Thoughts on website

F

frosty

New member
Joined
Nov 17, 2009
Messages
271
Reaction score
0
Getting up to speed with Silverlight, I started working on a detailing website. The text and everything is place holder and may need corrected. However, looking for input on the picture display on the main page as well as on the Our Work page.

TrickDetailing

Thanks in advance.

P.S. Viewing the website will installing Silverlight 3.0 which is about 2 mb. (It's Microsoft competition to Flash.)
 
Does that mean everyone will have to download a Silverlight flash player to view your website in the future? Sounds like a disadvantage. Many people are hesitant to add more software to their puters, however small the program, including me.
 
Having to download a program to view your website is a drawback. You want your site to jump out at people. We're an impatient lot. We want things in an instant.
 
Several of the latest web design guides say that Flash (or Silverlight) has seen it's day in the sense that you have to wait on anything to load. Now, there are several advantages to Flash content being embedded, but you shouldn't have to wait for it to load, it should load with the page. It definitely has it's place in the web world.

I forget what the time is, but I think the general consensus is that you have something like 5-10 seconds to "sell" your website to someone. When half or all of that is waiting on content to load - you missed them.

Do some browsing on how to effectively use Flash content and go from there. Personally, I would spend more time on your site if I didn't have to wait for Silverlight to load it. Your pictures could easily be prompted with some good JavaScript or something, and still look nice.

Either way - I say if you are going to use dynamic content, use Flash, not Silverlight. Silverlight still hasn't caught on (and probably never will catch up) like Flash. Most people already have the Flash Player installed, and it isn't that big a deal.

DLB

DLB
 
jpegs13 said:
Having to download a program to view your website is a drawback. You want your site to jump out at people. We're an impatient lot. We want things in an instant.
Click to expand...

Hehe I know, but you can't do the types of things as efficient in regular web technologies as you can with Silverlight or flash.

For me, it's learning more about Silverlight and evaluating some new controls.

Silverlight is just a browser add on and will get added via Windows Updates if enabled. I've been running it for years and maybe erroneously assummed others are running it via windows Updates.

If I used a traditional based HTML technology, at this point there wouldn't be any need for this thread. :) There's a cool pix display control I'm evaluating that I mainly was looking for feedback on.

Of course all is not lost, feedback that users that may visit my site aren't much on updating with that latest OS patches & updates is of help as well. (If running Windows.)

I may add a separate asp.net site without the extra functionality at a later time.

Mainly the detailing I do and have extra time to do is by word of mouth so I won't be doing a ton of SEO trying to get as many people as I can to call. I agree, if that were the goal I'd definitely have an Asp.Net alternative site up as well.

Thanks for the input. If anybody does have Silverlight 3 add on for their browser, specifically I'm looking for feedback on the pix display on the Home page, Our Work and the concept on the Restoration page.

Thanks
 
Forgive my criticism - it is totally meant to be constructive. I in no way mean it personally.

Your gallery presentation is neat - but I don't think it is very useful for this application. You apparently have a good grasp on how to build a Silverlight gallery (I have never fooled with it). I can see where it would be a nice touch on some sites, but don't think so for a site trying to highlight your detailing work.

I think the most effective type of gallery for something trying to show dramatic differences in pictures yet still maintaining speed, functionality, and user options is something like this:
SimpleViewer Gallery

That is the most intuitive and simple gallery viewer I have ever used. I have customized it (SimpleViewer, not just that compact one) to be used on several different sites in different ways.

The good thing about something like that is that you have a preview button, but all of the focus is on the image at hand. Plus, users have the Full Screen option if they want to see more of a photo. There are also several other useful features in their program, but those are some highlights.

With a small fixed image size and the scrolling gallery like you have built, you can only see 3 pictures at a time. Not very good if someone just wants to jump and see your interior work on a car and have to click all the exterior shots to get there. You have no way to really choose what you want to see.

As far as the "Our Work" page - I think I grasp your concept. However, it looks a little "boxy". There's not much flavor there. One thing that you are doing to yourself is limiting your page width to be really small. I don't know what resolution you are optimizing for, but it seems like that width is even small for 800x600. I missed the drop down menus inside each page to begin with. They are a little hard to catch - especially for scan the page lookers like myself.

