PDA

View Full Version : My Site: Micromuseum.co.uk



ChrisCwmbran
May 17th, 2012, 07:23 AM
Hi all,

I've just put my new site online if any of you would like to take a look. At the moment it doesn't contain much informaiton about the collection it self as that is being added as we catalogue stuff however the look and feel is all done, and we've cobbled together some histories of the main companies in the collection (thanks to all the sites we were able to find relevant historical info).

Hopefully you'll like it but I'm very open to criticism, and I look forward to hearing peoples views!

It will develop a lot over time I promise!

http://www.micromuseum.co.uk/

DOS lives on!!
May 17th, 2012, 07:31 AM
Well done on the site. I like the scrolling pictures on the right; makes you feel like you've entered vintage computer hall.:) Keep us posted on your collection, on here and on ths ite.

ChrisCwmbran
May 17th, 2012, 07:48 AM
Thanks Ian!

If anyone is interested the blog should be generating this RSS feed:

http://www.micromuseum.co.uk/index.php/latest/museum-blog?format=feed&type=rss

And the news should be generating this one:

http://www.micromuseum.co.uk/index.php/latest/news?format=feed&type=rss

ChrisCwmbran
May 26th, 2012, 03:02 PM
Although I don't usual mention specific updates to the site, I thought I'd mention that I regularly update the blog on my site, and post a link to the latest post:

http://www.micromuseum.co.uk/index.php/latest/museum-blog/112-the-toxic-box

Please take a browse. I'm open to comment good or bad on the site and want to make sure it is as good as possible.

ChrisCwmbran
May 28th, 2012, 02:36 PM
Come on guys! Give me some feed back please!

Is what I'm writing a waste of time? Is it good?

Do my feeds even work? lol

DOS lives on!!
May 28th, 2012, 02:39 PM
The scrolling pictures on the side--are they computers that you actually own or just ones that you are telling people about? If not, you could take pictures of your own collection and post them on the site.

ChrisCwmbran
May 28th, 2012, 02:41 PM
I'm planning to take a lot of pictures of my collection. I'm still in the process of moving it all.

I have (I think) over 100 machines, plus monitors etc, and stacks of peripherals, and software so its going to take me a long long time.

I think all the machines featured in the scroller are in my collection, but the photos there aren't of my actual ones.

ChrisCwmbran
June 27th, 2012, 07:08 AM
Regular(ish) updates being posted to the site - though some of it is documented on here.

Started a download section with some documents that others will hopefully need.

Don't forget to let me know if you'd like a link to your site on there too please!

WMH
July 2nd, 2012, 06:25 PM
Wow, great site, love the UI.

Here's a link that I use quite often that can help populate your link section: http://beagle.applearchives.com/

abritdownunder
July 15th, 2012, 11:41 PM
It's a great looking site with some very interesting information. Love the scrolling pictures

ChrisCwmbran
July 21st, 2012, 03:29 PM
Thanks for the nice comments guys.

Just created a twitter account for the site: @MicroMuseumUK

Please feel free to follow it :) I won't spam I promise!

DOS lives on!!
July 23rd, 2012, 02:05 PM
Nice! I don't use Twitter or tweet (or is it twit?), but it's nice that you're spreading the word about your site and vintage computers too.

ChrisCwmbran
August 19th, 2012, 01:12 PM
Just done a big update to the site following a cataloguing push: http://www.micromuseum.co.uk/

That's about 1/8th of the collection catalogued so a long way to go yet!

Thanks for taking the time to read this!

ChrisCwmbran
December 23rd, 2012, 06:28 AM
I don't know how many of you noticed by my site has just had a downtime of about a week, but it's back up now!

Full details of what happened are here:

http://www.micromuseum.co.uk/index.php/latest/news/457-we-re-back

Thanks for taking the time to read this!

Seasons greetings and best wishes to all of you!

ChrisCwmbran
June 20th, 2013, 03:37 AM
In case any of you have looked at my site and haven't noticed, I've put the all new version of the website up at:

http://www.micromuseum.co.uk

It is still very much a work in progress, and Im still adding data as fast as I can but I hope you'll think it's an improvement!

ChrisCwmbran
June 28th, 2013, 07:09 AM
Hi all,

I've just restored the RSS functionality to my website.

For the restoration blog the URL is http://www.micromuseum.co.uk/index.php/restoration-blog?format=feed

For the acquisitions blog the URL is http://www.micromuseum.co.uk/index.php/aquisitions?format=feed

Sorry about that!

SpidersWeb
July 29th, 2013, 09:34 PM
Added you on twitter. Site's looking good, inspiring me to do more work on mine (which isn't worth visiting yet - needs more content).

ChrisCwmbran
October 30th, 2013, 07:16 AM
Added you on twitter. Site's looking good, inspiring me to do more work on mine (which isn't worth visiting yet - needs more content).

Thank you :) It's nice to get some feedback! The site has taken a lot of time so far.

Your site looks good so far - I look forward to seeing some updates!

If you have time please take a look at my latest developments.!

ChrisCwmbran
December 23rd, 2013, 04:46 AM
Just done a write up on cleaning up and fixing my newly acquired BBC model B+ 64Kb:

http://www.micromuseum.co.uk/index.php/restoration-blog/110-cleaning-the-b-64kb

Please feel free to have a browse, and don't be shy about using the comments system!

