iEntry 10th Anniversary Forum Rules Search
WebProWorld
Register FAQ Calendar Mark Forums Read
Submit Your Site For Review Need a fresh set of eyeballs to take a look at your site? Have a specific issue or question about some aspect of your layout, design or interface? This is the forum for you. When submitting your site, be sure to discuss what aspect you are looking for input on. Just posting a link with the word 'review' isn't appropriate.

Share Thread: & Tags

Share Thread:

Closed Thread
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old 09-23-2005, 11:05 AM
WebProWorld Veteran
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: London - Cheswick
Posts: 669
JuniorOnline RepRank 0
Default www.airtimemanager.co.uk - site to review

Hi

could you please check the site and let me know what do you think?

many thanks,
Tania
  #2 (permalink)  
Old 09-26-2005, 06:39 PM
WebProWorld Pro
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Longmont, Colorado
Posts: 216
CJacobson RepRank 0
Default

This site looks very professional. You've obviously put a LOT of work into it! There are a ton of pages for search engines to index, and many of them have good content. The Site Map is particularly nicely done... but IMHO there's still room for improvement.

You have a LOT of link options on the home page. Many of them are redundant. I think you risk confusing and overwhelming visitors... and that's not good marketing.

At the top of the navigation column, you've got two rows of four buttons. On-mouse-over, the first four switch to words, but the second four just brighten. I couldn't figure out the logic of those four buttons.

On the home page, the "content" starts with a 35 word sentence. That's too many words. Simplify! (At the very least, you should consider breaking that sentence into two. For example, change "low, transparent tariffs tailored specifically to..." to "low, transparent tariffs. Airtime Manager is tailored specifically to...")

The source code (on EVERY page) and the css file are both similarly way too bloated. You could improve search engine performance and load time by cutting out the fat.

Start here: http://www.websiteoptimization.com/services/analyze/

That nice Site Map of yours... I bet you could exactly replicate it with half as much code! Maybe a third.

You might want to consider losing the Flash on the more utilitarian pages (to improve load time).

It's cool that you have a favicon... but the image you used broke down to a messy smudge. You should try something else there.


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

If you have a minute, I'd love to know what you'd do to improve this site: childrens educational toys.
  #3 (permalink)  
Old 09-27-2005, 05:22 AM
WebProWorld Veteran
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: London - Cheswick
Posts: 669
JuniorOnline RepRank 0
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CJacobson

It's cool that you have a favicon... but the image you used broke down to a messy smudge. You should try something else there.
Many thanks for your spot on comments - I will certainly work on these to enhance the site further. I was a little unsure about the above 2 comments. could you please clarify what is: favicon
  #4 (permalink)  
Old 09-27-2005, 01:05 PM
WebProWorld Pro
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Longmont, Colorado
Posts: 216
CJacobson RepRank 0
Default

Your "favicon" (short for "favorites icon") is that tiny little square image that appears next to your URL in the browser toolbar of Firefox and Netscape, or next to your link if someone puts you in their "favorites" list in IE. I didn't find the file-name of your favicon, or where it's declared in your source code, but the image show up in the normal place. It looks like a blurry Adam, in repose, in white on a black background.

Most people who have favicons declare them in their head section (right below the meta-name tags) like this: "<link rel="shortcut icon" href="favicon.ico">" (Google "favicon" and you'll find cool online utilities for making them, etc.)

While I was looking for it elsewhere, I noticed a few other things...

I noticed in your css file that you ONLY use one font for the whole website... which means that you only needed to declare "font-family:verdana, arial, Sans-Serif;" one time. That's cool. The other 124 times you declared font-family are redundant, and simply deleting them will significantly decrease the size and load time of your CSS file. (There are obviously other redundant declarations in there too.)

I also noticed that for some reason your homepage never quite finishes loading in IE 5.50 on my PC (where I'm still running Windows ME). Oddly, it works fine in IE on my Mac. It might be a problem with my particular installation. Almost everything looks okay, except IE's little globe/window thingy keeps rotating. The only functional problem I see is that your drop-down menus won't function until/unless downloading is complete.
  #5 (permalink)  
Old 09-27-2005, 02:36 PM
WebProWorld Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Boston, MA
Posts: 25
empyrelounge RepRank 0
Default

I agree with a lot of CJacobson said. While I like the flash at the top of the page, I think it is redundant to load on every page, I would just have a graphic there if you do not want to leave it as just blank space.
__________________
http://www.empyrelounge.com
  #6 (permalink)  
Old 09-27-2005, 04:34 PM
WebProWorld New Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Mississauga, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 9
Accolution.ca RepRank 0
Default

I agree with the comments so far. There is a lot of information, bordering on too much.

The links are the side are too numerous and I felt like I did not know where to start. Offering more generic headings like "services", "products", etc would provide the user an easier time navigating the site.

Also putting your Home, Privacy Policy, Site Map links at the bottom or away from the main links would help to not overwhelm the user.

The graphics and design looks nice and pleasing to the eye.

I hope that perspective is useful.
  #7 (permalink)  
Old 09-28-2005, 06:46 AM
WebProWorld Veteran
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: London - Cheswick
Posts: 669
JuniorOnline RepRank 0
Default

Interesting feedback - I passed them on to our developer to make a start. Thank you all for taking the time to look into it.

regarding the navigation I totally agree - I have been working on this and the new version will be coming soon - also the menu is very hard to use - we cut down on it and made it more user friendly.
  #8 (permalink)  
Old 01-09-2006, 03:12 AM
WebProWorld Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 50
twist RepRank 0
Default

Nice website, my wife saw me looking at it and it got her attention right away. She thought I was looking for toys for our kid.

You get a bottom scrollbar at 800x600. If you could just cut down on menu font/size or content width you could easily fix this.

When viewing the page in a window the menu text is pushed very close to the left side making it harder to read.

You need to close your <h1> tag on line 81.

Line 519, replace "&" with "&amp;"

Copyright, "2003, 2004, 2005 Storyboard Toys!" might want to go with 2003-2005 or it's going to start getting crowded.

The homepage comes in at 209306 bytes which could be slow for 56k users. Smaller thumbnails on the homepage could help ease the size.
Closed Thread

  WebProWorld > Site Design > Submit Your Site For Review

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:31 PM.



Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.3.0