Rob Aid

Wrong on so many levels: item positioning, color scheme, menu colors and height of some submenu items, back to top button doesn't work and the website has the lowest Page Speed score i've seen in a while of 19/100 so it has many things to improve. The most ridiculous part I can give an advice on is creation of thumbnails instead resizing images in HTML or CSS. Serving scaled images on the main page could save 3.8MiB (95% reduction). Example: http://webhowz.com/images/portfolio/port4.jpg is re-sized from 1011x683 to 142x140. Serving a scaled image could save 576.7KiB (97% reduction). You should redo the website nearly from scratch because it doesn't assure the visitors that your work will be professional.

Yep, much better readability, now fix the scroller width

I don't know where to start, but I can suggest you either center the website or keep the unorthodox stick to the left side (which I think would look better in your case). Here's how it looks on my monitor: If you plan to stick with the textures you seem to like, make them merge seamlessly at the left and right end. You could also apply that to the header texture. Other than that, the font is too small, the options and presentations of your creative process should be presented in a better way. Consider using more noticeable expression and using some way to connect the mentioned process with a flow (arrows between them or whatever you can think of). The sprockets at the bottom defy physics and all spin in the same direction (at least they do until hovered). The link to the blog isn't that obvious and requires reading before it is easily found as BLOG instead Bio3Design. Its readability is better, but some fonts need to be larger (especially those 3 popular | recent | active switchable tabs. If you plan to keep the comments closed on every post, consider removing that small line of code from the code/query. Optimization is very poor both on the main website and the blog. Way too many javascript and slices of images... there's a lot to be done. P.S.: Just noticed that the footer on the main page is fixed at the bottom of the page, which can look pretty bad on low resolutions. This is how your website looks to 80% of the people who might visit your site (looks much worse when you resize it to fit even wider audience).

I thought about overall contrast of the website, where you could add more color to the wesite logo to make it stand out a little... Here are my two fast mockups with warmer colors or fixed contrast, and two different ways to make the logo more noticeable.

I can't talk too many bad things about it after watching those illustrations The only thing which bothers me in design is the fact that pastel washed-out colors are pretty much dominant everywhere and it cause the eyes to strain while reading. Just play with contrast a little without disturbing the calmness you want to achieve. On other note, images should be served scaled and optimized to make the website load faster, and caching of the static objects should be enabled (server or .htaccess configuration). Saludos

I won't go into design and the rest since everybody already told most of the things i would say about readability and such. The idea for logo in the middle isn't bad but I thought it's something interactive on the page and needed time to figure it's a logo The only thing I'll contribute m criticism is the position of the scroller on the technology page (didn't check the rest of those). Here's how it looks on 1920 x 1080:

I don't like the overall contrast. It screams. The text on other pages needs more line height. Mouse over on buttons reacts a bit sluggish for the first time hover, and I suggest using CSS with hover instead... or some JQuery effect instead swap image. Menu items need proper spacing when selected. You could widen the image rotator to fit the width of website since its controls are over rotated images. If you choose to do that, widen the banner above it as well to be larger than website width.

Design is much better and has a more modern look. Suggestions: - That partial shadow on the sides of the content looks a bit weird on other pages. - Fix the background positioning for client box or come up with another idea for that area (same goes for the bubble on the em locksmith services page).

It isn't too bad regarding design and features, and here are my few remarks: - you should pay more attention to post formatting in order to make them more readable (I went through Crowdfunding post and everything in it has the same formatting). - enable browser caching if you know how - center background (since top-left looks silly on large resolutions) and find/create a better image that could be repeatable or look nicely centered

It loaded to me and design wise it looks OK, however, you might consider ditching accordion menu layout and increase the website width in order to gain on vertical space. Accordion menus are one of the worst UX (user experience) solutions and their application for content lowers the information availability while increasing page loading time. Optimization isn't too bad but you could use some image optimization (the page could save 117.9kB or 28% reduction in size). Average loading time from US east coast is 7.6 seconds, and the first byte time isn't too bad since I believe you are using a static file and you used jquery website for parallel resource downloading. You should also make sure you use the right image types for right images. For example, your header.png (flowers on the last accordion item) has 324.2 kB. Since it doesn't have any transparency in it, I would suggest using JPG instead PNG. Content: - Image 615.0 kB - Script 481.4 kB - CSS 129.0 kB - HTML 28.9 kB CSS is way too large for a 1 page website and PageSpeed found you aren't using 51% of CSS (estimated 67.2kB) on that page.