All of this is my personal opinion, and I am not a professional or anything, you can toss it with the bath water if you want. Just trying to give you (one guy's) some insight. Typically, I can tell if a webpage I am looking at has the info I want on it in ~7 seconds. Chalk it up to browsing over the years, or just hyper focusing on what I am seeing. In comparison though - my wife (who uses the internet about 1-2 hours a week tops) will spend 30 seconds looking for something on a page that I spot in the first 2-3. Some audiences are more forgiving than others.

Hope that helps you out some.

DLB
 
JMO.....get spell check b4 you post to site. I also noticed some grammar mistakes
Good luck
 
DLB said:
Forgive my criticism - it is totally meant to be constructive. I in no way mean it personally.

Hope that helps you out some.

DLB
Click to expand...

First thanks for the input. I wouldn't have posted on here if I didn't want honest feedback. :)

I build more Line Of Business versus marketing websites and I'm not great with graphics as you can probably tell. I'm usually more about functionality than looks and why I'm asking for feedback.
I'm with you on looking at a website in a couple of seconds and determining whether I'll use it. I wouldn't use Craig's list for years because of the way it looks and function. Took constant prodding by friends to give it a try. :)
I can go into depth as to why I don't care for Flash and SL is just getting started and think it has a future when you look at it and WPF. I was with you on SL being a flash in the pan until Version 2.0 & 3.0 and that they are going way beyond what I think Flash will be. Check out controls such as at telerik.com and try to find those for flash.
Anyway, I don't want to side track this thread in that direction as it will be silverlight or I'll just go with asp.net. :) (Will be glad to discuss offline.)
Now to the site feedback.
I'm not happy with the pix quality as is right now. Picking the base screen size is hard to guess as well as I run at 1680 or 1920 but not sure the majority of users use. I may take it up to 1280x768. Maybe I'll play with it and leave the top section set as is and the bottom half take up the entire page and adjust with the users screen size.
Thanks to the link to the viewer. That actually has sparked a few ideas. I like the viewer I have but something just doesn't seem "right". I have a cube for displaying pix as well which is good for the "cool" factor but just didn't seem to fit the environment either.
Plus I'd like to have synched up before & afters for an easy comparison. Your idea about categories such interior/exterior seems interesting which I'll be thinking about.
I may see if this will do a vertical scroll and a way to synch up the befores & afters side by side with one scroll.
What do you think would make the drop downs easier to focus in on?

Impressions, you are definitely right on grammer/spelling. The words and everything were just thrown on there as placeholders and take up space testing some scrollbars etc. Some of it may even be babble I need to correct or just replace. I'll get back to those when I have functionality the way I want it.
Thanks guys for taking the time for the input. I appreciate it.
 
I won't check your website because I have to install Silverlight.
Not a good idea.
 
The image gallery made me have to think. I don't want to have to think, just point and click. Very strange design.

Also, if I didn't have broad band there is no way in hell I would sit around and wait for it to load. Even with broadband took like 30 seconds to load. I guess I was expecting to be blown away by this silver light. I've seen word press template designs that looked better.

Am I missing something? That's what I waited for to download. Let me give you an example of what can, and is, being done with XHTML, CSS and Javascript.

www.andrew-brundle.com

can silverlight do that? Just HTML, CSS and JavaScript.

Also might want to check out css Zen Garden: The Beauty in CSS Design to see whats being done with CSS.

Not a shot at you. Just some design inspiration. :)
 
Last edited:
I would recommend you use a different format for your website because not everyone has Silverstar. When people see that you have to download a program to view your website it can turn customers away.
 
Lowprofile said:
The image gallery made me have to think. I don't want to have to think, just point and click. Very strange design.

Also, if I didn't have broad band there is no way in hell I would sit around and wait for it to load. Even with broadband took like 30 seconds to load. I guess I was expecting to be blown away by this silver light. I've seen word press template designs that looked better.

