rev.iew.me

Eple.co.cc has 8 Reviews

Below are the reviews left by other members on Eple.co.cc. Jump to review form?

1. 

   PopJustice gave it on 13th Nov 2010 and said:

   Hey i am James and I run pop-justice.piczo.com and here is my review of your site....
   Your layout is good, its class and cute, i especially like your header and the images you used. I also like the footer, but the scrollbar on your tweets does not look good, I think you should take it off.
   Your content is okay, the pixels i doubt many people will use most of them so some of them are a waste of space and ideas but still its good to have them there..
   Your SIm2 lot has nothing to do with what your site offers so you should put it under the title 'Other' rather than Downloads. Apart from that you have a good amount of content. I like some of your srticles but especially the one about giving credit but some of them are pointless like the one about why I hate strawberries, I doubt if anyone is interested in that. Overall your content should be more organised. Stuff with nothing to do with web designing should be under a separate header. But it will do.
   You have a great amount of tutorials and I have nothing wrong to say apart from putting your disclaimer at the top so thats the first thing your visitors will see.
   Your credit section is good but some of the links are dead or you have not added a link, so make sure you do so.
   When you write about your website, you should add a bit more, 2 lines does not describe your whole site or your whole life on web designing.
   Your navigation is good but it should be in the middle so it looks nicer, I do not like the idea of having a white border when your hovering on it, maybe change the background colour or something,
   Overall this is one of the best sites I have reviewed, you have very few mistakes but they can be easily edited. Keep up the good work

   JAMES // POP-JUSTICE.PICZO.COM

   Using Firefox on Linux | Report This?

2. lolitsronald gave it on 31st Jan 2010 and said:

   First impression: The first impression is the site looks really simple and nice.rnLayout: The layout colors are nice and soothing. The picture of the blimp looks high def. The birdy, the porcupine and the bee are cute. I like the part that when you hover the house someone takes a bite out of it. I like that part since it is funny.
   Tutorials: The tutorials are really detailed and helpful. I didnt know how to shade things in pixels so the pixel shading tutorials really helped me. It was really detailed and i just learned we could have that color grid thing. The other guides like the neopet one is really helpful (haha i can now get a lot of neopoints :P). I never knew we can have the fanupdate paginate like that.
   Graphics: Your graphics are cute. i love your pixels. Your smiles were both cool and cute at the same time. I love the asian one. Your avatars are really cool cause they are really neat and the shading looks real. Your favicons looks good and cute and i wish i can eat them up :3
   Overall: I am a beginner reviewer. Hopefully this review can help you in some way. The layout was cool and hi def which is really cool in my eye. Your content is really helpful which helped me alot. Your graphics are cute and i want to use them some day. The only thing i should tell you is the thing for download for the smileys are weird. i think it it should be zipped instead of rar. I really had fun reviewing this site since i learned a lot of new things today.

   Using MSIE on Windows | Report This?

3. 

   verarorato gave it on 24th Dec 2009 and said:

   Hello!

   First, I'm using Internet Explorer V. ...(?) I believe it's the last one.

   I'm sorry about any spelling or grammer mistake. I'm Brazilian and I'm learning how to write (speak) in english.

   My first impression about your site is good. I like the pixelled images. You favicon is great. It's give a notability in yout site.

   You template is very simple and clean. No sidebars, just a menu on the header, and a very simple footer.

   I liked your style: no excess images, what leaves pleasant be in your site.

   I approve have your news tweets in your foot. I'ts great.

   Now, let's go to your intern pages.

   CREATOR: I have to admit that I didn't understand that the "CREATOR" was referring to you. I understood that when I in the page and I read "about me". Sorry about my... huh... stupidity. xD
   You told much about you, but I liked what you told. The visitors like to know about the webmaster.

   VISITOR: This I understando: it's part of your resources, right? I think SO! The content you offer is very comprehensive. Sorry but I didn't look one by one.

   TUTORIALS: it's great too. Nothing new to say about that.

   WEBSITE: Okay, I learned about your site's name. WOW, I didn't know the meaning of "auberginer", and I'm surprise. Your name is very creative.

   I liked your button menu, but sometimes it's hard to find a "MENU" there, if you understand me.

   AFFILIATES: It's very organized. I liked.

   ASK AND ANSWER: your ask&answer is very simples: just one thing to fill: Your question. It's good but sometimes you need more than just the question. You need the home, the name, the e-mail... etc...

   TAG: I liked. (I just know say it: I liked... =D)

   I rate 5 stars...

   Using MSIE on Windows | Report This?

4. littletoys gave it on 24th Nov 2009 and said:

   Hi, I am Adelle and I would be reviewing your site on a 1440 X 900 screen resolution with Mozilla Firefox.

   To begin with, it is a very nice pixelled layout, Lisa. I like how it is unique and not just a two-sidebar with header layout. I especially love the Twitter updates box because it is very cool and it allows visitors to see your past tweets.
   Your navigations are very well planned. I have nothing much to say about that because, well, there isn't much.

   On to your 'About Me' page. I adore your simplistic way of describing yourself.
   The Ask & Answer page is carefully planned and very neat, unlike other website with default words, etc. I like how you bother to change the settings to fit it in with your current layout.
   Your 'Contact Me', 'Kitty Friends pixel club' and 'Joined' page is fine, nothing much wrong with it.
   Your Toybox is really unique, as you gave your special adoptables a small description. I like how you bother with thinking of descriptions to fit your adoptables.
   Your Quilt is well done, nothing else to say, actually.
   I quite enjoyed reading your 'Facts about Lisa' and 'In Lisa's world' because I feel like I really know you a lot better and I got a feeling many other visitors would leave feeling the same way.

