Calling out Overclockers!

[Jakeee]

I dunno - one of the reasons I tend to shop with OcUK is that the design is very simple to get to exactly what I want with the minimum amount of visual "noise" and minimal navigation.

Some of you guys might do a more "professional" job on the site I'm sure but it would end up exactly like every other ecommerce site that I hate where you have to look about 3 times to find what you need to click on to go where you want next.

The odd attention to detail aside not much wrong with the site really.

We all rather the older, "simper" layout or an updated prettier one Not something in-between.

At the moment there is too much going on with too much colour. I know I'm critical but I always have been when it comes to web design, certain standards have not been followed, and its been playing on me

 

[mufcmark]

I prefer the layout of ******s website. I don't like scans as it seems like there is too much on the screen.

I think the the overclockers website doesn't look professional enough.

 

[simisker]

Just to play devil's advocate - hey, it's fun* - here's a hypothesis to mull over:

What if they've already tested a cleaner, more 'designed' layout, with many of the features mentioned in this thread... and found that it didn't perform as well as the current site layout?

Maybe this layout converts visitors into sales better than anything else, no matter how aesthetically dodgy it appears. Wouldn't that make the current layout the best design to solve the primary problem of conversion?

Taking my advocate hat off again, I should point out that the OcUK powers-that-be have consistently demonstrated a lack of appreciation of the value of good design, so this seems spectacularly unlikely. I just wanted to point out that design isn't about creating attractive solutions, it's about creating effective solutions.






* The DLC is costing me a fortune, however.

 

[Jakeee]

Just to play devil's advocate - hey, it's fun* - here's a hypothesis to mull over:

What if they've already tested a cleaner, more 'designed' layout, with many of the features mentioned in this thread... and found that it didn't perform as well as the current site layout?

Maybe this layout converts visitors into sales better than anything else, no matter how aesthetically dodgy it appears. Wouldn't that make the current layout the best design to solve the primary problem of conversion?

Taking my advocate hat off again, I should point out that the OcUK powers-that-be have consistently demonstrated a lack of appreciation of the value of good design, so this seems spectacularly unlikely. I just wanted to point out that design isn't about creating attractive solutions, it's about creating effective solutions.

* The DLC is costing me a fortune, however.

Have you checked the website, the last few months it has slowly changed, I wasn't moaning about the effectiveness (Even though I think it could be a little better when it comes to usability) It was the colour and different panel styles that have been added recently.

A few little tweaks to the design would go a long way.

 

[ng93]

I don't like scans as it seems like there is too much on the screen.

agreed but they do have a very good search bar, makes browsing so much quicker

 

[atmax1]

I think it should work basicly the same, just sort out the design and spaceing..

and yeh s**n is a pain in the ass lol why I do get from overclockers even if i do find some things cheaper else where.

 

[VaderDSL]

Personally I like the layout on OcUK, I HATE the way other sites have those stupid drop down tick boxes, it's all so cluttered.

With OcuK, menu down the left, and there you are.

 

[mufcmark]

The search bar on ******* is very useful when looking for items. Maybe Ocuk should try to implement a similar system.

 

[unwashed potato!]

i don't see what's wrong with the site. they've obviously not gone for super clean but i don't think it's messy at all. i also like the blue headers, ok they could have been done with css but for the sake of speed images are quicker and easier to update later as say they wan a gradient, they just change the one image, custom fonts etc.

 

[Mattus]

i also like the blue headers, ok they could have been done with css but for the sake of speed images are quicker and easier to update later as say they wan a gradient, they just change the one image, custom fonts etc.

Spending five minutes knocking up a bit of CSS, or looking like you're a top computer retailer that doesn't know the difference between a JPEG and a PNG? I know which I'd prefer.

 

[fez]

i don't see what's wrong with the site. they've obviously not gone for super clean but i don't think it's messy at all. i also like the blue headers, ok they could have been done with css but for the sake of speed images are quicker and easier to update later as say they wan a gradient, they just change the one image, custom fonts etc.

No, images are easier to update if they dont have text layers. Also, in what world are images quicker to load than css. In what world are background gradients quicker to create that css3 gradients. If you have no clue about web development, its usually best to keep quiet

 

[pieplough]

The average visitor wouldn't notice I would imagine. But the use of images in the Bundles/Systems/Portables is quite lazy.

And whoever said that images are easier to update has got to be taking the ****

 

[unwashed potato!]

