Fully agree Very unbalanced as is now.
On the Focal website there is a little R mark, which I believe is registered trademark. Naim doesnât have one, so maybe the Naim logo isnât trademarked.
A constructive (re)view is that it should have been thoroughly reviewed, tested, proof read prior to launch. It really wasnât that difficult to do.
I would too, which makes it odd that there is no R.
Agree but itâs out there now so canât change the course of events
Good to see feedback from members advising what changes should be made
Indeed. My constructive comment for @Richard.Dane was that this should have been put to forum members BEFORE the website went public.
Hopefully this farce wonât happen at the next iteration of the websiteâŠ
Itâs not odd at all - many brands choose not to attach the R symbol or TM for Trade Mark to their logo in numerous places - a branded website is one of them. The legal side is covered at the bottom of the page like this.
© 2024 Naim Audio. All Rights Reserved.
Thanks.
So the odd thing is rather the presence of R in these types of contexts?
It depends on the company, and their legal protection requirements for a particular market.
Statement links to product brochure rather than manual both from support and âproduct manualâ link on the equipment page
Yes, there are a number like this Iâve found. Thanks Ian.
This is not a speaker cableâŠ
And the only accessory that got additional text is NACA5 which feels bit odd. No offence NACA5.
Text and pictures are badly aligned too.
The Intro Video
Naim have used videos on the website before this one - in my view, itâs not the best way to begin.
This latest one has a few Positives
Plenty of colour to liven up the sales of Black Boxes, intriguing images to grab attention, the Bentley link, a top of the range Statement, an Atom (?) with similar DNA, high quality design, all quite aspirational.
Negatives
The video auto plays when entering the website - which feels like you are being played an advert whether you want it or not + then there is the need / desire to locate the pause button to stop it.
The video flashes the imagery at a rapid pace, the editing is too quick.
Having moving people is fine, but they arenât interacting with the products at all, they are in literally in two different universes. No one touches a remote or turns a volume dial, and even without sound on the website - no one is obviously reacting to music from a naim system.
There arenât any New Classic products in this video!!!
To me the images are thoroughly unpleasant to look at, even before they start moving. Then the movement, when it happens (and it sometimes doesnât) is jerky and not nice. Some of this, I admit, may be just personal taste, but there you go. I donât like it!
As per my opening post, please could members here stick to strictly constructive criticism of the actual website. Thanks.
Iâm trying my best Richard, I promise!
On a practical note, for me the factual intormation is whatâs most lacking here, and what I would mostly want from the website, making this iteration of greatly reduced value.
The lack of a rear view image to help with understanding connections is a glaring omission in this respect.
The removal of the button that takes you to the Support thing is another. There were poor substitutes for a proper manual, rarely updated or corrected, as discussed here in the past, but they were better than nothing. Perhaps they are still there somewhere, but I havenât found them, and a link from the main product page would surely be the best way to make them available.
To be fair itâs probably difficult to resist temptation given the number of factual errors reported so far.
Exposed HTML tags, really?
My constructive criticism having experience in intranet and internet websites for a FTSE100 company is to take it down and fix it properly to avoid futher embarrassment.
Iâd have had my arse kicked for this!
I was surprised to see flashy videos we canât even put a moving picture gif on here.
Continuing the discussion from FORUM RULES - Please Read & Follow: