PDA

View Full Version : New website


evergreenedmond
12-03-2008, 10:35 AM
It's not finished yet, but just got it up. Let me know what you think. www.evergreenedmond.com

Team-Green L&L
12-03-2008, 11:03 AM
It's not finished yet, but just got it up. Let me know what you think. www.evergreenedmond.com

Take it down before the spiderbots see that. Finish the coding of the site BEFORE launching it. That is Rule #1.

Team-Green L&L
12-03-2008, 11:09 AM
Please don't be mad for my blatant statement here, but this needs to be said. You guys know how aggravating it is to talk to a homeowner about landscaping when they don't know what they are talking about. How about when they build a some piss-poor wall that they think is GREAT?

Well that's about what a website looks like to someone who knows what they are looking for when it's built by someone who doesn't. Kind of like a wall built by a homeowner...even though they think it's great we know better and so do a lot of passer-by's.

Kiril
12-03-2008, 11:22 AM
Argggg ... another flash site. Need a graceful fall back, bots don't crawl flash and you shouldn't force people to install a third party extension in order to view your site. Kinda curious why you even need flash to do that?

WebMan
12-06-2008, 09:59 PM
Argggg ... another flash site. Need a graceful fall back, bots don't crawl flash and you shouldn't force people to install a third party extension in order to view your site. Kinda curious why you even need flash to do that?
Same curiosity since it's just a slide show..AND on my browser it covers all your drop down links so I can't see them if I try (only know because I can see a bit of the end one on the left.)
Below is exactly how a search engine "bot" sees your site:

[1]Evergreen Landscaping

* [2]Landscaping
+ [3]Seasonal
+ [4]Water Features
* [5]Lighting
+ [6]Landscape Lighting
* [7]Weed Control
+ [8]Lawn Program
+ [9]Tree & Shrub
* [10]Mowing
+ [11]Commercial
+ [12]Residential
* [13]Irrigation
+ [14]Installation
+ [15]Repair
* [16]About
+ [17]Contact Us

[EMBED]

BDLC Mikey
12-08-2008, 07:23 PM
google z index for your layering issue... why do you hate flash so much, kiril?

Kiril
12-08-2008, 09:01 PM
google z index for your layering issue... why do you hate flash so much, kiril?

It's not that I hate it, it is however what I consider bloat for the majority of cases. There is no need for flash on most sites. If you want to do some cool presentation with flash, by all means do it, but for your bread and butter site, all it amounts to is a nuisance that is not accessibility compliant, a bandwidth hog, is very restrictive in its capabilities, many are difficult to use and are buggy, and does not come standard with any browser. About the only good thing I see flash being used for are movie and gaming sites ... beyond that :nono:

I will also point out, if a flash site takes 30 secs or more to load using a 56K modem, you might as well kiss that potential client goodbye.

RickR1818
12-08-2008, 10:25 PM
Flash sucks! Not needed in this industry. Tell the client why they should choose you dont "bell and whistle" them to death and hope they contact you because your site has animation or flash. You need more text content that is larger font and easier to read with keyword content. Also, for all the pictures that you do have; the quality of photo isn't that great. Consider lightening them in a photo editor.

Turboguy
12-09-2008, 08:15 AM
Well, sorry to go against the grain here. Personally I thought your site looked great. The photos are among the best I have seen on any website. It does a good job of making you look professional and creating confidence in your work.

Your meta tags could use some work. You only have a title and not a good one.

BDLC Mikey
12-09-2008, 10:16 AM
I guess it just depends who your target demo is kiril. mine is definitely not some old coot afraid to embrace technology and does not have a simple flash player that takes a minute to install. Especially not one who is so afraid of change they cling to some 56k isp... ugh;), i get better speed than that on my cell phone. This is the same person that wants to control every little aspect of their lawn maintenance... send their wife out to follow you around and then ask why the price is so high and have the audacity to mention some other entity who may or may not have done it cheaper. no thanks i will keep shooting for the young to middle aged buisness exec type who is educated, easy going and "knows" that they are paying for a nice job and appreciate it.

Kiril
12-09-2008, 10:31 AM
I guess it just depends who your target demo is kiril. mine is definitely not some old coot afraid to embrace technology and does not have a simple flash player that takes a minute to install.

Why would you restrict your site to any particular demographic? Do you ask your clients or potential clients if they have broadband, and turn down/accept jobs based on that? Also, have you considered the security aspects of third party plug-ins.

Especially not one who is so afraid of change they cling to some 56k isp... ugh;),

Many parts of this country have no other option, or need. If all you do is check email and browse the web on occasion, why do you need broadband?

i get better speed than that on my cell phone.

And does your website support small devices? How does your phone handle bloated websites?

This is the same person that wants to control every little aspect of their lawn maintenance... send their wife out to follow you around and then ask why the price is so high and have the audacity to mention some other entity who may or may not have done it cheaper. no thanks i will keep shooting for the young to middle aged buisness exec type who is educated, easy going and "knows" that they are paying for a nice job and appreciate it.

