer to Only viewable with IE. Truth be told, most of Microsofts new technologies lead to inferior websites that break web usability by using POSTBacks rather than using GET parameters so one cannot even bookmark a page with a specific image or other tool. JavaScript/ECMAScript, Java, and other scripting tools used clientside should not cause a page to fail to display things. In this case, search engines are unlikely to ever know that there are images on your website at all.

An example of this type of damage is easily seen at keh.com where one cannot open many links in a new window so you have to open two browser instances on the homepage and navigate down to compare manufacturer to third party lenses. It wastes the consumers time and drives people away from them who might otherwise spend money if it were convenient.

The amount of text used is good for a 15 second attention span and the web practice of scanning text.

some thoughts,

Sean (who is rather critical of certain stupid web design choices that are common to Microsoft's newest tools that do a half-assed job in half the time)
 

John Siewert

New member
Im glad to hear your comments. Initially when I signed up with office live I assumed I would be able to use front page or other script tools. Unfortunately after signing up and being bound for 90 days i discovered i am stuck using their template with the crappy slideshow tool being the most effective tool they provided for a portfolio type site. I believe I have a week or so left before I can take my domain elsewhere, and fortunately I have not sent out my direct marketing cards which direct people to my site. I was lured in by FREE DOMAIN!!! and now have to put business on hold long enough to iron things out. Thanks again for the comments, I would rather hear these things from you than from customers that were turned away because of these things.

- John Siewert
 

nicolas claris

OPF Co-founder/Administrator
Well, I guess not!
I wonder whether IE from my G5 would work on the Intel Mac?
Asher
Nope! I tried already. Shades will be for later on...
I won't install IExx even on my Windows bootcamp disk..
 

Tim Smith

New member
[insert rant here]

As a sometimes web site designer I can tell you that getting a site to display in the highest number of possible browser and OS combinations is both art and science. It is tedious in the extreme (or can be). Providing a clean and democratic viewing experience for everyone has been a long-time campaign for those involved in programming and setting standards for the web. For years, standards have been developed for things like CSS, HTML, etc. to help realize an evolution to a browser-independent user experience. So it seems the height of arrogance to me that MS would roll out a tool that would flat out preclude the viewing of a site by anyone who doesn't conform to their notion of the correct browser.

[end rant]
 

Ray West

New member
Hi Tim,

setting standards for the web
Well, there's no enforcement agency, so why shoud M$ or anyone bother? I.E. is free, M$ have there own agenda. Standards are no use in a fast developing scenario.

Best wishes,

Ray
 

Tim Smith

New member
Ray West said:
Hi Tim,


Well, there's no enforcement agency, so why shoud M$ or anyone bother? I.E. is free, M$ have there own agenda. Standards are no use in a fast developing scenario.

Best wishes,

Ray

From a strictly business standpoint I suppose you're right. At least from the MS business standpoint. But the gentleman who posted his site using the MS non-compliant product has lost me as a potential client since I am unable to view his site (no great loss really ;)). As for "fast developing", when was it again that Al Gore invented the internet?
 
Tim Smith said:
From a strictly business standpoint I suppose you're right. At least from the MS business standpoint. But the gentleman who posted his site using the MS non-compliant product has lost me as a potential client since I am unable to view his site (no great loss really ;)). As for "fast developing", when was it again that Al Gore invented the internet?

The problems with standards is they are done by committee. The results may be good (TCP, IP, SONET, DS-1, ...) but the process is very slow. MSFT tends to release non-standards-compliant products before the committees would have finalized the standards. This gets a product to market and generating revenue and from a business standpoint that matters.

enjoy your day,

Sean
 

Tim Smith

New member
I could accept that if the product in question were not one that ignored many of the standards and conventions already in place. To release a product that allows people to make websites that can only be viewed in one browser has a negative impact on those that use it by limiting their potential customer base, and those that wish to partake of the user's products/services by rendering them unable to see it.

This is not a product that has bypassed standards that are still to come, it's a product that has ignored a simple guiding rule, namely that a website should appear in as many of the most frequently used browsers as possible to insure the largest possible positive user experience. For a web page creation software to essentially say: "This product will make easily assembled and attractive web pages very quickly, but the results may ONLY be viewed in one browser" might be expedient, but it also seems silly. If Asher (or the forum service he employs) were to use the software in question, there would be far fewer members of this board. Of course at this point, you might wish that he did, just to be rid of me and my stubborn opinions.

Cheers!
Tim
 

nicolas claris

OPF Co-founder/Administrator
Tim Smith said:
If Asher (or the forum service he employs) were to use the software in question, there would be far fewer members of this board. Of course at this point, you might wish that he did, just to be rid of me and my stubborn opinions.
Cheers!
Tim
In fact, the software we use (Vbulletin) has of course be written by professionnal, but the customization took quite a while too and has been (and still is) handled by pros.

Why would a website developpement be different than photography?

You have different players: amateurs and pros…
While some bugs are acceptable from amateurs, they shouldn't be from pros (see my precaution for the wording ;-)).

Since computers are affordable some companies like Microsoft have produced and sold many softwares to make users beleive that they can do better than pros.
This is true in every jobs, for example Powerpoint may help someone to build a presentation, not to be a multimedia specialist! MS Word is a (very good) word processor but won't make a secretary a pro for brochure design.

In fact I strongly believe three things:

- The arrival of computers have brung the possibility for a much larger audience to become creative and choose a specialization that will become their job for long. Great !

- For the others, they are just fooled and spend to much time with these apps instead of doing their job, I mean the one that brings the spinach in the plates (and even the butter!).

- For whatever reasons, if one wants to handle the complete processes, then one should buy the right softwares, read the tutorials and books, and train, train so much that one will become a pro...
For example, this is what most of photographers do now when they develop their raw files instead of bringing the films to the lab.
And this is why there are forums like OPF to share our experiences!

So for once let's not blame Microsoft for this software, execpt if they lied when they sold it. It is not a pro software for web developpement.

Hope I didn't start for a war here ;;;;-))))))
 

Tim Smith

New member
No war. I understand what you're saying. And I don't entirely disagree. I'm feeling a bit more mellow after lunch and realize I really don't care what MS does with their software or how they might cause as many problems as they solve by releasing a software that will frustrate rather than facilitate. When I go to a website built by that software and can't get it to work, I'll just move on.

Peace,
Tim
 
Top