1
DrClaw
Redesign of my xoops site. . .
  • 2004/3/29 5:37

  • DrClaw

  • Just popping in

  • Posts: 23

  • Since: 2002/11/5


Please tell me what you think. It is not the type of theme that I can share, because it is highly customized, but I wanted to do an experiment with making XOOPS sites not looking so "xoopsy"

http://minusdriven.com

2
Stewdio
Re: Redesign of my xoops site. . .
  • 2004/3/29 5:41

  • Stewdio

  • Community Support Member

  • Posts: 1560

  • Since: 2003/5/7 1


Nice job!

3
dlh
Re: Redesign of my xoops site. . .
  • 2004/3/29 6:51

  • dlh

  • Posts: 182

  • Since: 2002/2/20


Great job...two things:

1) Make sure you post this as a news item under YAXS so the site gets in our next newsletter.

2) Maybe you want to list your band at my website? http://www.guitargearheads.com I just opened a section for member bands!

Nice design - congratulations.

Dan

4
brash
Re: Redesign of my xoops site. . .
  • 2004/3/29 11:31

  • brash

  • Friend of XOOPS

  • Posts: 2206

  • Since: 2003/4/10


Very good job. Visually it is one of the best XOOPS sites I've seen. However, according to the IBM Page Detailer breakdown there is 509925 bytes (498K) of data transferred to fully load your site which is making it very slow to load. On my 512/512k SDSL link it took over 30 seconds for the site to load which is way to long.

You really need to look at optimizing your jpg files a little as the biggest one is nearly 140k in itself. Good news is that images account for about 465K of the 498K total when loading your site. Get your graphics under control and you'll have a top notch looking site that should perform well to boot. As a rule of thumb, your site shouldn't exceed about 80-100k in total, as that'll put it at about a 10 second load time for 56k modem users.

5
DrClaw
Re: Redesign of my xoops site. . .
  • 2004/3/29 16:04

  • DrClaw

  • Just popping in

  • Posts: 23

  • Since: 2002/11/5


Thanks for the input. I optimized the images a little better. I also downloaded the IBM Page Detailer. Its a handy tool, I just wish I could learn how to read the results that it gives. Do you think you can run it on my site again for me and tell me what you think?

6
sunsnapper
Re: Redesign of my xoops site. . .

Rock on! Pretty cool.

Two things I noticed. It would nice if the size of the fonts were adjustable by the user, so the user, so they could make them bigger or smaller as the desire. This is achieved by not using px to define font sizes. Instead, an easy way is to use percentages... like 100%.

Also, it would be nice if an image showed up in your header in place of the flash menu if a user arrives without flash. Just a nice to have.

Nice job.

7
brash
Re: Redesign of my xoops site. . .
  • 2004/3/29 23:28

  • brash

  • Friend of XOOPS

  • Posts: 2206

  • Since: 2003/4/10


Hi DrClaw,

File size is still way up there. From my work the IBM Page Detailer is reporting 561327 bytes (548K). I suggest getting your hands on PhotoShop, and running through every single graphic, and use the save for web option of PhotoShop. This will enable you to squeeze down those file sizes as much as you can without loosing too much image quality. Both your flash menu, and one of the pictures in your top news story are well over 100K each, you really need to chop them down to size to get performance.

THe results from the IBM Page Detailer are quite easy once you get the basics. You have a chart, and a details display. The chart displays the timeline of your site loading and the total time and size of your site (up the top). The details section gives you a breakdown of each item that is contained in your site.

Login

Who's Online

247 user(s) are online (161 user(s) are browsing Support Forums)


Members: 0


Guests: 247


more...

Donat-O-Meter

Stats
Goal: $100.00
Due Date: Nov 30
Gross Amount: $0.00
Net Balance: $0.00
Left to go: $100.00
Make donations with PayPal!

Latest GitHub Commits