Ha! They come back cryin'

[Adrienne Boswell]

I did a site for someone a while ago, and for some reason they decided I
charged too much, or I wasn't available enough, or it was a cloudy day, who
knows? Anyway, they had a friend armed with Dreamweaver and a cheap price
(free), redo the site.

The new site's pages are all done in plain transitional HTML (with
validation errors, of course), my pages were done in PHP (all valid HTML
Strict).

When searching in Google for Nick Mendoza, the first site is mine, and the
sixth result is Mendoza Gomez & Associates - MG&A Team (team.php). It
returns a 404 - because it's the old page _I_ did. I gave up looking for
the new site at page 10 (with 50 results per page) - nothing, it's indexed,
but who knows where.

To make a long story short, the client called me tonight and wants me to
"fix" it. I _love_ my life!

 

[Richard Formby]

When searching in Google for Nick Mendoza, the first site is mine, and the
sixth result is Mendoza Gomez & Associates - MG&A Team (team.php). It
returns a 404 - because it's the old page _I_ did. I gave up looking for
the new site at page 10 (with 50 results per page) - nothing, it's
indexed,
but who knows where.

Did you look here?
http://www.mendozagomez.com/

To make a long story short, the client called me tonight and wants me to
"fix" it. I _love_ my life!

Charge them twice your normal?

 

[Paul B]

The new site's pages are all done in plain transitional HTML (with
validation errors, of course),

Why of course ?
I use transitional HTML and I don't have validation errors.

 

[Jonathan N. Little]

Did you look here?
http://www.mendozagomez.com/


Charge them twice your normal?

That was going to be my suggestion. Sort of "I Told You So" fee.

 

[dorayme]

I did a site for someone a while ago, and for some reason they decided I
charged too much, or I wasn't available enough, or it was a cloudy day, who
knows? Anyway, they had a friend armed with Dreamweaver and a cheap price
(free), redo the site.

The new site's pages are all done in plain transitional HTML (with
validation errors, of course), my pages were done in PHP (all valid HTML
Strict).

When searching in Google for Nick Mendoza, the first site is mine, and the
sixth result is Mendoza Gomez & Associates - MG&A Team (team.php). It
returns a 404 - because it's the old page _I_ did. I gave up looking for
the new site at page 10 (with 50 results per page) - nothing, it's indexed,
but who knows where.

To make a long story short, the client called me tonight and wants me to
"fix" it. I _love_ my life!

That must have been very sweet! Good on you.

 

[dorayme]

Why of course ?
I use transitional HTML and I don't have validation errors.

Sure, it is not a necessary connection and you are the proof that
it is not. But generally, to make a site from scratch today with
transitional either suggests a lack of experience or confidence
or a special rare good reason.

 

[Borek]

That was going to be my suggestion. Sort of "I Told You So" fee.

Me three

Borek

 

[Dylan Parry]

To make a long story short, the client called me tonight and wants me to
"fix" it. I _love_ my life!

I'd tell them to bugger off - in as polite a way as possible, of course.
If they didn't have confidence in your ability the first time round,
despite you being more than able, and they had the nerve to insult your
work, what makes them think you'd want to work with them again?

--
Dylan Parry
http://electricfreedom.org | http://webpageworkshop.co.uk

The opinions stated above are not necessarily representative of
those of my cats. All opinions expressed are entirely your own.

 

[mark r]

I'd tell them to bugger off - in as polite a way as possible, of course.
If they didn't have confidence in your ability the first time round,
despite you being more than able, and they had the nerve to insult your
work, what makes them think you'd want to work with them again?

--
Dylan Parryhttp://electricfreedom.org|http://webpageworkshop.co.uk

The opinions stated above are not necessarily representative of
those of my cats. All opinions expressed are entirely your own.

Charge em double for the effort - "my living costs have gone up" and
"if you want it fixing in the next x weeks then you're going to have
to pay for priority"

lol

mark
www.neue.co.uk

 

[Travis Newbury]

Did you look here?http://www.mendozagomez.com/

Personally I think both sites are bland and boring. and in both cases
free is even too much to pay for them.

 

[Big Bill]

Sure, it is not a necessary connection and you are the proof that
it is not. But generally, to make a site from scratch today with
transitional either suggests a lack of experience or confidence
or a special rare good reason.

I have a special good reason; I don't wanna!

BB

 

[Big Bill]

I did a site for someone a while ago, and for some reason they decided I
charged too much, or I wasn't available enough, or it was a cloudy day, who
knows? Anyway, they had a friend armed with Dreamweaver and a cheap price
(free), redo the site.

The new site's pages are all done in plain transitional HTML (with
validation errors, of course), my pages were done in PHP (all valid HTML
Strict).

When searching in Google for Nick Mendoza, the first site is mine, and the
sixth result is Mendoza Gomez & Associates - MG&A Team (team.php). It
returns a 404 - because it's the old page _I_ did. I gave up looking for
the new site at page 10 (with 50 results per page) - nothing, it's indexed,
but who knows where.

To make a long story short, the client called me tonight and wants me to
"fix" it. I _love_ my life!

We love your life too, dear

BB

 

[Richard Formby]

Travis Newbury wrote

Personally I think both sites are bland and boring. and in both cases
free is even too much to pay for them.

