The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
There's never been a better time to start designing Websites. In five years, the Internet has shifted from being the preserve of computer geeks to the new medium no one can afford to be without.
Britain has witnessed explosive growth and acceptance of the Net - you can't open a magazine or switch on the telly these days without being accosted by Web addresses.
Hand in hand with this popularity has come a huge demand for Web designers who can produce sites to satisfy a whole spectrum of weird and wonderful design briefs. If you've been considering taking the plunge into Web design, now is the time to do it.
If you already have a background in computer aided design and are familiar with packages like Photoshop, FreeHand and Illustrator, then you have an advantage when it comes to learning Web design. It means you're already familiar with generating and manipulating graphics, as well as understanding the importance of colour usage and font application. But producing graphics for the Web is a whole different kettle of fish to producing them for print - and graphics are only a part of the equation of realising a successful Website.
The key for designers coming fresh to Web design is to avoid bringing with them the dogma of their previous professions. Good Web design is about flexibility - it's about relinquishing pixel perfect control of a design's appearance and concentrating instead on functionality. Instead of thinking simply about how a Website looks, a Web designer has to think about how it works too - how a user gets around the site, how they find what they want easily, and to ensure that the site is as intuitive as possible.
Navigation aid
--------------
Web design is 3D because it's fundamentally about presenting a collection of information that the user can move around in, rather than merely being visually attractive. Of course, the best sites manage to be both, but functionality should always take precedence over form. You only have to look at the most popular site on the Web, Yahoo! (www.yahoo.com) to see such functionality in action. The appearance would probably make most traditional designers weep, but the design is like that precisely because it's the most efficient way of letting people get the info they want.
Hand in hand with the 3D nature of Web design come the considerations of bandwidth and platforms. The Web isn't nicknamed the World Wide Wait for nothing - all of us have suffered the annoyance of slow loading Websites, and more often than not have given up and gone elsewhere. Web designers have to ensure that whatever they do, it downloads fast - otherwise you'll lose most of your audience.
Equally, Web pages are seen on lots of different platforms - Windows, Mac and Linux, using Internet Explorer and Netscape Navigator, to name just the major contenders. Ideally, Websites have to work on all these different platforms so as to ensure the maximum amount of users. If the page loads and everything goes pear-shaped, the users will disappear to somewhere that does work on their machine.
Screen test
-----------------
Pop-ups galore and slow loading makes Boo's online shopping experience a nightmare. Too mcuh cool, not enough practical.
Similarly, most designers are used to working with big monitors running at 1024 resolution or higher - but don't forget most ordinary Joes access the Web with a Windows machine running at 640x480 or 800x600. Therefore the sites you design must be viewable in those resolutions as well as your own.
Of course, not all of us can afford a Mac and PC to test our sites on - but we can ensure that sites work OK in both the major browsers and at different resolutions. More importantly, at least being aware that a site will be seen on other browsers and platforms other than the one you design it on will help in designing it for everyone to see.
In short, if you're coming fresh to designing for the Web, don't try and shoehorn Web pages into what you think is good design for other media. Huge images, cryptic navigation, slow loading pages, sites that only work at a resolution of 1024 or higher - these are all the hallmarks of designers trying to transfer design tenets from other media on to the Web - and making a right mess of it.
The key to good Web design, as with most things, is to go back to basics. It's certainly a good idea to familiarise yourself with a Web editing program like Macromedia's Dreamweaver or Adobe's GoLive, but don't just stop there. Roll up your sleeves and learn a bit about HTML - Hyper Text Markup Language - itself, the language that holds Web pages together.
Under the bonnet
----------------
More importantly, once you've got your head round HTML, you'll start planning out Web pages in HTML terms rather than purely visual terms. Then you can start analysing Web pages you like by using the View Source function and seeing how the designer put it together. This means you're considering a site in terms of how it functions as well as how it appears. Looking under the bonnet of sites you like is an essential part of creating good site designs yourself. With over a billion pages out there on the Web, there's a lot to learn from. Equally it's essential to realise that your site doesn't exist in isolation - people will be coming to it from all manner of other sources, whether they be on-line or off-line, but they'll also be coming with expectations of how your site should function.
