New Remix Website

Subzero · Post by **Subzero** » 14/12/2003 - 8:19

Subby and Infy have joined farces (oops sorry that should read forces but I suddenly cant find the backspace key - maybe it feel off!!) and we now have our own site for our remixes, BUT THERES MORE!! For the peeps who visited before and saw a bland one page site - well ONE PAGE NO MORE!!! (WOW says you -what more can this man do!!

) Each remixer has their own page, and there may also be the addition of another non-c64 remixer shortly (I'll keep you posted on that).

Anyways - take a look, and dont forget to leave some comments on the guestbook

merman · Post by **merman** » 14/12/2003 - 17:36

It's bit wide isn't it? No, not my backside, the site! Still, nice ideas, look forward to hearing and seeing more.

Subzero · Post by **Subzero** » 14/12/2003 - 18:54

Wideness depends on what size your'e viewing it at. I prefer 1152x764 meself.

Waz · Post by **Waz** » 14/12/2003 - 23:31

subzero wrote:Wideness depends on what size your'e viewing it at. I prefer 1152x764 meself.

That may be okay at that size, but ideally when designing a site you should think about a lower resolution for people to view your site at. After all, not everyone might have good vision so those users would turn down the res to say 800x600 and maybe even turn on large text in the display, for example.

Also do have a think about the colour scheme: it's not that easy on the eye and could also be offputting. Maybe three shades of one colour would look nicer and more appealing?

Just my two pence worth..

CraigG · Post by **CraigG** » 14/12/2003 - 23:53

subzero wrote:Wideness depends on what size your'e viewing it at. I prefer 1152x764 meself.

Good for you - around 98% of the people surfing the Web don't...

Infamous · Post by **Infamous** » 15/12/2003 - 17:55

I um view it in er... ya know i dunno lol. hang on..

ah! 1024 x 768 ... which i aint got a clue what it means, but it fits better on my screen than the 800 one that you all mention, but then i have so much shit on my screen at one time it can be unbelievable.

what im wondering is whatever resolution i look at that website its missing its flash animation i wrote for it, and if i dont start hearing dodgy early 90's retro techno and crap flash animation soon with my name attached to it, it'll be death by vetetables mr subby! you've seen the stockpile of over ripe fruit and veg i got in my garden, i have weapons of mass clothing and phycological destruction!.

flash !
ahaaaaaaaaaaa! he'll save everyone of us!.

CraigG · Post by **CraigG** » 15/12/2003 - 17:58

About 30-40% of the people using the Web use 800 x 600. If you don't want them to be able to use your site, then so be it. However, the site looks very simple to me, so reworking it as a liquid layout (i.e. one that stretches with the Web browser) shouldn't take that long.

Infamous · Post by **Infamous** » 15/12/2003 - 18:03

ahhh i wouldnt know to be honest craig, im not the web designer, but i do agree if we gonna have a website then it does need to NOT alienate those that use different screen modes... guess subby'll be on that soon enough.

though i have plans of my own for it

but lets see what happens.
still waiting for that damn flash intro to appear.

Subzero · Post by **Subzero** » 16/12/2003 - 18:36

I dunno wot your all moaning aboot, i've not set a resolution on the bleeding thing - and if infy has his way the whole blinking thing will be in flash anyways.

I need to add a disclaimer on the site aboot it using macromedia flash too.

Post by **tas** » 16/12/2003 - 19:06

heh, my monitor is so old, i can't even reach that high of a display

Post by **tas** » 16/12/2003 - 19:10

oh and not to sound too picky, but chris asked you to change that banner cos its slowing the site down. It's also affecting my pc too. Please change or remove it mate.

Post by **tas** » 16/12/2003 - 19:14

hehe, and btw, you have a bad link on your guestbook

CraigG · Post by **CraigG** » 16/12/2003 - 19:33

subzero wrote:I dunno wot your all moaning aboot, i've not set a resolution on the bleeding thing

You mean apart from the defined sizes for *every* column element on the page? Because each of your columns are a set width in pixels, this is what your site looks like to 30%+ of the people on the Web:

(And before any smartarse says "yes, but you're using a Mac", the same thing happens in any Windows browser, too.)

As for Flash, I can't see what benefit that would bring to such a site, but there you go.

CraigG · Post by **CraigG** » 16/12/2003 - 19:38

Tas wrote:oh and not to sound too picky, but chris asked you to change that banner cos its slowing the site down. It's also affecting my pc too. Please change or remove it mate.

I guess on the plus side, that is the only piece of Flash I've ever seen that runs faster on my Mac than on my PC. How odd.

Subzero · Post by **Subzero** » 16/12/2003 - 19:41

The layers are squished doon