Seasons greetings!

tezza
December 23rd, 2013, 08:15 AM
Spent some time looking at your site Chris. Good one. Wow, what a lot of computers!

Just wondered if your restoration part had any kind of index? I might have missed it?

Tez

ChrisCwmbran
December 23rd, 2013, 08:34 AM
Thanks for dropping by Tez, and thanks for leaving a comment too :)

Getting the PSU board out of the metal PSU housing on the BBC is a nightmare! Despite having done it several times before it still takes ages!


Just wondered if your restoration part had any kind of index? I might have missed it?

Thanks for reminding me! It is something I intended to add and forgot all about! I will try to add it in the next few days.

Whilst I'm at it, unless you object I'll add a link to your excellent site too :)

tezza
December 23rd, 2013, 09:10 AM
Whilst I'm at it, unless you object I'll add a link to your excellent site too :)

No worries, thanks!

Tez

ChrisCwmbran
February 12th, 2014, 04:08 PM
Added a small write up on my new USB microscope.

I think its a device that would help many of you guys.

Check it out here:

http://www.micromuseum.co.uk/index.php/restoration-blog/115-restoration-equipment-the-usb-microscope

ChrisCwmbran
March 5th, 2014, 03:27 PM
Added a write up on a brand new piece of equipment with a definite retro connection:

http://micromuseum.co.uk/index.php/acquisitions/119-modern-tech-unicomp-ub434ha

ChrisCwmbran
April 10th, 2014, 11:44 AM
The site has been given a new look to help some people who were having issues with it's responsive nature:

http://www.micromuseum.co.uk

If you have any further suggestions or comments about the new look feel free to comment in this thread or here:

http://www.micromuseum.co.uk/index.php/odds-n-ends/site-news/123-responding-to-responsivity

Thanks for looking!

ChrisCwmbran
May 3rd, 2014, 04:37 AM
Here's an update on my recent work to rectify faults on various Apple IIe motherboards - with the invaluable help of Sark:

http://www.micromuseum.co.uk/index.php/restoration-blog/127-apple-iie-repairs

ChrisCwmbran
May 10th, 2014, 11:27 AM
Parts 2 and 3 of the Apple IIe Repair story added!

ChrisCwmbran
June 15th, 2014, 02:12 PM
Added part 4 of the Apple IIe Repair story, and an article about fixing my Apricot Xi.

The Apricot article can be found here:

http://www.micromuseum.co.uk/index.php/restoration-blog/133-apricot-xi-repairs

ChrisCwmbran
July 17th, 2014, 12:25 PM
Added updates about my recently acquired Kaypro 10, and a guide to burning EPROMS:

http://www.micromuseum.co.uk/index.php/restoration-blog/136-guide-burning-eproms

Please feel free to use the comment function on my site to leave your thoughts, or let me know here.

Thanks for taking the time to read this!

ChrisCwmbran
September 11th, 2014, 08:40 AM
Changed the design again to make it work better on different kind of devices. Various bits of news now being added.


Just wondered if your restoration part had any kind of index? I might have missed it?

Added indexes for the Restoration Blog and Acquisition Blog thus:

http://www.micromuseum.co.uk/index.php/blogs/restoration-blog/restoration-blog-index

http://www.micromuseum.co.uk/index.php/blogs/acquisition-blog/acquisition-blog-index

Hopefully this is what you were looking for Tezza? (Sorry about the delay!)

Malc
September 14th, 2014, 09:45 AM
I've no idea why but your site takes an age to download for me, If i can get it to load, Most times i have to click the stop button and restart several times, I remember i never had this problem with the original site, I'm not having any problems with other sites, I've tried it on FF / IE and chrome and it's the same on all, Any ideas what it could be ?.

ChrisCwmbran
September 16th, 2014, 02:21 PM
I've no idea why but your site takes an age to download for me, If i can get it to load, Most times i have to click the stop button and restart several times, I remember i never had this problem with the original site, I'm not having any problems with other sites, I've tried it on FF / IE and chrome and it's the same on all, Any ideas what it could be ?.

I've completely changed the DNS arrangement on the website today. Has it helped at all? Or even made it worse? This is hard for me to help with because I cannot reproduce the problem :(

deathshadow
September 16th, 2014, 10:08 PM
It is painful to watch load here too -- and I can see why; a ridiculous 2.5 megabyte homepage built from 55 files; for what? To deliver 5k of plaintext and maybe a half dozen actual content images? :/

The lack of image optimization or proper thumbnails, basically having the browser scale ridiculously oversized 1600px wide images down to the 256 or less width they're actually being used is just the tip of the iceberg. The endless scripttardery for Christmas only knows what (667k in 25 files), Holy mother of Christmas 493k of CSS in 15 files (when there's no excuse for an entire site's CSS to break 48k in 2 files per media target), and 56k of markup (anywhere from eight to ten times what's needed) means OF COURSE IT'S SLOW... and dicking around with server settings isn't gonna fix that.

Though it's ENTIRELY what I expect when I see turdpress -- much less when mated to bootcrap; on the former turning a blogging system for re-re's into an actual website is a guaranteed road to failure, and on the latter half of the problem you really should go find a stick to scrape that off with; by itself bootstrap is three times the size your entire CSS for a site should be, so you were already long down the road to failure before you tacked another 400k of garbage CSS on it for who knows what.

