threebirds

On the page: http://www.food-lover.com/gallery.html It's taking a long time to load this page because the thumbnails are NOT sized properly. Some are okay and some aren't. The one's that aren't --are very large. 100K+ This lack of image optimization is bogging down the page load. Very, very slow. On your HOME page, you have two dropcaps that are the same size. This implies that both columns are of equal importance. If you emphasize them the same, people won't know which one to start reading first. Make one larger for emphasis. It is a little issue that is causing visual confusion. Small but important.

Your image work is rich and has lots of texture. But on the invisible side, the images are slowing down the load time. Investigate optimization alternatives like different image formats without compromising your art. Designers tend to think viewers care about image quality. It's actually down the list somewhere after speed, usability, navigation, and content. Yes. Even on portfolio sites. Viewers expect a little longer load time on portfolio sites but not as long as your HOME page is presently. The HOME page is NOT your portfolio. It's the pages that come after that. So viewers still have high expectations on that first page for load time. It's taking 15 to 30 seconds to load the HOME page. You're target should be 7 seconds on highspeed or less. At 30 seconds, usability testing has shown, you've lost half your visitors already. Bail out. Speed is a transparent credibility feature. Viewers only notice slow sites not fast ones. You're code looks beautiful. I'm jealous. The page tile says design portfolio but it doesn't appear on the page. I'm a designer and on the HOME page I can't tell what it is you are "selling." After that on linked pages, it's obvious. The HOME page should tell me what you do, who you are, and why I should care. Just the title isn't sufficient. It's good for the search engines but not enough for a viewer. Make me want to explorer and discover. If you want design work, consider a "Hire Me" link and page. This has been shown to improve portfolio websites response. Assuming you want work, of course. Here's and example of how to optimize some images on the HOME page. The HOME page is the most critical. The background image is about 90K PNG. I switched it to a low color depth in GIF to half the file size, for me the effect is the same with much faster loading. You might also be creative with a smaller tiling effect that gives similar "theme" results. The full-width banner images could be reduced to 30% of original weight by converting to high quality JPEGs. Small images like "think_sm-resizecrop-214-117.png" could be reduced 10 fold by using GIFs. Those are just some examples. Also, another way to speed up your pages is using GZIP-PHP to compress the code on-the-fly. Do you have PHP functions on your server / host? If so, I can tell you how to do this. My challenge to you is finding out how fast you can make this site really load. Visitors will love you for it.

You've shown some great design technique on the HOME page. It's beautiful work. But it's not communicating what the viewer should do next. I'm overwhelmed (over-communication creates confusion.) This is a matter of emphasis. "If you emphasize everything, you emphasize nothing." I don't have a fast solution on that. When a site has a "search field" in the top right corner (the right place), it's a subliminal indicator the site is "bloated." Doesn't matter if it is or not, it's like a sign saying, "There's just too much stuff here. You're going to need help finding anything." Is this feature really necessary for your portfolio website? Frequently, we think it adds credibility but in reality it can put people off "scent." I'll look a little deeper beyond the HOME page in a moment. More comments coming.

Thelma and Friends- I've enjoyed the stimulation of your company and minds. I've bigger fish to fry now so I won't be back for awhile. I haven't been so well pounced other than by religious fanatics. I'm sure Thelma won't miss me and my anti-establishment rebel attitude. I did generate quite a bit of good content for the search engines in your behalf. While Thelma tried hardest to get my goat, it was just all too predictable. She just couldn't stay out of it militarily or emotionally. I can smell the smoke all the way from Texas. To those who actually found and solved website browser related problems, you're the best and I have gratitude for your brilliance and willingness to help. Thanks. - End of File-

