SB2007 website is online now, please post your comment here.

[Per]

Finally a picture of happy people on the front page (home). Anyway the graphic is poor. Hard to focus. Bottom of the front page looks like some inside information not meant to the customers. Boring and I never look at it. A lot og TBA on the products page.
COLOURS PLEASE... And you know this already.. It's very sloooow...
Still think the whole point, your boards, look great
Keep on fightingB)

[GazMan]

Hey, looks like you guys at Starboard have been working extremely hard on the new website, so how about Forum members giving them some praise and thanks for the effort they've put in to improve the website!

The fact is that a lot of totally new products have bugs and please don't forget that there will always be "work in progress" with this type of product. Positive, constructive criticism is good, but surely a bit of patience wouldn't go astray!

That and the continual login errors aside, I have attempted to contact the company (Starboard) at 'info@star-board.com' via both my home and work email and received the same error message:


Subject: failure notice

Hi. This is the qmail-send program.
I'm afraid I wasn't able to deliver your message to the following addresses.
This is a permanent error; I've given up. Sorry it didn't work out.

<info@star-board.com>:
Sorry, no mailbox here by that name. (#5.1.1)


Regards,

Gaz

[Egor]

Team don?t take this the wrong way but how about next year when you start planning the new website you consider asking the forum members for some input about the design and new features or give us an idea on what your thinking about implementing and we can tell you before hand to forget it. Hey just kidding but you know what I mean.

[Per]

GazMan
RespectB), but this thread is actually opened by the team to receive input from the members. I didn&#39;t buy a new Star board every year if I didn&#39;t eppreciate the guts of this brand to develop new ideas (GO&#39;s, wide formulas, 127 litre wave boards, Serenity etc.). Actually I think (but I dont know) that a great part of Starboards success comes from being open to their customers, be it positive or negative.

[PG]

GazMan&#39;s comment that
"Hey, looks like you guys at Starboard have been working extremely hard on the new website, so how about Forum members giving them some praise and thanks for the effort they&#39;ve put in to improve the website! "
is very misplaced. I would rather think that the ones responsible for the "hard work" would at this point in time be really close to be fired.

The new site has been "up" for two weeks now, and it just doesn&#39;t work properly. What if Google would have their site down for 2 weeks? I think there would be some serious axing going on :-)

[geo]

I wish that one day the main objective of site designers will be: simplicity.
Instead, every time I see a "new" site, it is more complicated of the one it substituted, is slower, and has new bugs.
Just to make it more clear: just think of this new web site, only with the "old" graphics; would anyone notice any change for better? And think of the "old" site with the new graphics: would anyone complain?

[geo]

I wish that one day the main objective of site designers will be: simplicity.
Instead, every time I see a "new" site, it is more complicated of the one it substituted, is slower, and has new bugs.
Just to make it more clear: just think of this new web site, only with the "old" graphics; would anyone notice any change for better? And think of the "old" site with the new graphics: would anyone complain?

[GazMan]

Re: Commments by Per & PG,

Points taken, though I&#39;m curious about the level of patience some members have when I read comments like:

"Sooner or later nobody is going to visit it anymore"

Qoute: " Rome wasn&#39;t built in a day"
Reply: "But it burned down overnight....."

Time to chill out!

[Ian Fox]

A few quick updates..

The new version site definitely uses new and more complex architecture - which in theory will allow us to have a great deal of more active content into the future. Agree, we&#39;re in bad shape right now and are in "containment" mode this week whie we ensure the next move (3rd new server) is going to cover demand. It is not a bandwith issue, we are well catered for that, but a CP (concurrent process/es) overload issue, which is related to not only how any users are on the website, but how they are using the page/s etc- each action generating.

Next server move will require new IP, (potential downtime) so we are working to avoid interuption during c/over/propogation delays etc.

Without commiting formqally, we would like to achieve the new server this week(but will not) and in that case hopefully mid/late next week.
(subject to server co conf, still a work in progress)

We&#39;re certainly not happy with the performance either, nor the ongoing user problems and issues. Love it or hate it, rest assured we&#39;re onto it and look forward to finally getting a higher grade site working - and delivered - as intended.

Cheers ~ Ian

[RobSwift]

You really should have hired a web tester before going public with this. It&#39;s not too late. http://www.radview.com/