There's a reason why left hand navigation is virtually ubiquitous on Websites - not only because it works as an efficient method of ordering a site's main sections, but also it's because what surfers are used to. Imagine how peeved you'd be if every time you booted up your computer the desktop icons were in a completely different place from last time. So it is with Websites with weird and wonderful navigation - they confuse and disorientate the user, so giving them less impetus to explore the site.
This is the main reason why frames have fallen from grace in recent times. While they allow initially easier navigation by keeping the navigation bar on screen at all times, they make bookmarking individual pages within the site impossible and also make the back button go awry. Most sites simply position the navigation bar on each individual page, so keeping it available at all times and allowing for easy bookmarking.
Make it easy
------------
Remember that surfing Websites is not a linear experience, where people enter at the front, go through the middle and leave at the exit. People can arrive and exit from your site via any page. Don't try and force them to do otherwise - ensure they have that navigation bar against which to orientate themselves and know they've arrived at a different site. If you present it coherently, they may well start exploring the rest of the site. In short, if you're catering to the widest possible range of Web users, make it easy for them.
Of course, if you're not out to attract everyone to your site, then you can design more to the audience you have in mind. There are some fantastic sites like the Remedi Project [w] www.theremediproject.com and Balthaser [w] www.balthaser.com that exploit the uses of Shockwave to the full. These are bandwidth intensive sites that are designed for high end users - that is, people who understand the Web and its many idiosyncrasies and always have the latest browser and plug-in versions.
Remember that the vast majority of people using the Web have no interest in the Internet per se, just as they don't care about the computer that they use at work. Both are just tools to get things done, and if it goes wrong, they'll blame your Website rather than their own lack of knowledge.
Flash is evil?
--------------
As such, it's important to only use these elements where they're needed. Too often Web designers get carried away with the impulse to add dynamism to their pages with wholly inappropriate Shockwave intros to their site or animations. These might be mildly entertaining the first time but they soon get annoying, especially if they stop the user getting to the information. Have the humility to look long and hard at your Website designs and ask yourself, 'Would I actually use this site?'. It's also worth reading the personal but pertinent meditation Flash Is Evil at www.dack.com/web/flash_evil.html
Plug-ins are great if they deliver content on demand - that is, if the user asks to see the animation or the video clip, rather than it being thrust upon them - Shockwave.com and wildfeedtv.com are two good examples of this. Deliver the content that your users want to see, not what you think they should see. Unless you're building a site for a niche audience, make sure people can get at the content without needing plug-ins. For more about designing with and without plug-ins, see the Investigation in issue 39 of Computer Arts. See page 93 to obtain back issues.
While Shockwave and other plug-ins such as RealAudio, Quicktime and Java applets are commonly considered cutting edge Web design, they're actually blunting it. The real cutting edge is to be found in designers who can produce pages that are 5k or less in total download size, as the recent massive response to the on-line design competition at [w] www.sylloge.com/5k showed. The need for tiny file sizes is becoming increasingly important as more and more sites become database driven, especially e-commerce Websites. Because databases take a while to display all the information asked for, it's absolutely critical that the Web page which contains that information loads fast.
With high bandwidth ADSL Net access now about to happen in the UK with BT's Open World scheme - see [w] www.btopenworld.com for more information, perhaps designers' worries about file sizes, bandwidth and download speeds are finally over? Unfortunately not. As people get used to having greater bandwidth, they'll be expecting even more from the Web - perhaps not in terms of sites having more bells and whistles, but in being able to access several Websites simultaneously and expecting them all to download instantly.
The big screen
--------------
the high end niche sites will be able to become even more radical with full screen streaming video and the like, but that won't change the fundamental point that not all sites require such multimedia. Why insert a pointless Shockwave animation when you can ensure the whole front page of your Website appears in one second flat? This increased bandwidth will be exploited by the best Websites on a user demand basis, but more importantly, it will also be used for the simple purpose of making the Internet we know actually work far faster than it currently does.