   Now, let's move on to the content you offer to your visitors.
   Your fonts are really original and I like that you make your own fonts unlike some sites who just redistribute fonts. I am a huge fan of Crackers' nutshell, to tell you the truth and I don't have likings to pixel fonts.
   Your Giffy, Imagemapic and Unfreez downloads are okay, I suppose. I prefer the Giffy page over the rest because of the fact that it has a tiny tutorial on the screenshot. However, you deserve an applause for taking screenshots of each and every one of those programs.
   Your emoticons are just so cute. Oh man, I haven't said cute since forever but these pixels are truly adorable. I like how you give the visitors a chance to view all of its 'faces' before downloading it.
   Your premade layouts is average, I love the layout but there is only one so maybe you can add more or change the name to Layout with the s at the back. (If you know what I mean)
   I like your Sims 2 lots including your descriptions for each lot. Very descriptive, well done with that.
   Your doll maker is fine, I love the clothing choices.
   I am just going to summarise your pixel sections into one section.
   Your pixels are quite well done, congratulations on that. I like the 'Adopt an Egg' section. Really innovative and it really give the visitors a chance to somehow 'connect' to your site.
   Your 'Avatars', 'Web icons' and 'Favicons' are good, once again, nothing much to say.
   Your clocks are really cool and your palettes are really well done. Your choices of colour are really awesome. Also, your web materials are good, not average but there's only a few that stand out a lot.
   Your articles are very well written. You started with a point and in the article, you enforced it in the article and I liked how you stated examples.
   Your jokes are just hilarious and your useful reads are really useful.
   I like your Interactive section. You really want to have a link to your visitors which is really good.

   Your tutorials are really good, I am not going to explain about every single one of them but a few of my favourites includes the pixelling tutorial and the FTP using browser.

   Very organized 'Site' page. Very well done, you summarized it up with a few paragraphs on the main 'Site' page and then you elaborated more on sub-sections. Good, very well done, in fact.
   Very well, you listed your affiliates, hostees and you credited particularly everyone you need.
   Your link buttons are very well done, you organized it differently and you put it in sizes.
   Your link exchange and 'Joined' page is just that, nothing much to say, actually.
   Your past (and current) layout page is very well done. But if you can, I would have love to see a close-up with a few of the other layouts that didn't have a bigger version of the layout.
   Well, your tagboard is... a tagboard. That's all for the Site section.

   I love the arrangement of your footer, really organized.
   I like the spiral-thingys at the bottom, really elegant and really bring a professional edge to this layout.
   Also, a huge congratulations for reading to the almost end of this review.

   To wrap this review up, Lisa, your site has pretty much left me speechless with your unique and wonderfully awesome site. Keep up the good work.

   P.S Sorry for any spelling or grammer mistakes.

   Using Firefox on Windows | Report This?

5. katiiness gave it on 14th Nov 2009 and said:

   Overall look of the site:

   Beautiful layout and very well organized sections and content. I really enjoy the hover effects, and your footer is AMAZINGLY well designed. I don’t know how to emphasize the lovely footer! I like the earthy brown color, and the blue and purple textures really spice up the layout, but still keeping it very simple and elegant at the same time. I also really like the header of the layout (probably should have talked about this first huh?) Anyhow, I like the display of “Leave me a note” and “Ask me a Question”. The hover effect over the updates box is really awesome. Hover effects are truly my weaknesses, I love them.

   You selected a really nice pattern for the blue and purple texturized parts of the layout. It works really well with the image and borders of the website. However, I wished that the brown curly borders around the image stood out more (perhaps a different color for the borders or darker?). I think it would have given the site a very nice vintage feel. But the color as is blends with the image at the top portion and gets lost in it.

   The way your posts are laid out is very clear. The colors are easy to see and again, relates back to your layout.

   Pages:

   About Me: I like how it’s sectioned out, and I like the extra links on the left side so that visitors can further get to know you, instead of having one long page of info! Great idea. This way, it allows visitors to choose what interests them instead of throwing it all in their face.

   Visitor: You have A LOT of content, which is a good thing. It caters to a variety of visitors with different interests. I especially love your pixels section, I would definitely consider using them on my own sites. I hope to see more additions to this section, because I think you are really great at making them.

   Your reads are great, and I do hope everyone who passes by takes some time to at least take a glance at those articles. Thank you for encouraging others to give credit where credit is due. I think sometimes people feel like if they give credits, then visitors will only think they’re not that great of a designer and the only reason the work is so great is because of the resources used. However, people seem to forget that while resources can be beautiful on their own, to be able to combine a dozen or resources into one beautiful and cohesive website takes skill and talent only the designer/webmaster can achieve to make their site personal, unique, and appealing.

   Tutorials: Again, you have a wonderful selection here with lots of variety. I looked at a few and thought they were very well written with great visual examples to accompany the instructions. I had no idea there was such a thing as online FTP using your browser! Thank you for bringing that to my attention!

   The Website: that eggplant picture is charming! Information is straight forward, and again I really enjoy the relevant links on the left side. Very useful to have them all in one area.

   Overall, your site is really resourceful with a variety of content to keep the visitor coming back. Your layout is very original and gives a very personal feel, as if it was a reflection of the kind of person you are.

   I really do not have much criticisms to give when your website is very VERY well built. I would definitely recommend this site to a friend.

   Using Firefox on Windows | Report This?

6. 

   Asia gave it on 5th Nov 2009 and said:

   Hello Lisa, it's Asia! I almost feel ashamed to be writing this right now because you requested a review so many months ago, but I'm hoping that if my reputation has preceded me well, this review will more than make up for it! I haven't written a review in quite some time, so if this lacks focus and/or clarity, I sincerely apologize. If there's anything you would like me to clarify, please make a note of it in your reply to this review. Additionally, I hope my extensive vocabulary doesn't get too much in the way, but you seem like a smart girl, so I imagine you wouldn't take much issue with it. Who knows, you might actually learn something new! With that being said, I'll just get right into this long overdue review.

