Design for 4WebHelp.net

Senior WebHelper Joined: 08 Jan 2002 Posts: 150

it says at http://www.4webhelp.net that you don't have a design. well i could make something for you!

Team Member Joined: 09 Jan 2002 Posts: 147 Location: UK

I don't know why it says that ont he front page, as I've knocked up this design for the forum already, and think it would do for the site. The one problem at the moment is where to put the navigation: top/bottom or left menu?

Peter.

Senior WebHelper Joined: 08 Jan 2002 Posts: 150

top in a style like these forums.

Team Member Joined: 06 Jan 2002 Posts: 2564

When I said we didn't have a design I meant that it wasn't finalised yet, and to the visitor, it's the same thing.

4WebHelp Addict Joined: 07 Jan 2002 Posts: 1060

Well I don't really want it along the bottom if it was me, down the left or the top would be better

Team Member Joined: 09 Jan 2002 Posts: 147 Location: UK

Justin wrote:

Well I don't really want it along the bottom if it was me, down the left or the top would be better

For a long page such as our articles, it is handy to have thenavigation at the bottom as well as the top - less scrolling needed.

Peter.

4WebHelp Addict Joined: 07 Jan 2002 Posts: 1060

reywob wrote:

Justin wrote:

Well I don't really want it along the bottom if it was me, down the left or the top would be better

For a long page such as our articles, it is handy to have thenavigation at the bottom as well as the top - less scrolling needed.

Peter.

Yeah it probbably would be too, I just thought you meant having the main navigation at the bottom, which I would not think was a good idea, if you had one on the left or at the top as well, I think it would be fine

Posted: Sat Jan 12, 2002 1:23 pm (23 years, 3 months ago)

reywob wrote:

For a long page such as our articles, it is handy to have thenavigation at the bottom as well as the top - less scrolling needed.

Peter.

It's my opinion, long articles tend to put off your readers (no matter how interesting the article), so my own long articles are broken up into Parts.

it has proven successful and easy to digest - somehow; strange but true...

Team Member Joined: 06 Jan 2002 Posts: 2564

The point of Peter's post was not long articles! Anyway, our Tutorials won't be that long, and if they are, we might break them up into parts (thanks for the idea).

WebHelper Joined: 08 Jan 2002 Posts: 69 Location: Ireland

Since you are talking about the design, may I suggest that someone tests it in Netscape 4? I know that few people use it, but those that do will instantly notice problems.

For instance in this post, tables are slightly wrong, with messages crushed. Sometimes I've to resize the browser window in order to get Netscae to re-render the page so that I can see it!

I use Netscape because I have to, University computers running Unix & Konqueror is broken - Mozilla ain't worth a toss either. But still any good webmaster tests their website in it.

Finally I liked the Phorum design simply because it is fast & easy for the computer to render, using as few images as possible. If you are clever, you can create a great design that will appeal to those with slow connections also.

Do you really need the background image?

Garth Farley

Posted: Mon Jan 14, 2002 3:30 pm (23 years, 3 months ago)

incidently, i installed Linux on my machine for the very 1st time yesterday and was horrified when i viewed my own pages - then i viewed many sites, including this one and felt much better; nearly all the sites looked like they were made by amateurs.

BUT, my own stats reveal only less then 2% use incompatible browsers and i have to decide what is negligible.

Team Member Joined: 09 Jan 2002 Posts: 147 Location: UK

Garth Farley wrote:

Since you are talking about the design, may I suggest that someone tests it in Netscape 4? I know that few people use it, but those that do will instantly notice problems.

For instance in this post, tables are slightly wrong, with messages crushed. Sometimes I've to resize the browser window in order to get Netscae to re-render the page so that I can see it!

We didn't actually design the theme - it's the bog standard phpBB one with the header/footer files modified.

Quote:

I use Netscape because I have to, University computers running Unix & Konqueror is broken - Mozilla ain't worth a toss either. But still any good webmaster tests their website in it.

Can't you get the Uni to fix Konqueror? From what I've heard the latest version of Mozilla is also v. good. Which uni is this?

Quote:

Finally I liked the Phorum design simply because it is fast & easy for the computer to render, using as few images as possible. If you are clever, you can create a great design that will appeal to those with slow connections also.

Do you really need the background image?

It was the only way I found to get the gradient. It's not huge (just over 4kb) but on a slow computer it may cause problems scrolling the page (as all background images do)

I agree about Phorum, but we won't start that discussion. Enough to say that we needed more management tools than it offered.

Peter.

WebHelper Joined: 08 Jan 2002 Posts: 52 Location: Israel

Quote:

It was the only way I found to get the gradient.

Yeah, but do you really need the gradient? How about a simple single-color background, or a nice all-blue tiled background with darker or lighter blue text (or some other color scheme alltogether)? I think it'll seem much more professional.

Posted: Tue Jan 15, 2002 3:36 am (23 years, 3 months ago)

Garth Farley wrote:

Since you are talking about the design, may I suggest that someone tests it in Netscape 4? I know that few people use it, but those that do will instantly notice problems.

For instance in this post, tables are slightly wrong, with messages crushed. Sometimes I've to resize the browser window in order to get Netscae to re-render the page so that I can see it!

I use Netscape because I have to, University computers running Unix & Konqueror is broken - Mozilla ain't worth a toss either. But still any good webmaster tests their website in it.

Finally I liked the Phorum design simply because it is fast & easy for the computer to render, using as few images as possible. If you are clever, you can create a great design that will appeal to those with slow connections also.

Do you really need the background image?

Garth Farley

Im on dial-up and find no speed issues, yet anyway.

I have Mozilla as system browser (Windows ME), no problems with the forums, must just be Netscape?

Posted: Tue Jan 15, 2002 3:28 pm (23 years, 3 months ago)

Quote:

We didn't actually design the theme - it's the bog standard phpBB one with the header/footer files modified.

Sorry, I'm not familiar with phpBB. But I must admit, while it is technically a very competant forum system, wth lots of features, even gzips pages, but it's initial design isn't up to much. I do despise gradients;)

Posting right now, I see orange text on a blue gradient - eugh. I have to search to find the post-follow-up button. I guess I'm too used to Phorum, as I miss the Go To Top link, I know I'm a dinosaur.

Quote:

Can't you get the Uni to fix Konqueror? From what I've heard the latest version of Mozilla is also v. good.

Perhaps, I've already emailed support about it. You see we upgraded to the latest supposedly stable build of KDE, it's full of **** in my opinion, some awful widgets & clones of Win ME.

But anyway Konqueror won't accept the HTTP protocol, while it still explores the file-system & will open html documents. Strange. I was hoping Netscape 6 was installed - Nope. How about the latest version of Mozilla that I've also heard good things about - No! So I'm stuck with a choice between Mozilla ver 4 (****) or Netscape 4.6. Not much of a choice I agree.

Quote:

I agree about Phorum, but we won't start that discussion. Enough to say that we needed more management tools than it offered.

Yes I agree with you on that one, and I suppose if this site becomes more popular you are going to need better moderation facilities. But it's the design I dislike. Too many tables. As my father used to say to me overly-frequently: "Keep it simple, stupid!"

Perhaps the cause of my inflated therapy bills.

Garth Farley