It REALLY looks like you just took a bunch of off the shelf tech and slapped it together any old way; and that's not a good thing.

Even the markup is the typical train wreck of "I can haz intarnets" garbage one expects from turdpress; from the pointlessly overstuffed keywords meta that has ZERO relevance to the page, to the stupid opengraph nonsense redundant to existing tags, to static scripting and static style inlined in the markup (so much for caching), endless pointless DIV and classes for NOTHING, clearing DIV like it's still 2001, gibberish use of numbered headings, and so forth...

Worst of all, not only is it a bloated mess, NONE of it is being served compressed; so that bloated CSS, bloated scripting and bloated markup is taking anywhere from five to eight times as much bandwidth as necessary. I don't know what you are hosted on, but you really should look into "mod_deflate", aka realtime gzip compression to at least TRY and make that painfully oversized load a little more manageable.

Though like I would tell you on a web development forum, my real advice would be to pitch that whole mess in the trash and to start over with progressive enhancement, semantic markup,

I mean seriously, if you don't know what's wrong with this:


<body class="logo-type-custom demostyle-type-preset2 mainbody-overlay-light font-family-plethora font-size-is-default menu-type-dropdownmenu layout-mode-responsive col12 option-com-k2 menu-home ">
<div id="rt-page-surround">
<header id="rt-header-surround">
<div class="rt-container">
<div id="rt-top">
<div class="rt-flex-container">
<div class="rt-grid-6 rt-alpha">
<div class="rt-block fp-breadcrumbs">
<div class="module-surround">
<div class="module-content">

<ul class="breadcrumb fp-breadcrumbs">
<li class="active"><span class="divider icon-location"></span></li><li class="active"><span>Home</span></li></ul>
</div>
</div>
</div>

</div>
<div class="rt-grid-4">
<div class="rt-block rt-horizmenu fp-topmenu">
<div class="module-surround">
<div class="module-content">
<ul class="nav menu">
<li class="item-292"><a href="/index.php/about-us-2" >About Us</a></li><li class="item-293"><a href="/index.php/trading-loans" >Trading &amp; Loans</a></li></ul>
</div>
</div>
</div>

</div>
<div class="rt-grid-2 rt-omega">
<div class="rt-social-buttons rt-block">






<div class="clear"></div>
</div>

</div>
<div class="clear"></div>
</div>
</div>
<div id="rt-header">
<div class="rt-flex-container">
<div class="rt-grid-4 rt-alpha">
<div class="rt-logo-block">
<a href="/" id="rt-logo"></a>
</div>

</div>

Do the world a favor, back the **** away from the keyboard, and don't come back until you do. Here's a hint:


<body>

<div id="top" class="widthWrapper">

<ul id="topMenu">
<li class="home">Home</li>
<li class="about">
<a href="/index.php/about-us-2">
About Us
</a>
</li>
<li class="trading">
<a href="/index.php/trading-loans">
Trading &amp; Loans
</a>
</li>
</ul>

<h1>
Micro Museum
<span><!-- image sandbag --></span>
</h1>

That's what probably SHOULD be there... though try convincing the halfwits who write skins for turdpress of that.

It's also completely broken here in both REAL Opera (as opposed to the pathetic crippleware that is ChrOpera) and IE11 -- mostly the stupid "gee ain't it neat" scripted tab nonsense seems to be conflicting with bootcraps pathetic attempts at being responsive.

Sadly, the technologies you've used to build a site exist just for the purpose of deluding people into thinking they can have a website. Reality doesn't work that way. Sorry if all this seems harsh, but the truth often is.

For fixing it, a quick fix for now would be to get server compression working and to stop using massive bloated images for what are being shown at thumbnail sizes. The REAL fix would be to start over from scratch with a "just say no" attitude towards the sleazy shortcuts and pointless code bloat like Wordpress, bootstrap and jQuery.

Malc
September 17th, 2014, 12:30 AM
I've completely changed the DNS arrangement on the website today. Has it helped at all? Or even made it worse? This is hard for me to help with because I cannot reproduce the problem :(

No noticeable difference on my end, I usually hit the stop button and move on when i hit a site that's slow in loading but thought i'd mention it in case other people are doing the same. What i know about building website's ain't worth knowing, I tried it once when Geocities was around but that was a very long time ago and it bored me to tears.

ChrisCwmbran
September 17th, 2014, 01:44 AM
Ok to please Deathshadow I'll shut the site off now.

Sorry to everyone else.

Malc
September 17th, 2014, 02:14 AM
No that would be a silly thing to do, You've obviously put a lot of time and effort into the site and i think Deathshadow could have been less harsh, I've played with wordpress and i don't like it one bit but saying that i've seen some superb sites that seem to be using it, Maybe try and slim it down a bit before adding more to the site ?, Wasn't the original site done in HTML ?.

ChrisCwmbran
September 17th, 2014, 02:23 AM
The site was created using Joomla and a template from Rocket Themes. I am more than capable of writing HTML and CSS myself - I can write PHP, C, Basic etc just fine too. In this case I don't have as much time as I would like for my old computers and hence to document what I've been doing I went for the quickest, easiest solution available meaning what little time I had available could be used to create content.

I appreciate your support Malc but at the moment I cannot help but feel that Deathshadow has given me the perfect excuse not to bother.