PageSpeed was used for statistics and loads.in was used for load time measurement. If you don't know the right parameters for web image optimization, try using smush.it for image optimization.

Design looks OK, however, code and optimization of the website are very poor. - Homepage yields 32 errors in coding so it might not look the same on every platform. - The form on contact page doesn't delete the description of input fields. - Server tweaking, image optimization (on your homepage you could save 130kB only in image optimization) and script optimization needs to done. Although you said you didn't want to make it image heavy look at the stats: Image 625.2 kB (could be 490 kB) Script 328.1 kB CSS 20.4 kB HTML 11.1 kB Consider eliminating some of the scripts you don't actually need to lower the time needed for your site to display (from a standard DSL connection in US, your site takes an average of 4.5 to show it's alive and 9 seconds to fully load).

I like it in general, and if I had to nitpick here are my remarks: - The search doesn't erase the word search when you use it and you have to manually delete it. - The comment bubble could be larger so you could use some other font inside it. - The footer image coloration and shadow doesn't match the content

@lieto there are modules that have been deleted and I have plans to introduce new modules and move some of the modules from website's footer into the sidebar (especially latest updates on articles) Ways to connect will move into the sidebar once I do a customization (there used to be a customized tw, fb, mail and rss link in the header). I couldn't change the whole UX at once so I'll do those things in baby steps. @komirad yes I agree on that one, it always increases readability. The website used to have a darker and textured background (which i ditched in terms of readability and website optimization), and I agree those links in need to be darkened or redone. That How and why to... page was made when I started the website in order to explain subscription features to the less tech savvy people (which should be rare on the website). I thought about uniting both bars below the logo in a single bar which could offer ajaxed search to users who are logged in. As I previously said, those changes will take baby steps. @marc roy alzer81 gave his opinion on the old logo: The only thing I reckoned to change on the new version are the elimination of robot's body or potential repositioning of logotype. Way too many websites use "insert font" to represent the whole brand and I don't plan removing the website mascot.

Why don't you widen the content of the website to match the header and footer width?

Yep, I would increase text size and lower the height of the image used on the main page. Maybe you should reposition the booking widget near the footer to somewhere more visible. Edit: You could also lower the transparency of the sub-menu items on the main menu.

Post images should brighten the site and the only thing that I really don't like are the bottles. the bottom of the bottles are drawn in a way that resembles a perspective where you look at them from a height, but the bottle necks and liquids don't.

Hehe, the first thing I thought about was adding some nice pictures of the signature dishes made there on the front page. If they are willing to update it regularly, you could add meal of the day or menu of the week on the page as well. If the restaurant has a nice exterior, i would put it in the header background.

I don't get any changes on the re-size.

It is a news website, it should have a lot going on. Anybody?

After a looong while, I've done a little revamp and simplification of the website. Your thoughts?

Remove those "hidden" links to bestfreetempaltes which are situated right from your header and increase the font size over the website (looks pretty small on a large monitor). You could also lower the #footer height to 30 or 40px in your CSS. I guess those empty spaces are left for advertisement. The weather part needs to be worked on as well. Pozdrav iz komsiluka

Clean, but it needs some placement fixes (wonder if Lev will jump-in with his detailed remarks) and more content. Try adding more columns with content at the footer too (as on my website).

Design is super. If i wanted to be a nitpick, I would criticize the Image optimization which could save about 80kB per page (70% of total image loading size).

As you might have noticed on my website, I'm very dedicated to optimization. If the file is too large and it can't be optimized or simplified, make 2 or 3 files with sprites to enable parallel download and thus make the site load faster on the user side.