Hello. I'd like to inform you of http://seductiveapps.com/tools/json ; a JSON validator and viewer with an edge, that does not send your JSON to it's server, thus keeping your datastructures-business-secrets safe...
New? The style/looks seems to be stolen directly from GeoCities or MySpace... what's with the playlist-thingy? Not needed for the functionality, and the page loads abysmally slow (10+ secs on a 25Mb line) - and what's with all the columns, bad colors and separate parts with way too big border-radius'es? Redo the styling/presentation, and this might actually be an okay service.
It takes me, on an emtpty browser cache, 5 seconds to start to see the intro animations. There's also room for improvement in how i serve up the html and javascript, but as I'm developing this software atm, I have no real need for the 2nd level of caching support that I have planned. The thing I'm working on atm, instead of the caching features that shaves a few seconds off an already acceptable (imo) bootup time (for a site that does not need to be refreshed like traditional websites), is allowing end-users to compose their own themes and get 'm autosaved in cookie data. That would get rid of all those objections you have over how it looks. As to my site looking lame, let's just say: I don't think so, and I also don't think you understand the potential of my web ui code. For instance, you're not at all tied to the number of dialogs that are on on seductiveapps.com today, or how they're layed out(see1), or what other layout options they offer to the end user, or how those layout options are automatically selected and manipulated based ona ny event (such as ajax information coming, or simply a mouse hovering near the bottom youtube player controlbar, to move my dialogs a bit up so you can access the youtube buttons). (see1): seductiveapps allows multiple layers of backgrounds with each their own css overrides (relative to the top-left of the dialog as it's auto-layed out for you by SA) , does crossfading of PNG backgrounds -while they animate from PNG frme to PNG frame-, all *per* dialog div, does crossfading of entire 'background layer sets' (for any dialog or main background) to another bg layer set, has buttons you can put video fragments on with per-pixel transparency, and solved a few other things as well, already.. 3 sayings apply to you: - you can't please everybody (not until you've exposed all options to the end-user, in this case). - if you don't like it, don't use it. - don't look a gifted horse in the mouth
Uhm.... you're currently providing a service checking JSON - all that other mumbo-jumbo will NOT attract many clients, unless you're planning to provide a whole set of functionality (which of course, you may) - however, for a function that only checks to see if data is properly served, this is overkill - and as long as you're not providing an API to get this into other pages (which will render the styling possibilities moot anyway), users using this kind of service probably won't bother with spending time manipulating the styling. And... why provide such an abyssmally ugly look as a start? Just... make it plain, simple and pleasing to the eye - if, few colors, max 4-5 different ones, either shades of one color + black/white/grey, or colors that are on the opposite side of the spectrum + black/white/grey - this is basic color theory. Background images are mostly a 90's thing, early 00'thing, and most of the stuff you're talking about, animations, fades etc. can be done with CSS, no need for images. My point mostly goes to providing a simple service - and I'm not talking about the intro-loading-animation - I'm talking about the actual page showing and working. I'm not interested in seeing a loading animation, I'm interested in getting to the page itself. Provide the service, and provide a link in the menu or elsewhere which will take the user to all the other stuff you're offering. Don't mix it all together. And... all the bouncing boxes, fades, buttons with moving backgrounds, lame background-images, semi-transparent boxes, borders that is jagged... it looks like it was made with a table-grid layout in the late 90s, hence my comment on GeoCities and MySpace. Get rid of the bouncing animations, and why, oh why, do you load everything dynamically (I'm assuming that's what you're doing due to the loading thing at the beginning) - it just takes more time. By all means, create dynamically the design and all that, but provide the end user with static pages built on that design, so to skip on loading times. You also have a LOT of redundant classnames, inline CSS, script-tags littering the code, inline-js-code, etc. Not really very modern, and creating bloat. And no - while the showing and hiding of the different "dialogs" as you call them (sic!) might be a thing user would want, the animations, loading etc. is horrible.
I won't, I'm perfectly capable of checking my own JSON returns, but have a look at these pages, for example (random link from Google search for "modern looking stylish websites"): http://psd.fanextra.com/articles/41-elegant-and-stylish-websites-for-your-inspiration/ These, while maybe not the most excellent of designs, always, at least provide a "today"-look - and might be an inspiration. I understand you wanting to provide something useful and fancy, but I don't think it will be very popular looking like it does today. Sad, but true.
Thanks for the tips bro.. I'm still building tech demos before I'm gonna herd the artwork, if you don't mind
I'm laughing at the "your browser is too outdated" notice on Opera 12... a message that most likely is either faulty browser sniffing or developer ineptitude. Oh wait, no, it just took too damned long for the page to load -- like a minute or more. Come back to it's tab and there's a site there now... So that's content which is likely scripting only being static in the markup -- boo... In FF it at least shows "this site will show soon" -- which to be frank is some goofy script-tard BS that has no business on the site either. Goofy scroller, auto-playing music, yeah PoPSiCLe has it right, that site reeks of pretty much every "how not to build a website" list of the past fifteen years. The fixed layout that chops off content with no way to scroll it, pointless bandwidth wasting animations, illegible color contrasts... and that's before talking the completely absurd 9 megabyte page size in 80 separate files. The size is bad enough, but when 2.5 megs of that is JavaScript -- "SIR, INTERNET POLICE! PUT THE SCRIPTING DOWN AND BACK AWAY FROM THE KEYBOARD!". The 80 separate files alone means a best case for most users handshake time of 16 seconds regardless of bandwidth, and as much as a minute and a half -- the latter of which is closer to what I'm seeing here! Or the fact that again, the actual CONTENT of the page is completely cut off at anything less than 2560x1440 here with no way to scroll through it. Can't say if this JSON thing the page is supposed to be about is useful since I can't even get at that part of the content thanks to all the other pointless crap littered around it for no good reason and layout that can't grow past browser height! ... or the "hey why did my laptop fan just scream up to full speed" nonsense thanks to the endless pointless scripttardery for NOTHING, much of it seemingly being to do what CSS could do in a fraction the code -- hardly a shock though with the 50k of markup to deliver 9k of plaintext -- anywhere from three two four times as much code as should have been needed. Seriously, if you don't know what's wrong with this: <div id="siteVideo" class="vividDialog vividTheme__dialog_black_simple_square vividScrollpane__hidden" style="position:absolute;overflow:visible;visibility:hidden;width:460px;height:300px;right:10px;top:-280px;z-index:10000010;"> Code (markup): Do the world a favor, and back away from the keyboard and don't come back until you understand what HTML is, what CSS is, and how to use them. Poster child for how not to build a website.
First of all, this website loads within 5 seconds on my home PC. But wait, I already said that to the previous heckler. As for too much animation, or bugs that will get fixed, hey it's a tech demo site.. As for my weird HTML markup, hey - it's the only way the job can get done.. All of you "all shall adhere to the marketing and tech standards of the day or be ridiculed by us EXPERTS" folks, just shut up if you're going to diss something good just because it's different. Talk about giving the label "EXPERTS" a bad name.. lol.