That is certainly your right, but consider this. Look around the web ... how many "business" sites do you see done in flash? Also I am also curious why you think young to middle aged means IT savy? Alot of your target demographic are hardly tech savy, nor would they know what a third party browser plug-in was if it kicked them in the head.

Oh, I see now ..... your website is all flash :nono:

Kiril
12-09-2008, 10:50 AM
I looked at your website Mike, FYI there are only two items that really require flash.

1) The shimmer on the banner
2) The hover action on the menu (which could most likely be duplicated with DHTML)

Your site is nothing more than standard HTML with a couple of flash effects ... why bother?

BDLC Mikey
12-09-2008, 06:13 PM
Why would you restrict your site to any particular demographic? Do you ask your clients or potential clients if they have broadband, and turn down/accept jobs based on that? Also, have you considered the security aspects of third party plug-ins.

I dont, no, and i have, they are minimal.



Many parts of this country have no other option, or need. If all you do is check email and browse the web on occasion, why do you need broadband?

My part of the country has ample access to broadband, many choices. So would not my site be tailored to them?



And does your website support small devices? How does your phone handle bloated websites?
Thankfully i have a non flash version which conveniently re-directs for a non-flash user in such cases. My t-mobile g1 displays the site well considering. And in q1 09, the g1 and other smart phones will handle flash anyways.

The benefits to flash over dhtml are obvious... the most important to me being the resolution/size ratio. i like things to look clean and as high resolution as possible without the page being over 1 megabyte... which is minimal and mine comes in at 1.2 so i guess i bent the rule a little bit but i think its worth the bytes for the clean and polished look. speaking of bloat the html required to reproduce that without flash is bloat.. sheesh

Kiril
12-09-2008, 09:32 PM
The benefits to flash over dhtml are obvious... the most important to me being the resolution/size ratio.

Huh? What does DHTML have anything to do with resolution? Why do you need flash for a menu effect or a scroll bar? Please explain yourself, especially the resolution/size ratio, given your site if a fixed width site that is contained entirely in a view port that is only slightly larger than 800 x 600.

Also, if you think flash is secure you might want to check the history of flash and its related security vulnerabilities.

i like things to look clean and as high resolution as possible without the page being over 1 megabyte... which is minimal and mine comes in at 1.2 so i guess i bent the rule a little bit but i think its worth the bytes for the clean and polished look. speaking of bloat the html required to reproduce that without flash is bloat.. sheesh

I could reproduce your entire site without the flash banner .... well under 1 MB of code. Heck ... compress the code and it would probably be around 100 -300 KB with images. You might lose the menu effect in favor of something that could be done with CSS, but still. Have you looked at your code lately .... what do you see? Mostly script & some HTML. Your site is dead azz simple, still don't see any need for flash, but it is your site, do what you want.

Also, you might want to look into the overflow problem on your about page. One last thing ... I block all scripts at my browser by default, yet I do not get a redirect. How exactly are you determining a flash capable browser?

evergreenedmond
12-10-2008, 01:29 PM
So if my website is that bad who should I contact to fix/redo it? I know nothing about websites & don't really care to. All I want is a nice website that I can use to upsell clients.

Turboguy
12-10-2008, 02:52 PM
Personally I think the critisizm went a little overboard. Your site is laid out well, you have some of the nicest photos I have seen. The content is good.
It does a great job of conveying a professional image.

Ok, so it uses flash. Lots of big company sites use flash as well. Perhaps an occassional user may have a problem accessing your site. Most everyone will be fine. I have flash on half my sites as well.

I would not change it if it were me.

evergreenedmond
12-10-2008, 03:03 PM
Personally I think the critisizm went a little overboard. Your site is laid out well, you have some of the nicest photos I have seen. The content is good.
It does a great job of conveying a professional image.

Ok, so it uses flash. Lots of big company sites use flash as well. Perhaps an occassional user may have a problem accessing your site. Most everyone will be fine. I have flash on half my sites as well.

I would not change it if it were me.
I had a pro photographer take all the pics except the Christmas lights & he is currently working on those, should have them to me by the end of the week. I had a local guy do the site & was pretty surprised by all of the feedback. I am just trying to get a presence online & am pretty surprised how difficult it has been to get anything done.

Turboguy
12-10-2008, 05:23 PM
Well if your photographer ever decides to move to my neck of the woods I would be happy to use him. He did an outstanding job for you.

As far as the website itself goes. I have seen some really great and helpful posts in this section. There are some guys who have much better websites as a result of getting the opinion of others here including some of the pro's that hang out here. It does seem to me that in the past week some of the comments have been a little on the harsh and nit picky side. In your case I think it was extreme.

The criticism seems to be the use of flash. I have seen some use of flash where it was very poorly done and took away from the site. There are guys who stick flash in for no purpose other than to show off their talents. In your case, yes, the flash could be eliminated. There are other ways to do a slide show and a drop down menu. Still the way it was used in your site it serves a purpose and creates a professional image. Yes, there may be a very few people who can't view flash but I think those are few and far between. I think anyone with a 56k dial up modem is used to waiting for pages to load. Other sites will load that slow and if they are looking for a landscaper in your city they will wait for your page.