If you have no clue about web development, its usually best to keep quiet

if you have no clue then it's best you keep quite. ocuk are a business with a million and one jobs to do. images will be far quicker for them to update then css as they will have a longer process for something to be changed then a single guy running his own site.

images ARE quicker to update and that's simple enough to prove. ok if you only ever want to change from blue to red background css is quicker, but ocuk may not know what they want in the future, so say they want a background which has stripes in it, if they'd been using css then they'd have to change it to images which will take a lot longer, then say you want to go back to a green background, you've got to change it back to css again, where as using images the whole time means you can have absolutely anything you want in the spot. what if they want a custom font, by using images they know every visitor will see it exactly how they want it as well, where as if they use html and css then they've also got to play around make sure it looks correct in all browsers.

i know that if ocuk asked me right now to update the header bar, it'd take me a few seconds to get the image and it's location, a few minutes at most to update the image, then 1 second update the file and done. if they were using css i'd have a much bigger job then that as i don't know what css rule is effecting what part of the website etc. is .headerBar only effecting the latest products header? what if i only want to change that to red but keep all others using that class as blue etc. i wouldn't know if i had to quickly update that file which i bet happens at ocuk. they wont have their top programmers changing header backgrounds

 

[Hatter The Mad]

It has always been my opinion that OcUK have wrongly put the development of their website at such a low priority compared to the rest of the business.

They are missing out on so much opportunity and having their asses kicked by competitors when it comes to search engine optimisation for long-tail product searches, and the like.

 

[Xinn]

I must say I haven't been on the shop homepage for a while but I checked it just now after seeing this thread and "WTF" was the first thing that came into my head.

Lots of noticeable image compression, squashed images, non matching colour scheme, boxes not aligned, way too much white space. It looked much better before they started messing with it.

Not that I could do any better, I couldn't but right now it's starting to look rather amaturish if that's even a word.

 

[unwashed potato!]

maybe they should have a look at amazon for ideas nice clean design not using images for borders and headers

 

[fez]

if you have no clue then it's best you keep quite. ocuk are a business with a million and one jobs to do. images will be far quicker for them to update then css as they will have a longer process for something to be changed then a single guy running his own site.

images ARE quicker to update and that's simple enough to prove. ok if you only ever want to change from blue to red background css is quicker, but ocuk may not know what they want in the future, so say they want a background which has stripes in it, if they'd been using css then they'd have to change it to images which will take a lot longer, then say you want to go back to a green background, you've got to change it back to css again, where as using images the whole time means you can have absolutely anything you want in the spot. what if they want a custom font, by using images they know every visitor will see it exactly how they want it as well, where as if they use html and css then they've also got to play around make sure it looks correct in all browsers.

i know that if ocuk asked me right now to update the header bar, it'd take me a few seconds to get the image and it's location, a few minutes at most to update the image, then 1 second update the file and done. if they were using css i'd have a much bigger job then that as i don't know what css rule is effecting what part of the website etc. is .headerBar only effecting the latest products header? what if i only want to change that to red but keep all others using that class as blue etc. i wouldn't know if i had to quickly update that file which i bet happens at ocuk. they wont have their top programmers changing header backgrounds

You might have to run that by me again, the background image is set in the css so if you update that image, like a css style update, it will apply that new image to ALL of the other elements with that class unless overridden.

Am I not understanding how css works or something? If you have a style in a class, be it an image or gradient, it will apply it to all elements with that class, it doesnt turn round and say "oh, thats a background image, ill have a little think whether updating this will update all elements of my class".

So lets just get this right.

You would, find the psd for that image
Open it in photoshop
Edit the text layer
Save it as a png
Upload it to the web into the correct directory after ftping onto it

And that would be quicker than editing a html template or changing the text in the CMS?

If they decided that stripey is a good look then it wouldnt take very long to knock up a stripey background compared to uhh knocking up a stripey background.

Open PS, create canvas, create stripes, save and upload, change css.

Or

Open PS, create canvas, create stripes, save and upload.

You wouldn't have to change more than one line in the css to add the image which again would take no time at all.

What loads faster as well, css styles or images? As someone has said, chances are, they way amazon creates its website is probably a little better than ocuk.

Edit. Thats you that is suggesting the ocuk look at amazon not using images as the way forward and yet have just argued that using images is best practice. Amazon uses images where they have to, not as a matter of course.

 

[unwashed potato!]

jees someone got out of the wrong side of bed or something.

yes it would be quicker. my mum could update ocuk header background as it is, as all you'd have to do is this.

