Website Update

[jscunn]

For all of those who might want something new to look at, our website has been updated. After this I have alot more respect for those who put together a sale catalog every year!!

Comments welcome.
http://www.pineridgeblackbaldie.com/

 

[purecountry]

Nice site, nice cattle. Congrats.

 

[fourstates]

Very nice site.

Did you do it yourself? I am very interested in having a website, but wonder about the cost. I am not trying to be rude but I am curious what a site like yours would cost. You may pm me if you like.

 

[ENNOT]

Good looking website, and you gotta love an Angus x Hereford baldie. That Hereford herdsire is nice!!

 

[ALACOWMAN]

simple site. great looking angus bulls i mean super nice

 

[MikeC]

Ah Jack Hedrick. What a guy! ;-)

 

[Frankie]

No advertising on these forums. Put them in the free classifieds

Mod1


The above was posted by mod1 about and to someone advertising feed bunks. Is not advertising a website advertising one and the same?

By the way I just joined because I wanted to know if and how things work on this site.

No, it's not the same thing. Generally people have been allowed to link to their websites, but not to advertise specific products/animals for sale.

Welcome to the board.

 

[Brute 23]

Good looking site,, and animals.

The only thing I noticed it every thing was soo small. I had alot of dead space on the side and bottom. Maybe that is just on my computer? Any one else notice this?

 

[Frankie]

Good looking site,, and animals.

The only thing I noticed it every thing was soo small. I had alot of dead space on the side and bottom. Maybe that is just on my computer? Any one else notice this?

Yes.

 

[ALACOWMAN]

Good looking site,, and animals.

The only thing I noticed it every thing was soo small. I had alot of dead space on the side and bottom. Maybe that is just on my computer? Any one else notice this?

Yes.

put somemore of those goodlook'in cattle in that dead space... they do more talking than anything else ;-)

 

[DiamondSCattleCo]

The only thing I noticed it every thing was soo small. I had alot of dead space on the side and bottom. Maybe that is just on my computer? Any one else notice this?

A common design choice is to design your web page for 800x600, which is still the norm for most computers accessing the internet. I didn't measure it, but I'm pretty sure thats an 800x600 site. It could/should be centered on the page though.

Rod

 

[Brute 23]

Ya the pictures are good size but the text is too small for me.

 

[TheBullLady]

Good start on the website! I think it's something every cattle producer is going to need to have for successful marketing. And keeping the site current is really important.

What kind of response do you get? How many contacts a week?

 

[Third Row]

A common design choice is to design your web page for 800x600, which is still the norm for most computers accessing the internet.

Actually 800 x 600 hasn't been the norm for a few years now. Fewer than 15% of users are on that resolution or lower.

Even ag visitors, which tend to be slower on the uptake of new technology, have switched to 1024x768 and up. Fewer than 20% (closer to 16%) of even ag users are on 800 x 600 now.

 

[Brute 23]

I really like the site though. Good color, good pics, easy to navigate....

 

[DiamondSCattleCo]

Actually 800 x 600 hasn't been the norm for a few years now. Fewer than 15% of users are on that resolution or lower.

<chuckle> Things do change, however the average statistics I found while trying to verify yours was 25% of users are still at 800 x 600. So you'd still want to design your site for that size, otherwise you risk ticking off 1 in 4 people who come to your site.

Rod

 

[Third Row]

What's your source? I haven't seen anybody claim it was a high as 25% in a long time.

I'm speaking from experience with four ag sites that do a combined 4 million page views per month and w3c.

 

[DiamondSCattleCo]

What's your source? I haven't seen anybody claim it was a high as 25% in a long time.

I'm speaking from experience with four ag sites that do a combined 4 million page views per month and w3c.

I just hit the Xerox and Microsoft sites. They're talking worldwide stats, whereas yours may be USA only. Its hard to say, as throughout the years I've seen stats on this and that reported all over the place. I've always used Xerox and Microsoft for my GUI guidelines.

Even if you're at 10% of all users sitting at 800 x 600, its a safe bet that ag users are going to be at _least_ 15%. You're still risking ticking off 2 out of 10 users. Theres no point in taking that risk since 1024 x 768 only buys you a couple hundred pixels. When the "norm" becomes 1650 x 1024 or something along those lines, I'd look at moving away from 800 x 600, but not until those days are here.

My experience is 18 years of systems analysis. We still build software products to suit 800 x 600, same as whats recommended for web site design.

Rod

 

[Third Row]

What do you mean "recommended"? Nothing is actually "recommended" by any official organization for web site design. If there is any single expert on usability, it would be Nielsen and even he says design for 1024x768 (Link). If anything is recommended (which it's not), it would be a fluid layout like this page.

Regardless, 800x600 hasn't been "the norm" in nearly half a decade, it fell below 50% sometime late 2001/early 2002. Yahoo, Youtube, Amazon, and Ebay have all switched to larger layouts.

 

[CPL]

For what its worth, I like the site. I think the extra inch or two on the right side is fine and actually makes it a little bit fancier (IMO).

Graphics look good. Text is right size for me atleast. And when you click on "Herd Sires" you get a list that goes directly to picture, pedigree, and EPDs when you click their name. So many of these sites are constructed like a maze- its rediculous. Very nice site! Do you have a frame size for the Logan son?