August 1, 201115 yr Hi Guys, I have a quick favour to ask of you. Basially, i built a site for a client and they have decided to go with another firm who is re doing the site amongst other stuff. That is all fine, i am a professional and i understand that sometimes relationships run their course. However, having just seen the new site i thougt i would come here from some proffesional opinions so i can refer my client here later on. My original site: http://s315189846.websitehome.co.uk/wingz_2/ I appreciate it is not going to win any design awards but i am a developer by trade and i did it all myself from scratch. It is running cubecart. The thumnails on the homepage / category pages do not work as this was the development URL. Apart from that.. you get the idea. The new site http://www.fatphrocks.com/shop.php?action=index I will say nothing. just wait for your feedback. Just bear in mind that i have been carrying out SEO on my original site and brought it in to profit with a steady stream of sales. Thanks in advance and please do you worst on either site! Edited August 1, 201115 yr by greyhat
August 1, 201115 yr Hi Difficult one, but unfortunately for you I also prefer the new one. Although they are both not great. Your design has ugly drop down, lack of padding make it very poor but easy to fix. Your navigation is confusing, the new design has separated the links better. Also you latest products links look unstyled and quite ugly as they are. The three buttons under your image slider are very small and easily ignored where the "new" design follows a more traditional route. Dont get me wrong, I do not like the new design, but between the two it is easier to navigate and therefor the better. P.H.
August 1, 201115 yr Author Hi Difficult one, but unfortunately for you I also prefer the new one. Although they are both not great. Your design has ugly drop down, lack of padding make it very poor but easy to fix. Your navigation is confusing, the new design has separated the links better. Also you latest products links look unstyled and quite ugly as they are. The three buttons under your image slider are very small and easily ignored where the "new" design follows a more traditional route. Dont get me wrong, I do not like the new design, but between the two it is easier to navigate and therefor the better. P.H. Lol ok fair enough. Will see what other people have to say.
August 1, 201115 yr I'm more concerned with the url! Would any self-respecting woman buy items from a store named FAT (PH)FROCKS? I don't get it? Edited August 1, 201115 yr by oakleaves
August 1, 201115 yr Author I'm more concerned with the url! Would any self-respecting woman buy items from a store named FAT (PH)FROCKS? I don't get it? Funny everybody i have spoken to has said exactly the same thing... I never mentioned it as it is none of my business but i do agree. I will take this opportunity to put that out there. (hope you don't mind, Steve!) Any thoughts on the new site?
August 1, 201115 yr dont get me wrong, I am not at any level to produce a shop myself, hardly understand the basics of HTML and CSS. Yours would be great if you had worked together with a designer, just these few navigation flaws and it would be better than the new site. I like your header better, the flower makes it a bit more original. The text in the header of the new site lacks padding and is quite ugly, so is the black colored background with the image links, although images themself dont link at all. Social links in new sites header are weird and lack design, and the main navigation has no hover effect and looks liveless. As soon as I go into the "wingz" page there is no styling at all, especially the 3 links could have been styled. All in all the new site is rubbish, especially after looking through more pages. I have to take a bit back and say that only the navigation is a bit better on the homepage of the new site.
August 1, 201115 yr There are a number of issues with the new site.. The first thing:- Footer Grey Area Far too much images, why haven't they followed standard practice? The links should be text not image based. The PayPal image could have been integrated better.. Header There are some alignment issues in my browser.. Particularly the search box. HTML Validation 102 Errors, 13 warning(s) CSS Validation FAIL Should I go on? Edited August 1, 201115 yr by oakleaves
August 1, 201115 yr I think your design is much better than the new website - I mean the graphic design. The new website looks very boring to me (maybe it`s just me). The name is bad the idea is obviously fat rocks, but it doesn`t work Edited August 1, 201115 yr by teodora
August 1, 201115 yr Author *cough* tables *cough* SEO *cough* anybody!?? Everone that has replied. i take your feedback on board and it looks like mine is staying so i may as well put a link up with it fully functional and the issues raised here sorted out. Thanks! Edited August 1, 201115 yr by greyhat
August 1, 201115 yr Author There are a number of issues with the new site.. The first thing:- Footer Grey Area Far too much images, why haven't they followed standard practice? The links should be text not image based. The PayPal image could have been integrated better.. Header There are some alignment issues in my browser.. Particularly the search box. HTML Validation 102 Errors, 13 warning(s) CSS Validation FAIL Should I go on? Your tears say more than words ever could.
August 1, 201115 yr Author dont get me wrong, I am not at any level to produce a shop myself, hardly understand the basics of HTML and CSS. Yours would be great if you had worked together with a designer, just these few navigation flaws and it would be better than the new site. I like your header better, the flower makes it a bit more original. The text in the header of the new site lacks padding and is quite ugly, so is the black colored background with the image links, although images themself dont link at all. Social links in new sites header are weird and lack design, and the main navigation has no hover effect and looks liveless. As soon as I go into the "wingz" page there is no styling at all, especially the 3 links could have been styled. All in all the new site is rubbish, especially after looking through more pages. I have to take a bit back and say that only the navigation is a bit better on the homepage of the new site. My site is back up with thumnails working I will work on your suggested improvements. Thanks.
August 1, 201115 yr Author I think your design is much better than the new website - I mean the graphic design. The new website looks very boring to me (maybe it`s just me). The name is bad the idea is obviously fat rocks, but it doesn`t work Thanks for the feedback!
Create an account or sign in to comment