Sites that i like. Well, I started by going to www.deviantart.com and analyzing it. I have to say that the overall flow of the site is good and I’m going to use it as a site that I like. I liked how the site is set up to lead you to different parts of it. I liked the navigation and how you have links at the top of the pages that will let you into your settings at any time. The ability to comment on different works is greatly enhanced by having a comment box at the bottom of the pages. Other sites will take you to an entirely different section of their site. The advertisement were unobtrusive and did not detract from the site like many others do. As far as being CSS or tables I’m pretty sure it is CSS. I viewed the page source and there is a ton of javascript and a lot of div tags but I didn't see any table elements. The downside to this site is they could use some more information about what it is and how it works.
The second site I looked at is www.photoshopsupport.com I like this site also. Its navigation has a really cool effect applied to the hover states. The layout is clean with some good colors being used. There is a lot of information in the site so the navigation is not bad for how much you have access to. They used CSS and tables to design the site. Ease of use I would give it a 5 middle of the road no matter which side you are coming from.
The third site I looked at was www.madisonartshop.com . This site is an online art supply shop. The first thing I don’t like about the site is the colors they used. The layout is dismal and there are some glitches throughout the site. The navigation is basic but it does provide access to all of their categories from every page. Which on second thought I do like. But they should make the width of the site a little wider and provide some sense of space. The site feels crowded. They used tables and CSS to create the pages.
In conclusion I was a little surprised by how many of the sites used embedded CSS and Scripts to create their sites. This made the markup unchangeable later on.