Am I missing something? That's what I waited for to download. Let me give you an example of what can, and is, being done with XHTML, CSS and Javascript.

www.andrew-brundle.com


Not a shot at you. Just some design inspiration. :)
Click to expand...

No problem at all. Looking at the brundle site I think there is some confusion between functionality & graphics. That site looks better as far as pretty because a graphic designer created the images and colors. I've written asp.net/javascript/html apps for quite some time.

If you get in the history, HTML was designed to display text documents and it's way beyond what it was designed to do. So it becomes a pain to continue to be efficient with it.

Silverlight is a framework which requires the download and it's a new platform for developing webapps. But the pretty, you still need a graphic designer to create the pretty pix and colors. Silverlight allows you to do more.

Anyway, I can't type or care to type a silverlight diatribe here. I was just curious as to what people thought about the coverflow that displays the images. About the best I can do in a short sentence is it's a framework designed to all you to develop the same types of applications to run over the web as do with a windows app.


Here are some sample links.

Play the piano.
Grand Piano


Showcase : The Official Microsoft Silverlight Site


Here's a better looking version of what I was thinking of doing.
MyAlbums


Anyway, the pix display is what I'm looking for display on and appears I need to come up with something better.

Thanks for the input.
 
I won't visit either due to no silverlight on my pc. For me anytime I try to visit a site and it wants to download something I'm gone.

Talk to you later
 
I too, did not look at your site... and will not download Silverlight. Never needed it before, and won't need it now.
 
I downloaded Silverlight, but it doesn't work with Google Chrome, so I had to switch to Firefox to continue browsing....not good.

I would also recommend changing from Silverlight as I don't see many customers opening a different browser and then downloading a plugin to view a website.

Now, about the gallery function (which was your main point).....wtf? I didn't like that at all.

It looks like you've put a lot of effort into this though, so good on you!

Argh! This post sounds so negative lol. Sorry, I was just trying to be straight up and honest.

Good luck :xyxthumbs:
 
If you get in the history, HTML was designed to display text documents and it's way beyond what it was designed to do. So it becomes a pain to continue to be efficient with it.
Click to expand...

I agree completely. HTML was not made for that. CSS is though. You have heard of CSS, right? (Cascading Style Sheets) If your still designing and styling trying to use HTML your living in the stone age.

As far as graphics, it definitely helps to know Photoshop but not 100% necessary. If you search hard enough you can find many sites with free graphics, backgrounds etc. Then with a good image editor you can manipulate them.

(X)HTML for content, CSS for page layout and style and maybe some Javascript for client side interaction.

Try that and then come back and ask for opinions on your website and you will get a much better response.
 
frosty said:
Getting up to speed with Silverlight, I started working on a detailing website. The text and everything is place holder and may need corrected. However, looking for input on the picture display on the main page as well as on the Our Work page.

TrickDetailing

Thanks in advance.

P.S. Viewing the website will installing Silverlight 3.0 which is about 2 mb. (It's Microsoft competition to Flash.)
Click to expand...

You said you welcome honest input, so here is mine.

Flash is an unacceptable security risk and not permitted on any of my computers. Before you laugh and call me an old man, I'll state that I have 25 years of experience, of which 15 years include computer security related experience. Internet Explorer has been the number one worst security risk of any software on the Internet and Flash runs a good second. Don't believe me? Look at the number and levels of exploits and patches over the years. Adobe just issued their latest critical patch to Flash just a few weeks ago.

I'll just add that the first time you visit a "trusted" Web site, such as CNN, BBC, etc. and YOU get a "drive by" incursion due to a Flash ad delivered by a third party of a third party ad server and it dumps 163,000 files into one Windows directory (which brings the computer to it's knees) - well, that will be the LAST time you allow Flash on your computer...and I've had to deal with many dozens of networked computers...not a pretty sight.

Second, there is no way I'm going to install software to use a Web site I'm visiting unless it is for my employment. There are many other sites out there that don't "require" this - I'll go to those sites and pass yours by.

Third, by using such proprietary software you are locking yourself into one or two companies and their whims. Some day that will come back to bite you in the wallet.