In conclusion, good Web design, like any discipline, is something that has to be practised and mastered. While it's easy to pick up the rudiments of putting a Web page together, creating a cohesive, easy to use site is a different matter entirely. The essential questions are: can it be seen anywhere by anyone? If you can create a Website that at least acknowledges the issues of accessibility, usability, download speed, platform and resolution, then half the battle's been won.
Starting from scratch
---------------------
Designers who can transfer their relevant skills from other disciplines to Web design while at the same time recognising that they have to start from scratch will become the people most in demand over the next few years. By being able to understand and switch between 'old' and 'new' media, these designers will be in the rare position of being able to produce projects that work across and exploit their differences, rather than being hampered by them.
Britain has witnessed explosive growth and acceptance of the Net - you can't open a magazine or switch on the telly these days without being accosted by Web addresses.
Hand in hand with this popularity has come a huge demand for Web designers who can produce sites to satisfy a whole spectrum of weird and wonderful design briefs. If you've been considering taking the plunge into Web design, now is the time to do it.
If you already have a background in computer aided design and are familiar with packages like Photoshop, FreeHand and Illustrator, then you have an advantage when it comes to learning Web design. It means you're already familiar with generating and manipulating graphics, as well as understanding the importance of colour usage and font application. But producing graphics for the Web is a whole different kettle of fish to producing them for print - and graphics are only a part of the equation of realising a successful Website.
The key for designers coming fresh to Web design is to avoid bringing with them the dogma of their previous professions. Good Web design is about flexibility - it's about relinquishing pixel perfect control of a design's appearance and concentrating instead on functionality. Instead of thinking simply about how a Website looks, a Web designer has to think about how it works too - how a user gets around the site, how they find what they want easily, and to ensure that the site is as intuitive as possible.
Navigation aid
--------------
Web design is 3D because it's fundamentally about presenting a collection of information that the user can move around in, rather than merely being visually attractive. Of course, the best sites manage to be both, but functionality should always take precedence over form. You only have to look at the most popular site on the Web, Yahoo! (www.yahoo.com) to see such functionality in action. The appearance would probably make most traditional designers weep, but the design is like that precisely because it's the most efficient way of letting people get the info they want.
Hand in hand with the 3D nature of Web design come the considerations of bandwidth and platforms. The Web isn't nicknamed the World Wide Wait for nothing - all of us have suffered the annoyance of slow loading Websites, and more often than not have given up and gone elsewhere. Web designers have to ensure that whatever they do, it downloads fast - otherwise you'll lose most of your audience.
Equally, Web pages are seen on lots of different platforms - Windows, Mac and Linux, using Internet Explorer and Netscape Navigator, to name just the major contenders. Ideally, Websites have to work on all these different platforms so as to ensure the maximum amount of users. If the page loads and everything goes pear-shaped, the users will disappear to somewhere that does work on their machine.
Screen test
-----------------
Pop-ups galore and slow loading makes Boo's online shopping experience a nightmare. Too mcuh cool, not enough practical.
Similarly, most designers are used to working with big monitors running at 1024 resolution or higher - but don't forget most ordinary Joes access the Web with a Windows machine running at 640x480 or 800x600. Therefore the sites you design must be viewable in those resolutions as well as your own.
Of course, not all of us can afford a Mac and PC to test our sites on - but we can ensure that sites work OK in both the major browsers and at different resolutions. More importantly, at least being aware that a site will be seen on other browsers and platforms other than the one you design it on will help in designing it for everyone to see.
In short, if you're coming fresh to designing for the Web, don't try and shoehorn Web pages into what you think is good design for other media. Huge images, cryptic navigation, slow loading pages, sites that only work at a resolution of 1024 or higher - these are all the hallmarks of designers trying to transfer design tenets from other media on to the Web - and making a right mess of it.