   First Impressions:

   Aesthetics:
   Having taken so long to write this review and still having some of the beginnings of that review available to me, my first reaction is to compare the previous layout with the current one. I think I like the former of the two more for its bright, inviting colors, but obviously that's irrelevant here as that design is no longer present.
   Despite my preferences, "One and only" does not fail to impress. It is obvious that you are a skilled pixel artist, and that is certainly what attracts my eye most in this design. Positively, your art is quite good, so it is very pleasant to the eyes. On the other hand, it is on this larger scale that the "faults" of pixel art become most apparent, that is, its tendency toward aliasing or jaggedness. This is most apparent at the neck of the girl and the rounder parts of the frame around her head.
   With my penchant for detail, I find this sort of thing to be quite jarring. It has the effect of making the drawing seem unfinished. Depending on what program you use, there might be some difficulty in the matter of smoothing things out, but I think that making the outlines in the drawing more apparent would help with that. I think that's part of the reason why pixel art like the one in your shortcut icon and your example of portraiture in your post "Some thoughts" look so polished, because of the obvious outline around the image. It somehow has a way of controlling the jaggedness rather than giving it the appearance of bleeding into other parts of the image or the background around it. Smoothing this issue out will give the site a much softer feel, which I feel would better reflect the "Victorian-like" theme you were going for.
   On the subject of the Victorian theme, I think that for the most part you have done well in mimicking its eclecticism, particularly in your incorporation of the various patterns. Unfortunately, once you get past the header, particularly in a longer blog post or page, any indication of that theme seems to disappear. I understand you were going for "Victorian-like" and not necessarily Victorian, but at certain points in your design, this motif is made unclear. The straight-edged border separating the header and the content, as well as the plain background on either side of the content, is plain and disrupts a sense of cohesion in the layout, as do the gradients throughout. Part of the beauty and sophistication of successful Victorian design is that it encompasses so many different themes without the appearance of being cluttered. Take for example this image of a Victorain styled room. Nearly every facet of the room features some type of pattern, including the wooden areas of the room around the frames of the door and windows and on the floor, although compared to other elements of the room, the natural wood patterns are perhaps the least obvious. The room is alive with diversity! If you can somehow convey that in the plainer parts of your design, I think it will bring more life to it and make it feel a little more polished and complete. As it is now, the lack of patterns as well as the gradients in the content area stick out like a single wall stripped of its wallpaper in a Victorian room.
   Finally, I think certain areas of the layout where you do incorporate more of these patterns are a little cluttered. If we return to the image of the Victorian room, you can see how every element, while standing apart from its counterparts, has the appearance of being in its right place. For example, the picture frames on the wall, or the seat beside the small table of books. I do not get this sense from certain parts of your header. The way you've overlapped certain elements, for example your introductory boxes and the frilly pinkish frame at the top of the page, makes the design feel a tad unstructured, particularly since the introductory boxes are laid with no particular attention to the frilly pinkish border underneath. You might adjust this by first combining the brown introductory boxes (with space between their text to make them legible as you've done with the footer) and placing them just underneath the frilly pinkish frame. This will help to make this part of the layout seem more precise in the same way lining up the edge of the introductory box with the edge of the content box does so. It would not be dissimilar to the way the two photo frames in the image of the Victorian room are both aligned. Similarly, I think the portrait could stand to be given a little more breathing room between the frilly pinking frame and the navigation bar.

   Typography:
   Another element of the layout that doesn't follow suit with the general Victorian theme is the typography. While serif fonts can occasionally be difficult to read if applied too often, they also help convey a sense of antiquity. Victorian design contains elements that resemble both serif fonts (i.e. floral patterns) and sans-serif fonts (i.e. the sweeping arcs of Art Nouveau pieces), so if you can use both font styles and play them off of each other, I think you could push the Victorian theme even further. One way this is frequently accomplished is to use serif fonts in header text (i.e. h1, h2, etc.) and sans-serif fonts in the main body of text. Of course, you could use serif fonts altogether and go full out with the antiquity of the Victorian theme as Ivy has done in her Seigaiha theme which was modeled after a traditional Japanese pattern. This will really help sell the theme across as many aspects of your design as possible.
   One thing I wanted to note about your type that I noticed in your previous design is that it looks a little strange on my screen. I don't know if it's just the resolution I'm using (1024 x 768), but your body text has this strange look to it, almost like it’s been intentionally aliased. It's jagged, and in some cases, difficult to read. My initial guess is that the font size you've chosen for the particular font is too small, because the second I enlarge it, the jaggedness goes away. For some reason, certain fonts like Lucida Sans seem to degrade at certain sizes. I would recommend either making the text larger or using another font. Of course, you probably haven't been hearing this remark very often, so you may not feel pressed to do this, but I encourage you to at least check out your design at that resolution to be certain. I would also keep in mind that certain fonts are not common to all operating systems or computers, and I don't see Lucida Sans used too often, perhaps for a reason. My research suggests that the font was designed for a Mac, so that may be why it looks just a little wonky on my PC. Here is an article I highly recommend about type in web design. (In retrospect, now that I am using a Vista PC, I realize the font looked weird because it wasn’t installed on my old XP based PC. This only serves to prove my point about using “web safe” fonts.

   Blog:
   Although I covered some facets of blog elements that I think could be improved very briefly, I would like to make sure I clarify here. Most if not all of your blog elements feel very detached from the overall Victorian theme. The gradient boxes combined with the dotted borders of your meta data (titles, post dates, etc.) feel very much out of place and are rather plain. As I'm sure I've already emphasized, Victorian style is all about embellishments! Don't be afraid to add some in the blog area. I could not begin to stress this further when it comes to the comment area. As I have mentioned in previous reviews, it seems the comment area often gets the short end of the stick when it comes to cohesion in a design. There is an array of things you could do here to add interest to the area and to differentiate between the comments. At least add some patterns to differentiate between different elements of a comment! Finally, the pixel heart that precedes each commenter name seems incongruous with the darker colors and general theme of the layout. If you're going to add little elements like that, it's best that they somehow reiterate the general theme. What are some popular symbols from the Victorian era that you might be able to use instead of a heart? Of course, if you insist on using a heart, you could also simply make it look more "Victorian-like." Maybe it would help you to examine the backings of Victorian chairs for embellishments that could go inside of the heart.

   Navigation:
   The navigation in this particular layout is a tad bit overwhelming for the simple fact that there are so many ways to one page. For example, just at the top of the page, you can get to two different pages in the "About me" area of the website. The footer isn't much better because you link only to "Home" when it is common to recreate the entire body of main navigation. It seems useless only to include the "Home" link and not the others. Speaking of which, the order in which you arrange the links for the navigation bar seems quite arbitrary and scattered. For example, "About me" and "The website" are both categories of information that might go under a general "About" category. Therefore, it seems more logical to have them placed closer together just as you've done with "For you" and "Tutorials" which are both related as they feature content made especially for the visitor. Other than the arrangement, I think the navigation categories work just fine since these are the main attractions of your site. I would suggest that you might rethink your capitalization tactics for these links, however. As I'm sure you know, with the exception of small words like "of" and "the", among others, generally most of the main important words of a title are to be capitalized. It's not a huge deal as the size gives away that they are in fact titles. Finally, I think the inclusion of the link to the quilting bee in the form of an image is a little random if not also superfluous. Given its obscure location, I would not be surprised if it isn't used very often. You may want to consider if it's really necessary.

