Is the Professional Look Really Better?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Stephen Horrillo
  • Start date Start date
GreyWyvern wrote:
: Put ads on each site. Whichever makes the most money wins.
:
: Grey

I think he meant to buy two campaigns and see which gets the better
conversion.
I could be wrong though...
 
Just because I said it's important doesn't necessarily mean I do it.
LOL.


--
Chris Leeds,
Microsoft MVP-FrontPage

ContentSeed: great tool for web masters,
a fantastic convenience for site owners.
http://contentseed.com/
--
 
Stephen said:
Why would one want to build a site from the ground up? In case someday I'm
caught in the desert with nothing but Notepad?

If it's a simple site then it's less hassle than messing around running
things through unnecessarily complex software. Once you have a macro on a
text editor to set up paragraph and anchor tags it's at least as quick as
FP or DW, and in the same league as the best CMSs.

For a complex design it becomes essential to deal with the mark up
directly if it's a commercial site. Either by working from the ground up
or by editing automatically generated mark up line by line. It's the only
way to be sure of your ground on accessibility and it makes a huge
difference when it comes to search engines.

There's no need if it's a hobby site. It's not going to get sued if it's
not accessible and nobody loses money if there's less traffic than there
could be. However a professional job for a commercial site pretty much
requires that extraneous mark up be removed and that the essential aspects
of the site don't have any nasty surprises hidden away that might trip up
a browser somewhere along the line.

When push comes to shove html is conceptual mark up, not a programming
language and not a form of low tech DTP. If there's one thing in the world
that software can't handle it's "conceptualisation". To get a halfway
decent result a human being has to look over the mark up at some point in
the process.
 
Why would one want to build a site from the ground up?
You're not exactly the brightest bulb in the pack, are you?

Or, are you just a troll?

Bob Lehmann
 
Benign said:
IMHO...you need to evaluate the site, not the tool you used to create it.
Many "webmasters" scoff at anyone that uses FP. FP is in my toolset, but
it's not my only tool.

When you look at a house to purchase do you what kind of hammer they used?

Yeah well, with good reason. The amount of time WASTED by using FP would
instantly make me wonder about any professional designs ability to hold
together a project.
 
Toby said:
It *looks* nice -- it just *behaves* amateurish.

From this page:
http://www.jimcoaddins.com/templates/fpstandard.htm

Click the "Home" link.

We apologize for the inconvenience!
An error has occurred in processing your request. Please
try your request again. If this problem continues, please
contact us.
Thank you!

My Web site is very busy and when I update it, the app domain will recycle
and some people may see this happen. You probably caught me during an update
while the app domain was recycling. Had you retried the request, it would
have worked, and you almost certainly would not be able to reproduce this.

I'm actually in the process of writing code that will allow me to update the
content without republishing so that it won't ever happen. In any case,
this isn't amateurish as you claim. Had you seen a nasty error message,
THAT would have been amateurish! :)

--
Jim Cheshire
JIMCO
http://www.jimcoaddins.com

Now offering templates ranging from
affordable standard templates to
powerful e-commerce applications!
 
Yes, Rob.

That is generally how belief works. However, in your somewhat ludicruos
example, time would quickly show the belief to be false.
Man has believed in many things that later showed to be false. One
famous belief from the dark ages was that the earth was flat where today
we know that it isn't so.
Another one was that the earth were the center of the universe.
To show that beliefs die hard you have to look no further than the Flat
Earth Society http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/flatearth.html



Regards Jens Peter Karlsen. Microsoft MVP - Frontpage.
 
That means you think it is more professional that the link simply didn't
work without any explanation?

Regards Jens Peter Karlsen. Microsoft MVP - Frontpage.
-----Original Message-----
From: Toby Inkster [mailto:[email protected]]
Posted At: 25. februar 2005 08:54
Posted To: microsoft.public.frontpage.client
Conversation: Is the Professional Look Really Better?
Subject: Re: Is the Professional Look Really Better?

As an example, I built my site in FrontPage and I don't think it looks
amateurish.
http://www.jimcoaddins.com

It *looks* nice -- it just *behaves* amateurish.

From this page:
http://www.jimcoaddins.com/templates/fpstandard.htm

Click the "Home" link.

We apologize for the inconvenience!
An error has occurred in processing your request. Please
try your request again. If this problem continues, please
contact us.
Thank you!
 
Stephen Horrillo said:
Why would one want to build a site from the ground up? In case someday I'm
caught in the desert with nothing but Notepad?

I concur...as a Newb...code the pages with FP or WeamDreaver, then start
looking at the code and learning how/what the tool did for you. You'll
quickly find the WYSIWYG tools are nice for mocking up quick ideas, but
you'll be doing more and more of your work outside the WYSIWYG editor. At
least that is how it happened to me. :) Even when I am coding ASPX in .NET,
I'll often mock my tables or layouts quickly in FP to get an idea for look.
 
