Please Comment!!!

[druhin]

Hello Fellow powweb members and crtics,

Here's a website that i would like to request your attention. Please review it and let us know how you think of it and if any necessary changes need to be made. It is a commercial website dealing with stocks/equities. I am NO web-developer, but have tried my best to follow the KISS rule.

http://stocks.dlngroup.com

Thank you for your time.

Cheers.
Druhin
for and on behalf of dlngroup.com

[LordKaT]

It's a very "clean" site, in that the KISS rule has been followed to a T; however, there are some problems.

First off, it's best viewed in 1280x960 and above? You may want to redesign your site to not require such a high resolution.

Now, as far as resolution is concerned, I run in 1280x1024, and there is horizontal scrolling in firefox 1.0, when there should not be any. There's no image, or text there. It's actually a bit annoying.

Other than that it's a pretty decent layout - very clean, easy to navigate.

[druhin]

Hi There,

First of all let me Thank you for reviewing my site. Appreciate it.

I have fixed the scrollbar problem and it is more or less not there. I was taking good care of this issue until last moment when i got something in there that i shouldn't have had.

As for the comment on "best viewing", it is just informative, because that is the starting point of best mode IMHO. As you have already figured out, the site is purely following the KISS rule. No flashes, no images, no jazzy stuff. Pure text. Which is why, it is by default compatible with any browser of current and lower versions.

Thanks again!!!

Cheers
Druhin

[okami]

I like the simple look also. It says "Serious" :)

Only thing I'd change is the flash banner. Drop the radial gradient. It's over used and so very 80's :P

Try a solid blue color like in your nav bar, for a banner background. Then just fading the texts in and out.
Just my opinion.

[okami]

Keyplyr,
Are you getting these errors *in* his website? Or you just like that validator website that much? :P
I mean if you have to run it at validator to find the "errors" what's the big deal? The site aparently functions fine otherwise? As does many other sites that get the same errors from validator.w3.org like www.allmediastudios.com.

Just curious.. I'd like to know if there's something I need to change in my website. :)

[okami]

I suppose I am missing the point a bit.

I surely can understand the browser bit. But as far as search engines go.. I just ran 10 of the top websites from google in a random category and all ten of them came up with errors at validator.w3.org

microsoft.com, yahoo.com, aol.com, ibm.com -the list goes on, they all get errors showing up at validator.w3.org. So I admit I am missing alot here.

Not trying to start an uproar here. Just interested in the subject.

Thank you for the link.. I'll read up on it tonight.

[LordKaT]

Actually, to clarify a bit: the W3C are the folks who develop the HTML standard that the browsers rely on to sucessfully parse and display an HTML document. Interestingly, if you run Google AdSense Ad's, you'll run into validator problems as well. Heck, even google.com doesn't validate :)

The downside of using strict HTMl 4.01 is that it's _very_ strict on what you can or cannot do. Especially for those of us who learned how to write websites using the HTML tags that are now depreciated (which is, honestly, a lot of them).

The positive side is that if your site validates, then you don't really have to worry about checking cross-browser compatability. Of course, that doesn't mean the sites are going to look the same on different browsers (lord knows that IE has caused be so many headaches, where FireFox gleefully rendered my website).

For the most part, my own site is HTML 4.01 loose compliant. Except for the google Ads, which I can't do anything about.

Anyway, to get back on topic: Love the stocks quote box you've added to the website.

[druhin]

Thank you All for your comments. Any and all suggestions and comments do help in improving the overall design and performance of the website.

As i mentioned earlier, i am NOT a webdesigner. But a developer. Hence my concentration has been on the core product and back-end processing rather than the UI. And that is the reason i requested your comments. And i appreciate all your comments.

As an aside i was thinking of opting for a pre-designed template for our website. Does anybody have any experience with it.

Thanks again!!!

Cheers
Druhin

[YvetteKuhns]

First thing I see is the blue gradient banner with moving text. I never liked that. It is distracting while I try to read the other text on the page. The page is gray and not white, probably to avoid glare, but too much gray is depressing like a cloudy, rainy day.

This site doesn't have many images, so it loads quickly. There are keywords in different colors to bring attention to them. Usually, red text is associated with a sale price, negative amounts, negative text such as DO NOT feed the animals.

(around 15%+ profit)

This is on the index page in RED text! It should be black, green or even blue, but not red.

Best viewed with IE 6.0 or greater, Netscape 7 or greater, Firefox 1.0 @ 1280X960Px or greater

Okay, this is just not necessary. If there is something wrong with the browser or setting, this will be noticeable to the viewer. I don't like to change my screen resolution to view a webpage. Just make it look good for 800x600 and up and most people will view it fine. Of course, fluid or liquid design is better - the web pages will fill the screen without requiring horizontal scrolling at most screen resolutions.

The contents are well organized and informative, however, the home page is very wordy and may lose some visitors. Many people are too lazy or in too much of a hurry to read all that text. Clicking to the Products page made it easier for me to know what you offered. (There is a typo at the bottom of the Products page and probably elsewhere, but I rushed through the website.)

The Contact Us link was found on the Company page which could use more info. The Contact Us link should be on the links menu to be easily clicked from any page. The Feedback link could be included with the Contact Us page.

The text between the title tags could be better. There should not be too many exclamation points, but there should be helpful keyword phrases. The word welcome is not a helpful keyword phrase. The meta tags info could also be improved. The description should be short sentences to describe the site purpose or topic.

The links page should include links to sites that have a similar site topic or target audience. They should open in a new window - and they do. Google is the search engine that cares most about link popularity, but don't fuss about it too much. The quality is more important than the quantity.

[rodneyb74]

site looks nice... very plain and simple, which is a good thing IMHO... yes the banner needs to change... i agree with the above comments there, it is very out of place with the theme of your page...

i like the grey over the white, easier on the eyes... especially when you are looking at so many numbers and what have ya...

i also totally agree with okami , if you have to use some validator to find an error, then there is no error... sheesh... if microsoft.com doesnt validate... ya know... its only one of THE biggest and most used websites out there... but if your website does validate, about the only advantage is then you get to put that little banner that advertises w3.org on your page, yay for your team... what a privledge! useless...

[druhin]

Thank you all for your suggestions. It really feels good to hear comments on your work from professionals like you. Thanks to Yvette Kuhns and everyone else too.

Ok, i have made quite a lot of changes as per many suggestions on this thread. I shall look into the banner soon. But otherwise, i think most of the suggestions did make into the latest changes.

If you guys get a chance, please re-comment.

Again. Thank you for all your comments and time!!!

Cheers
Druhin

[YvetteKuhns]

The home page is better now that there isn't too much text showing at one time. The link to Keep Reading allows the visitor to see more information if interested. The link to go directly to the Products page is even better.

I actually had a phone call from Forbes to be listed in their web designer directory last Thursday. The poor salesperson wanted to give me the whole speech and I said, "I know about the directory. Just tell me what it costs!". I know that people are busy, in a hurry and just want the highlights, then they will check out the details.

The Contact Us link is now in the links menu where it can be found quickly from any location. The text colors were changed as I suggested. Don't know why that bothers me more than other people, but I was glad to see that the profit text was no longer red. ;)

There still seems to be too much gray which is not a good feeling when talking about stocks. How about a pale blue, beige or something else? While I am still dwelling on color, why does the logo have the word "group" in purple? Why not deep green to be different from the blue and still be appropriate?

I recently recalibrated my monitor so the colors would look right and I thought I that would help me complain less about color, but it seemed to have the opposite effect. :rolleyes:

The site is informative and well organized. Any comments are just being picky at this point. Still waiting to see that Flash banner be removed or replaced. :D