Open it in photoshop
Edit the text layer
Save it as a png
Upload it to the web into the correct directory after ftping onto it

this would allow for absolutely anything to be put there by someone with very little knowledge of web design. you could get someone at ocuk who just builds computers all day to update the site rather then pay their top programmers to do it which itself is a big bonus for ocuk as small jobs can easily, quickly be done by cheaper staff.

now to update the headers for say the latest products box. say i wanted to change it to say LATEST DEALS AND PRODUCTS. you simply open this image , edit it, upload and done.

doing that if it's using only css and html. this would require someone going around the complicated structure that will be the shopping cart that ocuk use. i used opencart which is a very easy to navigate cart and still there is more to change then just simple opening index file and updating the text that says latest products. i'm sure whatever ocuk use will be worse for navigating. this no doubt would take a lot longer for people who don't know what they are doing to update.

i'm sure if someone from ocuk came on here they'd agree roughly with what i've been saying. for ocuk it will be cheaper and far quicker for them to update the header as an image then if it was made with html and css.

say ocuk wanted to change the background from dark red to black, have a custom font, and change the text to something new. from what i roughly remember now from opencart on how to do this you first need to navigate the folders to find the theme folder. find the one which has the header for the latest products box, find the div for the header in amongst the rest of the code which can get a tad messy for first few times going through opencart. find what the variable is as it uses separate language folders. navigate through the language folders to find the correct file. update the variable with the latest text.

then go back to the first file to find the class for the header. find the style page which that class is in. update the class. check it looks the same on all browsers and hasn't some reason messed around.

then install a custom font which i don't know how to do tbh but i know it's longer then using images which is why many companies use image for custom fonts. check all browses can read new font (which afaik all wont be able to). settle that some users will see different font but now check those browsers to make sure the font they see works with new styling.

 

[Mattus]

this would allow for absolutely anything to be put there by someone with very little knowledge of web design. you could get someone at ocuk who just builds computers all day to update the site rather then pay their top programmers to do it which itself is a big bonus for ocuk as small jobs can easily, quickly be done by cheaper staff

Top programmers? I wouldn't say that using CSS/HTML to create a blue box and put some white text in it is a job which demands a web development guru - whichever e-commerce package they use! And if you don't have a reasonable knowledge of CSS, you shouldn't really be allowed anywhere near the front page of a large retail website.

And on that note - does it really matter if it costs them a few quid extra to do it properly? This is the front page of the site. Everybody who considers buying something from OcUK will see it. First impressions are important. If I see poor attention to detail on the website, I will assume (rightly or wrongly) that similarly poor attention to detail will be applied to my order. If that order is a £2000 custom build with lots of potential to go wrong, I might take that order elsewhere.

Finally, as I've said, the main issue is that the text has been saved as a JPEG rather than a PNG. It wouldn't have taken any longer to do that right - it's just a bit sloppy.

 

[fez]

jees someone got out of the wrong side of bed or something.

yes it would be quicker. my mum could update ocuk header background as it is, as all you'd have to do is this.



this would allow for absolutely anything to be put there by someone with very little knowledge of web design. you could get someone at ocuk who just builds computers all day to update the site rather then pay their top programmers to do it which itself is a big bonus for ocuk as small jobs can easily, quickly be done by cheaper staff.

now to update the headers for say the latest products box. say i wanted to change it to say LATEST DEALS AND PRODUCTS. you simply open this image , edit it, upload and done.

doing that if it's using only css and html. this would require someone going around the complicated structure that will be the shopping cart that ocuk use. i used opencart which is a very easy to navigate cart and still there is more to change then just simple opening index file and updating the text that says latest products. i'm sure whatever ocuk use will be worse for navigating. this no doubt would take a lot longer for people who don't know what they are doing to update.

i'm sure if someone from ocuk came on here they'd agree roughly with what i've been saying. for ocuk it will be cheaper and far quicker for them to update the header as an image then if it was made with html and css.

say ocuk wanted to change the background from dark red to black, have a custom font, and change the text to something new. from what i roughly remember now from opencart on how to do this you first need to navigate the folders to find the theme folder. find the one which has the header for the latest products box, find the div for the header in amongst the rest of the code which can get a tad messy for first few times going through opencart. find what the variable is as it uses separate language folders. navigate through the language folders to find the correct file. update the variable with the latest text.

then go back to the first file to find the class for the header. find the style page which that class is in. update the class. check it looks the same on all browsers and hasn't some reason messed around.

then install a custom font which i don't know how to do tbh but i know it's longer then using images which is why many companies use image for custom fonts. check all browses can read new font (which afaik all wont be able to). settle that some users will see different font but now check those browsers to make sure the font they see works with new styling.

I may well be a little grumpy today but I wasn't trying to be mean just to clear that up.

To argue that its cheaper is fair enough, but a company of OCUKs size shouldn't be cutting corners with something like this. And to make the image such poor quality is pretty bad. Either or our methods work fine but I would wager that the vast majority of web developers would rather use css and do things properly.