   About me:
   Wow. To put things simply, this page is very much all over the place. It could really stand to be reorganized as it is very inconsistent, both within itself and in comparison to other pages on your site. For one, there isn't much space between the main title and the list you begin with. Frankly, I think a list is no way to introduce oneself, as a person is definitely more than the sum of their... preferences! You don't even explain what the list really means, although most people are likely to assume that it's a list of favorites. Yet, if that's the case, why also have a "Facts" page? I think it would make more sense to have your introduction with your photo at the very top of the page. Additionally, if you're going to include photos to convey the content on your page, you should really consider developing a consistent format for them in order to make them more pleasing to the eye. This generally means having them both be the same size and shape, at the very least. With the difference between the picture of macaroni and your photo, things look a bit sloppy. It's also quite random that you would choose to convey tomato soup with macaroni and not any of the other things you've listed. It's like you just threw these things altogether on the page quite randomly. Perhaps the most organized thing on this page is the list of links. They're alphabetized for ease of use! Just looking at the structure of this page, however, it doesn't really make me too excited to look into the other areas of this section as it precludes them with the suggestion that they too might be as disorganized and scattered across the page. Still, since I like to go into as much depth as possible with my reviews, I will look at every page. Let's start with your introduction since that should have come first from the start.

   > More about Lisa:
   This page is a lot better with organization. Each subject matter appears to have its own cluster of paragraphs, although some, like the first and last, seem better suited closer together to help the information flow a little better. My only real gripe about this page is that there needs to be some breathing room between the h1 tag and your paragraphs. This would certainly make the page look more attractive and readable.

   > Ask and answer:
   Seeing as to how the script does a lot of the work for you, I am not surprised by the organization of this page.

   > Contact me:
   I think you did a great job of incorporating all the colors from your design into the form, although, as before, I find the gradients stick out sorely in the midst of the Victorian theme. I think this page would also look neater if you line up the subject field with the others. That's the whole point of putting the field name to the right, is it not?

   > Facts about Lisa:
   Personally I have always loathed these types of pages as they tend to offer information of very little consequence. It certainly doesn't help that the subjects you have chosen are so random. Still, the page is decently organized, and that's a start, although virtually everything on this page other than the titles should be lists. I should also note that it is quite unattractive that the titles shift to the right of the margin of the content they label. It is most appealing (and logical) to either have them line up or shifted to the left, the latter being the case with "More facts" and the subsequent list.

   > In Lisa's world:
   This looks to be a new spin on the typical opinions sections people have on their sites these days. I like that this content is unique in this way, but at the same time, it still has that feeling of being random and inconsequential. It's really just an extension of the facts lists, and offers little means for your reader to engage with this content, other than your asking "How about in your world?" at the bottom. Altogether, it doesn't really tell us much about you.

   > Joined:
   Another tradition that I find particularly trivial. Sure, you like all these things, and that's great, but it doesn't really matter if I'm not already a fan and can identify the subjects in these tiny images. I think most people are interested in why you like the things you do, and not simply what they are. But 'ey, everybody's got a hobby...
   > Kitty Friends pixel club:
   Okay, I get that you like pixels, and you presumably like cats as well, but this doesn't tell me that outright. It would be helpful to have some information on this page about why it is of any importance or what exactly it conveys about you (since it's in your About Me section) rather than redirect the visitor to a site that doesn't directly convey what this page is about right away.

   > Toybox:
   You write "here I display the reasons you all have cutesy websites" but that does not even remotely convey what this page is about. Who do you refer to when you say "you?" How are these pixels reflective of "reasons you all have cutesy websites?" Pages like these would seem much more worthwhile if the visitor knows what they are for. Otherwise, it's like, "what does this have to do with anything?" At this point, I have no idea how this page reflects anything about you.

   > The Quilting bee:
   This is off-site technically, so I'm not going to review this section.

   For the visitor:
   First, let me start of by suggesting that you should be consistent if you’re going to refer to a page one way in the navigation; that is, since you refer to this page as “For you” in the navigation, it would make a lot more sense to the visitor for you to retain this on the page itself so that one doesn’t get lost or overwhelmed on your site.
   I find your offerings on this page to be particularly impressive from a quantitative standpoint, but by and large, I don’t think they’re particularly useful. You’ll see what I mean as I delve further into the contents of this section. As for the overall organization of this page, I think you’ve done a good job of dividing it between visual goods and written goods. However, looking at this page now, it really does seem to make better sense to have the tutorials here as well, as I am most certain that they are also created “for the visitor” and not for your health. I understand why you might have decided not to have them on the same page, as the page is already so full and you have quite a few tutorials as well, but this may be more of an indication that you may need to prune through your content and decide what’s really worthwhile, rather than place two logically related pages apart from one another. This is why forming a hierarchical content scheme is so valuable. You have the beginnings of this with how you’ve separated your content into “Downloads,” “Makers,” “Pixeled graphics,” etc., but I think you might like to take this a step further to make the content more accessible to your visitors.

   Downloads:

   > For your computer:

   >> Fonts (bitmap and pixel):
   While I have never liked bitmap and pixel based fonts, I really do find this type of content sets you apart from the crowd. I don’t see very many original fonts on personal sites these days. Most people just distribute any freebies they’ve come across. So, for that, I applaud you. I would advise, however, that you be consistent and provide a preview of all of the fonts you offer, rather than just one. You might have to do this manually, but it’s worth it if you want to encourage more people to use the font.

   >> Giffy:
   I’m really curious as to whether your redistribution of the program is well within your rights, as you don’t even provide a disclaimer that lets the user know who is responsible for creating it and whether you do in fact have the rights to redistribute it. The program is probably small enough that it won’t garner much attention, but you should still consult the software agreement and let your users know its demands, well before they’ve downloaded it.