Too many people think a site with pretty HTML and CSS is the be all and end all and forget that the sole reason for a website is its content not its design.

Tor
September 17th, 2014, 05:05 AM
Although Deathshadow sounded quite harsh his meaning was the opposite of what you're currently saying on the website - Deatshadow really said that the content is important, the stuff around is not. Not the other way around. Thus, the Wordpress stuff (and yes that can be real bloat) got totally in the way of the actual content, and that is why the site became problematic to load. Please please don't shut off the site - I have visited it several times in the past and would like to do so again in the future.

-Tor

deathshadow
September 17th, 2014, 10:41 AM
Tor got what I was saying -- and sorry if you found that a bit harsh, but I tend to give people the Gordon Ramsey / Charlie Fratelli / Simon Cowell treatment when it comes to websites. I figured it was better somebody said something instead of sugar coating it and letting you continue down the road to failure. Slapping the rose coloured glasses on your head and telling you everything is fine is NOT help; no matter how many tofu eating flip-flop wearing namby-pamby Starbucks clientèle tell you otherwise.

It's what I do.

Your CONTENT is what's important; your method of delivering that content is flawed and is what's making it slow. Your homepage has 1.3 megabytes of images in 16 files doing 130k in 8 files' job, 660k of scripting in 25 files for Christmas only knows what, and 493k in 13 files of CSS which just means something is disastrously and terrifyingly wrong. At the VERY least I would ditch that template for something leaner. 56k of markup doing 10k's job -- it's endemic across the entire site and that means overall I'm seeing 2.5 megs in 55 files doing the job of a tenth that in size and a quarter that in file counts. OF COURSE IT'S SLOW.

That's not about "pretty HTML and CSS" that's code bloat that's making it harder for users to get at what's important -- your CONTENT. That's just the truth of it -- if you can't be bothered to do things right it shouldn't be a surprise when people can't be bothered to wait for it to finish loading or start complaining about it's speed.

Though honestly just getting your server configured properly to send the scripttardery and endless pointless CSS for nothing gzipped would help a LOT... since that 56k of markup would likely be around 11k, the 660k of scripting likely dropping to ~100k, and the style hopefully seeing a reduction to 50k or less. It's more of a stopgap fix than an actual fix though.

Same goes for image optimization -- You've got 1330k of images doing the job of maybe 100k; it's not rocket science to resize an image down to the size you are actually using it at before uploading it to the server.

That the layout is broken here in two major browsers because of that scripted tabs nonsense on the home page is the real issue though. That would stop me in my tracks from bothering with your site.

Again, sorry if that seems harsh, but the truth often is.

http://cdn.buzznet.com/assets/users16/katelynannyce/default/large-msg-13740855084.jpg

Funny that it's Joomla and not turdpress -- it has all the telltales of the latter but that could just be that off the shelf template screwing with things. A lot of the template pushing scam artists like those found in the whorehouses like TemplateMonster or ThemeForest shoe-horn their code into multiple CMS resulting in the lines blurring when all you can see is the code.

Off the shelf templates are most always rubbish, there's a reason it's called nube predation.

That's no reason for you to throw your hands up in the air and go "Wah, I don't want a site anymore". Take it one step at a time when you have the time to fix things -- again just optimizing your images and tackling the server issue shouldn't take more than 20 minutes and would pay off massive dividends. Swapping to a better less scripting-heavy template that doesn't waste hundreds of K of CSS on doing tens of K's job and didn't have endless pointless "JS for nothing" would be another step in the right direction. You don't have to tackle it all at once. Baby steps when time is an issue; even that first step (gzip and images) could mean a 50% or more (possibly as much as 80%!) reduction in bandwidth. Shame it wouldn't help with the ridiculous number of separate files and the handshaking overhead that introduces.

"JS for nothing and your scripts for free. That ain't workin... That's not how you do it, lemme tell ya these guys ARE dumb."

Who knows, you might even be able to get people to help you with that if you ask. I often help people for free with sites that have issues if I care about their content, hence this entire directory on my hosting (http://www.cutcodedown.com/for_others/?C=M&O=D) filled with things I've helped people with ranging from small coding issues to entire site template rewrites.

NOT that I'd be all that enthusiastic about working with an off the shelf CMS like Joomla given what garbage their codebase is. Easy for you doesn't mean easy on your visitors; quite the opposite in fact.

sgifanatic
September 17th, 2014, 10:59 AM
The site was created using Joomla and a template from Rocket Themes. I am more than capable of writing HTML and CSS myself - I can write PHP, C, Basic etc just fine too. In this case I don't have as much time as I would like for my old computers and hence to document what I've been doing I went for the quickest, easiest solution available meaning what little time I had available could be used to create content.

I appreciate your support Malc but at the moment I cannot help but feel that Deathshadow has given me the perfect excuse not to bother.

Too many people think a site with pretty HTML and CSS is the be all and end all and forget that the sole reason for a website is its content not its design.

Would love to see the site. I was able to read a couple of the very interesting articles you had posted to your website via archive.org, but it's not quite the same! Please do consider bringing it back online.

geneb
September 18th, 2014, 08:00 AM
Deathshadow, I strongly suggest you consult Wheaton's Law. You've taken it to a level in which I'm pretty sure your shirt collar is hiding circumcision scars.

