Some people see "small and fiddly" as "sharp and clean"
I agree that they might be seen as "sharp and clean", but when it becomes an exercise in manual dexterity to select an image or category, and the user interface is slow because the flash code is inefficient, it's still "fiddly".
I would love to see what you consider a good case of usability and design.... please send along.
Yes, I would love to see good usability and design, too. Unfortunately, it's in short supply.
But please look up the thread that Chris directed you to, it contains a far more thorough discussion about the topic, and it's best not to repeat it here.
I'm sure the photography is good and type huge on your windows OS PC.
What are you getting at with this statement?
You can use either the arrows or small boxes to select the next in the series. I dont belittle the intelligence of my clients by putting next and previous
But what do the little boxes signify? How do I know which image I'll see by clicking one particular box? What is the purpose of many small boxes, if I can't predict what I'm getting?
I'm not arguing that you should type "next" and "previous", the symbolism of right and left arrows are well enough established in user interface design. But the arrows are small, and difficult to hit.
My guess is that the reason you're getting good feedback is because of the quality of your pictures more than the quality of the user interface. People who are dissatisfied move on to other sites. (Well, except when you're soliciting feedback.)
