SITE REVIEW: YazaaWeb Inc

Hey everyone. Tis my second site up for review, but I've given 3 reviews to put this one up. Okay, here it is: YazaaWeb Inc

It's basically a software dev/paramedia site I've set up with two friends. Since then the network's expanded like crazy. Our PR went down pretty bad with the launch of vIII (from 7 to 3 ) that's why I'm trying to build it up again. Anyway, hope you guys like it.

Like it...????????

You mean, "like it" like "it's good"...????????

The font.
The graphics.
The content.
The appearance.
The general balance.
The idea.
The colors.
The search funcionality.

It's just about all PERFECT, man!

One thing tho: The redirecting of the contact form makes the entire site be re-loaded in the iframe... Not good!

Wow...I'm flattered. Thanks a lot for the kind words! It's good to know some people think it's nice. I really appreciate your comments. Thank you. (Sorry about the contact redirect, I'll fix that!)

1. One of the major problems with the site is the use of mixed up metaphors. In some instances, a dotted box around an image means a hyperlink, while in others, there is no hyperlink.

2. The text is all but unreadable, since you completely prevent resizing of fonts. Is this because you like making people suffer? Well, of course not, but many, many people will have trouble reading your site. They'll just leave and go somewhere else.

3. You deviate from common Web practices in that your links are not underlined. They are not even a different color. The only thing that indicates its content as a hyperlink, in some cases, is the use of square brackets around the link. Except that other square-bracketed text isn't hyperlinked.

To sum this behavior up in one sentence, I'd say that brackets indicate the enclosed text as being hyperlinked, except for when they do not indicate the enclosed text as being hyperlinked.

4. I don't care how many unique hits you've had, and I don't care about my IP address.

5. You use images without alt attributes.

6. What is a "Re-evolutionary concept"?

7. "Welcome back"? This is my first time to the site.

8. One cannot link to individual pages in your site; only the main page, because you use a frame.

The site is a usability and accessibility nightmare.

Good things about it:
- The graphics are nice.

Okay, first of all...

It's called being different and thinking outside of the box. If everyone kept playing by the rules Hitler would have ruled the world today! There's a thing known as trying something different you know. I mean, I truly appreciate your comments and suggestions but most of them aren't based on constructive critisizm but rather being traditionally bias, in the context of web design that is. Maybe I should put a sign up, "If you're really old and can't read *plum*...click here to be redirected to the television."

Please disregard any uppitiness, condescendence, belittling, and communism that you have inferred from the above posting.

Well, I do like the layout... but something about the universal black and white and the small text everywhere... I can't put my finger on it.

No variety in your Software section? I think there should be pictures of the products, or at least some font size diversity in there. It's all the same and it's difficult to tell where one section ends and another begins.

But in terms of content... boffo, my friend. Just boffo.

Like the site psyc0w. I think the main content of each page looks a little odd. I would perhaps give it more definition (perhaps a background colour or image etc). I'd possibly use different font sizes too, just to split the page up a little and allow the eye to see at a glance what the main text of your site is.
I'm not a big fan of the dotted/dashed border, so my only other suggestion would be to use less of it (but, hey, I might be biased there ). One small point - there's a typo in your 'about' page: 'aswel' instead of 'as well'.

You asked for opinions, but you're just ignoring everything negative. Why ask at all, if you're just looking for people to kiss your ass?

The only thing that design has going for it is a vague notion of aesthetics. That's it. It fails on most of the important tests.

Also, all but #4 are constructive criticism.

Well that's probably because I'm 16 and the other guy's 15. We don't really have _that_ much time to keep programming all the time. We're looking at a release for December of a Google tool. Plus the recent expansion of the YazaaWeb Inc network's taken up most of our time lately.


Thanks man. I've always wondered about the 'as well' thing.


I don't want everyone to kiss my ass, ylwsub68 and katana made good points about the site but you just seem to insult and flame me due to some personal insecurity you have or somethin'. And no, #4 _is_ not the only opinion, most of them are. If you don't like it man, then just close the window. I'm not here to listen to how bad it sucks. I'm here to listen on how to improve on it. Answer questions on it. That's what this forum is all about...unless I've got it wrong.

Wow...ehhh...it just double posted. Sorry bout that.

I think you should actually pay attention to what Sam Hughes said because I had pretty much same thoughts as I was viewing it. What is your site is about? Anyone coming to your site should know the answer to that within 5 seconds or they are going to leave. Your logo is hard as hell to read. If I hadn't known that it was yazaa i would have never known, the z is unrecognizable. Links are not apparent at all. Those are some things you should work on.

Hmmm...maybe I'll look into this. It's not suppose to be "straight-forward" though. Cool Concept. Confusing Name. Mass Hysteria. Since 2002. That's what it's about. Anyway, PC Magazine liked it. At least it's unique, eh?

I have not been flaming at all. Each numbered point of mine is about how to improve it. I guess I will have to explain each one...

1: This item explains a basic usability problem that may confuse and agitate visitors. Things can be improved by removing the problem.

2: This item points out that your site's text is quite small and that most users cannot resize it. This is like building a restaurant without a wheelchair ramp. Actually, that analogy is not quite correct: It is like acquiring a restaurant that already has a wheelchair ramp, only to destroy it to create room for decorative flora.

Your site can be easily improved in that respect by setting the text size relative to the user's font size and using less tiny bitmaps (or, perhaps, less-tiny bitmaps) of text.

3: You can fix problem number three by no longer following that practice.

4: Well, I don't, and nobody else cares about that information either. It does nothing other than get in the way of the information the user will be looking for.

5: I should not have to explain this one...

6: I am just curious about this one. What is a "re-evolutionary concept"? What does it mean to "re-evolve," and how does a concept "re-evolve"?

7: I should not have to explain this one either...

8: This is a very important point. Essentially, your site, in the way it uses frames, breaks the fundamental model of the World Wide Web. If people can only link to the root page, we fall back to the model of Gopher. This can be solved by not implementing things in this manner.

You see, any "flaming" that you experienced is entirely a construction of your imagination (with some having to do with my writing style).

It is very nice...I smell money in your future!


It looks like your other site except better

Yes, I apologize. It did, however, occur to me that you just criticized me to the extent of flaming. Arg! Maybe it's your sophisticated writing style! See?! You've infected me with it!


Thanks man. My nose is blocked but if you smell it then I'll take your word on it!