(This post is my opinion and not intended to open a flame war. I will not defend my opinion or respond to attacks on this post. Do your own research and make up your own mind, but you won't change mine.)

Regards,
GEWB
 
Lowprofile said:
I agree completely. HTML was not made for that. CSS is though. You have heard of CSS, right? (Cascading Style Sheets) If your still designing and styling trying to use HTML your living in the stone age.
Click to expand...

I've been developing ajax for 6 years. I used to work for Microsoft as a consultant and get HTML and all the related technologies and the hassles and limitations of them.

Now I do mostly winforms or WPF based development and write ride & handling simulation software for race teams.

Most any technology you use such aspx, php ultimately renders to an HTML standard in order for your browser to render it unless you have an add on such as Flex or Silverlight etc.

Cascading Style Sheets are just a way to control presentation. You're still building HTML based websites.

I'm also a Telerik MVP. I'm trying to get across I get web development.

Keep in mind as I mentioned I build LOB apps and usually we have Graphic Designers that bring the "pretty" to the game.

You can take nice graphics and very simple HTML and make a page look pretty. But try to add 3D rendering etc and then you'll start seeing the differences etc.

I appreciate the input but I'm just interested in knowing about things on the page such how the images are displayed, the drop down boxes and I apologize as I should have been more specific about that.

I don't care for websites where everything is crammed on them. Especially the pix where they are jammed on and you're scrolling all over the place trying to see them.

I'm just exploring for new ways improve the functionality of the website while using a technology which cuts the down on the dev time and gives you a lot more options functionality wise.

Plus again I agree with everyone, if this website was totally for marketing, I'd build it with Asp.Net but as I said, I'm not really interested right now in everybody out there that has a computer finding the site and calling wanting a $100 job done for $20. Most of the stuff I'll do will be word of mouth.

The site will just be a way to post pix or videos if I get around to it and maybe build in some workflow type stuff down the road if anything takes off.

Additionally, I've taken the comments from those who say they don't care to install a Microsoft add-on and. After thinking about it and evaluating what I think my audience will be, most of the people in my crowd are either Developers or IT and don't have a second thought about installing a Microsoft add-on. So I'm not worried about whether SL will be an issue or not for the people that will visit the site. So for now that's going to be a non issue.

I really appreciate the feedback so far but going forward, it's ok if you don't like to install MS add-ons but not a factor for this. Also, I know, I know, it will look a lot prettier when I have the background etc prettied up.

If you have any comments about the combo boxes, menu layouts and the way the pix are displayed and now enlarged, I'm interested in layout feedback.

Thanks again for the feedback everyone.
 
gewb said:
You said you welcome honest input, so here is mine.
Click to expand...

First nobody is going to flame you. Nothing wrong with posting an opinion. The only thing I'll put on here is you have to be careful when looking at stats. You can make numbers say anything you want in some cases.

IE does have it's problems but there are a lot of different angles to look at it. Could the reason has the highest number of reported incidents is it's been it's had the majority of users in the browser market.

If Netscape would have stayed in the 90th percentile, then I'd wager we'd be talking about them having the most exploits.

Anyway, I don't know about flash vulnerabilities as I don't develop with it.

Finally, if you look at C2 Security requirements, to be 100% secure they call for taking a computer, locking it in a room with no input devices, network card etc.

On one hand, yes it's secure on the other might as well not even have a computer because nobody can touch it or connect to it so it'd be worthless.

So there is risk involved the more you want to do. I wouldn't just pick Silverlight out of the hat but when you investigate the technology and road map for what MS is working towards with it WPF & XAML, it makes a lot of sense. Plus Silverlight will be standard in all likelihood here shortly with Microsoft products so these types of discussion will be a moot point.

I agree though, this is a detailing site. I'd love to continue to hear feedback about the layout or functionality ideas for the website.

But my last post on the benefits Silverlight or anything like that in this thread.
 
Either way please let us know when you have the finished product. I am just a beginner in the web design/development game. Do it more for fun than anything else. Can't wait to see some of the new features in HTML 5. Thanks for sharing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top