Anyone been on the Blowers website today? They appear to have changed it - and made it worse.
I don't think it's worse. It needed an update, the old site was very old.
This version looks to be template driven which will allow online sales in the future, and it's responsive so you can view properly on tablets and phones. A step in the right direction I'd say.
Whats that all about the pictures are rubbish, like mine usually!
bit slow and I preferred having an up front description next to the watch without having to click for further info. not that bothered though
Yes, very slow for me and no up front descriptions. The old site looked very dated but it worked.
Where is the "further info" option mentioned above? All I get is pictures and no description/details?
Prefer the old site better, New site very slow .
If their dev is any good these should be ironed out in the coming days. The old site was horrible - a long, endless list of watches with no facility to sort or filter them. Did the job but not with any elegance. This looks like a good start atleast.
+1 have to click to get the description and then back pageOriginally Posted by Jdh1
Much prettier (albeit less usable?) than the outgoing site, only issue is it's running dog slow ... is that because everyone from TZ-UK is over there hammering it with searches?
The slow speed will be down to the server. The last site was fast because it had hardly any code to load.
I don't like 'sort by newness' lol
A *bit* slow!
Hmm the older site needed updating but this is a pain without the watch info displayed
Database is being transferred to a faster server and 3 x the current RAM being allocated, the search bar at the top will get you to where you to the ballpark or specific watch you are interested in and over time it will become more intuitive as more tags are recognised.
Over time it will get alot faster and any feedback will inform the future tweaks I imagine ;)
RIAC
I think it's a huge improvement, as I felt that the old site was a little "flat" and quite unrefined when it came to navigation and searching. I see that there's someone who heads up the photography aspect, so I'll keep my thoughts to myself in that respect.
Haven`t seen the new site, but I thought the old one was fine. Only problem was the prices......
Paul
Def looks more professional but they def need to display the watch info like the old site so that you dont have to click through to see it!
Looks quite generic but seems to be working fine. I'm sure it'll grow on you with time.
Its massively better than the old infinite scrolling site
Not a fan, but I' not known for my fondness for change...
Prices seem a little fruitier than previously too?
I'm sure that they will tweak it shortly.
Does that mean cheaper or more expensive?
I really liked the old site, so easy to just scroll down and stop at a watch that takes your fancy and read the blurb. The new one is a bit like Watchfinder's site, which I find clunky and complicated and generally avoid for those reasons. I'm sure they'll get it working well soon, afterall it is new.
They can make all the changes they like, but I won't be buying anything from them, way OTT pricing imo.
Further server improvements over the last 48 hours have seen it speed up but not quite there yet, compare options and tags now work and more info and ability is being added by the day. Bear with it and keep the comments coming as it informs the changes.
RIAC
Preferred old one
Much better than the old one, needed doing and presents a much more professional 'virtual store front'!
Website is alot slicker now and search function is getting more intelligent daily, just search anything in the search from model numbers to metal types etc to find a list.
If the item does not have the ability to enquire or PX then its reserved or sold and pending payment, this will be sorted soon to allow live updates of sold to avoid disappointment.
RIAC
I prefer the previous site, not just a "don't like change" syndrome either.
My tablet won't sort by model, (the desktop does but not always on!!), and a description per unit would be good, as was.
Ooh I don't know, looks okay on the phone
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote