Please critique my new website

[Radii]

BTW, spelling issues are hopefully all now corrected. I agree that immediately effects the professionalism of any site that I read.

[DanGarion]

Originally Posted by Fritz

just a thought from my late uncle Earl: A little cameltoe can go a long way.

You mean cowbell right?

[Zoetus]

Though tables have been officially deprecated by the W3C standard, I still think they're a little more reliable than css positioning if you're worried about cross-browser compatibility and different viewing resolutions. Css positioning, in my opinion, is best used in moderation. It can easily become much more trouble than it's worth. If you absolutely must use css, use relative positioning instead. When I design a website, I think it's a good rule of thumb to make sure all "mission-critical" content is viewable no matter how large or small the browser window is.
There are some neat tricks you can use with css, however, to add some bells and whistles to your site. For example: you can do rollover effects without writing any javascript and instead using css. If you write:

a.Example
{
font-family: Tahoma, Verdana;
color: black;
}

a.Example:hover
{
color: red;
}

You can do a simple rollover without any client-side scripting. This is a very basic example, but you see the possibilities.
You might also look into making the separation of different elements on the page (header, navigation sidebar, main content) more apparent to the user. I find that it's best when I design a website to look at some of the best sites out there (espn.com, microsoft.com, etc.) and really examine how their sites are laid out

[Zoetus]

Another thing I forgot to mention - some people would argue that Dreamweaver is overkill when designing simpler websites, but I would recommend at least trying the free trial of the MX 2004 version. It includes (among a long list of other features) a cross-browser validation checker, which even points out elements in your stylesheet(s) that may not render well with certain versions.