Experience has taught me that those that are best at criticizing are usually the worst at doing.

g.

ChrisCwmbran
October 14th, 2014, 06:15 AM
Some time has now passed since the flurry of input on my website and although my first instinct was not to bother having a website anymore, following appeals from a few people (thanks - you know who you are) I have re-done my website from scratch.

Deathshadow - Whilst I wasn't overly happy with your comments given the fact that I'm not a web developer, and was only doing a site to convey information about my collection and experiences fixing it however I can assure you I have read and thought about each of your comments. I did look and think about your implementation of my front page and whilst the overall look was similar having spent quite some time testing your design alongside mine on a variety of devices I felt that mine preformed better on the devices used. I appreciate my solution does use jQuery which you hate - but I have gone to some lengths to minimize the size of the pages, and to test the site on some slower connections.

The site is far from complete - in fact I wrote the initial "new" version of it using MySQLi database objects and have already totally re-written all the pages using what will hopefully prove to be higher security and higher performance methods - but oddly I have quite enjoyed actually doing it. There are a few things not yet implemented such as the downloads section, and the ability for people to leave comments on articles but hopefully as I get time they will happen.

Hopefully for the majority of you, or perhaps I should say the majority of those who look at my website, the experience is now improved and I do welcome comments from each and every one of you.

There are still a few residual articles where there are odd squares in the text. I'm getting rid of them as quickly as I find them. If you do find any articles with them in, please let me know somehow.

Thanks for reading this anyway! And If you haven't seen my website please take a look!

ChrisCwmbran
November 23rd, 2014, 01:01 PM
Updated with Part 2 of the story of "The Beast":

http://www.micromuseum.co.uk/displayarticle.php?article=116

For anyone who hasn't seen, this is The Beast:

21556

Malc
November 28th, 2014, 04:27 AM
Certainly looks better than it did, looking forward to seeing the end result :-)

deathshadow
November 28th, 2014, 10:49 AM
Initial impressions is that it is indeed a marked improvement -- it just "feels" way better than it did... I'd consider shrinking the max-width as the full width paragraphs are a bit hard to follow, but apart from that on the surface it's way nicer.

Peeking under the hood, a few suggestions:


<meta http-equiv="X-UA-Compatible" content="IE=edge,chrome=1">
If you have to say that, you've screwed up somewhere -- though most likely that line came with one of the scripts or layout frameworks you're working with... so they screwed up, not you.


<meta name="keywords" content="MicroMuseum,Micro Museum,UK,1980s,1990s,collection,museum,virtual,vi ntage,old,retro,micro,PC,British,restoration">
Overstuffed keywords meta. It should be seven or eight words (proper names like "Micro Museum is acceptable") that exists inside BODY as CDATA... what you have there mostly has zero relevance to the page and is far too many terms. It's also redundant as the separate instances of "micro" and "museum" would in fact also catch "Micro Museum". A lot of people say it doesn't matter as no engines pay attention to the keywords META anymore, but they only ignore it if you don't use it right. 7 or eight words totalling 90 characters or less that exist inside the BODY as plaintext. It's simple, shocking how many tutorials and even books get it wrong; so most people get it wrong as they blindly copypasta.


<meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0, user-scalable=yes">
I'd suggest removing user-scaleable, as that's the default state (just a tiny waste of code, not a big deal) -- I'd suggest adding height=device-height as some Android devices incorrectly report faux-height as width when rotated to portrait. (pain in the ...)


<link rel="shortcut icon" href="images/favicon.ico" type="image/x-icon">
Lose the "type="image/x-icon" part, it will in fact block the icon from loading in IE and some versions of FF (a regression that comes up every other version). Much like the viewport meta it's another thing that you in fact declared it correctly, but that doesn't mean browsers implemented it right.


<link rel="stylesheet" href="css/normalize.css">
<link rel="stylesheet" href="js/flexslider/flexslider.css">
<link rel="stylesheet" href="css/basic-style.css">
Those should all also have the type="text/css" declaration on them, and they should likely also be declared as media="screen,projection,tv" so you aren't sending them to UA's where it doesn't make any sense... like print, handheld, aural... Media targets are the stepping stone BEFORE media queries.


<script async src="js/libs/modernizr-2.6.2.min.js"></script>
<script async src="js/jquery-1.11.0.min.js"></script>
You have these in the head -- you could likely lose the async on the first one and move it to right before the other scripts in the footer, it will actually load faster there. The second one? Well, you see down at the bottom where you have this?


<script src="http://ajax.googleapis.com/ajax/libs/jquery/1/jquery.min.js"></script>
<script>window.jQuery || document.write('<script src="js/libs/jquery-1.9.0.min.js">\x3C/script>')</script>

If you're going to use the bloated train wreck of how not to write javascript known as jQuery, lose the load in the header as it's redundant to the load after the footer. IF you're going to use that init method to detect if Google loaded it properly, change that to load the newer version thus:


<script>window.jQuery || document.write('<script src="js/jquery-1.11.0.min.js">\x3C/script>')</script>

Normally I'd rail against using document.write since it forces a reflow, but since that's before </body> in the markup as a loader it's fine... still though, such a simple slider shouldn't need 220k of scripting (doing 8k's of scripting and CSS' job).

Basically the way you have it now you're loading two, possibly three (in some browsers) versions of jQuery at the same time. Bad enough using it's 94k of extra "code for nothing" without loading it multiple times.


