Please rate this site

[andymac]

Hi,
Can you happy people please try this site out ? I've been having a few formatting problems and other quirks and just want to get a feel for any small issues.

Please feel free to slag off crap HTML etc. !

Site is;

www.westparkclinic.com

cheers
Andy

[filburt1]

It complains that I am using IE6 under Windows XP. Other than that, AWESOME site layout. Nice work.

[andymac]

Blimey that was quick !
I'll have to get IE6 downloaded to see what user_agent the component thinks it is. I've used a load of stuff that Netscrape doesn't like so rather than doing 2 separate layouts (whilst it's still not completely live - rather Beta testing) I've made the "preferential browser" IE 5.

cheers
Andy

[DaoK]

It look nice but it take sometime to load at the beginning. Good job on the site!

[beachbum]

hi
Two things
1) The writing is a wee tad small on my screen
2) I would like to see a cow in the pasture
Good job

[DaoK]

What is your resolution BeachBummy?
Mine is 1024*768 and it was fine ( screen : 17inch )

[alex_read]

Nice !

1) you need IE to view it.

2) I need a later version of IE when I have the most up to date one (not sure what's going on there).

3) Pain in the neck one you'll probably not want to consider. I notice youi can view it in all screen resolutions which is cool. I normally use percentages rather than fixed widths for DIV or TABLEs so they take up the screen no matter what the resolution - related to beachbum's point above.

4) What's up with the HTML code alignment

On the whole though, not knocking it - great site !!!

[DaoK]

I need a later version of IE when I have the most up to date one (not sure what's going on there).

I think it worked on ie 5.5 , now I upgraded to 6...I dont see any difference since the 5.1 lol

[andymac]

Hi,
I think there's something out of date now with the MSWC.BrowserType object.

It's reporting that IE6 is in fact Netscape version 4.00 (I guess it's possibly it's default). I'll have to speak to the hosting co to get them to check what's going on.

I've now modded to not use a <DIV> but a table instead.

Do

cheers
Andy

[DaoK]

ok

[eiSecure]

Originally posted by andymac
Hi,
Can you happy people please try this site out ? I've been having a few formatting problems and other quirks and just want to get a feel for any small issues.

Please feel free to slag off crap HTML etc. !

Site is;

www.westparkclinic.com

cheers
Andy

Really cool design, but 1 suggestion: Do it in FLASH!

[filburt1]

A constant color scheme (always white-on-black or always black-on-white) is good too.

[Sastraxi]

I would go one against doing it in flash. Having a full-screen flash application will slow your computer down. Personally, I like HTML better because it shows your skills, and it shows you know how to program a layout in notepad/interdev or whatever. I'm positive andymac didn't use a WYSIWYG editor, as his site is so shockingly good. Those are my comments, don't burn me for my opinion.

[eiSecure]

Actually, a Flash site doesn't have to be full screen, and is surprisingly memory unintensive.

...and I think a site should look good and perform good as well, but I don't think that to be good, you should be limited to using only non-WYSIWYG programs, like Notepad/Interdev because complex layout is painstakingly hard to get right using a non-visual environment.

[andymac]

Hi Guys,
Thanks for the various praise and "flash" suggestions.
I have to say that I know nothing about developing under flash, but one of the things for this site is that it has to run on the sort of PC that a GP would have in their surgery. Therefore you can't expect them to have to install flash or similar on their PC before they can use it. Also if memory serves me correctly, you can't bookmark a flash page if that page doesn't have an "entry" somewhere on to the flash site ? (could be talking bo!!ocks here)

The site isn't yet finished - I've a meeting on Saturday to discus the technical aspects (like we've decided to shift it over to SQL server for a bit more resiliance) and to make sure all the functionality is there.

Once that's sorted, we're talking to the graphics designer on Monday to add in various bits and pieces to make it look nicer, so by that point, we'll have a constant colour scheme (i.e., the diary pages will integrate with the rest of the site to some extent !). I also need to do some careful image filesize reduction for a few of the images, just to get that initial load time a bit quicker.

And for peoples info, the development environment is;

Win2K (on 640Mb/PIII500), Visual InterDev SP(latest), SQL Server 2000, Fireworks 4

And yes, all the site layout was hand coded. I still don't like (probably historically with all those &nbsp; and other dodgy work arounds) using a WYWSIWYG editor to do my layouts. Ok, it takes longer, but then I understand what's happening, where and how.

cheers
Andy

[eiSecure]

Cool.

BTW: Flash comes pre-installed on everything running IE4 and higher. (IE3 may have it pre-installed too, but I'm not too sure.)

[DaoK]

BTW: Flash comes pre-installed on everything running IE4 and higher. (IE3 may have it pre-installed too, but I'm not too sure.)

anyway, if you dont have flash plugin the flash not will show and you will have a macromedia message to download it ( and it give a link ).

[andymac]

True, but not all IT managers are happy for their people to download things - albeit, things like plugins, from external sites.

The diary part of the site is also going to be licenced out to other people so it's better to make it something that other people can use / develop with.

cheers
Andy

[alex_read]

I agree, I have to take the opinion that the users have no rights when I write my pages at work - no frames, different resolution, creoss browsers, no flash or activex, crappy to write, but the best way then at least more people can see the site, & won't have to wait for things to load or get huge blank boxes where add-ins should be.

[andymac]

I've not gone so far as to say that anybody with any browser can use it (as you'll see if you fire it up with netscrape or earlier (ok, or version 6 until the ISP sort out their IIS install) versions of IE).

I generally design for IE5 and above as this seems to be what most people are running with now - certainly in the target market. It's not possible for me to have all the different target machines, i.e., I can't have a Mac or palm pilot or Internet TV all sitting here.

However, if the client insists that they want something looking a particular way then you have to go with that - hence my site uses IFrames, but if your browser doesn't support them, you can always open that bit in a separate window.

And definately no ActiveX !

The price you pay for really nice looking sites I guess !

cheers
Andy