   >> Imagemapic:
   My comments regarding this program are the same as for Giffy. I can see the copyright information in your screen capture, and I can probably assume that so long as you don’t claim the software as your own creation, it’s fine to redistribute it, but your visitors should never have to assume anything about your content, perhaps especially downloads. You should always try to be as transparent as possible.

   >> Unfreez:
   Please refer to my comments on your other software downloads.

   > Graphics:

   >> Emoticons:
   You might want to do something with the large amount of space on this page, especially between the warning and the actual emoticons. Although you seem not to want these emoticons used in ways against your discretion, I don’t think you are explicit enough about your ownership of your work. Sure, it can be annoying when people go overboard with their “me’s” and “mine’s” but it is equally disconcerting when you don’t really go into detail about your ownership yourself. It leaves it open to interpretation whether you made these yourself or got them elsewhere. One last gripe is that the method of preview does not allow us to see the animations of the emoticons. I guess that’s not that important, but it would be nice to see exactly what you’re downloading before you actually do so.

   >> Premade layouts:
   Your “About:” for the layout hangs on a previous line, almost like it’s unnecessary. I also question how “new” this content is. Do you actually keep up to date with this? Other than those small gripes, I really like your offering, and would hope that you will add more in the future.

   > The Sims 2:
   I honestly don’t see why this section has a subcategory since this is the only link in it.
   >> The Sims 2 lots:
   I don’t know much about the Sims personally, except that creating the house was always my favorite part, but this is a pretty cool offering, I suppose. I must say, the light blue headings and borders are a little hard on the eyes because they’re so light. They also seem not to match with the layout, particularly as this page is very long. I’ve already discussed cohesion in your layout though, so I won’t go into that any further.

   Makers:
   “Makers” is such a nondescript title for this section. What are we making? You waste the visitor’s time when you force them to assume things or drive them across the site with curiosity… if they get that far. People tend to scan websites at a glance, and if they don’t recognize things, they’re likely to turn away quickly. Maybe you could rename this “Doll Makers” if you intend to add to it, that is. Otherwise, since only Ellie MuPea is in this section, you could just name it that and have the link be clickable rather than a single subheading.

   >> Ellie MuPea:
   There is such a lack of context for this page that it feels utterly useless. Who is Ellie MuPea? Why should we want to make a doll of her? The page’s set up is not at all conducive to making a doll, as it is quite annoying to have to scroll up and down to fetch the various parts of the doll. Not only that, the limited skin colors of the doll might be a little disheartening for your multicultural visitors, assuming you have very many. You go through the trouble of creating various hair colors, but not skin colors… why? Again, even though you have a little (c) Auberginer in the lower right hand corner of the base, who’s to say that whoever does make a doll here will actually retain that information? Technically they could print screen and crop the image from anywhere on the page. You must be more explicit about your ownership of you work, unless you don’t care about the possibility of theft.

   Pixeled graphics:
   I won’t go through these one by one, as they all feature virtually the same content. I’ve already praised you for your pixels, but I will reiterate here that you are very talented! I am glad you are clearer here about your ownership of the offerings, but I think you can definitely go further. Also, with the last link, “Web material,” what are we to take from the “Sozai” in parenthesis? If this is meant to be a credit to original creators or something, you really need to be more explicit. You wouldn’t want someone to just use your images and write [Lisa] without any indication of who you are, would you? (I don’t mean this rhetorically. All I know is I certainly wouldn’t like that idea.)

   Reads:
   When I see “reads” on a site, I immediately shudder. It usually means rehashed content that’s just taking up space. I don’t think I’m alone with this, but most people don’t want to see something you’ve reproduced from elsewhere. In most cases, people want original content. Let’s see what you’ve got.

   > Articles:
   I will write about the entire section rather than address each article, especially since many of them are related in that they seem to be about your Internet pet peeves. I agree with your points, but I think you could definitely do a better job of presenting them. They read like something you wrote on the fly, in the heat of the moment that you realized that someone didn’t credit you, or that you had to read an apology post for the umpteenth time. I like that you don’t just complain about these things and offer solutions, however. Still, they feel rushed. If I were you, I would go back and revise these things, as there are typos (I don’t mean European spellings) and grammatical errors.

   > Favourite jokes:
   These are the types of reads I dread, things that have obviously been taken from elsewhere. I am curious how many people really read these things. It’s one thing if this were more of an interactive experience, where others could react to the joke or offer their own, but this is simply cutting and pasting from one site to another. Honestly, if it can be found somewhere else, why have it? However amusing, these feel like fodder to make your site look and feel more expansive than it really is. I’m glad you credited where you could, however.

   > Useful:
   How useful are these really? I doubt anyone’s going to come to your site specifically for such a limited list of acronyms and a page full of resources that likely has dozens of broken links. I’m not about to click each of them to see if they open, either. I’ve gotten viruses like that before. This is why I recommend against these types of pages. They’re hard to upkeep, and they typically aren’t used anyway. You may want to consider losing this page in future versions of your site.

   Interactive:
   Your goggles’ link is dead. Pimp my bear (although the name is rather trite) is a very cute little idea. This is the interactive stuff I like to see! It might not be an ongoing contest, but it’s still a wonderful idea. Plugboards are not nearly as useful when they’re several pages deep into the site. The point is for people to see these links, right?

   Tutorials:
   I’m not going to review each tutorial one by one for the simple fact that so much of it seems so superfluous, especially the basic stuff for CSS and HTML. Is it possible your site attracts a younger, more inexperienced audience that would use these? I can’t imagine it being a handful of people. So much of this stuff can be found elsewhere on the Internet. Why not direct them to something that might actually be more useful? I just don’t see the point of having a few of the basics when there are entire sites dedicated to this sort of thing. I think your most useful tutorials are the ones on pixeling. That is clearly your forte, and I would like to see you expand this area rather than having all the other somewhat useless stuff cluttering up the place and taking the attention away from the very thing that makes your site unique.

   The website:
   The placement of objects on this page seems really bizarre and disorganized, not unlike your “About me” page. Consistency is key to making a site feel neat. I think you could also reorganize the content on the inner pages. One big commentary I have is that I wish you had bigger images of your past layouts because they really are beautiful. Other than that, my general comment is to reorganize!

