Register

If this is your first visit, please click the Sign Up now button to begin the process of creating your account so you can begin posting on our forums! The Sign Up process will only take up about a minute of two of your time.

Results 1 to 3 of 3
  1. #1
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    1
    Member #
    13933

    Current Rating

    Visual Appeal:
    0.0 out of 5

    Accessibility:
    0.0 out of 5

    Website Speed:
    0.0 out of 5

    Compatibility:
    0.0 out of 5

    Overall Rating:
    0.0 out of 5

    Rate This Site


    Advertisement (login to hide this!)


    You must be logged in to view this site

    Hello,
    Please take a look at two sites that I have designed: www.gildnermaddox.com and www.klardesign.com. Please tell me if they work good in your browsers and give any critique that you have.
    Thanks.

  2.  

  3. #2
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    488
    Member #
    11940
    www.gildnermaddox.com was a refreshing change. Informative. Aesthetic excellence, fully in service to communication goals -- not a pointless display of photoshop skills. The Featured Project page was a little skimpy on human factors, but essentially hits the right points to communicate the firm's strong points.

    I wish www.klardesign.com was like the architectural firm site. It just misses every opportunity to stand apart from the information poor web design firms out there.

  4. #3
    Senior Member filburt1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Maryland, US
    Posts
    11,774
    Member #
    3
    Liked
    21 times
    As an aside, welcome to the forums here; I recognize you from the TiVo Community Forums...unless you're a different person with the same name, in which case just ignore my ramblings.
    • Gildner Maddox: Generally good, although the ghost of a blueprint on the background looks distracting to me. Some rollovers on the top nav would be good (maybe a glow effect like the current mouseover on the logo).
    • Klar Design: In Firefox, the button of the page is truncated.
    Also, both sites are tabular hell. I also noticed some of the normally crappy Javascript code that Dreamweaver generates. You'll find designing can be far less of a pain, although obviously there's an initial learning curve, if you write the code instead using XHTML and CSS, and pretty much never go into Dreamweaver's Design view.

    Tables are pretty much limited to late 90s/2000 design. Everything from then-on should be CSS-based where the (X)HTML describes the content and the structure, not its layout or appearance--this is known as semantic design.
    filburt1, Web Design Forums.net founder
    Site of the Month contest: submit your site or vote for the winner!


Remove Ads

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:04 PM.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.3
Copyright © 2019 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.
vBulletin Skin By: PurevB.com