swmagic — 2010-04-08T18:50:11-04:00 — #1
Well I'm stumped. I'm used to seeing HTML or JAVA or CSS when I right-click on a site and view source.
How the heck was THIS done?
kohoutek — 2010-04-08T19:08:16-04:00 — #2
The site is using frames in order to annoy us all with the music!
Have a look at the source code outside the frame...
swmagic — 2010-04-08T19:33:49-04:00 — #3
LOL. I get it now. I thought frames were dead. I'm wrong. I did notice that the dragging mechanism on the belts page worked inconsistently and intuitively which was annoying, but I liked the avant-garde effect of seeing examples of the product without the ho-hum vertical scrollbar. I guess in the fashion world you have to do such novel things. Your comments?
kohoutek — 2010-04-08T19:39:36-04:00 — #4
you don't need frames for such a site. They used it - I presume - to prevent users from having to refresh the page and thus getting uninterrupted music, which is generally a bad idea.
The code...well, it isn't the most modern code and it is highly inflexible.
You could do the exact same website with modern, clean code and make it more usable, accessible and still maintain good aesthetics. Ok, you can't use music, but that's a pretty audacious thing to impose on your site visitors anyway.
swmagic — 2010-04-08T20:15:53-04:00 — #5
swmagic — 2010-04-08T20:19:19-04:00 — #6
I've learned in marketing classes that sound usage is a function of your target market. If you are having corporate visitors then music is a bad thing (they're supposed to be working not surfing websites). However if your market is the casual user and or the entrepreneur then music is ok (given that it's NICE music, typically midi stuff if it's sophisticated enough.
BTW, I didn't know that about frames, thanks for the golden nugget (not that I would use frames mind you).
kohoutek — 2010-04-08T20:25:12-04:00 — #7
With modern I mean accessible and usable, light, easy to use, flexible for various devices...in other words; a website made for users.
As for music, I disagree because noone can possibly know what music site visitors like. What may sound great to you might sound awful to me and vice versa. Furthermore, when I surf the net, I almost always have my own music on and any website that tries to force music I don't want to hear gets the boot instantly.
felgall — 2010-04-08T21:10:19-04:00 — #8
No it isn't because the casual user will often have their own music alreadyplaying and will be annoyed when a web site tries to compete with it.
The ideal way to attach music to a web page is as a link where the individual visitor gets to choose whether to click the link and play the music or not click the link and continue listening to their own music.
The only sort of site that can claim any sort of legitimacy at all in forcing music on their visotors is a site specifically related to that music such as a band site playing music by that band. Even there it is more polite to ask.
stomme_poes — 2010-04-12T16:09:21-04:00 — #9
Hm, actually I would totally expect to hear Karl Jenkins' Diamond Music if I went to the DeBeers page. It's just so ingrained : )