   Final Thoughts:
   It’s probably not a good sign that even though I have had a lot of time away from this review over the months it has taken me to write it, I feel exhausted and relieved that I am finally finished! (But can you blame me? This is 17 pages in MSWord and over 5,000 words!) Don’t think that’s not a bad thing. I clearly don’t review for my health (not directly anyway) or my sanity (again I say to you 17 pages... that you might not even take the time to read), but because I genuinely enjoy doing it (mostly) and I especially want to feel like I can help people by offering my ideas and opinions. (Now you’re probably just like “Don’t I have enough to read already?)
   Getting back to the point, I think your site shows a lot of potential. From a visual standpoint, your site is quite nice, although from a conceptual basis, it could use some work. I think you also need to reconsider the way you organize things, both in regards to where you place things on the page and content-wise. Finally, and perhaps most importantly, is that you ought to think about the content you have—is it really all so necessary? At times your site felt very bogged down with content that you seemed to add just for the hell of it. I think that is partially reflected in my eventual decision not to review every teensy-tiny part of the site. If I were you, I’d incorporate whatever you’re willing to accept in my commentary into a new layout rather than the current, because I have certainly made a lot of suggestions, and it might be difficult to backtrack when you’ve likely become so attached to the layout as is. That’s everything I have for now. I hope my review has proven helpful, and I would appreciate any commentary as to how I could make it better. If you ever need any help or suggestions, feel free to drop me a line, and I will do what I can. Thank you, and good luck with your site!

   Using Firefox on Windows | Report This?

   Lisa's Response:

   Thank you for the review, Asia.

   I really like how you've put so much thought in the review. I have no knowledge about many things you mentioned (eg. Lucida Sans being designed for Mac and the info about the Victorian style). I certainly have a lot to improve and work on.

   Whenever in doubt, I'll go back to this review and absorb all the tips and advice you've given. I appreciate it.

7. 

   Vera gave it on 6th Oct 2009 and said:

   I've been meaning to review your site for quite a while now, but since I'm so utterly lazy I always found something to procrastinate with. No more of that now.

   = First impression =
   ----------------------------------------------
   WOW... that's VERY NICE. OK, so technically this is more like my 10th impression of the site, but I clearly remember what I thought upon first seeing it (see the previous sentence).

   = Presentation =
   ----------------------------------------------
   As a rule, I am not particularly fond of pixel art. Sure there are a few icons that are really awesome, but most of the "artwork" I saw was just rather... meh. Your header image though... it's just WOW. If all pixel art were like that I can definitely see myself starting to like it. Thankfully, I'm too lazy to take up a new obsession (I do have enough as it is). AHEM... but back to you.

   I also like the general feel of the layout. On the one had, the various details like the half circles and the decorative lines on the bottom of boxes make me think of the baroque architecture (or is that rococo? didn't pay THAT much attention in history classes :P). This type of architecture always spelled "crammed" and "filled with bells and whistles" to me. While I like looking at such things via a sweeping glance, I don't really like them as a permanent visual aide. Most surprisingly, however your design is very "airy". And by that I mean that there is a lot of "breathing space" for my eyes to rest. That's an extremely well done job.

   I see you're part of the QBee. No wonder, with such a talent, it'd be a waste. :)

   Upon a closer look, I do notice a few details that could be improved upon. Nothing serious though, however I'm a pathological nitpicker. *insert manic cackle* So... starting from the top:
   1) the two small brown boxes need a bit more padding inside them; they seem somewhat cramped to me. Either try to shorten the text, or make the boxes a bit larger.
   2) the white arrows on either site of the twitter/updates box are not very visible. On the one hand they're too close to the light blue background. On the other hand, it took me a bit to realize that they are back and forward arrows. They don't really look like some. Make the left (respectively right) edges a bit pointer: i.e. not so rounded.
   3) the larger footer on the bottom needs a larger top and bottom padding. Also, I'd 'bring' the affiliates columns closer to one another. You could use a multicolumn list (instead of the table - yuck!) and specify a right margin for the li tags.
   4) the bottom-most footer is too cramped. I can barely read the text there. Add more top and bottom padding.

   The following is more of a personal preference, really: the number of posts on the home page.
   First of all, if you chose to have one single post here, then don't "cut it off" and display it in its entirety.
   Second of all, why display only one post on the home page. Let people get the feel of your posts. I'd suggest having at least three, with the first post shown in its entirety, while for the other two only the summary. Alternately, display a larger number of recent posts in your footer.
   I'm glad to see that the pagination and the archives have more than one post per page. Well done! :)

   All in all, I really really like your design. I'm a huge fan of "chopped up backgrounds" (i.e. beige, then blue, then stripes, then beige again). The issues I pointed out are mainly small details which don't take away from the appeal of the design.

   = Content =
   ----------------------------------------------
   I'm a huge content-nazi. After all, that's what makes me come back for more. So let's see if your content is just as good as your design... if not better. :)

   -Home-
   The welcome message, that is to say the short description of your site (on the top) sounds somewhat weird to me. I'm not entirely sure about the use of "whose" in this case. I'm not so good at English literature that you could quote me, but it feels as if you're personifying the site. If that was your intention, then it's fine. Although it would be nice if you told us why.
   If not, I'd suggest you rephrase the phrase as follows:

   Auberginer - a slightly odd, but sweet website that aims to entertain and teach something to both the visitor and the owner.

   What exactly is a pianician? You call yourself one in the introduction. I can't seem to find this word on Webster. Or would that be a pianist (a person who plays the piano)? Also, don't use "and" more than once in the same enumeration. So instead of "an interest for webdesign and needles and thread" have "an interest for webdesign, needles and thread".
   Also, why the apple? I'd have personally chosen either a "fancier" question mark, or a framed mirror (to be in theme with the design). Oh well, this is really an insignificant detail.

   Oooh pancakes! The same way my mom makes me them! Nom nom! I can only make the fluffy American-style ones -_-;

   - About Me-
   Switch the self description with the list on the top. Normally, I'm all for having a brief list about yourself on the top, but these things seem rather insignificant compared to what you say in your short blurb. So put the more relevant stuff on the top.
   People who read English texts, are used to reading them from left to right. For that reason, put the content of the current page on the left, and the links on the right. People will be tempted to read the contents of the linked subpages, before having finished the content of the current page.

