# Cold Star Design Group



## Trip (Sep 7, 2002)

http://www.TannerSite.com/coldstar4

It's not even close to being done, but I thought it'd be nice to get some comments before I get too far into the design. None of the links work currently. And i noticed something i really dislike in this release: the bottom menu thing with the apple, adobe, and other junk. I'll update tomorrow.

All comments are welcome, good or bad!


----------



## BlingBling 3k12 (Sep 8, 2002)

Great looking site... is it for you? What happened to atomik?

Can't wait to see the rest of it!

oh, for comments... where it says Affordable, Quality, Promise, you should have it justified to the text below it...

like this...

oh yeah, and is that china? i recognize that building from SimCity 3000.


----------



## Trip (Sep 8, 2002)

Yup: good 'ol China alright. 
And thanks for the comments! I'll look into the text fixing as soon as I can!
For now, check out some of the work I'm posting on this site.


----------



## MacUser3of5 (Sep 23, 2002)

Under Affordable, Quality, Promise... I think the body text should be pushed to the right, so the headline text is left of the little text... sorta like

*Quality*
&nbsp;&nbsp;text goes here,
&nbsp;&nbsp;blahblahblah

OR

&nbsp;&nbsp;*Quality*
text goes here,
blachahalh

The current alignment just looks, um, unaligned, and just isn't aligned enough either way. Also, since the text is a graphic, you could be really anal-retentive and hand-kern the headlines  ... I would, but that's me


----------



## toast (Sep 24, 2002)

Advantage of your site: all content will be quickly accessible. Now it's your choice to decide whether you want people to follow a certain "path" through your site or not.

Example: PRICES are not the first thing you show to - maybe future ? - customers...

That's my 2¢


----------



## evildan (Oct 2, 2002)

Overall I like the page...

Looks and loads clean.

I do have issue with the copy... I'd suggest re-thinking it...

*Order:*
Promise should go first... After all it's the first thing skeptical viewers want to read.

Then Quality, Affordable

*Message:*
What exactly are you trying to say in each of these sections? What's your overall goal... the placement suggests that you want to guide the viewer to a conclusion... "buy from me" is a popular conclusion.

AFFORDABLE
"We offer prices that will fit your needs, while still keeping them at competitive ranges."

Says, you can afford us, and we're priced about the same as the other guys. This might seem a bit confusing to a consumer. You need to make a distinction between you and the other guys. It sounds like you're going to offer quality work for less then the other guys. If this is the case then you should *not* use the word "competitive" as it is often used in advertising as a way of saying "a bit higher priced then the other guys." 

QUALITY
"We can get the job done by whenever you need it done, and still make it look like a thousand dollars worth"

In addition to being incorrect English, you're actually fighting what you said in the previous statement.

Money, and all references to it, do not belong in this paragraph. People buy based on worth, worth is often a determination of quality... you want to say your work has quality, period, let the consumer assign a value for you.

Also, it seems as if you're trying to say fast, but good... Which is a great idea, but again, leave money out of the deal. Take a lesson from the jewelry industry quality should be priceless. After all they get people to buy rocks for much more then you're going to charge for a website.

PROMISE
"Not only do we value each of our customers, but we value their needs as well."

This is also not great English, but beyond that... you're really saying the same thing twice here...

if you value me, then you value my needs as well. They are one and the same. Also, kind of a technical issue here, but this line is NOT a promise, it's a statement. Kind of confusing to the reader.

Here's what I came up with... It's not perfect, but perhaps it might give you an idea for where you can go with the statements.

Promise...
We will care as much about you as we do about your project.

Quality...
Our deliberate methodology assures quick turnaround without ever sacrificing intelligent design.

Affordable...
Bringing beauty to the masses. Purchase a fully designed package plan for a lot less then you might think.

Something like that... (I'm not a writer but you get the point). 

By eliminating the double references the text reads a bit smoother I think.

Anyway, I don't mean to pick on you about the copy... I realize this isn't done, but I thought I might help out.

I really like the text placement by the way.


----------



## evildan (Oct 2, 2002)

Another thing...

you might want to put a disclaimer at the bottom...

"Apple, Adobe, Macromedia and (what's this logo?) are registered trademarks. All rights belong to their respective companies.

We are not affiliated with Apple, Adobe, Macromedia, etc....."


----------



## Nummi_G4 (Oct 6, 2002)

thats the Design is Kinky logo. I have not been there in a long time!


----------



## Trip (Oct 6, 2002)

Whoa, I forgot about this for a while! Time to get you guys/gals updated:

The CSDG has been temporarily disabled (the team, not the website) because I've gone freenlance. So the site won't be updated or changed for a few months. And yea: that is the Design Is Kinky logo, you can visit their site here: http://www.designiskinky.com I really like going there every once in a while for support/ideas.


----------



## godzookie (Oct 6, 2002)

a little too, apple/adobe knockoff design for me...with half the class. sorry. influence is one thing, copycat is another.


----------



## Nummi_G4 (Oct 7, 2002)

> _Originally posted by godzookie _
> *a little too, apple/adobe knockoff design for me...with half the class. sorry. influence is one thing, copycat is another. *



yeah trip. I am sorry, but the design is a little too appleish for me too.


----------



## Trip (Oct 7, 2002)

Hehe, thanks for all that guys, lol!
But all opinions as of a few weeks ago are obsolete.


----------

