I was wondering what the chance is that things could be updated a bit. I know it's extra work for Memblers, but I wanted to discuss it at least. I hope you understand I don't want to offend anyone, it is a good resource but I feel it could be laid out better.
nesdev.com is probably one of the first things people see when they decide they want to get into NES development - I know it was for me. So when you have to scroll past 2 or 3 pages of text right off the bat, it can be briefly confusing and/or not very inviting. I'd rather be hit up with a link to something useful right away. I suppose we are, with the links to the forum and wiki, but that's not necessarily the first place a new person will look.
First we see the updates section, which I can't help but think would be better suited elsewhere. Changes occur so few and far between anyway, and new visitors don't usually care about recent changes. I propose that minor updates could be posted at the bottom of the page, with a link to them under Notices. Particularly noteworthy or awesome announcements such as competitions would still be fine for top of the page.
The Notices section is necessary and worthwhile, people shouldn't be downloading the whole site off the webserver. But is the 2004 MiniGame Compo still going on? Do we need a link to the current message boards here when there is already a link at the top of the page? Is Membler Industries still producing a nes dev cartridge?
Then there is the site index, which is useful, but at the same time most other sites would relegate this sort of thing to a sidebar or menu, rather than having it in-line with the rest of the site. It's a lot to scroll past. Are the minor divisions needed, or would it be appropriate to go with just the 6 main headings so we can get to the content faster?
And then before the general NES documentation, there is a music section which is separate from the music links section at the bottom. Not sure why it should be there.
The next thing is the most important: the text files section needs direction for new programmers. I imagine a lot of people get here and click the first link, and become utterly confused at all the technical information without practical implementation. So they scan downward for something easier, maybe a tutorial...and the first tutorial they see is GBAGuy's. Don't we always tell people not to use it? I can understand keeping it there for historical purposes, but it shouldn't be the first tutorial people have access to.
How are the text files sorted? It looks like it goes by date, with the most recent on top. Generally this will also be in order of up-to-date usefulness, but there are plenty of reiterative, incomplete and mostly un-useful docs in the list. The second one by Blue Hawk is too brief in its explanations and doesn't have the best writing. "Programming that 8-bit beast of power" sounds friendly for newcomers, but it's incomplete in how it conveys its ideas and tries too often to be flippant/humorous to cover up a lack of explanation. It also mentions getting a zip file at his site...which is now defunct.
The PDF by Patrick Diskin is pretty good but also just a prettier retread of Jeremy Chadwick's documentation. Both are among the most useful references available, so perhaps they could both be together at the top? Could we label each document with a little explanation, like for nestech, "provides good technical info, but is incomplete on the subject of audio and practical programming."
I notice there are a lot of architectural sorts of docs mixed in with the programming sorts of docs. Maybe Text Files could be split into "Programming (new users start here!)" and "Technical Reference."
Again, please don't take this personally, I love this site and the forums and the people here, I just think some better thought could go into laying out the main page. I think the biggest improvement would be removing or relabeling GBAGuy's tutorial, and putting a link to Nerdy Nights right at the top. It's something we can all relate to and explain well if people have further questions.
nesdev.com is probably one of the first things people see when they decide they want to get into NES development - I know it was for me. So when you have to scroll past 2 or 3 pages of text right off the bat, it can be briefly confusing and/or not very inviting. I'd rather be hit up with a link to something useful right away. I suppose we are, with the links to the forum and wiki, but that's not necessarily the first place a new person will look.
First we see the updates section, which I can't help but think would be better suited elsewhere. Changes occur so few and far between anyway, and new visitors don't usually care about recent changes. I propose that minor updates could be posted at the bottom of the page, with a link to them under Notices. Particularly noteworthy or awesome announcements such as competitions would still be fine for top of the page.
The Notices section is necessary and worthwhile, people shouldn't be downloading the whole site off the webserver. But is the 2004 MiniGame Compo still going on? Do we need a link to the current message boards here when there is already a link at the top of the page? Is Membler Industries still producing a nes dev cartridge?
Then there is the site index, which is useful, but at the same time most other sites would relegate this sort of thing to a sidebar or menu, rather than having it in-line with the rest of the site. It's a lot to scroll past. Are the minor divisions needed, or would it be appropriate to go with just the 6 main headings so we can get to the content faster?
And then before the general NES documentation, there is a music section which is separate from the music links section at the bottom. Not sure why it should be there.
The next thing is the most important: the text files section needs direction for new programmers. I imagine a lot of people get here and click the first link, and become utterly confused at all the technical information without practical implementation. So they scan downward for something easier, maybe a tutorial...and the first tutorial they see is GBAGuy's. Don't we always tell people not to use it? I can understand keeping it there for historical purposes, but it shouldn't be the first tutorial people have access to.
How are the text files sorted? It looks like it goes by date, with the most recent on top. Generally this will also be in order of up-to-date usefulness, but there are plenty of reiterative, incomplete and mostly un-useful docs in the list. The second one by Blue Hawk is too brief in its explanations and doesn't have the best writing. "Programming that 8-bit beast of power" sounds friendly for newcomers, but it's incomplete in how it conveys its ideas and tries too often to be flippant/humorous to cover up a lack of explanation. It also mentions getting a zip file at his site...which is now defunct.
The PDF by Patrick Diskin is pretty good but also just a prettier retread of Jeremy Chadwick's documentation. Both are among the most useful references available, so perhaps they could both be together at the top? Could we label each document with a little explanation, like for nestech, "provides good technical info, but is incomplete on the subject of audio and practical programming."
I notice there are a lot of architectural sorts of docs mixed in with the programming sorts of docs. Maybe Text Files could be split into "Programming (new users start here!)" and "Technical Reference."
Again, please don't take this personally, I love this site and the forums and the people here, I just think some better thought could go into laying out the main page. I think the biggest improvement would be removing or relabeling GBAGuy's tutorial, and putting a link to Nerdy Nights right at the top. It's something we can all relate to and explain well if people have further questions.