<div id="banner">
<div id="logo"><a href="index.php"><img src="images/logo.png" alt="logo"></a></div>
</div>

Should probably be a H1 with a image replacement method... all the rest of your h1 on the page should be h2... of course if you went that route you could axe all the "section for nothing" -- but to be frank all those HTML 5 tags serve no legitimate purpose other than code-bloat; same for the aria roles.


<header class="wrapper clearfix">
There are more than enough ways to wrap floats, this is 2014 not 2004, you don't need "clearfix". (NOT that we ever did really)

You have a lot of comments:

</div><!-- end row -->
</section>
<!-- end content area -->
</div>
<!-- #end div #main .wrapper -->

That could trip rendering bugs. Avoid placing comments between sibling level tags.... the first two in that are ok as they are wedged between closures, but that last one is before a sibling level tag and that can trip the "disappearing content" and "double render" bugs in legacy IE, particularly if positioning and/or floats are involved. It's usally better to put the comment before the closure preventing the chance of that ever happening.

<!-- row --></div>

For example. You also don't need to say "end", that's what the / in </div> means.

Normally I'd not make a big deal out of that on modern browsers, but since you're wasting time including modernizr just so you can add the pointless HTML 5 bloat to the site on legacy browsers, you might want to avoid potential headaches in IE8/earlier since that's the only reason to include that script.

likewise:

<!-- footer area -->
<footer>
<div id="colophon" class="wrapper clearfix">
<p>&copy; 2014 Chris Long.</p>
</div>
</footer>
<!-- #end footer area -->

Really, <footer> is the start of the footer and </footer> is the end of the footer? Whoddathunkit? Avoid making comments that are painfully redundant to the code. Likewise not sold that you need the DIV or the inner P... (one or the other) but that goes for most of your DIV and the classes for nothing everywhere.

But for all that, it is far better than it was. Sorry if I took you to task before, but it pains me to see people new to making websites being repeatedly led down the garden path to failure by bad tutorials, bad books, and general bad practices... sadly much of said rubbish outdated practices are being treated as new and bleeding edge by the "HTML 5 generation"; pitching the past decade and a half of progress in the trash so they can have a new higher digit number and PRETEND they are using less code and making things more "semantic" while doing the exact opposite. They say HTML 5 means less code, it doesn't... they say using jQuery makes less code and makes things easier to follow, it doesn't... they say layout frameworks that rely on presentational classes like "grid_7" or "rightFloat" makes layout easier, it doesn't...

Really makes me wonder if it's intentional, or simply ignorance. You're new to this, it's hardly shocking with all web-rot misleading crap that it's so easy to be led astray.

ChrisCwmbran
March 12th, 2015, 12:44 PM
Initial impressions is that it is indeed a marked improvement -- it just "feels" way better than it did... I'd consider shrinking the max-width as the full width paragraphs are a bit hard to follow, but apart from that on the surface it's way nicer.

Peeking under the hood, a few suggestions:


<meta http-equiv="X-UA-Compatible" content="IE=edge,chrome=1">
If you have to say that, you've screwed up somewhere -- though most likely that line came with one of the scripts or layout frameworks you're working with... so they screwed up, not you.


<meta name="keywords" content="MicroMuseum,Micro Museum,UK,1980s,1990s,collection,museum,virtual,vi ntage,old,retro,micro,PC,British,restoration">
Overstuffed keywords meta. It should be seven or eight words (proper names like "Micro Museum is acceptable") that exists inside BODY as CDATA... what you have there mostly has zero relevance to the page and is far too many terms. It's also redundant as the separate instances of "micro" and "museum" would in fact also catch "Micro Museum". A lot of people say it doesn't matter as no engines pay attention to the keywords META anymore, but they only ignore it if you don't use it right. 7 or eight words totalling 90 characters or less that exist inside the BODY as plaintext. It's simple, shocking how many tutorials and even books get it wrong; so most people get it wrong as they blindly copypasta.


<meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0, user-scalable=yes">
I'd suggest removing user-scaleable, as that's the default state (just a tiny waste of code, not a big deal) -- I'd suggest adding height=device-height as some Android devices incorrectly report faux-height as width when rotated to portrait. (pain in the ...)


<link rel="shortcut icon" href="images/favicon.ico" type="image/x-icon">
Lose the "type="image/x-icon" part, it will in fact block the icon from loading in IE and some versions of FF (a regression that comes up every other version). Much like the viewport meta it's another thing that you in fact declared it correctly, but that doesn't mean browsers implemented it right.


<link rel="stylesheet" href="css/normalize.css">
<link rel="stylesheet" href="js/flexslider/flexslider.css">
<link rel="stylesheet" href="css/basic-style.css">
Those should all also have the type="text/css" declaration on them, and they should likely also be declared as media="screen,projection,tv" so you aren't sending them to UA's where it doesn't make any sense... like print, handheld, aural... Media targets are the stepping stone BEFORE media queries.


<script async src="js/libs/modernizr-2.6.2.min.js"></script>
<script async src="js/jquery-1.11.0.min.js"></script>
You have these in the head -- you could likely lose the async on the first one and move it to right before the other scripts in the footer, it will actually load faster there. The second one? Well, you see down at the bottom where you have this?