   Why DIY portfolio? DIY is short for "do it yourself". This displays your artistic work, and doesn't offer guidelines (or a ready-made kit for others) on how to make a portfolio. In conclusion, just portfolio is fine.
   Your drawings are very good! I especially like the way you draw the faces in those portraits (middle row). Your handmade stuff however, is absolutely adorable. If it were for sale, I'd seriously consider buying some. *drools*
   On the top of this page, the text "drawing and sewing" is linked, but it takes me to the homepage. I'm assuming this is due to it being a redirected 404 page? Fix this.

   "In Lisa's world" is a really interesting text. I can see why you made it into a page, rather than a post.

   Oooh, you joined Jem's fanlisting :D (I'm only that happy because it's managed by me :P).

   What's with the link on the bottom: "I am the Klaus Heissler of the WWW"? It seems to be a fanlisting as well? So why isn't it on the fanlistings' page?

   -For you-
   Out of principle, I dislike having sections named "for you". Since you published the site online, it means that all content is meant to be seen by "us" (i.e. the visitors). Call it goodies, articles, interactive, resources... but not "for you".

   I'm assuming you're not the one who programmed Giffy, right? Shouldn't you mention this here and credit the author (namely Yuri Margolin)? Yes, that was a rhetorical question. Same for Imagemapic and Unfreez.
   I don't get it! Why do you offer stuff that others made, when there's so much that YOU made. Quality over quantity, you know.

   *is momentarily distracted by emoticons... drools*

   Your premade layout looks very well. I can't believe you made it in Ms Paint! :O
   Incidentally, use the code tag to display code, not the pre tag. The latter is used to display pre-formatted text.

   The Elle MuPea doll is hilarious :)

   Yes, I'm sure you made your layout, but there's no way you managed to create your whole website all by yourself! Who hosts you, who gave you inspiration, whose tutorials did you read and who provided you with those beautiful fonts.

   Technically, if you paid for you host/font/web development software, you're not required to link to them as well. OK, so depending on the terms of the contract. If you visit the website of a company (be that a webdesign company), do you see a credits page there?

   What you set out to discuss is well done, however the introduction is wrong. You're referring here to personal/graphics sites who use a lot of free soft/images/etc. You say that giving credit, is akin to paying. Ergo, if we follow your logic, if one actually gives the creator money, shouldn't that equal credit?

   Adding a comment followed by continuous empty space, is not very pleasant to read (or picture).

   Au contraire, I'm always very much amused by these things. I'm almost tempted to pat the owned on the head for them... but then I just roll my eyes. :P
   It's "back off" not "buck off" ;)
   You "threaten people" not "threat people". You as in... the person the article refers to (not you Lisa :P).

   While I did enjoy the jokes, I did remember having received most of these via e-mail forwards. Just like you. What makes you think that others didn't?

   -Tutorials-
   Man... you have a lot of these.

   In the blockquote tutorial, you should also explain what blockquote.quote means. That is to say, you assign a class to the blockquote tag (in which case you also need to specify said class in HTML). Those who know enough CSS to know about classes, won't need your tutorial. Those who don't, will find that your tutorial won't work for them in its entirety.

   CSS comments are multiline ones. So instead of showing two examples with different content, but both on one lines, have one of the comments span over more than one line.

   In the tutorial about specifying images for the list style, the last paragraph sounds as if you were trying to explain some occult magic to your visitors. Just tell them, that you will assign an id (or a class) to your list. Incidentally, why are you assigning an id to your list as opposed to a class? A well written code (be it C,PHP or CSS) should be reusable.

   It's called a "Semantic CSS layout", not a "Div Layout".

   In the article "Transparency using your browser", I'm assuming that not ANY kind of image can be made transparent. What if I upload an image with a lot of colorful shapes, and expect to have only one of these shown?

   I didn't read all your tutorials, just randomly opened some. The general idea I get is that most of the time you seem to know what you're doing. Unfortunately, you don't EXPLAIN very well what you're doing. You seem to assume that people are familiar with a lot of coding theory, and thus you leave out critical information. It is perfectly fine, not to explain every single details about CSS, and assume that the visitor know his/her stuff. But then don't start treating the visitor like a n00b, halfway through. In other words, reread your tutorials and use the technical terms where they need to be used.

   - The website -
   Oh I remember having seen version 6 and having liked it a lot.

   All in all, you have a lot of good quality content, but you mix it with a lot of mediocre and filler content.
   Your strengths are graphics making, so focus on that. Don't mix these with e-mail forwards and half-heartedly written tutorials.

   Your css layout tutorial is good, but it needs more explanation. Those who are advanced enough to understand it in its entirety, don't need it, and those who DO need it, may find some stuff confusing. It's perfectly fine to explain things "your way". However, you should make sure that the visitor understands the tutorial well enough to be able to deviate from it.
   If you just dump some code, with minimal explanation, then the visitor will not know if said part is mandatory, or can have small changes done to.

   = Coding =
   --------------------------------------
   I don't validate. You can do that on your own. My interests lie with the how semantic, logical and elegant the coding is.

   Nicely indented, and using a correct skeleton. Quick look at the head section reveals a rather large number of JavaScript file inclusions. I'm glad that most of it is in external files, though. For better loading time, you should try to include these only on the pages where necessary. I have high speed broadband connect, and yet I noticed a significant lag on pages which merely had some lists in them. This is also due to the unnecessary JavaScript calls. For example, if you don't use the lightbox script on most pages, you could put it inside a php condition.

   eg:
   
<?php if(is_page(id) || is_page(id2) || ... ): ?>
<script type="text/javascript" src="myfile.js"> </script>
<?php endif; ?>


   You should use lists for navigation, instead of divs. Tutorialtastic has two articles on how to code this.
   Your CSS is very well done. Indented and logical. Good job!

   Score: 3.5/5

   You have a gorgeous layout, and a lot of high quality content. Unfortunately you still fill the need to add filler content.
   I get the impression that you added some content because you felt it was needed. If you don't feel like doing a thorough job, then don't add it.

   I would've given you 5 stars if all you had had were your graphics (aside the site and about me sections, of course). Some of your tutorials are started well, same for your articles. Unfortunately, you're not very consistent and just rush through them halfway. Either prune the things you don't feel like doing well, or redo them. I'm referring to the tutorials here.

