Hi guys,

The company I work for has released a new design for their website and I'd like to have your feedback on it. They asked me to take care of the ux part and it'd be amazing to have the opinion of technically savvy people.

Here's the link: http://wordans.com

Don't be afraid to look at the code. There's probably something different I could do.

Thanks a lot people!


2 answers

This was chosen as the best answer

It's pretty boxy, and the bulk of your gradients are unnecessary and ineffective given the way they just cut off at the edges. Though to be fair, I don't think there's any way to make any "#1 MOM" shirts look good, so you can only do so much with the assets at hand.

Your Flash shirt designer takes a very, very long time to load and its custom scrollbar thumb doesn't actually fit the track it rides in, which looks sloppy. The whole thing could probably be implemented without Flash, and I'd go so far as to say that it probably should be considering the sheer amount of fancy JavaScript effects libraries you're including.

Using Prototype and jQuery at the same time is also bound to cause some namespace problems.

Answered about 7 years ago by Nathan Duran
  • Thanks a lot! That is exactly the kind of feedback I was looking for... Will try to convince the people I work with now... Thanks again LP Louis-Pierre about 7 years ago
  • If done properly jQuery can be used with other libraries without causing conflicts. You can use noConflict() for this - http://api.jquery.com/jQuery.noConflict/ or you can get around it by using a closure for your jQuery code and passing in the jQuery object aliased to $. It's more about the visitor having to download and parse 2 JS libraries when only 1 should be required danwellman about 7 years ago

I'm running an i7 laptop with a Radeon 5870 and your page is chugging pretty hard on here. You could definitely speed things up be removing some of the unnecessary <div> tags that are floating around throughout your page.

Also, things would perform significantly faster if your CSS selectors were shortened. For example, odds are that this:

#homepage_container #main_banner #banner #btn_make .button_make

Could be done just as well with this:

#btn_make .button_make

Or this:

#banner .button_make

With just one selector, you won't see a humongeous improvement, but if you take the time to write efficient selectors every time, you'll notice much better performance on your page. Not only that, but the CSS files will be smaller: not a huge issue in most cases, but smaller files use less bandwidth, and that could end up saving you some money--plus, a smaller file downloads faster, increasing the speed that people view that first page before everything gets cached.

jQuery and Prototype aren't mutually exclusive and do play nice if you explicitly tell them to, but you usually can accomplish pretty much anything with either, I can't think of a scenario when you'd need both.

Here's another thing you could do to speed things up, use CSS sprites instead of some of your <img> tags. Take, for instance, the shopping cart icon, United States icon, currencies icons, and communities icons: those could all be consolidated into one file and placed in the document--using CSS background-position and precise height/width properties--just like they are now. Your server can respond to one GET for an image muuuuch faster than 12 GETs for images. More information on this can be found here.

If you haven't already, you can move some of your files to a CDN to speed things up further. This isn't entirely necessary, but it can take stress off your server for delivering CSS/JS/image files. You can actually use Google's AJAX Libraries on your site. jQuery, jQuery UI, and Prototype are all available for download, free of charge, from Google's lightning fast infrastructure. More information on this can be found here.

Answered about 7 years ago by Zack Doherty