No duh? What's your point? That wouldn't have fixed IE6 either. IE6 is dog food. What's your point? Am I supposed to feel embarrassed? Does this mean I'm stupid? Does it mean I can no longer support my family doing websites? Does it mean the site doesn't work? Are you secretly emotionally distressed about sloppy coders who are eager to get paid? Or do you just like the intellectual duel of putting people down? GASP! You can do that? What if I deliberately chose not to? Will the web fall apart? Ouch! Was that slander? Or libel? You're making fun of my old age and debilities aren't you? Look. I'm bleeding. Sob! Please stop! I didn't come here to teach coding. Or learn coding. I came here to breath the fresh air of tolerance and peace while having a Framed site reviewed. Thelma, you've gone over the edge. Get a grip. You're so easily provoked. I really bugs you that I can code crap and get paid for it. Doesn't it? It sort of destroys the whole illusion of your "web profession." It's like doing dentistry with a saw and hammer. There is no regulatory agency to prevent "quacks" like me from delivering usable websites with shortcuts, workarounds and hacks. No accreditation. And to the unsavvy client it appears to be extraordinary performance and magic, because they don't know diddly about the "invisible" side of the web. Can you believe I just got a government grant to build websites for small businesses? That makes the steam boil, eh? Because of my track record in real-world measurable results! In the end, it's all about credibility, isn't it? I have none with you because I don't live by your rules. That's not how I measure you. I just see you as extremely judgmental. I have no time to do it "perfect" like you. Life is short.

Absolutely yes. Everyone's life and time are a precious commodity. I charge for the exchange of my skills and mind. I and my clients want customized results fast. Otherwise, without Frames, my delivery would be longer (lead time), my client?le would pay more, I'd then lose my competitive edge. The very disposable nature of my web products wouldn't be possible. More time is spent on what really matters: presentation, content, and information scent. I sell my clients what they need, but within boundaries, not what is the vanguard of the day. I screen my customers. I turn away 50% of my walk-ins because my solutions are NOT what they need. The rejects are either unpleasant or micromanagers. Or they may be unprepared or can't supply me content fast enough. All of them know nothing about optimization, coding, or hosting, or SEO, etc. I provide all that for them in a Frames package. This site took 45 days- start to finish for me and a story researcher. No content was provided. But I can build a multi-page website where the content is prepared in advance in less than 8 hours and charge $500 to $1700 for it. Do the math. $62/hour on the low end. I get paid $350 per page for one page scrolling websites. which I deliver in less than 24-hours. That is what HTML Frames do for me. It's all about optimizing production process for profitability. It leaves me time to waste on forums and dreaming. Frames are fast and simple.

When you sent that screengrab of the scrollbar error, I about choked. I'd never seen so much "chrome" on an IE browser window in my life. At least 30% of the screen was gobbled up. You must've been going for a worst case scenario. Tell me you don't normally browse on that tight of a screen. You've been the shining example on this forum of getting past emotion and getting down to brass tacks. Real results. Thanks.

I just wanted you to know the solution to this horizontal scrolling problem. I did finally get my hands on the same build of IE6 you are using. Thanks. Couldn't have troubleshot the problem without it. It wasn't a percentage setting bug as thought. The solution was removing this line of code: It was at the top of all the errant pages. This code had been inserted by a WYSIWYG Linux when editing some of the pages. I thought it was benign --not so on IE6. All fixed. Thanks so much for your insights. You cracked it.

Just a note of irony: As pointed out on this forum, I had a horizontal scrollbar error that would occur in IE6. The pages that had the error had: as the first line of code. After removing this, the error disappeared. Have a nice day!

