G
grn
Well-known member
doesn't work in mozilla firefox very well, can't read it very well either. seems like a nice start though.
G
geet73
OMG!
I don't think Mozilla is going to like it. :-/
Halion
New member
I see times new roman, which is an intant death-sentence for any webdesigner.
Any self respecting webdesigners finds out what works and what doesnt, but most of all, they don't use the default, and you did
Any self respecting webdesigners finds out what works and what doesnt, but most of all, they don't use the default, and you did
warble
New member
Decent concept. I like the handwritten text, but the links seem kinda cluttered to me and all run together.
I wouldn't use the strong words "instant death-sentence" for the font you used, but it is kinda 1996 and not easy for everyone to read. To me it doesn't have a professional feel.
Why not get it to work in Mozilla? I haven't found it difficult to get sites working in Firefox, IE, and Netscape 7 - all together. Only the top of the photo (links and band name) are Flash, right?
I wouldn't use the strong words "instant death-sentence" for the font you used, but it is kinda 1996 and not easy for everyone to read. To me it doesn't have a professional feel.
Why not get it to work in Mozilla? I haven't found it difficult to get sites working in Firefox, IE, and Netscape 7 - all together. Only the top of the photo (links and band name) are Flash, right?
G
geet73
OMG!
I don't have Mozilla.
I also wasn't aware that times new roman was the end of everything. ??? I used times new roman for the reason that it's "simple" I guess.
Thats all that's flash, correct.
I also wasn't aware that times new roman was the end of everything. ??? I used times new roman for the reason that it's "simple" I guess.
Thats all that's flash, correct.
warble
New member
People visiting your site might. It's a free download for everyone involved and being a Web developer, I can tell you that there are a fair percentage of people that do use some form of Mozilla. IE is still the "big" one out there. It's really up to you in the end - I'm just offering advice from experience.
I certainly didn't agree with the "dramatic" statement that Halion made. It's certainly not a death sentence. To me, it just doesn't look professional though. Try Arial, Verdana, or other common ones and see what it looks like.
G
geet73
OMG!
warble said:
Do you have an idea as to why the flash might not work in mozilla?
C
Cloneboy Studio
.
Hrm, does your guitarist really want to advertise that he has a Behringer guitar cab? Blech. 
G
geet73
OMG!
It's mine. ;-)
Sounds fine to me. It takes a beating too. When I have the cash I'll go out and get a Marshall 1960. For now, I can deal with a cab that really doesn't sound that bad. It's better than a B-52, Crate, Marshall VS, whatever else is in the cheap cab range. Much, MUCH, better.
Sounds fine to me. It takes a beating too. When I have the cash I'll go out and get a Marshall 1960. For now, I can deal with a cab that really doesn't sound that bad. It's better than a B-52, Crate, Marshall VS, whatever else is in the cheap cab range. Much, MUCH, better.
warble
New member
geet73 said:
I took a look at the pages and their source code. Looks like the index2.htm has an iframe on it. Then you're loading full.htm into the iframe, which is creating a framset, which then is loading the Flash content into one frame and the bottom part of the photo in another frame. Might want to revisit your site structure.
The look you have can be accomplished in a much similar fashion avoiding frames - which I tend to avoid in Web development. The iframe isn't too bad an idea, and should work between modern Mozilla and IE browsers. I didn't spend to much time looking at all this, so I can't tell you exactly why the Flash isn't loading in Mozilla. My first though would be to revisit the design and start from scratch.
G
geet73
OMG!
This where that whole not actually knowing what you're doing thing starts to suck.. heh.
For now I guess I'll just make a page with an imagemap for the navigation.
For now I guess I'll just make a page with an imagemap for the navigation.
warble
New member
You could still use the Flash. I'd create a table with two cells for the center of the page. Top cell would have the Flash, bottom would have the rest of the photo and the iframe.
Check your PM box.
Check your PM box.
Robertt8
Well-known member
this doesn't work at all on my mac and on the newest IE. Once i get to the picture of the band with their faces burned out, that's pretty much the end of the site...I just get a blank white bar above with no links...
AlChuck
Well-known member
warble, don't recommend that people use tables for design. Tables for this purpose are a design hack that used to be necessary because of the lack of layout capability in older versions of HTML. It's old hat and a bad thing to propagate.
Robertt8
Well-known member
AlChuck said:
are you talking about tables or frames? that's a BIG difference. Tables are used way more now then they used to be. Frames suck and always did, that's why no one uses them anymore.
R
RousseauBABA
New member
looks pretty good...nice work dude...
warble
New member
AlChuck said:
What is wrong with tables? Professional designers still use them (except you in your professional web design prowess) and they WORK. Yes, there are urguably better ways to create site layouts (CSS-P, etc.), but I was simply trying to offer Geet an easier option than what was initially created with framesets and iframes. I was actually trying to offer him help.
"Old hat", maybe, but that makes most of the Web "old hat" then I guess. Also, tables still appear as valid markup when validated as XHTML 1.1. I don't feel they will be disappearing anytime soon. All in all, I use what works and focus on clean code.
Thanks for your invaluable input to this thread, I'm sure it really helped Geet out. Anyway, back to making music.
AlChuck
Well-known member
No, I mean tables. Frames do not actually suck, the real problem is that they are a tad too complicated for most people to get how to use correctly, so they get put out there in a sucky way.
Professional designers who learned several years ago (when tables were the only way) and "professional" designers who can't adapt once they learn one way to do something, still use tables. "Professional" just means somebody pays them to do it, it doesn't mean they are partulcarky skilled or even know what they are doing. I can't tell you how many "professional" web designers there are that know nearly nothing about HTML, that rely on tools that do all the "hard parts" for them and couldn't adapt if their lives depended on it. But because it's behind the magic curtain of a computer and thei bosses or clients often know even less than they do, they can get by. That still doesn't make it right or advisable.
Sorry, but you're right, I shouldn't have been so dogmatic under the circumstances. But it seems to me that if someone is new at this, it's a disservice to send them down the table-hack road, since it's really no easier (well, maybe a little easier) to learn that than it is to use DIVs instead. You're also right when you say it works... but it's really a pet peeve of mine when that's the best reason to do something.
Of course they won't be disappearing -- tables are as valid a document construct as a heading or a paragraph or anything else. It's using tables for a design kludge that I'm talking about.
Robertt8
Well-known member
I think you're being a bit of a web snob here Alchuck. This site is for home recording, not freakin' advanced web page design. I think we're all here to offer ideas, not sign this guy up for a 4 year web developing degree. I mean good lord man!? How do you layout web pages? I'm assuming you're a programmer... All we want to do is get our music online in a way that doesn't totally suck, and if we're lucky, have a cool site that is informative and easy to navigate. I think if that means using tables...go nuts.