I think you have a very nice site and your guy did a good job.

JDUtah
12-10-2008, 08:29 PM
Don't let the focus of the site distarct you of its purpose. If that site looks good and you are using it for upselling... pay attention to how many people are buying because of it... if that number is significant than NO criticism will do anything but help you make a good thing better (If you choose to listen to it). "Good now" is better than "perfect never"...

Kiril
12-10-2008, 09:38 PM
In your case, yes, the flash could be eliminated.

Note key words.

There are other ways to do a slide show and a drop down menu. Still the way it was used in your site it serves a purpose and creates a professional image.

The quality of the image has nothing to do with how it is presented.

The images are ok, but the whole slide show effect, plus the location of the images is distracting and will pull the viewer away from the content you want them to read. Furthermore, given the size of the images, you will most likely be forced to scroll in order to view most of the content, which is not that big of a deal, but if you can fit the content into a single view port without forcing use of the scroll bar, you should do it. This means if you do keep the slide show, it should go after the content, not before it.

Personally, I would look at using the images as header backgrounds for each menu link and work your logo in as a layer.

Beyond the above, code is not compliant, so I will give you my cut and paste response.


1) Code is not valid. Please validate!!

HTML: http://validator.w3.org/
CSS: http://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/

2) Mixture of hardcoded style, inline style, linked style is a NIGHTMARE.
Separation of style and content is the recommended way to maintain your code.

3) Limited or no document structure/outline

http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/html-spec/html-spec_5.html

4) Limited or no accessibility compliance

WCAG/Sec508: http://www.cynthiasays.com/fulloptions.asp

BDLC Mikey
12-12-2008, 01:20 AM
Huh? What does DHTML have anything to do with resolution? Why do you need flash for a menu effect or a scroll bar? Please explain yourself, especially the resolution/size ratio, given your site if a fixed width site that is contained entirely in a view port that is only slightly larger than 800 x 600.

Also, if you think flash is secure you might want to check the history of flash and its related security vulnerabilities.



I could reproduce your entire site without the flash banner .... well under 1 MB of code. Heck ... compress the code and it would probably be around 100 -300 KB with images. You might lose the menu effect in favor of something that could be done with CSS, but still. Have you looked at your code lately .... what do you see? Mostly script & some HTML. Your site is dead azz simple, still don't see any need for flash, but it is your site, do what you want.

Also, you might want to look into the overflow problem on your about page. One last thing ... I block all scripts at my browser by default, yet I do not get a redirect. How exactly are you determining a flash capable browser?

it is a flash detection script which is the bulk of the script at the head... so it probably would not detect a script blocker the likes of which mozilla and other such browsers would employ. And if you want to peruse the unfinished html and look at the ugly yet xhtml 1.0 strict compliant code here www.vistalawn.com/nonf. I just have not had the time to wrap it up with getting ready for plowing.

and on topic the main problem with the posters site is the flash/ dhtml layering issue which i have experienced before in the past and it can be resolved using the z index code found here http://www.w3schools.com/Css/pr_pos_z-index.asp

Kiril
12-12-2008, 02:45 AM
it is a flash detection script which is the bulk of the script at the head... so it probably would not detect a script blocker the likes of which mozilla and other such browsers would employ.

Odd ... JS detection scripts seem to be able to detect it is being blocked.

Kiril
12-12-2008, 11:05 AM
And if you want to peruse the unfinished html and look at the ugly yet xhtml 1.0 strict compliant code here www.vistalawn.com/nonf.

Dude .... WTF. DUMP THE TABLES and I strongly recommend removing the hard coded formatting (you know .... separation of style and content) :nono:

You also might want to look at the page in a standards compliant browser.

BDLC Mikey
12-12-2008, 01:26 PM
You also might want to look at the page in a standards compliant browser.

by that do you mean not firefox. :)

edit:
and im at a loss how you could remove the tables and still have content overlay the layout bg??????? unless i drastically altered the site. and i could remove the inline styling simply enough but it comes to the same thing... i dont know what do you have in mind??? divs?

btw we need to stop hijacking this fella's thread about my site.

Team-Green L&L
12-12-2008, 03:56 PM
WoW, Tables, flash, and accessibility issues. I'd start over for more reasons than one. I know you've got a lot of time dedicated into that site, but if you "build a patio that won't hold a table" you have to rebuild it.

You're site will not be easy to optimize if possible, is dependent on high bandwidth and third-party plug-ins (Adobe). This is not acceptable for the purposes in which you seek. IMO.

Kiril
12-12-2008, 09:11 PM
i dont know what do you have in mind??? divs?

Any block level element, but I use divs to position/layout content.

If you have never built a CSS table, perhaps you might want too.

B & B Yardscape
12-14-2008, 02:28 PM
Yes its Flash, yes it requires high speed, yes it requires adobe, and yes it might be hard to find in a search.

But, I don't normally say this, I liked it. It has good pictures, it looks good, everything is uniform. The information is good.

I would add a pic to the right of the wording on ALL the pages. Some don't have them and I expected to see them.

I think it would be a good place to send people to see what he does and examples of his work.