This is a better reply. You actually are teaching now instead of trashing. Much better. You do know of the provisions for future XFRAMES, correct? http://www.w3.org/TR/xframes/ The implementation is the same minus the negatives. This is the workaround of the future and a better solution. Then I will discard HTML Frames as will others. XFrames will be the fad for a moment. But this is somewhat off topic. The topic is not about Frames viability in the future --but rather about a critique of a simple website that's essentially "disposable" once it has served it's purpose gathering market data. This is actually the prime goal. This is no web monument. This is built for a product in transition. Testing an old product in a new market. The site message will change. Frames, in this case, provide a minimum lowtech investment. The site will be later repurposed. This is where the true innovation really is for the client-- saving money. The site "perception" is credible (even if it has no credibility in the IT community.) It serves it's purpose well for it's market. It is deliberately "clunky" looking. More like newsprint than 100% rag letterhead. This communicates something to the audience about it's volatility and urgency. It's the site "body language" --a certain user comfort in no-slickness and no pushy overselling. No site bloat. Coming here for a review was to have extra eyes give harsh critiques knowing the limitations of Frames. I got what I wanted. The site is improved. The invisible code is not. I don't care about which brush I paint with. Some artists can paint with a spoon or their feet. It only makes their output more unique. Uniqueness has monetary value in differentiating products and services. Frames are weird and rarely used. That is the strategy. Something is different on a subliminal level. But it doesn't feel uncomfortable or strange to the uninitiated.

Thanks for the screenshot' date=' it's very helpful. I apologize for misleading you, I haven't fixed that problem yet. Tonight? What the image shows is the same problem described in many places online with various workaround solutions. So this confirms the cause. Thanks. Incidentally, what is your IE6 verison number? I'd really like to know so I can reproduce the error.[/quote'] I tested using IE 6.00.2900.2180 build I also tested in IE8, Opera, Safari and Chrome which seems to render just fine. Regardless of the statistics, it's too bad that all the browsers do not render the code the same way when coded correctly. I'd just be happy when IE6 falls off entirely but it still looks like a few years away before that happens. You really have gone the extra mile. Thanks. I appreciate you making me look good in my clients eyes.

Such absolutism! That's terribly sad news for a lot of big sites who still use this outdated Frame technology. Do you think web committees can actually get them to discard something so entwined in the web today? Especially seeing as how these companies are the biggest players on the W3C committee? No need to answer that. You must believe this "idealism" or you wouldn't say frames have no future --even if they are still used in the present. I came here for a review and I got it. The prejudice against Frames was expected. I've had this Frame discussion with some brilliant people and I don't expect any converts from IT or programmers. It's just not the nature of their personalities to "break the rules." The DOCTYPE is easily implanted in the code but it is NOT needed for a functioning site. You're as overzealous about standards as I am about tricks and shortcuts. You've contributed nothing new to this post. Just old knowledge and setting me up as a dumb Luddite martyr. Thanks.

here. Thanks for the screenshot, it's very helpful. I apologize for misleading you, I haven't fixed that problem yet. Tonight? What the image shows is the same problem described in many places online with various workaround solutions. So this confirms the cause. Thanks. Incidentally, what is your IE6 verison number? I'd really like to know so I can reproduce the error. Thanks for letting me know the fix worked. I did change this last night. About browser statistics. Here's what this market (users) actually have been using on a gateway page the client had me set up for downloads on another URL. Here's the percentages: 1. MSIE 52.7% 2. Firefox 39.2% 3. Safari 7.4% 4. Opera 0.6% Unfortunately, no data between IE6 and IE7. Oh, well. But it does show how this market chooses to browse. We've beat this dead horse long enough. You found problems that needed fixing (besides the Frames issues.) That's why I came here. You have a good brain. Thanks for lending it to me.

Thanks, Eric. You're a tolerant person. There are many ways to solve a problem. There is no one right, perfect way. I've gotten what I need from my review and the site is improved. That was the goal.

Yes. That is a solution. But a simple change of percentage will fix the problem on all browsers. No sniffing required and no problems or complexity. A low-tech (no-tech) solution. Hmm? You have the same size monitors and settings I have. Any ideas why you are seeing "NAVBAR" folding? That is your belief. Got any numbers? "I believe" Firefox is stronger than people realize and still gaining ground fast. So picking and choosing data that supports our feelings / intuition is okay? That works for me.