Comments
On June 6, 2005 8:25 AM Joshua Kendall said:It looks nice, but half of the colors I saw were to bright and made me lose focus on the content. Especially the bright green and orange.
On June 6, 2005 8:41 AM Ronnie said:Nice site, the colors are bright indeed.
I love the a:visited you did on the portfolio, great job.
On June 6, 2005 9:41 AM da dawg said:I like the colors and the layout, but can you legally use "jello" in your name? Isn't that a trademark issue? I don't think that because it's usually spelled "jell-o" would make a difference...
On June 6, 2005 10:23 AM clint said:i like this site alot, nice and flat, vector goodness....
On June 6, 2005 11:52 AM Dave said:Very cool! Bright and colourful, makes a good anti-depressant.
On June 6, 2005 2:03 PM andrew said:dont like the big buttons on the main page. the "css/xhtml, flash" buttons made me think that i was choosing what the site was gonna be almost like a splash. the rest of the site is nice, the colors are good but detract from the content
On June 6, 2005 4:09 PM Big Rich said:Bit of a design classic this one. Bright, bold and full of css beauty.
Well done Sir
On June 6, 2005 8:01 PM Neko said:Very nice! Love the logo (made me smile) and overall feel.
The only downside isn't in design but in copy: the "about me" page doesn't even state the name of the designer.
On June 7, 2005 4:47 AM Jello said:A massive thank you for all the constructive feedback!
I’ve taken all of your comments onboard and made some amendments for v 1.1 …
Jello
On June 7, 2005 11:55 AM Josh said:I like this site, it made me feel happy! Like mentioned before, I loved the a:visited thing on your portfolios. Very nice touch.
I quite like the bright colours, they are a break from the norm! And the code is very clean too. Nice one :)
On June 7, 2005 3:04 PM Preston said:This site is plain and unimaginative; the colors are bland and too bright for the user to focus on the content. The text of the content is too small; you want to focus more on the colors than the text. I'd say the only good thing about this site is the navigation, but even that is quite distracting.
On June 7, 2005 3:54 PM Webster said:I love this site.
Simple but bold ... definately beautiful! The colors really work for me.
Some fine work in the folio too.
- On June 7, 2005 4:26 PM Joshua Kendall said:
Funny how someone can complain about a site when theirs is all sloppy.
Might want to make the link bar of yours the same size as the links since they don't line up, and most of your pages are inconsistent in design.
Then again you are a middle school student Preston, so I guess there is some leeway to be given.
People who can't design a site half as good as the one they insult should really get a head check.
Oh, and make the "AA" and "CSS" links actually do the validating for the end user.
I'm not going to sit here and explain everything that needs to be fixed, but the stuff above is a good start.
Back on topic, the Jello site wasn't as bright when I visited the second time, since I knew how bright the colors were going to be.
- On June 7, 2005 8:23 PM Preston said:
You have a very keen eye for details, Joshua, and I'm glad you saw that I'm younger than you thought or you would have blasted me with more protests regarding my site.
Thank you for telling me it was a "good start," for that will not be my home site in a while; I'm designing a blog that will be tenfold better than the one you have seen.
As for my comments, I was looking at the Jello site through the eyes of a user, not a designer. I think a user with no Web design experience whatsoever might have said the same things I said.
I hope I haven't struck a rivalry here, because CSS Beauty has gotten so much larger since when I first came here and I'd hate for this to escalate.
So I apologize for the tastelessness of that comment and hope we can forget about it. Cheers!
On June 8, 2005 1:32 AM Lee said:I like this site, I cant see how its unimaginative???. Nice colours by the way, good to see a bold, colourfull css site !
On June 8, 2005 4:10 AM tri_factor said:I am really confused by this comment "the colors are bland and too bright" as it seems to contradict itself before it's even got to a point, but there we are eh, we can't all be perfect!?
I think the site is wicked though. Really clean, very bold and distinctive and most important of all, extremely easy to use.
:)
On June 8, 2005 3:43 PM joel said:It made me crave fruit! Very nice - I dig big buttons too, utterly pressable.
