1. Missed the live Ask the Expert event?
    Not to worry. Check out the archived thread of the Q&A with Ken Hutcheson, President of U.S. Lawns, and the LawnSite community on the Franchising Forum.

    Dismiss Notice

Help Me out

Discussion in 'Digital Marketing' started by Kent Lawn Care, Nov 25, 2006.

  1. Kent Lawn Care

    Kent Lawn Care LawnSite Member
    Posts: 69

    heres my website.

    Let me know what you think, what should i change. Im ditching the company that designed it the first time, they dont seem to want to fix anything the screwed up even after a year being up. i.e. WRONG LOGO! anyways lemme know what you all are thinking. thanks, remember the only wrong suggestion is one not said!

    http://www.KentLandscaping.com
     
  2. WALKER LANDSCAPE

    WALKER LANDSCAPE LawnSite Bronze Member
    Posts: 1,415

    Looks good the questions is are you happy with it. Does it work for you and all the info you need to get out to the customer.
    P>s the gallery did not come up for me. :)
     
  3. Allure

    Allure LawnSite Senior Member
    Posts: 426

    Hi Kent
    I like the overall apppearance but there are a few things that strike me. the first thing that comes to mind - the photos all appear to be stock photos. Are they, or are most of them pictures of actual installs you have done? Ideally you want to show your work not just general photos.

    second, there needs to be some proof reading. for example 'Working from a high quality design insures that we can you exactly what you want in your landscape with the best quality possible' there is a word missing here, perhaps 'give' between can & you.

    Third, it's not exactly easy to read the small text with the logo in the background. They say you have about 30 seconds to capture the attention of someone searching the web.

    also, i noticed several places where you said things like 'From soils to plant material, we are familiar with our products' etc. I would choose words that inspire more confidence like 'From soils to plant material, our knowledge is extensive'

    I tried to look at the site as a consumer & these are the things that jumped out at me.
    best of luck
     
  4. WebMan

    WebMan LawnSite Member
    from D/FW TX
    Posts: 11

    OH BOY!!! Where do I start? :confused:
    Everything is all out of line with items on top of items etc. and mainly EVERY item on your navigation bar on the side triggers an ad block! Plus all the "shadow" or "watermark" background stuff is all messed up (like the white background of the leaf is a square white box covering up the watermark background in that area, looks "funny" to say the least and the "gallery" is a gray box that does nothing on the home page.

    Download Firefox 2.0 (the browser about 1/4 of Internet users now use...everybody I know but one poor soul) and look at it. You'll see what I mean. Obviously this site is designed only for Internet Explorer because it looks OK there (it's all small and in the left top 1/3 of my 20" screen but you might be able to live with that)

    I imagine after looking in IE that "whatever" is in however he coded all the embedded Flash" animations for the buttons (why use flash for buttons?) he is using to put the little white boxes around your links "on mouse over" and is tripping the ad blockers in Firefox and probably will in IE7 since it is supposed to have pop up and ad blockers too (but I downloaded IE7 and immediately un-installed it the next day...sheesh what a buggy mess, so I can't check it in that right now)

    To a search engine your site looks just like below:
    Kent Landscaping
    Since 1998 Kent, inc. has been serving residential and commercial customers with year round
    seasonal services. Our commitments to design, installation, affordability and customer service has
    established us one of the finest landscaping and full service maintenance companies in Michigan.
    Services
    Plant Material
    Gallery
    Professional Tips
    Seasonal Information
    Macomb, north Oakland, Lapeer, St. Clair & Sanilac counties

    That's all. That may suit you but won't be great for SEO.

    Anyhow Firefox has ~25% of the browser market nowadays, some other people (~10%) use Opera ("leaner" and another great alternative to Microsoft and with great mail features but not as "cool" as Firefox for "surfing"), and others use things like AOL browsers, Netscape etc.
    I noticed in the code he put some type special instructions for Netscape browsers (probably to prevent such display errors) so he must be aware of potential issues with whatever he did for Netscape users but may not realize all the BIG problems with other browsers.
     
  5. topsites

    topsites LawnSite Fanatic
    Posts: 21,654

    Yes but at least they took the time to optimize things for load-times...

    I was surprised to note the flash buttons take up 1k each, the images are a bit heavy but nothing like what I was expecting.
    Still over 100k all in all, it would never load on a 56k, but I've seen pages where each image is that big.

    The code, although not 100% up to par, looks neat at first glance and is easy to read.
    And it's not FULL of errors, thou the below check makes it look this way, all the errors are related to 2-3 issues, so it's not outrageously terrible. It's just one or two things that throw the whole thing off...
    The programmer could, however, at least fix those bs errors... What I mean:
    Validation

    The first set of errors appears to be an incorrect command being used or the level of html is inappropriate, however you want to look at it... I find this tolerable, depending how much you paid, still not pro but it's also not uncommon.

    But omitting the alt-tag for images? No, that I can't accept, to me that's just real basic stuff.
    Anyway, all those ALT errors are just that, he simply forgot the alt-tag (numerous times, but).
    Then, the first set of errors are all related to line 40... One simple problem line.

    As for SEO, one can mention this but technically speaking it's not always part of the deal and it doesn't have to be.
    Granted, it would be nice and it ought to be common sense to do it, but site design and engine optimizing still are two different jobs for most of these folks out there.
    And so...

    Anyway, it looks pretty good thou, all in all.
     
  6. WebMan

    WebMan LawnSite Member
    from D/FW TX
    Posts: 11

    The validation errors would not likely account for tripping the ad blockers, possible, but not likely, it is way heavy on Flash commands & "embeds' & such if you want to talk coding but it's enough to know you want your site to be compatible with all major browsers. And validation would not account for the photo's covering the backgrounds & other display problems.
    (By the way Firefox & Opera are both 100% free downloads but be sure to get them only from their parent sites, the originals are free and contain no ads etc....I've seen links to "download for $1.99 & other scams, the worst where they have added spyware or ads to these excellent browsers) Surely Firefox, which has more users than Netscape (and as I mentioned he included some form of special commands for Netscape)

    So I couldn't say it "looks good" ...OK in IE6 anyway but a jumbled mess in the browser I and millions of other people use 99% of the time I'm "surfing".
     
  7. NC_Irrigator

    NC_Irrigator LawnSite Bronze Member
    from NC
    Posts: 1,415

    site looks great!
     
  8. Kent Lawn Care

    Kent Lawn Care LawnSite Member
    Posts: 69

    Just wanted to say thanks to everyone, ive decided that i am for sure switching people that are taking care of my site, they insist that there is NOTHING wrong with it still.
     
  9. Grass-Masters

    Grass-Masters LawnSite Senior Member
    Posts: 424

    If you need a little help with anything, let me know I will see if I can help. It looks pretty good the way it is.
     
  10. machsixer

    machsixer LawnSite Member
    Posts: 33

    The site looks good on my Mac using Firefox 1.5.0.9
    As for the validation comments; "validating" a site and html code is still not the accepted "norm" for webmasters. Don't worry so much if the code isn't valid, what matters is how the site looks on a variety of browsers. I know, I know, some of you will say validating the site will make the site look the same on all browsers. Bunk. You still should test your code on a variety of browsers to be safe.
     

Share This Page