View the source, Travis, I am sure this is really what Adrienne is bitching
about. One of these 'sites' is a good one. The other is...

 

[Travis Newbury]

View the source, Travis, I am sure this is really what Adrienne is bitching
about. One of these 'sites' is a good one. The other is...

I know that is what they were talking about. I on the other hand was
looking at the sites from a visitors point of view, and thought both
sites sucked. They were plain, boring, and If I were looking for
someone to do some advertising for me, I would have left both sites as
soon as they came up.

There was nothing artistic or creative with either site. So one of
the sites can be proud to know that it is not their HTML skills that
drove their customers away. It was their pure lack of creativity in
both cases.

 

[Richard Formby]

Big Bill wrote:

I have a special good reason; I don't wanna!

Let us assume that your statement indicates you still use deprecated font,
center and other such elements, and possibly tables for layout and all the
other nasties, as these are the usual reasons to use transitional as against
strict and still be able to validate.

The following comments apply *exactly* to the difference between the two
sites Adrienne has brought to our attention:

I had a sit down with client the other day, to discuss the new site I
started to build for her while ago[1]. She had changed her mind, as I knew
she would[2]:

Client: "I don't what that left hand menu with square boxes around the links
anymore, I want a nice buttony nav bar at the top like my favourite singers
web site and I dont like the gradient anymore and you were right we need a
"headerish" thing and I want a new logo and *how* to I get listed at the top
of google?"

Took me nine minutes, in front of client and over a coffee, to change *all*
of the presentational stuff[3], move the menu, change the colours, create
the "header", the nice gradients on the nav bar, the colours and balance of
the text/background. All in front of her. To her satisfaction. Almost no
change at all to the HTML/CMS. Mostly simple CSS stuff.

Client: "Crikey. That would have taken [other web drezigner] hours to do.

But it took us another whole hour to redsign the logo to her satisfaction.
Art, not mechanics.

We are still working on the google thing[4].

[1] http://australistrees.com.au/old/ (obsolete)
[2] Women do that...
[3] http://australistrees.com.au/ (may not validate, still in draft)
[4] This is a CMS site. She enters the content, I am gradually teaching her
how to enter google friendly content.

Please feel free to critique the [3] site with the caveat: the template is
*not* finished yet.

Cheers,
Richard.

 

[tonnie]

Richard Formby schreef:

Big Bill wrote:

I have a special good reason; I don't wanna!

Let us assume that your statement indicates you still use deprecated font,
center and other such elements, and possibly tables for layout and all the
other nasties, as these are the usual reasons to use transitional as against
strict and still be able to validate.

The following comments apply *exactly* to the difference between the two
sites Adrienne has brought to our attention:

I had a sit down with client the other day, to discuss the new site I
started to build for her while ago[1]. She had changed her mind, as I knew
she would[2]:

Client: "I don't what that left hand menu with square boxes around the links
anymore, I want a nice buttony nav bar at the top like my favourite singers
web site and I dont like the gradient anymore and you were right we need a
"headerish" thing and I want a new logo and *how* to I get listed at the top
of google?"

Took me nine minutes, in front of client and over a coffee, to change *all*
of the presentational stuff[3], move the menu, change the colours, create
the "header", the nice gradients on the nav bar, the colours and balance of
the text/background. All in front of her. To her satisfaction. Almost no
change at all to the HTML/CMS. Mostly simple CSS stuff.

Client: "Crikey. That would have taken [other web drezigner] hours to do.

But it took us another whole hour to redsign the logo to her satisfaction.
Art, not mechanics.

We are still working on the google thing[4].

[1] http://australistrees.com.au/old/ (obsolete)
[2] Women do that...
[3] http://australistrees.com.au/ (may not validate, still in draft)
[4] This is a CMS site. She enters the content, I am gradually teaching her
how to enter google friendly content.

[4]

Why a cms? Total overkill as it looks now. Use the time to teach her how
to place content in HTML!

 

[Rik]

Why a cms? Total overkill as it looks now. Use the time to teach her how
to place content in HTML!

Hmmmz, a CMS is a real time-saver. Teaching a client HTML, billed by the
hour, quickly becomes very expensive. Also, it would mean a lot of
'helpdesking' for them, you can just count on the fact that they will call
for every little problem they don't know how to solve.

Most of my clients have better things to do then to learn HTML, but still
want to be able to change content themselves.

 

[Paul B]

Sure, it is not a necessary connection and you are the proof that
it is not.

But generally, to make a site from scratch today with transitional either suggests a lack of experience or confidence
or a special rare good reason.

My site was made 3 years ago. Self taught and over 6000 pages. It is
used a lot by schools etc, which don't always have the latest browser
etc. I've no need to have it as strict, php, cms or any other fancy
new idea.
It works, why break it ?
At least my site will carry on working - THAT'S what matters.
Nothing to do with lack of experience or confidence.

plh
Paul

 

[Harlan Messinger]

Why of course ?
I use transitional HTML and I don't have validation errors.

Separate issues. The "of course", I understood, referred to the pages
having been created in Dreamweaver.

 

[Paul B]

Separate issues. The "of course", I understood, referred to the pages
having been created in Dreamweaver.

I use dreamweaver and handcode. Does it bother the visitor ? No. Do
they care ? No.