Vote for 2010 Website of the Year

[William Warner]

OK folks...

It's time to vote on one of the finalists for 2010 website of the year.

Congratulations to all the finalists! The websites are all winners!

[rsmith24]

You should make these sticky if you can so they don't get buried.

[rsmith24]

http://BCWarner.com This is the only full screen website to pick from. I am sure many potential clients have wide screen displays and the sites with the little strip of information down the middle look ridiculous and unprofessional. That just my opinion am I'm entitled to it.

[Roy D. Cooke, Sr]

I have enjoyed being on the awards committee and we sure have a great group .
I think many NACHI members do not know how active this group is .
Thanks to all big time it has been most enjoyable .... Roy

[Brian E. Kelly]

nice sites

[Dominic J. Maricic]

Originally Posted by rsmith24

http://BCWarner.com This is the only full screen website to pick from. I am sure many potential clients have wide screen displays and the sites with the little strip of information down the middle look ridiculous and unprofessional. That just my opinion am I'm entitled to it.

The average user has a 1024x768 resolution computer which is what the w3c (web consortium) recommends building sites for. Auto adjusting is fine too but will usually have less structure as it requires repeating images. You'll see this if you check out Google Analytics for your site (also listed on many sites online).

You'll notice some of the biggest sites on the net such as http://www.msn.com/ http://www.facebook.com/ and http://www.cnn.com/ do not go full width. This is in part because on large screens the sites start to look like a person looking through a set of blinds.

[Bob Elliott]

Originally Posted by rsmith24

http://BCWarner.com This is the only full screen website to pick from. I am sure many potential clients have wide screen displays and the sites with the little strip of information down the middle look ridiculous and unprofessional. That just my opinion am I'm entitled to it.

You are entitled to it but you would be wrong.
Many clients use cell phones .
By the way that full time logo looks cool.

[Bob Elliott]

Originally Posted by dmaricic

The average user has a 1024x768 resolution computer which is what the w3c (web consortium) recommends building sites for. Auto adjusting is fine too but will usually have less structure as it requires repeating images. You'll see this if you check out Google Analytics for your site (also listed on many sites online).

You'll notice some of the biggest sites on the net such as http://www.msn.com/ http://www.facebook.com/ and http://www.cnn.com/ do not go full width. This is in part because on large screens the sites start to look like a person looking through a set of blinds.

Dominic you have arguably the best Hosting in the industry but do your large templates adjust?
Some are full screen and some are middle strips.
How does one know which is best?

[Dominic J. Maricic]

There is no 'best' there's personal preference and a difference based on application. I listed some of the top 5 sites on the internet above, none of which are full screen. Those were the first 3 I looked at, I'm sure most of the rest are the same (add http://www.yahoo.com to the list). We have a dozen more templates in the works, some will auto adjust to full screen, some will be fixed width. Right now I think we have 5 or 6 that auto adjust.

You'll notice sites like mine and InterNACHI's auto adjust in large part because of the message boards. You'll also notice there's a patter at the top of the site rather than a fixed image (which is what some people want).

[Bob Elliott]

Originally Posted by dmaricic

There is no 'best' there's personal preference and a difference based on application. I listed some of the top 5 sites on the internet above, none of which are full screen. Those were the first 3 I looked at, I'm sure most of the rest are the same (add http://www.yahoo.com to the list). We have a dozen more templates in the works, some will auto adjust to full screen, some will be fixed width. Right now I think we have 5 or 6 that auto adjust.

You'll notice sites like mine and InterNACHI's auto adjust in large part because of the message boards. You'll also notice there's a patter at the top of the site rather than a fixed image (which is what some people want).

You are right that we all have personal preference.
Judging has two criteria.
SEO meaning it is created with keywords and tags designed to help search engines feast on them.
The above are combined with good load speed,fresh content,links and of course a volume of text balanced with nothing that would water down desired Key search.
Second criteria would be the personal preference part of judging and in a sense arguably more important once you are in the top half of Googles first page.
They clicked but what makes them take the effort to pick up the phone.

[rsmith24]

Originally Posted by dmaricic

The average user has a 1024x768 resolution computer which is what the w3c (web consortium) recommends building sites for. Auto adjusting is fine too but will usually have less structure as it requires repeating images. You'll see this if you check out Google Analytics for your site (also listed on many sites online).

You'll notice some of the biggest sites on the net such as http://www.msn.com/ http://www.facebook.com/ and http://www.cnn.com/ do not go full width. This is in part because on large screens the sites start to look like a person looking through a set of blinds.

None of the sites you listed have the small strip down the middle as the fore mentioned sites do. While they are not completely full screen they at least utilize most or more of the screen. I wasn't criticizing your work or talents. I was simple giving my opinion.

[rsmith24]

Originally Posted by dmaricic

There is no 'best' there's personal preference and a difference based on application. I listed some of the top 5 sites on the internet above, none of which are full screen. Those were the first 3 I looked at, I'm sure most of the rest are the same (add http://www.yahoo.com to the list). We have a dozen more templates in the works, some will auto adjust to full screen, some will be fixed width. Right now I think we have 5 or 6 that auto adjust.

You'll notice sites like mine and InterNACHI's auto adjust in large part because of the message boards. You'll also notice there's a patter at the top of the site rather than a fixed image (which is what some people want).

Your response to my post sounded like you completely disagreed with me and even gave examples about the screen widths to prove me wrong (even though your examples didn't have a little strip down the middle). And now for Condo's reply you sound like you somewhat agree. And go as far to say you are even making new templates about the issue.

[rsmith24]

Originally Posted by belliott

By the way that full time logo looks cool.

You or who ever is more then welcome to use it. If you were serious.

[Dominic J. Maricic]

Originally Posted by rsmith24

Your response to my post sounded like you completely disagreed with me and even gave examples about the screen widths to prove me wrong (even though your examples didn't have a little strip down the middle). And now for Condo's reply you sound like you somewhat agree. And go as far to say you are even making new templates about the issue.

I'm saying there's nothing wrong with fixed width or full screen if done right and am pointing out well done examples. People can deferentially overload columns and make items too narrow as well.

[Bob Elliott]

I actually meant that a middle strip (small might be better for a cell phone)
I was asking Dom if his large templates self adjust .