Opinions on this site please!

www.efconsulting.ie

It was done form a template from www.templatemonster.com - yes I know
it could have been better to spend 1000's and get it done
professionally but we have a tigh budget and I think this looks very
well considering it was so cheap.

I'd appreciate some feedback on overall look, feel and usability.
Thanks

colinfitz (AT) gmail (DOT) com wrote:

www.efconsulting.ie

It was done form a template from www.templatemonster.com - yes I know
it could have been better to spend 1000's and get it done
professionally but we have a tigh budget and I think this looks very
well considering it was so cheap.

You should have spent the money.

I'd appreciate some feedback on overall look, feel and usability.
Thanks

Flash. Annoying, extremely-slow-to-download Flash. If I was a regular
visitor on a dialup connection, I'd have been gone in 10 seconds.

Even on my very fast cable connection, I sit and watch the Flash load
for about 15 seconds.

--------------------------------------
loading ...

And it is the same stock photo for each page! It appears your use of
Flash is only for the menu buttons and the noise. Takes up a lot of
space, too.

Use a normal HTML/CSS menu and make it load instantly.

Noise.

No background color assigned; I see my ugly default purple.

--
-bts
-Warning: I brake for lawn deer

<colinfitz (AT) gmail (DOT) com> wrote

www.efconsulting.ie

It was done form a template from www.templatemonster.com - yes I know
it could have been better to spend 1000's and get it done
professionally but we have a tigh budget and I think this looks very
well considering it was so cheap.

I'd appreciate some feedback on overall look, feel and usability.
Thanks

I would get rid of that blue bar that runs horizontally across the middle of
the page, it serves no purpose. You would be better off getting rid of the
flash because frankly its annoying. Once you've done that just keep your
logo where it is, have a nav bar underneath( just a suggestion) and set the
main table to 100% width. That way you'll have website that adjust to
whatever the screen resolution is.
Better yet scrap the whole thing because its done in unecessary tables which
were fine in 1995 but are outdated now. If you dont have the time to learn
CSS, hire a professional to do it for you. You wont regret it.

--
Cheers

Paul

http://www.paulwatt.info

"Paul Watt" <paulio (AT) wattio (DOT) NOSPAMfreeserve.co.uk> wrote

colinfitz (AT) gmail (DOT) com> wrote in message
news:1152016717.952937.73250 (AT) a14g2000cwb (DOT) googlegroups.com...
www.efconsulting.ie

It was done form a template from www.templatemonster.com - yes I know
it could have been better to spend 1000's and get it done
professionally but we have a tigh budget and I think this looks very
well considering it was so cheap.

I'd appreciate some feedback on overall look, feel and usability.
Thanks


I would get rid of that blue bar that runs horizontally across the middle
of the page, it serves no purpose. You would be better off getting rid of
the flash because frankly its annoying. Once you've done that just keep
your logo where it is, have a nav bar underneath( just a suggestion) and
set the main table to 100% width. That way you'll have website that adjust
to whatever the screen resolution is.
Better yet scrap the whole thing because its done in unecessary tables
which were fine in 1995 but are outdated now. If you dont have the time to
learn CSS, hire a professional to do it for you. You wont regret it.

I should have said that as your layout is so simple, a professional would
charge you in the low hundreds, not thousands of pounds.
--
Cheers

Paul

http://www.paulwatt.info

Paul Watt wrote:

"Paul Watt" <paulio (AT) wattio (DOT) NOSPAMfreeserve.co.uk> wrote in message
news:4gvm0iF1or4sdU1 (AT) individual (DOT) net...


colinfitz (AT) gmail (DOT) com> wrote in message
news:1152016717.952937.73250 (AT) a14g2000cwb (DOT) googlegroups.com...
www.efconsulting.ie

It was done form a template from www.templatemonster.com - yes I know
it could have been better to spend 1000's and get it done
professionally but we have a tigh budget and I think this looks very
well considering it was so cheap.

I'd appreciate some feedback on overall look, feel and usability.
Thanks


I would get rid of that blue bar that runs horizontally across the middle
of the page, it serves no purpose. You would be better off getting rid of
the flash because frankly its annoying. Once you've done that just keep
your logo where it is, have a nav bar underneath( just a suggestion) and
set the main table to 100% width. That way you'll have website that adjust
to whatever the screen resolution is.
Better yet scrap the whole thing because its done in unecessary tables
which were fine in 1995 but are outdated now. If you dont have the time to
learn CSS, hire a professional to do it for you. You wont regret it.


I should have said that as your layout is so simple, a professional would
charge you in the low hundreds, not thousands of pounds.

A note to the Op.

Research, HTML +CSS templates, there are a lot of good ones around.
Your site in it's current state is not good at all. For one, your fonts
are way too small, you have used a table which looks to be nested,
which is bad for accessibility. The use of Flash on this site is also
unnecisary.
You should also not use Flash for navigation.
http://freewebdesign.cjb.cc/design-tips4.html
and http://freewebdesign.cjb.cc/design-tips2.html
Also read, http://freewebdesign.cjb.cc/design-tips3.html
In fact, just read all the tips linked on those pages, they might help
you out a lot.
--
Regards Chad. http://freewebdesign.cjb.cc

I was actually expecting much worse, given the replies to this.

