RedRock Catering, Restaurant & Bar  . . .  www.redrockto.com

 
 
[Webpage Copy or 'Mirror']Existing RedRock Site Homepage.   (142K)
(As it was, when I first looked at this site.)
[Webpage Copy or 'Mirror']Proposed Optimized Site Homepage.   (46K)
Scope of Work: 2 days. (A lot of hand graphics work.)

   This proposal essentially took (what was) the existing Homepage design, and performed extensive optimization, to provide loading performance appropriate for dial-up Internet users. (Those using a phone-line modem, rather than a high-speed connection.) Optimization that included both reducing the total file size for the page, and adjusting the order in which the resulting graphic images load. (On most browsers, the navigation graphics load first, and the side graphics finish loading last.)

   There are four things to take notice of, if examining the optimized coding and images:
  1. How transparent GIFs were used to help slash the total image file-size for this page.
  2. Instead of using an image-map, the image was cut-up then pasted together with a table.
  3. The use of JavaScript to pre-load the navigation images.
  4. The use of CSS (level 1), to load the side graphics as a background image.

   This last point also helps the site to scale what is delivered, to better accommodate any "legacy" (read ancient) systems. Where the (significant file-size) side graphics do enhance immediately identifying what this site is about. But they are not actually essential to the site content or navigation. And a very old browser, which is probably running on a sloooooooow computer, is about the only set-up that will not load those graphics.

   Further, it was necessary to reduce the physical size of the main (logo) graphic to get the page file sizes down to an acceptable amount. The more important reason to reduce the physical size of that graphic is because people who browse the Internet can be very impatient, and often react based on what they see immediately, on the first visible screen of a Webpage.

   That viewing the proposed Site Homepage on an 800x600 screen, the entire page, including the bottom of page text navigation, is fully visible. So a really impatient visitor will simply select one of those text links, and proceed into the site without really seeing what was on that first page. However, on the original version of this page, all that 800x600 "first screen" would show is a slowly loading graphic, and a bit of text that contains no navigation links. So when the competition is "just a couple of clicks away", many visitors will just hit the browser back button, and try the next listing in the search engine results, etc..

 

Note: When an assumption about screen size must be made, almost all visitors to a site now seem to have a system that provides at least an 800x600 screen. However, smaller screen sizes (such as the 480x320 screen on an iPhone) still exist and remain actively in use. So if at least 800x600 is "ideal", the site should remain "very usable" with a smaller screen size.

 

   The other change in this proposal was the consistent use of blue for links, and brown for informational text.

 
 
 
[Supports Any Browser]*
 E-mail the Webmaster
Page Content Updated: 24 April 2010