The navigation bar on the second one has the buttons that come with Frontpage. It makes it look sort of cheesy when you see things that you see on so many other sites. I love the first site, though. Looks really nice.

frames = bad

use css2/xhtml 1.0 strict

[Message Edited]

As for the sites themselves, I think they're pretty good. The navigation is nice and clear on both, and you obviously know how to put together web pages.

I'd avoid using 'canned' page elements though, such as the clock Javascript, and put more emphasis on creating your own. It's far more impressive to a client to have something unique on their site, rather than coming across other sites with elements from their own which they thought were unique.

Two very good steps in the right direction PixelCargo.

Have you given Macromedia Fireworks a try? It's always been my tool of choice for detail work like web design and skinning.

I think I have Fireworks, dont know what its for lol
Çërêb®øJÐ When they made me put those buttons at the last second well they streched the whole menu page Its a bug I will have to fix sooner or later but if you have a high res you wont have that problem but support is important eh I would like to see some examples of what Fireworks can do for skinning if any of you have some that would be great! Wincustomize should have a website section so skinners can rate it.

grayhaze:
obviously you haven't been a web developer long enough

the "important" browsers (4.0+) all support xhtml and css

frames are rapidly being phased out by dynamic content creation
i'll be much happier the day w3 kills them completely

Browser Hits Visitors % of Total Visitors
1 Internet Explorer 6.x 64,783 3,510 44.51%
2 Internet Explorer 5.x 7,199 1,119 14.19%
3 Netscape 6.x 5,304 475 6.02%
4 spider
5 spider
6 Netscape 4.x 540 171 2.17%
7 spider
8 spider
9 spider
10 spider

thats from a site i run
100,000 hits a month
huh
real huge need for backwards compatability eh?

the use of xhtml and css isn't about hype and whatnot
its about accessibility and adherence to the standards set forth by w3.

do you know the accesibility standards? do you know why they exist?

but you should already know that having "been there since very close to the boom" huh?

and ANYTHING you can do in frames
i can do better with xhtml/css
and faster hands down

sorry, i'm neither a salesperson, nor PR person, i'm a coder looking for ways to do things better and faster

i bet you said the same things when flash came out huh?

but i don't know what im talking about...
[Message Edited]

Actually Doomgaze, I was a part of a team who were one of the first web design outfits to embrace Flash and use it in mainstream websites. Unfortunately, the lack of users with the latest version of the Flash plugin always caused problems for us, and we ended up with a good number of disgruntled clients who didn't understand why they needed an inaccessible technology in their site.

As for your '100,000 hits a month' site, can I hazard a guess that it's a site which mainly appeals to the Internet-savvy audience who are more likely to have a desire for the latest versions of their browser? It all comes down to context. If you're creating a site which you hope will attract a broad range of viewers, you don't tailor it to the users who have the technology, you tailor it to those who don't. There's very little point in creating a website to sell a product if a large percentage of your viewers will never even be able to see the first page.

I'm by no means against the use of current technology in the appropriate context, but blindly spouting the benefits of the technology for all potential applications is both irresponsible and self-harming to a web designer.

Perhaps the root of your attitude is the fact that you're a coder and not a designer. You see everything from a purely technical point of view, and if it works for you it must work for everyone. If it doesn't work for everyone, then it's their own fault and they need to make sure their software is up to date. As a web designer, I consider myself fully versed in web standards, and having created sites for several government projects aimed at a non-technical audience I'm only too aware of the dangers of alienating potential viewers.

Anyway, sorry for hijacking your thread PixelCargo, but there's nothing that gets me more angry than a misinformed developer telling a designer how to do his job.