In all sense, which is best?

Terencentanio · 03-13-2005, 10:38 PM

I am one-time webdesigner for Phorce, hoping to become full time webdesigner and get a perm. place on the staff page.

Anyways, I've done a redesign of the site with a new colour scheme and some images. In my humble opinion, it looks frikkin hotttttttttt.

Anyways, here're the stats:

http://shin-ra.org/phorce (NEW)

HTML 4.0 Errors: 0 (W3C)
CSS 2.1 Errors: 0 (W3C)
14.4K: 16.30 seconds
28.8K: 8.25 seconds
33.6K: 7.10 seconds
56K: 4.34 seconds
ISDN 128K: 1.47 seconds
T1 1.44Mbps: 0.31 seconds
HTTP Objects: 6
Page size: 20855 bytes

http://phorce.co.uk (OLD)

HTML 4.0 Errors: 6
CSS 2.1 Errors: Doesn't even use CSS
14.4K: 35.01 seconds
28.8K: 17.50 seconds
33.6K: 15.00 seconds
56K: 9.00 seconds
ISDN 128K: 2.76 seconds
T1 1.44Mbps: 0.24 seconds
HTTP Objects: 3
Page size: 45171 bytes

... Please... back me up... the one at Shin-ra is more elegant and professional than the current, is easier on bandwidth .... in truth, it's better all around. Even has a PHP engine and all the pages can be customized from a control panel (will be able to)

... am I the only one who sees the logic in going for the new one?!

bigbmxdave · 03-14-2005, 08:56 AM

the old site link doesnt work, and the new one isnt finished.
How can I say which one is better?

Terencentanio · 03-14-2005, 11:20 AM

Lmao. The new one IS finished. Only thing missing is the backend... which can't be added yet. No idea why the old one isn't working.

Making a site isn't all about design. Sure, it has to look nice, but you gotta find the ballance of looks, performance and compatability. You can make a site with thousands of images that looks OMG HOT! ... but if the pages are 3mb in size, people won't like coming to the site.

Hence the question posed, "am I the only one who sees the login in the new one?!" ... it is clearly the dominant choice, as not only does it look better (not exactly hard) it outperforms in bandwidth consumption, speed and compatability.

rollincatera · 03-15-2005, 12:20 PM

If your so gun hoe on the new one, why ask us for our opinions?

Terencentanio · 03-15-2005, 12:21 PM

'cos my decision means **** all

Hackerman · 03-15-2005, 10:37 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Terencentanio
Lmao. The new one IS finished. Only thing missing is the backend... which can't be added yet. No idea why the old one isn't working.

Making a site isn't all about design. Sure, it has to look nice, but you gotta find the ballance of looks, performance and compatability. You can make a site with thousands of images that looks OMG HOT! ... but if the pages are 3mb in size, people won't like coming to the site.

Hence the question posed, "am I the only one who sees the login in the new one?!" ... it is clearly the dominant choice, as not only does it look better (not exactly hard) it outperforms in bandwidth consumption, speed and compatability.

it's really boring..... There isn't much to do and little/no interaction. I go to the site and leave because I can't do anything and there isn't anything cool keeping me there.

z3r0gr4v1ty · 03-15-2005, 11:35 PM

well as he said it isn't finished yet it will be better and more interesting once he gets the backend

and it does look freakin hawt!

Terencentanio · 03-15-2005, 11:56 PM

Many thanks @ z3r0.

Hackerman: lmao.

The backend will only be coded when it arrives on the phorce.co.uk server. They're currently on different servers. No point coding a backend and adding all the info to the database, only for it to be lost when the stuff is moved to the new server.

When the site is there, it'll have very little difference because the _site_ is just for information. Contact info, links to partners/affiliates, staff page, news page, etc. There's nothing to return for. You return for the _forums_ which is where all the action is

And that's how it's meant to be.