|
I didn't take offense but Dawson found my proof mistakes ( which happen a lot) Andy brought up a valid point on loading time, however the others confirmed fast load on there end and the file is small. Again, it's not a flash site, but the front page has a flash element.
It's not that I didn't take your criticism, but saying something is amateur is debatable, saying something is spelled wrong or that I need to optimize a file wouldn't be.
The web is dynamic, so where does the standard come from? I see lots of impressive flash sites, but optimizing is difficult.
The navigation point was noted which most wouldn't pick up on so I explained the 2 markets for the front end and back end.
Overall impression of the general public was what I was looking for. Text too small, irregular contrast issues etc. I figure you've been on a lot of car sites and maybe that's the standard, but it isn't a professional standard but just average or par for the course. I want to set myself apart from par and be a little unique so I explained it to you or justified what you mentioned. So you didn't think I blew off your comments and realized I welcomed discussion. Had you said that the flash scroller text looks amateur I would have agreed, but just to say flash on a site is amateur I didn't agree with since it's most all pro sites have flash elements.
|