| LED Digest 2067: The Target Audience |
|
|
|
================================================== The LED Digest Moderated Discussion List "Effective Online Advertising, Since 1997" pair Networks: The LED's Web Host Hosting and Domain Reg. from a Trusted Leader pair.com for Hosting | pairNIC.com for Domains ================================================== List Moderator: Published by: Adam Audette LED Digest adam, led-digest.com http://www.led-digest.com .............................................. January 4, 2006 Issue #2067 .............................................. .....IN THIS DIGEST..... ==== CONTINUING ================= --== Streaming Audio ==-- ~ Donald Nelson "Here is a simple trick which I learned..." ~ Ronni Rhodes "The best way to do this is with Flash audio..." --== Screen Display Sizing ==-- ~ Amy D. Moore "I do a lot of work with another local web developer..." ~ James Miller "...check the log file and see how many people leave the site immediately..." ~ Steve Warriner "A free tool for checking the display is available.." ~ Peter D'Aprix "...you cannot design a site...that will please all the people all the time." ==== BILLBOARD =================== --== The 'Net Habit of Skimming ==-- ~ Kathryn Martyn ======== CONTINUING =============================== From: Donald Nelson Subject: Audio > I would like to make it possible for visitors to listen to my > audio files from my web site, without downloading them. - Val Waldeck, LED 2066 Dear All, In LED 2066 Val Waldeck asked how to stream audio files. Here is a simple trick which I learned in an earlier LED discussion on this same topic. Upload an MP3 file to your server: let's suppose the file name is sample.mp3. Then make a text file and in that text file you only write the following: http://www.yoursite.com/sample.mp3 . save this file as sample2.m3u and upload it to your website. Whenever someone goes to your file http://www.yoursite.com/sample2.m3u then the sample.mp3 file will stream (using whatever sound software the user has installed on her computer). This is the way to stream files without buying any software. Alternatively, there are different software packages costing from $30 to $100 which convert your audio file into a flash file. This flash file usually will display on your site with a push button, pause button, stop button. Some programs of this type are audiomakerpro and mp3soundstream. There are several others as well. I hope this helps. Sincerely, Donald Nelson www.a1-optimization.com ------- new post - same topic ------- From: Ronni Rhodes Subject: Audio The best way to do this is with Flash audio, Val. Not only does this deter people from downloading, but Flash also produces a quality audio file that is cross platform. Keep in mind, however, that "determined" people will always find a way - even if they simply place a mike next to their speakers.:-) HTH! Ronni Rhodes Ignite Your Site with Sound and Motion! http://www.wbcimaging.com ------- new post - new topic ------- From: Amy D. Moore Subject: Display size I do a lot of work with another local web developer. One time I went to visit her at her office. I found she had a graphic on her screen as her wallpaper. She kept her monitor resolution at whatever it was - say 1280x1024. But her wallpaper had a different colored box nested up to the top left corner for every other smaller resolution. This is a pretty easy image to create. Create a graphic with the pixel dimensions of your monitor. Then, make boxes inside that for the other standard monitor resolutions at the appropriate pixel dimensions: 1280 x 1024 1280 x 960 1280 x 768 1152 x 864 1024 x 768 960 x 720 800 x 600 Make each box a different color and label them. Make the image your design computer's wallpaper. Then, when you create a new design for a site, resize your browser windows to fit those colored boxes and see how they render. Frankly, every monitor has an ideal resolution to be set at. Resizing the browser window is much faster - although it will not necessarily re-render your fonts. But it will give you a quick and dirty idea of how well other site assets render in a browser. Regards, Amy D. Moore http://internetsupportservice.com Building Internet & Media Solutions since 1996 ------- new post - same topic ------- From: James Miller Subject: Display size Just a small point! I am perhaps a control freak myself, in that I run a large 1280 x 1024 screen, with usually my browser windows set to about 800 x 600. I get really annoyed when someone automatically resizes my browser window, so I immediately stop looking at the site, delete the copy of the browser and load a new one. Which of course I have to resize! Grrr! So one thing I believe you should never never do, is resize the browser window. It annoys many intensely. How many sales have you lost? An interesting thing would be to check the log file and see how many people leave the site immediately after the resize. I always do! Remember too, that a lot of nasty sites do this and many people associate resizing with all of the worst parts of the Internet. Incidentally, I have a program that I wrote called the Daisy Multiple Browser that opens several copies of IE in the same dialog. The latest version of this allows me to set the dialog to a range of sizes. It also stops the windows being resized! One of the reasons I am so pedantic about window size is that I write extensive notes on how to use the Internet and I like to have all the captured images at exactly the same scale. James Miller Daisy Analysis: www.daisy.co.uk ------- new post - same topic ------ From: Steve Warriner Subject: Display size A free tool for checking the display is available at http://www.pythoness.com/ (which oddly enough scrolls horizontally about 21 px. on my 800x600). Best, Steve Warriner ------- new post - same topic ------ From: Peter D'Aprix Subject: Display size Responding to Malcolm Bailey's comments about my post (LED 2064) re. display size. Thank you, Malcolm, for taking the time to view the site and keeping notes. It is valuable feed back and I will certainly go back over the site, seek more feed back from the users of the site who are so far very complimentary but I find when questioned on specific points often provide more critical input than when asked for an over all assessment. However, thank you for reminding my about the difficulty of ID'ing the hot HTML links visually (the image ones are roll overs). I am rushing to adjust that element as we speak. Thank God for CSS! I have had, however, no negative feed back on the control of the window size other than yours. I do think though that we need to identify that there is no point in having a browser window (and we are talking about browser window size in this case whose maximum size is controlled by the size