IconBuffet

Perhaps if I was at home where I can use FF and have a high rez monitor but at work I have to use IE6 from a laptop.

There are alignment problems. "Would you like to send free icons to your friends?" extends to the right and the body below to the left. (Left is just a few pixels).

The header height jumps quite a bit on window maximize (~70px) and 800x600 (~220px).

I could forgive the resizing issues if there was an indication that I should view at 1024.

It would look great if not for those distractions.

nice site. but the IE issuse can, and should be fixed, easy.

It's a very good looking site but I don't see how its better then weburza or tennessee or the penn design school site.

Well thats the most hype I've seen in a 'review' in a while. The site gets a solid 6 from me. Probably deserves a 7 or more but I just got hit with a bad case of reverse psychology.

Thanks for the mention guys. I dunno if it deserves the highest rating possible either, but we've a lot of fun putting it together. The real joy though is not the layout, it's the free icons. Free icons almost always win over snappy layouts. But really, you're too kind.

Adam, you are right... I probably got a little too excited. I don't think I understand the "hype" comment though.

I guess I am just a little curious as to what kind of site it would take to break through the "8" ceiling. I don't want to abuse my position as reviewer and try to coerce you guys into giving a higher rating than is deserved either. So we'll just keep looking... :)

from what i can see people are just being stingy vote wise. but then if you dont have a blog attached its automatically 4 points off right?... :(

I am beginning to suspect if once you joint the 'web standards bucnh' ( which i would newly consider myself ) you dont loose some of your design sence, and ability to be objective.

alot of sites I have seen here dont deserve to be IMO, and some that are incredible eye candy and semantic get low scores. wonders never cease.

My problem isn't that the site doesn't look good, it does. The fact the the layout gets just a little funky in IE throws out 80% of the web seeing your site the way you meant it to be seen. And don't just start IE bashing, I love Firefox; but my employer will never, ever switch. And that's the way it is. Ignoring that much of the market share just because they can't or won't upgrade browsers is just stupid. Fix it right for all browsers.

Doesn't look very great in IE.

Alignment issues all over the place.

Whilst i use Firefox at home, my employer only allows IE.

I agree with Adam Bramwell, stop hyping/bragging about the site. The grade just fell one step down, and thats because I'd like to review the sites myself, not being told which grade it is, even from the reviewer's point of view.

The sites have some images-off issues, and the IE issues. The top colors reminded me something of blogger, but that doesn't have to be bad. Other than that, it looks really good :)

This site could have been listed for the free delivery sign up page alone.

Telling people what to vote is the kiss of death tho... I would hope that the reviewers would always give any site they list a high score.

Get a grip, people.

Looks very 'adobe-illustratory', which aint no bad thing - very appropriate when you consider what they are selling.

The add to basket function is masterful - no basket redirects, and having the style switch to 'add and remove' a product is ser-weeeeeeeet.

Oh, and blah blah blah IE, blah blah blah Firefox, blah blah blah, etc ...

No hacks in the css - surely a good thing, especially when you think of the market they are selling to - web developers. Need I say more. If there is ever a site where the ol' 'IE problem' isn't really an issue, it's this'un.

Hmmm ... there are a few hacks in the the css actually - I'll get my coat ...

This is a very nice site BUT - the review smacks of the old boys club. I know of at least a couple of sites that didn't make it that were better put together but they didn't get listed. No they're not my sites and it's not sour grapes but I know the guys who built them and their far better than this. This site is a redesign. You reviewers change your tune like the weather changes. There's no consistency in your reviews or your rules. Sadly stylegala is losing much of it's appeal for me.

Penultimately, the reviewer deserves some serious flak. How dare you tell us what rating a site deserves. The most patronising review i've ever read here.

Lastly - how much were you paid to write this review? Blatant favouritism and advertising. That's not the way it should be and I hope it comes back to haunt you!

Darren

Turn it down a thousand. I really don't care whether or not you know a handful of sites that deserve to be here before IconBuffet. I'm sure you do. Just the same, lay off John Peele (the reviewer). I don't know John from Adam... nor do I actually know _anyone_ at Stylegala.

When Stylegala published this review I was honestly flattered, and a bit shocked. But I had absolutely nothing to do with it. To insinuate that we would pay off somebody for a review, or that Stylegala would accept payment for a positive review is insulting.

It reflects bad on Stylegala, and reflest horribly on our own site, service, and standards.

But he still should have dropped the "This site is an 8 at least!" - That’s just unprofessional for a site like Stylegala.

It does raise a point.

On a scale of 1 to 10 what the heck does it take to get past an 8? The "best" site here is only a 7.4.

Stylegala is generally a lower review. Kind of interesting to note.

And as I said before, get a grip everyone. Chill out, it's snowing right now :)

Man the comments left here are worse than the ones on Slashdot. Who gives a shit if the reviewer said "oh it's an 8 at least!"... did that sway your vote at all? Of course it didn't, because all of you can hopefully make up your own mind.