   Using Firefox on Windows | Report This?

   Lisa's Response:

   Thank you for the long review, Vera! It's not often someone takes the time to write something with so much thought put in.

   You're the very first person to notice the "pianician". Unfortunately, I have no "worthy" explanation of why I wrote that instead of "pianist". I had a thing with "eatable" (edible), so it sort of hopped over to a few other things.. anyway, I think I might have to change that.

   I will try the PHP condition-thingy you mentioned. I had no idea I had so many JavaScript files!

   If you've already bought something, then you don't have the need to link back. I'm thinking about smaller things, such as a free premade layout, an avatar and the like. I wrote the article because I felt the need to rant about the whole "Thank you Google for my gorgeous layout!", as if Google was the one who spent numerous hours on creating the layout.

   Thank you for pointing out my errors. I appreciate it!

8. 

   breadtoast gave it on 4th Oct 2009 and said:

   I'm not really a good reviewer,so bear with me when i say some things that to you,aren't clear.FYI,I'm Dorine :P

   First Impression
   The image on the top left is very neat and nice.I love it.Did you make it?The colors matches well and i had a feeling that I'm going to rate you at least 4/5 in the end.

   Site Name
   Don't mind me,but i had read the part in your domain page about the word Auberginer.After reading it,i realized that it was definitely a good name.Like you,i like one word site-name but i can't seem to find one that is nice!Impressive,I call that.

   Coding and Validation
   Well done!Based on validator.w3.org you actually passed!No errors.I call that good going.

   Layout
   I like the background image of the upper part of your website.I can't explain it fully but i do hope you understand it.For your navigation words,it would be nicer if it was bold instead of italic.It's very nice on how you arrange your posts but please change the link of Word press.Com to Word press.Org.

   Content
   Here I'm going to speak about your content.
   About Me
   To be honest,nothing is wrong in this section because you actually speak and type proper English.It is great to see that you actually place some things about you.Eg.things that you like,that you like to eat,and sowhatever.And actually,the part about you(not your 'Hi,I'm Lisa' section but your 'Cartoon
   Characters' section) should be exchanged with the 'Hi,I'm Lisa' section.Other than that,it's perfect.It's great that you provide an ask and answer page but shouldn't it be put on the domain page?
   For You
   Here i guess i'm going to write a little bit longer because visitors mostly visit because of your goodies :P

   My favorite part of this page is your articles.By reading the title but not the article,i laughed till my stomach ached.Your visitors section have a variety of things so i think many people will download it from you.I saw your pre-made layouts and even though there is only one it is designed nicely and not like most people,they put in pictures for demo and you gave a site for demonstration.I also loved the adoptables,especially the eggs,but there was none at the moment so,i could not adopt them!You should kind of make five at a time.Many people like resource links so i hope people are grateful to you for collecting those sites for them and they do not have to search Google!Other than the adoptables,I could not find any obvious or really bad mistakes.Again,i call that good going!
   Tutorials
   My first sentence is : I thought tutorials were part of the visitors section?

   Even though the tutorials' page had too many tutorials in it and may not fit in the visitors page,don't you have to at least link it to each other?Many sites that i visit they put their tutorials in a page,but do not display it at their navigations.Instead,they link it to the visitors' page.Talking about it,it is quite good that you offer tutorials' request.
   The Website
   My first comment?Good that you credit people.I hate people who doesn't credits because every artist likes to have their work credited when used by others.Who doesn't?Many people likes having a good host,so mind you are good to your hostees too!And before i forget again,I wanted to tell you that the image 'Updated' wasn't very clear.Could you change it,please?Other than those things,i hope you can add in a section where you write your history of blogging.Or your experiences,too.I look forward to reading your history,because i love books.

   Overall
   On top of everything,I realized that i have a very good impression on your website after all that reviewing.Just change all those things and maybe i'll change my rating to 5/5!

   UPDATED 04 Oct 09:
   [EDIT]
   I agree that tutorials are a part of the visitors' section, but I think placing a link to the tutorials on the 'For you' index is quite useless and a waste of time (for people who only came for the tutorials, for instance). That's my reason for separating the two sections: Easy and quick access.

   Well,I suppose i have to remove what I said but what a pity i could not edit the review.Anyway,welcome for the 'About Me' idea.And,you needn't improve your story-telling skills.Because you just have to write about the history.You can write something like this :

   September 2009
   It was horrifying to quit blogging....................and so on and so for,you continue your self.
   October 2009
   So i came back to blogging and became famous :P .........your turn to continue.
   
   You just write the month and about the month.A short description would do!And welcome for the review,i was just bored.Plus,for the updated thing,it's hard to read because of it's font and font color.By the way,i love your site!I go there everyday except one month cause i forget the link :P
   [/edit]

   Using Firefox on Windows | Report This?

   Lisa's Response:

   Yes, I did make the header image. I was using a picture of myself as reference which I hope made the end result look somewhat like me (which was intended, too).

   Do you mean on the index page for 'About me'? If so, I think I see what you mean. I never thought of switching the places, so kudos for giving me the idea.

   I have to disagree with removing the 'Tutorials' link from the navigation. Why the need to have to go on an other page to get to that section?
   I agree that tutorials are a part of the visitors' section, but I think placing a link to the tutorials on the 'For you' index is quite useless and a waste of time (for people who only came for the tutorials, for instance). That's my reason for separating the two sections: Easy and quick access.
   I think I might have rename 'For you' to 'Graphics' or something. Hm... You got me thinking now.

   I wanted to tell you that the image 'Updated' wasn't very clear

   I don't quite understand. Do you mean that it's hard to read, or that it's placed oddly? I can change the image if it's because you can't read the text.
   (To tell you secret: I've been working on writing an article about my "history" in the online community, but I have to improve my story-telling skills first, he-he.)

   Thank you for the review, Dorine.

Write Your Own Review

Leave your feedback for Eple.co.cc below, and remember - the longer your review, the more points you receive. Don't forget to look at things like style/design, content, coding and originality as they will all help to improve the quality of your review.

You have to be logged in to write a review.

Site copyright © 2008—10 Jem Turner. Designed by Jacky Gilbertson © 2008.
About ⋅ Terms of Use ⋅ Site Map ⋅ Help ⋅ Contact ⋅ Points Charter