<script src="http://ajax.googleapis.com/ajax/libs/jquery/1/jquery.min.js"></script>
<script>window.jQuery || document.write('<script src="js/libs/jquery-1.9.0.min.js">\x3C/script>')</script>

If you're going to use the bloated train wreck of how not to write javascript known as jQuery, lose the load in the header as it's redundant to the load after the footer. IF you're going to use that init method to detect if Google loaded it properly, change that to load the newer version thus:


<script>window.jQuery || document.write('<script src="js/jquery-1.11.0.min.js">\x3C/script>')</script>

Normally I'd rail against using document.write since it forces a reflow, but since that's before </body> in the markup as a loader it's fine... still though, such a simple slider shouldn't need 220k of scripting (doing 8k's of scripting and CSS' job).

Basically the way you have it now you're loading two, possibly three (in some browsers) versions of jQuery at the same time. Bad enough using it's 94k of extra "code for nothing" without loading it multiple times.


<div id="banner">
<div id="logo"><a href="index.php"><img src="images/logo.png" alt="logo"></a></div>
</div>

Should probably be a H1 with a image replacement method... all the rest of your h1 on the page should be h2... of course if you went that route you could axe all the "section for nothing" -- but to be frank all those HTML 5 tags serve no legitimate purpose other than code-bloat; same for the aria roles.


<header class="wrapper clearfix">
There are more than enough ways to wrap floats, this is 2014 not 2004, you don't need "clearfix". (NOT that we ever did really)

You have a lot of comments:

</div><!-- end row -->
</section>
<!-- end content area -->
</div>
<!-- #end div #main .wrapper -->

That could trip rendering bugs. Avoid placing comments between sibling level tags.... the first two in that are ok as they are wedged between closures, but that last one is before a sibling level tag and that can trip the "disappearing content" and "double render" bugs in legacy IE, particularly if positioning and/or floats are involved. It's usally better to put the comment before the closure preventing the chance of that ever happening.

<!-- row --></div>

For example. You also don't need to say "end", that's what the / in </div> means.

Normally I'd not make a big deal out of that on modern browsers, but since you're wasting time including modernizr just so you can add the pointless HTML 5 bloat to the site on legacy browsers, you might want to avoid potential headaches in IE8/earlier since that's the only reason to include that script.

likewise:

<!-- footer area -->
<footer>
<div id="colophon" class="wrapper clearfix">
<p>© 2014 Chris Long.</p>
</div>
</footer>
<!-- #end footer area -->

Really, <footer> is the start of the footer and </footer> is the end of the footer? Whoddathunkit? Avoid making comments that are painfully redundant to the code. Likewise not sold that you need the DIV or the inner P... (one or the other) but that goes for most of your DIV and the classes for nothing everywhere.

But for all that, it is far better than it was. Sorry if I took you to task before, but it pains me to see people new to making websites being repeatedly led down the garden path to failure by bad tutorials, bad books, and general bad practices... sadly much of said rubbish outdated practices are being treated as new and bleeding edge by the "HTML 5 generation"; pitching the past decade and a half of progress in the trash so they can have a new higher digit number and PRETEND they are using less code and making things more "semantic" while doing the exact opposite. They say HTML 5 means less code, it doesn't... they say using jQuery makes less code and makes things easier to follow, it doesn't... they say layout frameworks that rely on presentational classes like "grid_7" or "rightFloat" makes layout easier, it doesn't...

Really makes me wonder if it's intentional, or simply ignorance. You're new to this, it's hardly shocking with all web-rot misleading crap that it's so easy to be led astray.

Thanks again Deathshadow. I've taken as much as I can from your post into consideration and implemented quite a bit of it.

I've also added some updates for the first time in a while including site signup function allowing people to comment easily on the articles.

Please take a look if you all have time!

tipc
March 14th, 2015, 03:10 PM
Hey Chris, I have a few cases, though not nearly as bad as yours, need significant restoration. What I was going to do was either strip the paint off first using an ammonia bath (I soaked a 100 year old lathe and the paint came right off. Took overnight, but was messing w/an IBM AT case which I simply laid newspaper over, then poured ammonia on top of, and it more or less came off readily in minutes). Or just immediately using electrolysis to remove the paint and rust. Electrolytic rust removal is cheap and easy, all you need it a tub and a 12 vdc battery charger or source (one guy did use an old computer power supply). 10 or 15 amps is needed. I can't remember the details, but I had to limit the current on one occasion (was pegging the meter on my old battery charger) and used a short (very short) piece of nichrome (technically kanthal) wire. You can salvage some from an old electric heater or even hair dryer/heat gun. The element from an auto cigarette lighter could work too. All that would need to be submerged to keep it cool.
I've heard the 1 benefit of electrolyzing rust is that it shouldn't rust in the future. Some talk on a forum, not sure if it's accurate, but allegedly metal that once was rusty is bound to develop rust in the future. Electrolysis neutralizes it.

tipc
March 19th, 2015, 04:35 PM
oh forgot you need Arm & Hammer washing soda or equivalent. Washing soda is like more potent baking soda (sodium bicarbonate). Baking soda also works, I've been told, but the washing soda works better. Usually added to the laundry for tougher jobs. There's loads of info on the net about derusting w/electrolysis.

ChrisCwmbran
May 1st, 2015, 02:36 PM
Thanks for the ideas Tipc! I should have some more info on the IBM cases in the next few days.

