Comments on: Disappointing relaunch of The British Monarchy website http://www.939design.com/blog/index.php/2009/02/12/disapointing-relaunch-of-the-british-monarchy-website/ Thoughts about graphic and web design among other things! Wed, 08 Feb 2012 13:05:48 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.2 By: DIY Dave http://www.939design.com/blog/index.php/2009/02/12/disapointing-relaunch-of-the-british-monarchy-website/#comment-2454 DIY Dave Tue, 05 May 2009 09:46:45 +0000 http://www.939design.com/blog/?p=262#comment-2454 Site seems ok visually. @'Fred Campbell' You seem to have a problem with the royal family. The Queen is a dignified lady who represents the country well. Not like the scum MPs. Site seems ok visually.

@’Fred Campbell’
You seem to have a problem with the royal family. The Queen is a dignified lady who represents the country well. Not like the scum MPs.

]]> By: Fred Campbell http://www.939design.com/blog/index.php/2009/02/12/disapointing-relaunch-of-the-british-monarchy-website/#comment-1765 Fred Campbell Fri, 13 Feb 2009 10:45:45 +0000 http://www.939design.com/blog/?p=262#comment-1765 [Quote from the Governments website, Direct Gov:] New features "The new British Monarchy website has a more user-friendly and accessible design. It also utilises a number of new technological features, such as: * integration of Google maps with the Royal Diary of Engagements to track royal movements * a password protected Media Centre * integration with the Royal Channel on YouTube * a new personnel module to allow job applicants to apply online * a new search function [Come on, Google maps, password protection, YouTube, and search facility are totally basic. And it's not accessible, by any standards.] "A star-studded reception was held in the Blue Drawing Room at Buckingham Palace to mark the launch of the new British Monarchy website. The Queen was joined by Sir Tim Berners-Lee OM, KBE, inventor of the World Wide Web, the Minister for Digital Engagement, Mr Tom Watson MP, and a cross-section of people from the web-based community." [Good grief. Hypocrisy, stupidity, back slapping and canapes all round.] [Quote from the Governments website, Direct Gov:]

New features

“The new British Monarchy website has a more user-friendly and accessible design. It also utilises a number of new technological features, such as:

* integration of Google maps with the Royal Diary of Engagements to track royal movements
* a password protected Media Centre
* integration with the Royal Channel on YouTube
* a new personnel module to allow job applicants to apply online
* a new search function

[Come on, Google maps, password protection, YouTube, and search facility are totally basic. And it's not accessible, by any standards.]

“A star-studded reception was held in the Blue Drawing Room at Buckingham Palace to mark the launch of the new British Monarchy website.

The Queen was joined by Sir Tim Berners-Lee OM, KBE, inventor of the World Wide Web, the Minister for Digital Engagement, Mr Tom Watson MP, and a cross-section of people from the web-based community.”

[Good grief. Hypocrisy, stupidity, back slapping and canapes all round.]

]]> By: Fred Campbell http://www.939design.com/blog/index.php/2009/02/12/disapointing-relaunch-of-the-british-monarchy-website/#comment-1764 Fred Campbell Fri, 13 Feb 2009 10:31:37 +0000 http://www.939design.com/blog/?p=262#comment-1764 It sucks. Even if you forget the legal requirements about accessibility and the Disability Discrimination Act, the site is just sloppy work - even on the basics. Saving images to be optimized for the web in the right size, format is one of the first things you learn. And yet it has been missed. Why is this important? So the page loads quickly and you don't lose your visitors. Take a look at the Latest Images section - wonder why they roll down, even on a broadband connection? That's because of the stupid file size - each image is over 400KB, if they had saved the images properly they would be about 40KB. I could go on. But what's the point. I helped pay for this site and I didn't even vote for them. It sucks. Even if you forget the legal requirements about accessibility and the Disability Discrimination Act, the site is just sloppy work - even on the basics.

Saving images to be optimized for the web in the right size, format is one of the first things you learn. And yet it has been missed.

Why is this important? So the page loads quickly and you don’t lose your visitors.

Take a look at the Latest Images section - wonder why they roll down, even on a broadband connection? That’s because of the stupid file size - each image is over 400KB, if they had saved the images properly they would be about 40KB.

I could go on. But what’s the point.

I helped pay for this site and I didn’t even vote for them.

]]>