For a complex design it becomes essential to deal with the mark up
directly if it's a commercial site. Either by working from the ground up
or by editing automatically generated mark up line by line. It's the only
way to be sure of your ground on accessibility and it makes a huge
difference when it comes to search engines.
<snip>

I've learned the hard way to learn about CSS NOW and not later. I have been
cleaning up my site to use CSS, instead of the 1000's of <font> tags. My
HTML is much more readable, and more flexible now. I'd say if you are going
to learn something now, learn CSS. Build your page in whatever fancy tool
you want, but understand the power of CSS. Come to the dark side.
 
Once upon a time, far far away "Benign Vanilla"
<snip>

I've learned the hard way to learn about CSS NOW and not later. I have been
cleaning up my site to use CSS, instead of the 1000's of <font> tags. My
HTML is much more readable, and more flexible now. I'd say if you are going
to learn something now, learn CSS. Build your page in whatever fancy tool
you want, but understand the power of CSS. Come to the dark side.

Oh gosh yes!

At least use an external CSS style sheet to define properties for
heading tags, and perhaps a few simple <div>s.

It makes making global changes so much easier.

Matt
 
Re: Is the Professional Look Really Better?The link worked fine. The page encountered an error (probably due to a loss of Session state because of an app domain recycle.) I don't give you details on that because I don't want you to see a stack trace and the details of the error are not useful to you. Besides, I don't want to reveal my implementation.

I guess you really need to be a developer to understand the details of handling exceptions in a Web application.

--
Jim Cheshire
JIMCO
http://www.jimcoaddins.com

Now offering templates ranging from
affordable standard templates to
powerful e-commerce applications!


That means you think it is more professional that the link simply didn't work without any explanation?

Regards Jens Peter Karlsen. Microsoft MVP - Frontpage.
-----Original Message-----
From: Toby Inkster [mailto:[email protected]]
Posted At: 25. februar 2005 08:54
Posted To: microsoft.public.frontpage.client
Conversation: Is the Professional Look Really Better?
Subject: Re: Is the Professional Look Really Better?


Jim Cheshire (JIMCO) wrote:
As an example, I built my site in FrontPage and I don't think it looks
amateurish.
http://www.jimcoaddins.com

It *looks* nice -- it just *behaves* amateurish.

From this page:
http://www.jimcoaddins.com/templates/fpstandard.htm

Click the "Home" link.

We apologize for the inconvenience!
An error has occurred in processing your request. Please
try your request again. If this problem continues, please
contact us.
Thank you!
 
Oh gosh yes!

At least use an external CSS style sheet to define properties for
heading tags, and perhaps a few simple <div>s.

It makes making global changes so much easier.

I've heard other talk about it, and I always said I'd get around to it. Now
I am kicking myself. I've been going through my code looking for any <font>
tags and replacing them with classes that reference my external style sheet.
This is so much better.
 
Jim Cheshire \(JIMCO\) said:
My Web site is very busy and when I update it, the app domain will recycle
and some people may see this happen. You probably caught me during an update
while the app domain was recycling. Had you retried the request, it would
have worked, and you almost certainly would not be able to reproduce this.

I'm actually in the process of writing code that will allow me to update the
content without republishing so that it won't ever happen. In any case,
this isn't amateurish as you claim. Had you seen a nasty error message,
THAT would have been amateurish! :)

The point is that FP is a slow and cumbersome way to update a site. Using
a halfway decent FTP programme there is next to no chance of any
interruption for users of the site. With any reasonable volume of traffic
that can make a big difference.

FP is convenient for the site owner, and that's fine for hobby sites.
However it's not designed for the convenience for site users, and that's a
problem with a commercial site.
 
And lo, Jim Cheshire (JIMCO) didst speak in
microsoft.public.frontpage.client,alt.www.webmaster:
My Web site is very busy and when I update it, the app domain will
recycle
and some people may see this happen. You probably caught me during an
update
while the app domain was recycling. Had you retried the request, it
would
have worked, and you almost certainly would not be able to reproduce
this.

Whatever you say, but I just went to the URI above and got the same error
message as Toby. Your updates certainly last a long time. Almost 12hrs
or so.
I'm actually in the process of writing code that will allow me to update
the
content without republishing so that it won't ever happen. In any case,
this isn't amateurish as you claim. Had you seen a nasty error message,
THAT would have been amateurish! :)

But I do, lots of them. Numerous javascript errors which I get all over
the site. Most likely because FP designs for IE only and doesn't consider
the standards of other browsers.

Grey
 
How do you figure that FP slow a site down for users?

--
==============================================
Thomas A. Rowe (Microsoft MVP - FrontPage)
WEBMASTER Resources(tm)

FrontPage Resources, WebCircle, MS KB Quick Links, etc.
==============================================
 

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments. After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.

Ask a Question

Back
Top