My personal webpage

[cypher543]

EDIT: I've abandoned my web host because I don't have time to manage the internals, at the moment. My new blog is hosted on Squarespace, so the link below redirects there.

It's not a mapping portfolio, so I apologize. But I thought I'd go ahead and ask for your opinions. I decided to go for a single page kind of thing just to keep it simple.

http://www.webdevguy.net/

On my local copy, the profile boxes extend across the content area to fill the empty space on the right under the Xbox Live avatar. I just haven't gotten a chance to upload it yet.

The site is running on ASP.NET MVC. In the future, I plan to add a simple page system system for whatever projects I'm working on. It's not a super flashy layout or anything, because simplicity is my favorite design style.

[zombie@computer]

will it become wider? I dont have a widescreen but even then the page only has a usable width of about 25%...

[Blink]

I like it.

The width works because you don't have much content on there. If you start adding more text and such then 'd probably widen the design as too much scrolling gets annoying.

Plus your front-end code is quite tidy too, which you don't normally find with programmers

[cypher543]

Thanks! Yeah, I figured the width would be an issue for some, but it's designed so that if I change the width of the container DIV, everything will adjust accordingly (except for a few little things). So, like Blink said, if I add more later, I can always increase the width.

Plus your front-end code is quite tidy too, which you don't normally find with programmers

I started out doing web design, then started programming a few years in. Which probably means I'm a bad programmer, since I've heard you can only be good at one or the other.

[Habboi]

Looks good! Clean, efficient and smart.

[abathor]

It looks nice and clean, if a bit light on content. Your banner could do with a a bit of a gradient or something to liven it up a bit, the colour is fine but it's a bit flat at the moment.

Your code doesn't validate by the way, which is something you might want to look into. (Sorry, I am a bit of a standards-obsessive.)

http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http% ... or%2F1.654

Other than that, it gets a thumbs-up from me!

[cypher543]

Your code doesn't validate by the way, which is something you might want to look into.

Thanks for pointing that out! The erroneous HTML is actually retrieved from an API, but I'll let the creators know so they can fix it.