Made some updates

[Left Nut of Thresh]

I made some updates and I'm interested in feedback, especially from those with slower connections.

http://www.roberthenry.org



Thanks,
Robert Henry

[jofta]

Question though...
If the preloader tell me its loading 600k ( and it takes long enough to be doing that - 60 seconds + on dial up)then it says fine, its all loaded off you go to the site..

why does every element of the site have a preloader on it as well?

The 600k cannot just be the blue screen and menu!!! There was no background music.

The "news" which is only available as a drop down from the HOME segment is a tad non intuitive.

And just this once I will overlook the "if its an update please use the original thread " rule

jofta

[Left Nut of Thresh]

Good, I'm glad the preloader works. I made it on the fly without testing.

Every element has it's own preloader so I can update one element without everyone having to download the entire site again. It is faster for the user in the long run.

Lots of sounds and different graphics make up the 600. Yes, they are all optimized, but I have MANY images.

Thanks Jofta

RH

[vwebworld]

It took a while to load 600K
3-5 min around 28.8K

I liked that you show different words(while loading)
and that there was a load progress bar.
BUT...it says "you will not have to wait after loading"
which is NOT true. After clicking on a link, there is additional load time. I suggest you do not say "there
is no more waiting."

The look of the site is great! It may be a little
"futuristic/modern" for a pianist's site...and the
sounds on the site one would assume would be from
a piano rather than more "modern".

In general, I think someone would really want to come
to your site to wait to have it load (with a dial-up
connection). In other words... must people would not
wait that long unless they just HAD to see your site.

Purhaps you might consider crafting a "smaller" site
for people with dial up...and providing a choice of
which site they want to go to??? In this way, people
who find your site through searching can make theirown
choice on whether to have a short wiat or long wait.
If you do not offer this...their choice may be just
to leave...which you don't want.

~ Roland

[AlienInLondon]

I doubt whether people on slower connections will download 1 meg+ just to give you an opinion. Any first interface bigger than 50KB is not good - yours is 600. Regarding feedback on the site, it depends on the purpose of it:

1. As a showcase for demonstrating the possibilities of combining Flash with Swish to produce good effects - very good.
2. As a website showcasing yourself, i.e. providing information, it is everything a good website should not be. Dazzling graphics quickly become boring and even tedious if you have to go through them time and time again every time you just want to get some information. 1 Meg for an FAQ? You must be joking!! The whole thing is just way too big - even for fast connections (I'm on 512k broadband).

Advice?

You've mastered the first step in webdesign. Now for the hard part:

- optimising that site to portray the same image in less than 100KB
- presenting information CLEARLY, QUICKLY and in an ORGANISED way
- using animation to thrill and dazzle the user once and then concentrating on accessibility of information.

[Left Nut of Thresh]

Thanks for the feedback guys.

I don't think you guys are thinking about my target audience. Think about it: My clients are generally more affluent, live in major cities where broadband is almost a certainty, have faster computers, and/or they are affiliated with a university or conservatory in some way (meaning they have superfast connections). So loadtime is not an issue. If people wanna wait, they can. If not, oh well. This website is generally a place where I send fans. It is not like a business where someone is looking for a service in a hurry and there are thousands of others like me. I've stated before on this forum that I would never design a site for someone with as much eye candy or file size requirements as mine.

You doubt whether people are willing to wait? Alomst 50,000 people have visited in 6 months. Only 25,000 of those are mine. j/k.

There are plenty of sites that are even bigger than mine that get lots of trraffic. You listed two purposes of my site and indeed I set out to do both of them, perhaps with a slight emphasis on design, believe it or not. I am tired of seeing lackluster swish sites with low frame rates, and at the same time I was looking to update my site from html. I laff when I see people giving advice about keeping their framerates below 15. That's why their sites look like crap. I am tired of audio that is less than stellar, so I consciously chose to jack up the file size to accomodate my taste. I like audio where you can actually hear sounds above 2 Khz. I like crisp graphics and again I chose to err on the side of looks. And I am also tired (as I'm sure we all are) of swish being dissed in the webdesign community. So I set out to make a site that causes people to question their view on swish. It just happened to be about myself.

The faq gives the user a choice of high and low bandwidth, the low version being like 30k...dunno what your point is there...I created it out of boredom, and didn't care about size, although I did optimize it.

