Fog Creek Software
Discussion Board




Web Critics Welcome - Part II

Hello again,

A month or so ago I asked y'all to check out and critique a website I had developed for a real estate company. 99% of the comments  I read where excellent, relevant, and useful.

As a direct result of that feedback I totally redesigned the site and would ask you to check it out again and give me your comments.

http://www.resultswa.com.au/

I await your comments with fear and trepidation.

Jack of all
Monday, August 18, 2003

Hi,never saw your earlier website. This website has very nice design. The colors and graphics are also superb. Overall, a above average website.

The only thing I don't like is the search functions opens up another window to show the results. I don't know if this is a good but I personally don't like it that way.

Just my 2 cents...

suhu
Monday, August 18, 2003

Generally I think it looks very nice and clean.

However two things I noticed:

1) It asked me to install the Cyrillic language pack for some reason -- is this intentional?

2) I would prefer not to have all the boxes with the rounded edges.  It is just unnecessary clutter.  This site is a good example of the "no boxes" philosophy of design.  The text already falls in a box anyway, so there's no reason to have the redundant box.  Just makes it look cleaner.  See Edward Tufte and the "1+1=3" effect he likes to talk about.

Andy
Monday, August 18, 2003

I would lose the "Loading..." at the root of the site and the <META http-equiv="refresh" ...> to /cgi-bin/control.pl and have a server-side script issue an HTTP redirect - I always find "http-equiv=refresh" far too slow.

The picture of Ryan Kennedy could do with being made a little snappier using a bit of brightness/contrast -- does he have a goatee or is that shadow on his chin -- could do with a bit of touching up.

Did you know that "Printer Friendly" versions can be made redundant with use of stylesheets? Something simple like:
<style media='print'>
.notForPrinting {
  display:'none';
}
</style>
And then associate this class with the screen furniture you don't want printed.

Duncan Smart
Monday, August 18, 2003

first visit to your website.

over a dial up connection, loaded pretty fast. IE/ 800*600 res.

asks me to install the cyrillic language pack, eveytime I click on a different page.

your webpage is clean, well designed, navigation is easy,; I did not try the search though.

one minor thing: that parachute in the background of the webpages does not seem to serve much purpose.

Prakash S
Monday, August 18, 2003

I agree with the rounded edges... Round edges are ok, but yours dominate the page. I don't know about getting rid of all color/line indicators that the text is in sections, but you might want to make them more subdued, single pixel maybe, more like amazon.

I'm thinking in terms of pixels given to design v. pixels given to content. It seems that such a large percentage is design that it's hard to actually read the text.

Also, I noticed the graphics doing the "IE Dance" where since they don't have height & width tags, the page jumps around as the graphics are being downloaded.

www.marktaw.com
Monday, August 18, 2003

Looks good in opera, has the doctype tag at the top, nice crisp look.

anony125
Monday, August 18, 2003

Very good to look at.

Dewd
Monday, August 18, 2003

Great job.  The site is nicely organized, visually clean and appealing, and very approachable.  (Enough so that I indulged my idle curiosity in clicking around a few minutes.  The earlier one put me off -- I just wanted off that page :).)

I think the rounded borders are great.  They provide clear visual separation of different elements of the page/site.

The background balloon might look nicer if you washout/fade the colors and make it considerably larger -- maybe 600px wide.

-Thomas

Thomas
Monday, August 18, 2003

First impression - good job.

Evgeny Gesin /Javadesk/
Monday, August 18, 2003

Very nice! The only thing I would do is lose the hit counter at the bottom of each page.

dsf
Monday, August 18, 2003

It's clean and loads fast. Below are my suggestions:

1. Try changing the rounded rectangles (borders) from blue to black or something light gray. The blue clashes with the default blue of your hyperlinks.

2. You obviously adopted the central symmetry layout by having side (left+right) columns. Since you fixed the width of your content, I suggest you add a global center alignment so that all the content shows up in the middle of a browser window thats wider than your content width. Alternatively, try not fixing the width of your center column, so that it resizes with the browser window.

rexguo
Monday, August 18, 2003

Most importantly... how does the client like it? In the end that's all that really matters. As they say, "You can't please them all", so just make sure the client is happy, and tell everyone else to take a hike.  :)

HeyCoolAid!
Monday, August 18, 2003

OK, so at least one person likes the boxes... but if you really want to separate the elements using something besides whitespace (which I prefer), I would suggest using a *single* line, even though it might be harder to code... or you could just turn down the contrast of the borders like someone else said.  The box makes it feel a bit cluttered to me, as I already said.

Imagine if there were boxes around every post in this board... don't you think it would look a lot worse?  Proper space is enough.

Although I did look at Amazon and Ebay and they seem to have boxes on the sidebars, but NOT in the middle (where they use a single line).  Google seems to be the cleanest, without boxes.  They just use a nice color shaded background, which is nice too.

Andy
Monday, August 18, 2003

I'd just like to say thank you to everyone who has provided feedback. I will be implementing many of the changes proposed.

The Cyrillic issue was due to use the charset ISO-8859-5. I've changed it to ISO-8859-1 which should fix that problem.

As an aside, placing this topic on the forum generated 300 unique hits to the website (in 24 hours). That's 275 more than normal (the site is not being advertised - yet).

My thanks again,

Jack.

Jack of all
Monday, August 18, 2003

Looks a million times better.

Loads fast. Easy to read.

Wow - you have layers implemented that my funky off-standard browser renders correctly.

Didn't have any cyrillic problems like the others.

Holy cow! Real estate is outragously expensive in Australia!

Dennis Atkins
Monday, August 18, 2003

About the prices - remember they're Aussie dollars.

My thoughts are:

1. If I want to rent a unit, I'm going to have to search 3 times, using 'flat', 'unit' and 'apartment'. Maybe you want to explain the difference, or have a combined search choice.

2. You missed out Cottesloe on the list of suburbs. Or I take it you're south of Perth?

It looks smart though.

Bill Rayer
Tuesday, August 19, 2003

Sorry Dennis - I just re-read your last sentence "Holy cow! Real estate is outragously expensive in Australia!"

Bill Rayer
Tuesday, August 19, 2003

The search criteria for rentals - Unit, Flat, Apartment, etc - are set by a seperate listing company. I just tap into their db.

Yes, we're south of Perth - Peel Region - based in Mandurah and Rockingham.

Jack of all
Tuesday, August 19, 2003

On my computer, laptop resoultion 1400 x 1050 the balloon just sits in the top corner in both Netscape 7.0 and IE6.0 and looks silly. Get rid of it.

Stephen Jones
Wednesday, August 20, 2003

As for the balloon to the right, I don't much like it myself, but my boss loves it... I have another "skin", for lack of a better word, which doesn't have the balloon, hasn't got all those round cornered boxes and is centre aligned, but my boss likes this layout, especially the balloon...

*shrug*

What ever makes my boss happy, makes me happy.

Jack of all
Thursday, August 21, 2003

*  Recent Topics

*  Fog Creek Home