Feedback and Suggestions for my developed websites

I am currently requesting some feedback and suggestions on my developed websites please. I also developed a website that contains some of the games I've developed with the Unity game engine. The websites are these:

www.claytonagius.com
www.games.claytonagius.com
www.dreadshairdressing.com
www.makeupbyvioletvella.com

Your feedback and suggestions are very important for me, so I really appreciate if you leave your message on what you think about these sites.

Thanks Very Much
Regards

 

Your first website "claytonagius" looks good, but had a js error in IE6. You may also wanna have a look at it in IE6 (colors are off, and lookup png fix).

 

Thanks for your feedback, I really appreciate. I will try to handle the problem for the IE6. Thanks very much.

 

I have more or less completely dropped support for IE6 users on my websites.

 

Not that much trouble to at least make sure things don't break or look horrible in IE6. It's about degrading smoothly. And for real world clients - that's a consideration.

 

One guy contacted me asking me to build a website for him with support for IE6 but he also wanted it to be fully responsive and modern. I just couldn't be bothered and declined the job. Lol, speaks for my laziness but you get my point.

 

You've got WAY too much animooted garbage in there, to the point it makes ALL the animations painfully slow and the pages agonizing to scroll, much less use.

With claytonagius.com you've got a goofy illegible webfont (not a fan) wasting all sorts of bandwidth -- it's too thin, screwing up the color contrasts. The light blue text on grey background in particular just doesn't cut it. Your menu is outright illegible both in terms of the dark grey on dark grey text, and the absurdly undersized fixed metric (px) fonts. while you tried to be fluid (a good thing) the lack of a max-width makes your content area lines WAY too long to read at anything more than 1440 wide, and from a visual consistency standpoint if there's enough screen to show everything, the footer should probably sit flush with your sidebar like the header does.

Under the hood it's knee deep in script-tard garbage for nothing, likely also explaining why it's pegging an entire CPU core just sitting here doing nothing. The home page is almost entirely plaintext with nothing really fancy going on (other than the scripts for nothing and annoying CSS animations) -- so why is it wasting 10.5k of markup on it? You've got some real gibberish markup given the lack of headings, the entire document going through screen readers like a single giant run-on sentence. You've got meta nothing actually cares about, incomplete media stacks (don't forget projection and TV), endless pointless DIV for nothing, DIV doing numbered heading's job, attributes like TARGET that have no business on any website written after 1997, static style inlined in the markup (that reeks of margins doing flow's job), div with classes doing either a table or DL's job, line-breaks doing padding's job, giant graphical ugly quotes around elements that aren't quotes, (and if they were you should have a BLOCKQUOTE tag in there), a source order that's bad for people visiting on screen readers (all your sidebar crap should be AFTER the content and menu)... and of course the advert code that doesn't even run here. (since I'm not dumb enough to browse without an adblock).

Size-wise it's a completely absurd 2 megabytes in 63 files (not even counting the webfonts), which is why it takes FOREVER to load here. That massive background image certainly isn't helping, but the real culprit is again the massive bandwidth wasting idiotic amount of "JS for nothing and your scripts for free. That ain't working, that's not how you do it... lemme tell ya, those guys ARE dumb."

You've got 1.3 megabytes of javascript in 22 files -- FOR WHAT?!? Generally speaking a site this simple there's little if any legitimate reason for the entire PAGE (HTML+CSS+SCRIPTS+IMAGES) to consume more than 140k in a dozen files, and I'd try to bring it in at under HALF that!

Which is why I would say (and I say this a LOT) throw it out and start over, using semantic markup, separation of presentation from content, and accessible design -- doing yourself a huge favor by using webfonts with an eyedropper not a supertanker-full, and staying the **** away from anything even related to jQuery, analtytics redundant to your server logs, and sleazeball advertising scams that any sane user will never see in the first place.

"Game Portfolio" is some real inaccessible CRAP. The white on orange is effecitvely illegible, and the grey text on black is right up against the minimums. The uselessly absurdly undersized fixed metric (px) fonts means large screen users are more likely to bounce than to try and use the zoom, particularly with the massive image rotator falling apart miserably when you do so. Under the hood it's similarly afflicted with bad practices and bloated markup, with classes for nothing, div for nothing, and overall anywhere from two to three times the markup needed and overall ten times the total page size.

"dreads" gets even worse, since it has the trifecta of fail; inaccessible fixed width, inaccessible fixed metric (px) fonts, and illegible color contrasts (the white on cyan). The attempt to make multiple equal-height perfect width elements means it would be nigh impossible to make elastic in an attractive fashion, and it too falls apart miserably when someone tries to zoom. Under the hood It's even WORSE with the static scripting inlined in the markup, BS warning about JS to cover up the 'JS for nothing' garbage, and everything else I outlined about the first site.

the third one -- Do I even need to say it? This is perhaps the worst of all of them since there's NO CONTENT! (sorry, but text is the first class citizen, everything else may as well have leprosy).. The illegible pink on black and media player for nothing (at least it doesn't auto-play) reeks of "Icans haz a websites?!?" -- especially with the ajaxtard bull to load the sub-pages destroying anything resembling normal navigation (and indexing in search) out of some "pageloads are evil" paranoid bull.

I wouldn't even have considered deploying any of those sites, and would pitch every last one of them in the trash to start over with semantic markup, separation of presentation from content, logical document structure, progressively enhancing the pages as I go so they gracefully degrades, and following the unwritten rule of javascript -- if you can't make the site work without scripting you have no business adding scripting to it.

Though they are ALL very much what I've come to expect from the people using HTML 5... since it's carefully crafted to undo all the progress of the past fifteen years, with the core audience seeming to be all the developers who never extracted their heads from 1997's rump, still to this day writing HTML 3.2 and until recently slapping 4 tranny on it. Now they slap 5 lip-service around the same outdated outmoded broken methodologies and have the huevos rancheros to call it "progress". It sure as shine-ola was never meant for anyone who embraced all the methodologies I just outlined.

You might want to read my series of articles "What's wrong with your website" that I tossed up on a friends forums (see my signature) -- almost ALL of it applies to your pages.


Oh, and you might get more feedback if you had posted this in the site reviews section of these forums.