The reviewer really likes IconBuffet and was genuinely excited to review it, and in that excitement his own opinion was to say it's at least an 8. That's why he's a reviewer! He can write his opinion because that's what reviews are!

As for the IE bugs (I haven't personally checked on a PC) do any of you really know what the traffic figures are actually like at IconBuffet? At 9rules we get nearly 3x more Firefox/Mozilla users than IE users, so we launched our latest design with some IE6 bugs (fixed 'em a week later) and nobody really cared all that much.

IconBuffet sells icons and vector illustrations to a designer audience, so who knows, maybe he has only 2-3% of his users viewing the new design with IE6.

Josh,

You doth protest too much methinks!

In defence of Darren, I too thought the review was way over the top. (And your icons are way overpriced imho)

The review does look like the old boys network at work and I don't believe for a minute that you lot don't know each other. I'm not saying you paid for the review but Stylegala does have a tendency to favour its chums and they show very little in the way of consistency with the sites they list. Far too often the "network" gets showcased at the expense of some first class grass roots sites which are so much better than your site.

As for the IE bugs - you can make excuses till the cows come home but it shows a severe lack of skills when you dont address these issues.

One of the reviewers (can't remember who) wrote that attention to detail was important to get listed. You have showed a lack of attention to detail but your were still listed.It just doesn't make sense.

Wow. Designers are grumpy. Why don't all of you stop sippin' on that hater-ade. Seriously. Stop trying to make a difference and let this site be what it will be.

IconBuffet is what it is. Comment how you see fit, but the originator of this showcasing does deserve an opinion, as do you. If you want a bias free site, don't have it run by humans, as we are prone to it. Head on over to Dark-I.

Wow is right. alasdair's (anonymous) comment is something else. If you think our icons are overpriced, you don't have to buy em. If you don't like the site, you don't have to visit. If you think we contacted Stylegala in any way, shape, or form for this review, you're sadly mistaken.

This is not the right place for this conversation. If you guys feel the need to continue this line of comments, please move over to the forum and vent until your eyes pop. If I don't say it, David will.

Darren and alasdair, feel free to send directly to me sites that you think are worthy of a review here on Stylegala. There are literally hundreds of sites that get submitted for our consideration and sometimes, honestly, I miss the mark. It is difficult to sift through every site that is submitted through the interface. You guys have said some rather harsh things concerning my review of IconBuffet. There is no elaborate reviewer's manual that we to refer to, but we do try to remain objective and consistent. I would love to address the two of you personally, but alas I think you forgot to leave your email or site address. ;)

BTW, Rundle is on point. I never *told* anyone how to vote. I merely alluded to my personal vote. *gasp* Even I don't think it is a 10...

I didn't see a post on this at the forum so:

Saying the site is at least a 8, is as far from objective as you get, just leave your personal vote out of the review. And you say again that "Even I don't think it is a 10..." - So what?

What really bugs me about this review is this line:

'IconBuffet is an 8 atleast'

I can't believe he could do such a thing!?!?! What was John thinking!!!?? How dare he write such a line and lower the standards (etc.)!!! I'm going to have to set him straight, here goes ...

'IconBuffet is an 8 at least'

Ahhhhhh, that's better.

The space bar's the big key at the bottom!

Heh! Had yu goin' tho, ay!

Seriously though, I reckon that the URL field for comments should now be made mandatory - it seems that nearly all negative, unconstructive comments come from those who refuse to show us all 'how it should be done'. For me, because of this, their comments / opinions hold little or no weight at all. I reckon it's 'balls out of the bath' from now on ...

you know I have made a few comments here. and i will make another.

everyone is entitled to thier own opinion, and i happen to somewhat agree with the 'old boys network' comment, but not fully. running a gallery site you do tend to look at items that are familiar to you and you do tend to flow to the 'famous people' there is nothing wrong with that.

I personally would like to see, however, the stylegala reviewers stay off the beaten path a little more than they already do though, but i nevertheless enjoy every review they have made, whether i agree with them about the site or not.

lastly I must admit that I am sorely dissappointed at Josh Williams response to the 'anonymous' poster. you are supposed to remove yourself from this type of banter. there are plenty enough people here to take up your charge, it just came off very unprofessional what you said. i know its the heat of the moment and all but you are a salesmen and need to be careful of your public comments.

Feh.

All of you who think Stylegala is biased/overrated/wrong, stop wasting your time complaining here and just visit the other 15 or so galleries[1] instead. You might like them better anyway.

As for IconBuffet, it's okay, but not better than web.burza.

[1] http://css-discuss.incutio.com/?page=DesignInspiration

I just dont see it- to me its arbitrary, not a look I would remember after closing the window - great functionality and product but I just dont get the fuss over the design- guess its subjective

Nice site....

Colour combinations also good....