In the mean time here is an article about one of my recent (or not quite so recent) acquisitions!

https://www.micromuseum.co.uk/displayarticle.php?article=128

Thanks as usual for taking the time to read this! I hope you will all have a browse on my site and maybe even sign up and leave some comments!

ChrisCwmbran
May 8th, 2015, 09:07 AM
A short article about a new piece of kit:

https://www.micromuseum.co.uk/DisplayArticle.php?article=129

May even be another new article by the time you read this! Thank you again for taking the time to read this!

Beerhunter
May 30th, 2015, 02:27 AM
A fascinating site with lots of stuff not found elsewhere.

BTW, you may want to fix some of the IBM Product names PC XT rather than PC/XT and PC AT rather than PC/AT.

ChrisCwmbran
August 2nd, 2015, 07:53 AM
Today I've launched an all new version of my website. Hopefully people will like the design better - its been a lot of work and its only the second website I've done totally on my own. I'm currently working on replacing missing images which is going to take a while, but the new content should start flowing as of now too!

If you take a look, make sure you look at the Site Settings option on the User Menu. If you have a decent internet connection, opting in to the higher quality images will allow for a better experience. The high resolution stuff is basic at the moment, but as always my sites are always evolving and hopefully improving.

There will be an update restoring the "comments functions" soon!

I hope you like what you see! As always any constructive feedback is welcome!

Thanks taking the time to read this and hopefully have a look!

g4ugm
August 2nd, 2015, 09:49 AM
The stuff that leaks from NiCads is a strong alkali, snot "battery acid" and you should use ACID to neutralise it.. So Vinegar perhaps..

http://www.vintage-computer.com/vcforum/showthread.php?46206-Sad-MicroVAX2000&highlight=vinegar

or perhaps just search the forum for vinegar...

ChrisCwmbran
August 16th, 2015, 07:52 AM
I've added the first new articles to the site this weekend.

I've also added an RSS feed which is available here:

https://www.micromuseum.co.uk/rss.php

Thanks for taking the time to read this. Any comments are as always appreciated.

deathshadow
August 16th, 2015, 08:56 AM
The stuff that leaks from NiCads is a strong alkali, snot "battery acid" and you should use ACID to neutralise it.. So Vinegar perhaps..
I would actually advise against that. Mixing the opposite will cause a reaction, the end result may be neutral, but you don't want the reaction to occur on the board as that could just make things worse.

As with most cleanup situations for acids or base it's far safer to just keep hosing it down with universal solvent, aka that evil dihydrogen monoxide until it's clean and clear. Actively encouraging a chemical reaction on top of existing corrosion? BAD IDEA.

ChrisCwmbran
October 1st, 2015, 06:19 AM
Another update for anyone who cares to read!

https://www.micromuseum.co.uk/display_article.php?id=141

Trixter
October 1st, 2015, 12:27 PM
I love that your site is more than just pictures; it's your personal observations as well as experiences repairing and using the hardware. You've taken the extra effort and it shows, good work.

ChrisCwmbran
January 26th, 2016, 09:11 AM
Thanks Trixter! Its nice to hear from anyone who likes to site :)

Just added a new extensive article!

ChrisCwmbran
January 27th, 2016, 10:33 AM
Part three now added to the HxC article:

https://www.micromuseum.co.uk/display_article.php?id=161

ChrisCwmbran
February 1st, 2016, 07:50 AM
Added another article to my series of HxC exploits, this time with the Camputers Lynx:

https://www.micromuseum.co.uk/display_article.php?id=160

ChrisCwmbran
February 4th, 2016, 09:00 AM
Opening a can of worms....

https://www.micromuseum.co.uk/display_article.php?id=163

geneb
February 5th, 2016, 06:22 AM
Didn't you know there's a rule out there that says a $$$$ part will blow in order to save a $ fuse? :)

g.

ChrisCwmbran
February 5th, 2016, 08:38 AM
Never a truer word spoken in gest Mr Geneb!

The fuses are 20p each! The one transistor cost me £9 and I had to haggle to get it at that!

I've just posted another article about the PSU failure:

https://www.micromuseum.co.uk/display_article.php?id=164

Malc
February 5th, 2016, 10:41 AM
Series light bulb trick, It can save ££ if you don't get it right first time.

ChrisCwmbran
February 18th, 2016, 03:00 AM
Series light bulb trick, It can save ££ if you don't get it right first time.

Nice advice Malc! I'm making up a special cable for testing machines with a built in lightbulb socket accordingly!

In the mean time here is a new article about keyboard repairs to a BBC model B:

https://www.micromuseum.co.uk/display_article.php?id=158

ChrisCwmbran
March 23rd, 2016, 08:10 AM
Couple of new articles about my Sanyo MBC-550-2 just gone up! A couple more articles to join them later today I think too!

Thanks for looking!

Remember there is also an RSS feed: https://www.micromuseum.co.uk/rss.php

ChrisCwmbran
March 30th, 2016, 07:12 AM
Just posted a further update on my Sanyo MBC-550-2 progress:

https://www.micromuseum.co.uk/display_article.php?id=173

Thanks for looking!

ghostwriter
January 7th, 2017, 06:16 AM
Thanks for reminding me! It is something I intended to add and forgot all about! I will try to add it in the next few days.