- On June 8, 2005 4:29 PM Preston said:
Okay, since every seems to htae my comments, I'm taking them back. This time I took a specific look at the details and the overall presentation. There is a lot that this site needs to improve and I would suggest a reconstruction.
- The colors are too bright. It is nearly impossible to focus on the content while this is distracting the user.
- The navigation is inconsistent. The first link has a menu while the others do not. This also distracts from the content.
- The navigation has a distracting border. The dashes make the page look jagged and disorganized.
- The image stating "3 fruity flavours" could easily have been presented in a Web font. Also, in a smaller note, "3 fruity flavours" should be "three fruity flavours" because any number below 11 should be spelled out completely.
- The three "stamp-like" buttons also are distracting, just like the navigation.
- The layout is unimaginative. For example, CSS Beauty has a great layout with an excellent eye toward what the user enjoys. Jellomedia has a sort of fragmented layout that makes the user not want to read the text in the middle of the page. The only page with creative layout is the "Portfolio" page, which makes excellent use of a:visited, as mentioned twice before.
This is hopefully a more in-depth look at the site and an expansion of my comments. What I said might not have been correct word choice, but I do still think I am right about all the things I complained about.
- On June 8, 2005 4:36 PM Joshua Kendall said:
Well that's your opinion, although the thing about spelling out "three" instead of using the number "3" is correct in normal text implementaions such as documents, resume's (unless it's a date), and other things like those.
On the internet, it's up to the designer to decide how to present HIS or HER text.
- On June 8, 2005 5:00 PM Preston said:
You know, Joshua, I took a good look at your site also and I didn't like it very much either.
The first page you arrive at is "About" but the URL says "index.html."
Your content has a lot of grammatical and spelling errors.
The two validation links at the bottom have such high color contrast that when you hover over them, they seem to disappear.
Shouldn't your navigation be an ordered list? Although it is an unordered list, I'm sure if I designed a site as such, I would style the ordered list as the navigation instead of having text that should be an ordered list inside an unordered list.
As for your blog, the links are quite unreadable and it is a pain for the user to have to hover over them in order to read them.
Your calendar is empty. Why have it online if you don't use it?
Your sort by links are hard to identify because they are the same color as the text surrounding.
Your layout is quite boring. The masthead is distractive and the headings don't stand out enough.
Joshua, please don't complain about people's sites that are not being featured. It's just plain manners. You could have contacted me via the feedback page on my site or via e-mail to list your concerns, not publicize them. I do acknowledge that my site is flawed in many ways.
If you read the RSS feed, you would have seen that the site was "under reconstruction" and that some pages wouldn't look the same. Obviously you overlooked this when you said that my pages are "inconsistent in design."
As for me being in middle school, "some leeway"? I am the only teenager in my neighborhood to support standards and use CSS.
- On June 8, 2005 5:26 PM Joshua Kendall said:
Good catch on the links in the blog. Forgot to add a class to them.
I never said my site was perfect. Calendar is empty because I haven't had the time to fill it in.
You can tell the sort by links are links, because why else would it say "Sort By:" and have text by it.
Anyway a new version of my site is under construction and will come with three or four different styles.
As for as the "I am the only teenager in my neighborhood to support standards and use CSS.", I pose a question to you. How many teenagers in your neighbor hood actually have a web site, that people visit?
Anyway, I refuse to get into an arguement on a CSS site, so good day.
- On June 8, 2005 9:52 PM Preston said:
None; that's what I meant.
Listen, I was the one who suggested we stop this argument and you're continuing it. I'm not posting any more comments under this site.
- On July 12, 2005 12:42 PM JDH said:
Great site, colours and original layout... but is it me or is your 'tick' effect on your portfolio links copied from web.burza? ;) (see http://web.burza.hr/en/core.web/)
Post a comment
Note: The author reserves the right to delete inappropriate comments.
- Foul and offensive language will be edited or deleted.
- Personal attacks will be deleted.
- Advertising or spam will not be tolerated.
Formatting: Linebreaks will be converted automatically. Basic HTML tags allowed: a href, strong, em, ol, ul, li, blockquote, code, acronym title, abbr title.
Gravatars are enabled.