Like others pointed out, unnecessary flash is annoying and not very
accessible. You could get the same effects using some pretty simple
CSS.

My biggest problem with the site is its cluttered look. There is hardly
any whitespace and everything just seems packed together, so that I
have no idea what I should be looking at first. On the homepage alone
you have multiple callouts, a search, featured products, blog posts, a
newsletter, and a list of "partners" You don't need to put everything
on the homepage! Consider taking some of that out.

- Bethany

colinfitz (AT) gmail (DOT) com wrote:

www.efconsulting.ie

It was done form a template from www.templatemonster.com - yes I know
it could have been better to spend 1000's and get it done
professionally but we have a tigh budget and I think this looks very
well considering it was so cheap.

I'd appreciate some feedback on overall look, feel and usability.
Thanks

On Tue, 04 Jul 2006 18:14:57 +0100, Paul Watt wrote:

I would get rid of that blue bar that runs horizontally across the middle
of the page, it serves no purpose. =

But it looks kind of cool, no?

You would be better off getting rid
of the flash because frankly its annoying.

Whew! Agreed! This is a particularly annoying example of Flash as
navigation. A little "Dinkle-twinkle-do" noise every time I rollover a
nav link? Ugh!! Not to mention the navigation has to load every time I
click on a link (I have my browser cache set to zero).

However, it is just the type of thing that a "client" might request, ask
for, demand, etc.

Once you've done that just

keep your logo where it is, have a nav bar underneath( just a
suggestion) and set the main table to 100% width.

DISAGREE! Keep your center column around 750px. Why not? It looks good.
I think that there is a little over-zealousness in this newsgroup when it
comes to fluid width layouts. Why bother? I know all the reasons, BTW,
please don't post a list: they are all subjective. And I lean towards the
"who cares?" point of view.

Or better yet, use "min-width" set to like, 500px, and max-width set to
like 800, for the best of both worlds. But of course you'll haveta ditch
the Tables layout for that.

That way you'll have
website that adjust to whatever the screen resolution is. Better yet
scrap the whole thing because its done in unecessary tables which were
fine in 1995 but are outdated now. If you dont have the time to learn
CSS, hire a professional to do it for you. You wont regret it.

Agree on the non-tables layout, though. This site can super easily be
rewritten with CSS layout, and even for MSIE 5+.


later...
--
JDS

On Tue, 04 Jul 2006 13:25:49 +0000, Beauregard T. Shagnasty wrote:

No background color assigned; I see my ugly default purple.

Heh! I like that idea -- a very good idea for a web developer to do.
--
JDS

"JDS" <jeffrey (AT) invalid (DOT) address> wrote

On Tue, 04 Jul 2006 18:14:57 +0100, Paul Watt wrote:

I would get rid of that blue bar that runs horizontally across the middle
of the page, it serves no purpose. =

But it looks kind of cool, no?

No, It makes the whole page layout look disjointed and out of shape.

You would be better off getting rid
of the flash because frankly its annoying.

Whew! Agreed! This is a particularly annoying example of Flash as
navigation. A little "Dinkle-twinkle-do" noise every time I rollover a
nav link? Ugh!! Not to mention the navigation has to load every time I
click on a link (I have my browser cache set to zero).

However, it is just the type of thing that a "client" might request, ask
for, demand, etc.

Once you've done that just
keep your logo where it is, have a nav bar underneath( just a
suggestion) and set the main table to 100% width.

DISAGREE! Keep your center column around 750px. Why not? It looks good.
I think that there is a little over-zealousness in this newsgroup when it
comes to fluid width layouts. Why bother? I know all the reasons, BTW,
please don't post a list: they are all subjective. And I lean towards the
"who cares?" point of view.

Why have a fixed width when you can easily have a fluid layout? I often make
sites with fixed dimensions when the design demands it, but ALWAYS fluid
when I can.

Or better yet, use "min-width" set to like, 500px, and max-width set to
like 800, for the best of both worlds. But of course you'll haveta ditch
the Tables layout for that.

That way you'll have
website that adjust to whatever the screen resolution is. Better yet
scrap the whole thing because its done in unecessary tables which were
fine in 1995 but are outdated now. If you dont have the time to learn
CSS, hire a professional to do it for you. You wont regret it.

Agree on the non-tables layout, though. This site can super easily be
rewritten with CSS layout, and even for MSIE 5+.


later...
--
JDS

--

Paul watt
le singe est dans l'arbre

colinfitz (AT) gmail (DOT) com wrote:

www.efconsulting.ie

It was done form a template from www.templatemonster.com - yes I know
it could have been better to spend 1000's and get it done
professionally but we have a tigh budget and I think this looks very
well considering it was so cheap.

Visitors to the site without Flash have little hope of finding anything

there. Dump the Flash.
I had little idea what the other comments were about because I do not
have Flash enabled. I got a large blank space where the primary navigation
is located.

What monetary unit is "£9.65 billion"?

- An incomplete DTD. A Strict DTD should be used for new work.
- A number of validation errors, some due to not quoting <meta> values.
- 1995 layout style (table-based layout).
- Lots of inline styling. It should be consolidated into an external
stylesheet

--
jmm (hyphen) list (at) sohnen-moe (dot) com
(Remove .AXSPAMGN for email)