Vwebworld...I say that about the loading because alot of webnewbs don't know that the site will be cached. If you wanna get particular (), I state that "once this PAGE loads..." Anyways, I was referring to the main file.

One more thing regarding the actual sitecheck (coughs)...I'm interested to know if, on subsequent visits, it bypasses the loading sequence. It should skip from "welcome" to the logo to the down and to the left and all that.

BTW, what you call my first interface is actually a combination of an intro and an interface, so it's not as objectionable as you make it seem. Most intros are at leat 200k. Besides, I've yet to see a flash site with a 50k interface that looks and sounds good.

If I sound grouchy it's because it's 5:30 in the morning. I appreciate what you guys are saying, but since I began work on the site, I have made conscious decisions as to your advice all throughout the design process and the end result is precisely what I wanted.

Robert Henry

[jofta]

On revisit the site kicks straight in

EACH menu selection however goes through its full preloading again...!!!!

and I still think the "news" drop down is not intuitive

Hope your day gets better

jofta

[Left Nut of Thresh]

Thanks Jofta. My question to you is: what in the hell are YOU doing up at this hour.

My day is ending. I am about to go to bed, lol.

RH

[AlienInLondon]

Just a thought:
If everything is exactly as you planned it, with an end result that is exactly what you want, why ask for comments?? Also why ask feedback from dial-up users when you specifically know the site is designed for affluent people with high speed connections? Just wondering....

As for the rationale behind your design - I understand and accept that. I don't agree with it, but I do understand it.

[Left Nut of Thresh]

Alien: This is a sitecheck forum. As in check my site for bugs. I want to know if everything works on everyone's respective computer. My caching on my comp is screwed up for some reason, so it reloads the whole thing everytime. I can't rely on the feedback my own comp gives me. The way I designed the preloader can benefit both low and high bandwidth users (you'd have to see the code), so I need low bandwidth people to test it also. The other target audience is webdesign enthusiasts who generally will wait longer than most folks for a cool site. I know this because I just got broadband in March and I used to sit and wait. I still sit and wait. I'll take your sarcasm with a smile.

As for the design rationale, what's not to get? I know my audience, bandwidth doesn't matter, end of story.

Post a link to 50k intro and interface at your earliest convenience.

RH

[jofta]

"what in the hell are YOU doing up at this hour"

Its only 8.45 in the evening on the "right" side of the planet.

Once again, the "news" section still bugs me

Out of curiosity...
What is the contribution of your "place tags" to total file size for the main site?

[AlienInLondon]

I was not being sarcastic - I tried giving an honest informed opinion and asked (what I thought was) an honest question. You specifically asked for feedback from slow connection users and when informed about the obvious problems for slow users, you emphatically keep on pointing out that it wasn't designed for them anyway.

It clearly doesn't fit in with the responses you want, so I'll refrain from commenting any more.

[Left Nut of Thresh]

What do you mean about the news? You speak as though my site totally new to you. You've been there b4 right?

19,310

I'll optimize some more tomorrow..er today, but only to find the stray, unused hidden image. We've all had those...I was just anxious to get the site back up tonight.

[Left Nut of Thresh]

Alien: You are correct. Those aren't the responses I wanted. Any idiot can say "hey, 600k is too big for dailuppers," which BTW is an opinion often stated as fact. Even when you insisted on discussing file size, you offered no suggestions other than to tell me to essentially redesign the site, which was arrogant, impractical, and unwarranted. Now, you are pouting. In fact, I have yet to see one suggestion from anyone in this entire thread.

In my follow-up to your first response, I gave you plently of reasons why I designed the site the way I did, to which you replied with two sentences.

"When informed of the obvious problem for slow users" ?!?! As if it had never dawned on me...If you understand my original premise for having designed a bigger site then we shouldn't even be having this discussion. There is one group of people that this site was designed for: rich, educated, music-loving, high-bandwidth using city-dwellers. These people generally don't have 28.8! That said, I still want the site to function properly for 28.8 users, meaning I want the preloader to work, hence the reason for my posting this thread.

Feel free to copy and paste any specific suggestions I might have missed in your posts.

You were being sarcastic. There is *nothing wrong* with being sarcastic. Just don't be a prude about it, jeez. Alien, I am sure you have some good things to say, and I would be interested in hearing them.

