Doctorrr — Tue, 11 Nov 2003 07:28:17 +0000

Not bad for the first time.
But menu moving under mousepoint is not very comfortable, IMHO

And musik.... It is very nice, but when I opened tour page I was listening "Prodigy" and was very surprised with new sounds Maybe somebody likes music on sites.... I like this things separately

tsnyderawt — Mon, 10 Nov 2003 18:25:04 +0000

I'm surprised to hear so many responses that didn't like the format, design, colors or flash. I thought it was beautifully designed, very appealing, contemporary, and elegant. I don't even mind the dull gray color or soft background music.

Normally, I think flash is annoying and hate background music. But in your case, you have managed to balance glitz with functionality and 'bells & whistles' with appropriateness.

Excellent site.

DanielJay — Mon, 10 Nov 2003 17:36:15 +0000

Eloquent...and a very nice use of white space. WOuld suggest making the fade out a lil slower with the first screen. LOVE the drop down effects.

Ken Elliott — Mon, 03 Nov 2003 22:16:28 +0000

we pondered over whether to have our name on the webpage, but we decided to use our branding alone. Same as we do for other mediums.

Yeah, I'm not worried about the title and meta-tags. This page is not going to be indexed, our html and opening pages will be indexed instead. Good suggestion for the tabbed browser though. I'll keep that one in mind.

Oh well, thanks for merging.

webG

Megan — Mon, 03 Nov 2003 21:31:46 +0000

Threads merged.

Don't have a lot of time to critique right now, but this looks better. It might be a good idea to expand the title tag a little bit. Including more information there would be helpful for search engines and those of using tabbed browsers (the shorter the title, the shorter the tab). Also a good way of giving the user more information (i.e. what does IFAE stand for, anyway?)

http://www.ifae.com/flash/index1.html

Ken Elliott — Mon, 03 Nov 2003 19:54:48 +0000

Well based on the input I received from this forum and others I completely changed our site around. Please take a look at this version of the site. Since it is almost a completely new version, I figured I should start a new thread for it.

I pruned down the links, spaced out the content, and adapted a more dynamic code base. Please give me your honest criticism.

System requirements:
Flash 6 Player
1024 x 768 desktop resolution

Thanks again, you guys are my best asset! The people I work with won't criticise my work, because they dont' want their work criticised.. go figure

webG

Busy — Sat, 01 Nov 2003 09:40:51 +0000

I can't view either of the flash layouts, just get a blank white page with scroll bars (on 800x600), doesn't give me option to download the flash player either (not that I would)

The html version seems fuzzy, the small text makes the banner and link buttons seem fuzzier.
You also need to use the width and height tags on your images, with 56k it's very jumpy as it loads.
You also need a way back to the index, a home link or something
viewed in firebird (mozilla)

The Webmistress — Sat, 01 Nov 2003 08:27:18 +0000

Flash & framesets!!! Argh, you really aren't interest in SEO for the site are you?

The new photos are good but it's still too grey and dull for my liking.

Ken Elliott — Fri, 31 Oct 2003 22:14:28 +0000

Thanks for reviewing the site! Alot more helpful then the people I got in the office, I knew I didn't like it - that's enough to start all over

So I made some revisions here on version 4. And I forgot to mention, that I have a companion html site as well, http://www.ifae.com .

http://www.ifae.com/flash/index1.html

And I feel the overwhelming urge to defend my use of Flash

Megan - I don't think that building full sites is really the best use of flash

I'd have to disagree with this statement. Of all of the possible uses for Flash, I'd have to say that website development is probably it's tightest niche. Flash is a great program for games, but arguably not it's best use because ActionScript is an ineffecient language compared to others. Probably one of the best programs for CD presentations but probably not it's best use. Good for banners, but your still neglecting your audience.

Megan - It's such a paint to update

This depends on how it was built.. same as an html site. If you use SSI, your job becomes easier. If you use ActionScript, your job becomes easier.

WebMistress - Especially when you can do the same thing with html

I think there is an infinite list of things I can do with flash that aren't possible with html. Maybe with complex Java, or DHTML tied in with other server-sides. But you would probably be neglecting a far larger audience working the later.

WebMistress - SE Friendly

What is that :ezbill:

Thanks for the help, I have great respect for this place, always have. Thanks TWF.

webG

skyraider — Sun, 26 Oct 2003 00:20:07 +0000

if the page loaded immediatly, it'd probably look much better. long intros tend to detract from the overall quality of a site. quicker loading on the sub-pages might be a nice feature, too.

the music on/off is VERY good, as it happens immediately... and i like how the menu links bounch slightly before resting. excellent site!