Site review

[cockhungryhoes]

I took some advise changed a lot, and was wondering if I could get some reviews. I have less content but feel it laid out a little better. I wouldnt say it great but better. I am open for suggestion? Anyone?

[cockhungryhoes]

Also do you feel this is SEO friendly?

[Greenguy]

I'm turned off by it for the same reason I was before - it looks horrible at 800 as well as anything over 1024.

[cockhungryhoes]

Greenie,
I ment to ask you about that. Don't think I am stupid but what do you mean when you say that. I am asuming pixel width in the browser. Are normal windows 800 and maxized 1024? How do I see that? I really want to make the adjustments. What about the colors, I was tring to make it warm and more inviting. Remember I was to dark before.

[Greenguy]

Here's what I see when I look at it at 800 wide:
http://www.link-o-rama.com/cock800.jpg

This is what I see when I look at it at 1280 & higher:
http://www.link-o-rama.com/cock1280.jpg

It looks perfect at 1024, but not everyone surfs at exactly 1024 - you really need to look at it in different browser width's to verify that everyone see pretty much the same thing.

[MrYum]

Originally Posted by Greenie

Here's what I see when I look at it at 800 wide:
http://www.link-o-rama.com/cock800.jpg

This is what I see when I look at it at 1280 & higher:
http://www.link-o-rama.com/cock1280.jpg

It looks perfect at 1024, but not everyone surfs at exactly 1024 - you really need to look at it in different browser width's to verify that everyone see pretty much the same thing.

Yep, those are pretty much the same results I get in FF. Although, I do get a slight side scroll even at 1024.

The color scheme looks okay...not too hard on the eyes anyway

[ronnie]

And the main page scrolls quite a bit to the side at over 1200...

ronnie

[cockhungryhoes]

I see that and yea it is suppost to look like http://www.link-o-rama.com/cock1280.jpg and I have worked the nav into the side there. I guess my question is this in my dreamweaver I look at it in different syles and I have checked it in IE, and netscape but I am not seeing it at any real difference. How do I see it at at 800 wide vs 1280 do I have to actually put /cock1280 in the browser?

[Greenguy]

Originally Posted by cockhungryhoes

...How do I see it at at 800 wide vs 1280 do I have to actually put /cock1280 in the browser?

See if your html editor has an option to view the pages at different widths.

[ecchi]

Originally Posted by cockhungryhoes

How do I see it at at 800 wide vs 1280 do I have to actually put /cock1280 in the browser?

You do not only want to see it at these sizes, you need to see it at all possible widths because people with big monitors rarely open a window full size, it could be any width.

The way to do this is simply resize the window (that little gadget in the bottom right hand side of your browser). Start with the window as wide as possible (i.e. right across the screen) and slowly make it narrower. Your site should continue to look good as you get it narrower and narrower (up to about 600 wide or possibly 500, I doubt if anyone uses a window smaller than that).

Of course this does not help you see it at widths wider than your screen's maximum resolution. That is not going to be possible.

[cockhungryhoes]

O ok thanks guys. I think i know what your talking about. I am feeling kind of stupid. I thought I did that I am using IE6. I know this very basic.

[cockhungryhoes]

I got it for some reason I though you guys were talking about something more complex but I see the two differces. Is there any real way to fix that. I am thinking relitive vs absolute right. When setting the pixel dem?

[ecchi]

Use simple html. Nothing on your site requires CSS, and it is a bastard to work with unless you are an expert (since you mentioned Dreamweaver, I am assuming you are not an expert). And even if you are an expert, there is still no point in a site like this, you are doing twice as much work to achieve half the effect.

Then try to never set the width of the table Instead use -table width="100%"- (or less).

[cockhungryhoes]

I have using layers and CSS because everytime I use tables for anything it looks off in most browsers. Sometimes its good in IE, but all others are no good.

[cockhungryhoes]

I guess I need to do this "Then try to never set the width of the table Instead use -table width="100%"- (or less)."

This makes the tables relitive?
I am new to everything. I do have a decent grasp or html or at least I think, I do. I could be wrong. I have been reading and learning only since feb. programming, adult. all of it.

[cockhungryhoes]

Ecchi,
I took a look at you source code I see what you are talking about "table width="100%"- "table width="33%"-

[ecchi]

Originally Posted by cockhungryhoes

This makes the tables relitive?