Just once, I'd like someone to mention some aspect of my site other than its size...Everyone in these forums is a web-designer. I have a target audience that might be different from yours. Accept that, and help me reach them better.

RH

[AlienInLondon]

I am a 45 y/o educated company director living in London, with a 512k broadband connection. I am also a connoisseur of classical music, so I guess I do fit your stringent parameters for a target audience.

Apart from that, I have been involved in IT for over 25 years and this involvement included specifying many websites, according to accepted "good web practice", of which I have wide knowledge. As far as actually designing in Flash, I am a complete novice with 4 months' experience, as can obviously be seen from my few (feeble) attempts. I do find it fascinating though, hence my continued involvement in experimenting with Swish and participating in these forums.

Your site has pushed the boundaries of Swish, probably way beyond what it was initially intended for. Technically, it's a masterpiece. As far as being a 'good' website, my initial responses is still my (informed) opinion:

1. As a showcase for demonstrating the possibilities of combining Flash with Swish to produce good effects - very good (I'll change that to excellent).
2. As a website showcasing yourself, i.e. providing information, it is everything a good website should not be. Dazzling graphics quickly become boring and even tedious if you have to go through them time and time again every time you just want to get some information.

Advice?

You've mastered the first step in webdesign. Now for the hard part:

- optimising that site to portray the same image in less than 100KB
- presenting information CLEARLY, QUICKLY and in an ORGANISED way
- using animation to thrill and dazzle the user once and then concentrating on accessibility of information.

That's my opinion, which you asked for. Use it / lose it.

I repeat I was not being sarcastic and I'm certainly not pouting - I just hate wasting good advice where it's obviously not heeded.


[Edited by AlienInLondon on 06-11-2002 at 08:02 AM]

[jofta]

What do you mean about the news? You speak as though my site totally new to you. You've been there b4 right?

Since the beginning...

I just think that the "tucked" away nature of the "welcome..heres what Ive been doing and here is how the sites been updated" is a bit too subtle (although very slick) and the option to click on it is gone once you move into the body of the site.

Jofta

[Left Nut of Thresh]

"I am a 45 y/o educated company director living in London, with a 512k broadband connection. I am also a connoisseur of classical music, so I guess I do fit your stringent parameters for a target audience."

That's right. You are the target audience. And what is your connection again? Hmm. And what is your point again?

(I'm playing in Wells Cathedral on July 19. Mozart k.488. Come out!)

"- optimising that site to portray the same image in less than 100KB"

The biggest image I have is 36k (that's the background).


"- presenting information CLEARLY, QUICKLY and in an ORGANISED way"

OK. I will admit that it is not quite as fast as you would like it. But where is is not clear and organized?


- using animation to thrill and dazzle the user once and then concentrating on accessibility of information.

Meaning what? Have a splash page that asks is this your first time here? Your third piece of advice is really the same as the second in that it deals with clarity and presentation, so again, be specific. What is not clear? Organized?

I do plan on making an html or maybe a low bandwidth swish site soon. I guess if I had to question your comments, I would say that they are entirely too general. You could say the same thing to every web designer in existence.

[Left Nut of Thresh]

"I just think that the "tucked" away nature of the "welcome..heres what Ive been doing and here is how the sites been updated" is a bit too subtle (although very slick) and the option to click on it is gone once you move into the body of the site."

Haha. A self-aggrandizing post, eh? Please, I only have 104 posts. Sure, I wanna know what everyone thinks of the updates, especially those of you who have helped me through the learning curve and are familiar with the old site. But, as I said, this thread was truly a preloading bug check. Also, I have a separate movie load into a sprite from my server *during* the intro, and I can't be sure it works with my comp behaving as it does.

I ask about the news thing because it is the same as it has always been, so just wonder why you wait till now to mention it. You are the first person to ever dislike it, at least in writing.

[jofta]

"to ever dislike it"

Im just stating what I think about it and never said "dislike" and am a bit stunned by your "Haha. A self-aggrandizing post, eh?" comment

In fact, I have never even clicked on "it" before.

If your having a bad day, have it elsewhere, all Im doing is replying to a site check

Good night

[Left Nut of Thresh]

I apologize? You may have taken something the wrong way. I was referring to myself with the self-aggrandizing thing. I reread the last couple posts and can't figure out where the misunderstanding happened. I wasn't being smart in the least. I meant no harm.

RH