of the screen and the setting of the resolution of same) larger than the maximum width of the content itself. Viewed on a large monitor set at a high resolution, having a browser window set to fill the screen or any size larger than the width of the content would not enlarge the content of the page, just create a lot of empty black space. In this case, I chose to control the size and positioning of the type to maintain its relative size in relation to the heavy use of images on the site. Thus the overall size, especially the width, is locked in, at least until someone selects a large type view. (Us control freaks on the internet are doomed to disappointment). This is mainly a portfolio site, so what we say is less important than the photographs and the perception of our control over our product. By having the browser window open to the approximate size required for each page saves the viewer a step or a mouse movement; I hope! That is the intent. I have watched people from dummies to techies using the site on factory default set lap tops to 20" monitors and so far the usability seems to work. Only time will tell and feed back from people like yourself, Malcolm. Also, I want to control the length of the lines of copy. It is all very well to set a page at a percent, but then people with large monitors can find lines of copy going on forever. When combined with image files which don't change size, this can make a hell of a mess out of the look and feel of a page. I am still of the school that the first impression is what stays with people, and that first impression is always visual, not the written word. So you want to control as much as possible how that first page is displayed. In print this is easy; on the net it results in rapid baldness of the designer and a lifetime subscription to Tumms. We have found that our "target" (sorry Tom) tends to multi task and like to have use of excess screen real estate to compare products either from my client's site or with other manufacturers side by side. It's a pain to have to keep dragging a browser window smaller as you browse a site or widen it to accommodate some pages with wider content. Regarding the serif type face used. I agree, it is not the best for the net. But that is not the only consideration. It is the type face associated with all the visual material that issues from the client. It is also cross platform applicable. The light type on a black background is also not the best choice for readability on the net. But it too is the visual "branding" of this company. It is how all their ads, catalogues and other sales material is designed. To maintain visual identity, it must be maintained. However, I must come back to what the site is first and foremost. It is a photo portfolio site. Photos look richest and best against black. The photos, time has proven, are what sell the floors, not words. So the words and type take a back seat to the photos. But then, for the individual product pages, PDFs are supplied for down load and printing with a white background. We are sensitive to the fact that inkjet ink is bloody expensive. We don't want to piss off our visitors by making them purchase a new black cartridge every 3 pages. Sure you can print the page without the black background, but then the gold type will be very hard to read. This all does get rather complex with very little effort n'est pas? But I think all this brings us right back to the beginning to the fact that you simply cannot design a site in this fluid environment that will please all the people all the time. And as much as you can try to nail down characteristics of a "target" audience, you never really know who will visit your site in advance; only after you have some site tracker stats. By then, of course, you have already committed yourself to the site. Unless you have a client with a huge budget that will allow you to run test groups with several site approaches, you have to rely on past performance, input from the client which can be very suspect, and the weight of your experience and gut instinct. All hardly a scientific approach but often the best we can do. But then, this medium is in such a fast state of change, what we think we know today is wiped out tomorrow. And that would be my point to Tom Aman. Not only does the target audience change for any business, these days often very rapidly, but so do the tools we have to use to convey information on the net. That is not to mention that corporate and small business marketing plans can shift, product lines become modified or completely changed in response to consumer activity. Consumer activity can change overnight, competitors spring up like weeds after a rain. Everything is changing. So I know from all your posts over the years, Tom, that you are a very bright guy and know all this perfectly well. Tools that seemed like the best way to solve a problem a few years ago become out dated, new data show that user habits change, become more sophisticated, browsers more intelligent, connection speeds faster, monitors larger and of higher resolution and so on. So I was a little surprised at your post. So we too have to release some of our favorite tools and pick up new ones. This is especially hard for us old farts. This digest is such a rich source of these new ideas and debates over how to use them, we are all better off for Adam's willingness to sort through our responses and present them in a logical way. Thank's again Adam. Peter D'Aprix - Visual Communications http://peterdaprix.com ==== BILLBOARD =================================== From: Kathryn Martyn Subject: Skimming Did you say "doggie friendly restaurants" and high end at that? LOL Who knew? I'm definitely mentioning this in my next newsletter, Bits-n-Bites for People Who Chew. I love LED-digest.com for more than just what I learn about the web and development, but also discovering new sites and ideas. As to skimming, of course we skim. Who's got time to read all those words? What many don't realize is books are sold based on titles and chapter headings and the vast majority are never cracked open, let alone read. No reason to think websites would be much different. Think about it: most people hate to read. Who do you know that reads lots of books? There are a few of us word freaks out there, but most never step foot in a bookstore, and go right to the comics when they read the Sunday paper. ;-0 Kathryn Martyn, M.NLP Ending Emotional Eating, One Bite at a Time http://www.onemorebite-weightloss.com ------------------------------------------------------- The LED Digest is sponsored by pair Networks: pair.com for Hosting | pairNIC.com for Domains Copyright 1995-2006 Orange Wheel, LLC. All Rights Reserved. "Only the spoon knows what is stirring in the pot." - Sicilian Proverb |