Yes. You can use it to size the cells too, e.g. -table width="50%"--tr--td width="25%"- but note the width of cells is relative to the width of the table, in my example the cell would be 12.5% of the width of the screen

Originally Posted by cockhungryhoes

every time I use tables for anything it looks off in most browsers. Sometimes its good in IE, but all others are no good

I would guess you are making a mistake in your table which IE is correcting for, but others are not. Possibly leaving out a /td or /tr, I used to make that mistake when I started, looked fine on my browser (Voyager in those days) because it compensated, but failed in some other browsers.

[ecchi]

Originally Posted by cockhungryhoes

I took a look at you source code I see what you are talking about

Once you have the basics, looking at other people's source codes is a great way to learn. Particularly if you are surfing and you see something and think 'how the hell did he do that?' However always look up what you have learnt afterwards because looking at the source code may only give you part of the story (using Google to find a html tutorial that covers it is the best way, as you can read several tutorials in case one has said something incorrect).

[cockhungryhoes]

I have noticed that. I guess I will have to get back to the drawing board but I learned a lot today thanks. I will start playing around with that.

[Greenguy]

cockhungryhoes - don't take this the wrong way, but you really need to go & learn some basic html, get some real hosting, spend a couple of bucks to get your company up & running so that you have the tools you need to succeed in this industry or go fine a new hobby.

[cockhungryhoes]

Na it's cool, I had that take on it too. I guess I kind of rush things a bit but its accidently. I am all self thought and so I but have a lot of the basics. I try to read anything and everything and find boards like this. It seems like everytime I think O ok this how its done, I get torn down. I like it and its fusterating at times. From what I can tell its some what normal and I always come away with something. You guys help a great deal. I thank you and everyone else for that. It something I always wanted to do. I am doing full time, but man there is a hell of a lot to know. I am sorry I ask stupid shit sometimes lol. I figure I need to ask but hope you all dont think I am an idoit.

[Simon]

The screeshot below is from Safari on the Mac platform. It shows some positioning problems at the bottom of your page.

You really should be able to make that page in a text editor with simple hand-coded html and very basic CSS. If you learn to do that by hand, you'll have developed a valuable skill.

Dreamweaver can help you move faster, but picking up speed isn't always the best thing to do before you know what you're doing.


Added: Looking at your source code, I can see you're using ".png" images and calling files with paths that have spaces in their names. You're also use an XHTML doc-type but not leaving spaces before the trailing slash character. And in some cases there are tags which should have that trailing slash and don't have it at all.

Some of these things mean your page isn't validating. Always be sure it validates before putting it online (unless you're making an intentional invalid page - which you have to mean to do).

You really don't need to go to xhtml and css positioning to build that page. Take the time to learn html a little better and you can type valid code for that page into a text editor and have it online with less than an hour's work.

[cockhungryhoes]

Wow! That really looks like shit. Yea I would have never intentionally up that up. Can anyone reccomend a good html site? I have looked some in google. Is a book really needed?

[ronnie]

One big thing is that Dreamweaver can add alot of un-needed code, font tags are the worst. As simon said, validating the page(s) should be done, you migth be suprized how many errors there are, I know I was. When I first started in this biz, I wrote html in notepad and only notepad. Nowdays I use Dreamweaver only because it can be quicker, but I also know the code. CSS thats another story..

Speaking about CSS, I noticed you have a lot of CSS code on your page, one of the beauties of CSS is that you can have all your code in one file and call that file for each page. Also helps keep the page size down. Not to mention if you need to change something, you would only need to change one page. But as said, it's a simple page you really dont "need" CSS.

ronnie

[MrYum]

Yea, the learning curve is the beginning is a bit intense

I absolutely agree with the others, you'd be doing yourself a huge favor to take the time to actually learn basic html. Step away from the html editor and learn to code. Once you get started, html is actually very easy to learn. And once you've learned html, using an editor is okay because you can keep an eye on it to make sure it doesn't screw something up.

Think of it as learning to walk before learning to run...

Myself, I still hand code every page. Started out using dreamweaver and figured out early on that I needed to know the code. Once I'd learned how to code, just never bothered going back to the editor.

Also, definitely validate every page you build. Again, it's a great way to learn what works and what doesn't. You'll also find that validated pages will usually display correctly in all browsers.

As to css, you might want to leave it alone for now. It's a complication you don't need in your early learning phase. But, definitely plan on adding it in later one you have html down. And Ronnie is exactly right...one of the beautiful things about css is not having it in the code. But instead pulling it from a single off page file