The key to good Web design, as with most things, is to go back to basics. It's certainly a good idea to familiarise yourself with a Web editing program like Macromedia's Dreamweaver or Adobe's GoLive, but don't just stop there. Roll up your sleeves and learn a bit about HTML - Hyper Text Markup Language - itself, the language that holds Web pages together.
Under the bonnet
----------------
More importantly, once you've got your head round HTML, you'll start planning out Web pages in HTML terms rather than purely visual terms. Then you can start analysing Web pages you like by using the View Source function and seeing how the designer put it together. This means you're considering a site in terms of how it functions as well as how it appears. Looking under the bonnet of sites you like is an essential part of creating good site designs yourself. With over a billion pages out there on the Web, there's a lot to learn from. Equally it's essential to realise that your site doesn't exist in isolation - people will be coming to it from all manner of other sources, whether they be on-line or off-line, but they'll also be coming with expectations of how your site should function.
There's a reason why left hand navigation is virtually ubiquitous on Websites - not only because it works as an efficient method of ordering a site's main sections, but also it's because what surfers are used to. Imagine how peeved you'd be if every time you booted up your computer the desktop icons were in a completely different place from last time. So it is with Websites with weird and wonderful navigation - they confuse and disorientate the user, so giving them less impetus to explore the site.
This is the main reason why frames have fallen from grace in recent times. While they allow initially easier navigation by keeping the navigation bar on screen at all times, they make bookmarking individual pages within the site impossible and also make the back button go awry. Most sites simply position the navigation bar on each individual page, so keeping it available at all times and allowing for easy bookmarking.
Make it easy
------------
Remember that surfing Websites is not a linear experience, where people enter at the front, go through the middle and leave at the exit. People can arrive and exit from your site via any page. Don't try and force them to do otherwise - ensure they have that navigation bar against which to orientate themselves and know they've arrived at a different site. If you present it coherently, they may well start exploring the rest of the site. In short, if you're catering to the widest possible range of Web users, make it easy for them.
Of course, if you're not out to attract everyone to your site, then you can design more to the audience you have in mind. There are some fantastic sites like the Remedi Project [w] www.theremediproject.com and Balthaser [w] www.balthaser.com that exploit the uses of Shockwave to the full. These are bandwidth intensive sites that are designed for high end users - that is, people who understand the Web and its many idiosyncrasies and always have the latest browser and plug-in versions.
Remember that the vast majority of people using the Web have no interest in the Internet per se, just as they don't care about the computer that they use at work. Both are just tools to get things done, and if it goes wrong, they'll blame your Website rather than their own lack of knowledge.
Flash is evil?
--------------
As such, it's important to only use these elements where they're needed. Too often Web designers get carried away with the impulse to add dynamism to their pages with wholly inappropriate Shockwave intros to their site or animations. These might be mildly entertaining the first time but they soon get annoying, especially if they stop the user getting to the information. Have the humility to look long and hard at your Website designs and ask yourself, 'Would I actually use this site?'. It's also worth reading the personal but pertinent meditation Flash Is Evil at www.dack.com/web/flash_evil.html
Plug-ins are great if they deliver content on demand - that is, if the user asks to see the animation or the video clip, rather than it being thrust upon them - Shockwave.com and wildfeedtv.com are two good examples of this. Deliver the content that your users want to see, not what you think they should see. Unless you're building a site for a niche audience, make sure people can get at the content without needing plug-ins. For more about designing with and without plug-ins, see the Investigation in issue 39 of Computer Arts. See page 93 to obtain back issues.
While Shockwave and other plug-ins such as RealAudio, Quicktime and Java applets are commonly considered cutting edge Web design, they're actually blunting it. The real cutting edge is to be found in designers who can produce pages that are 5k or less in total download size, as the recent massive response to the on-line design competition at [w] www.sylloge.com/5k showed. The need for tiny file sizes is becoming increasingly important as more and more sites become database driven, especially e-commerce Websites. Because databases take a while to display all the information asked for, it's absolutely critical that the Web page which contains that information loads fast.
With high bandwidth ADSL Net access now about to happen in the UK with BT's Open World scheme - see [w] www.btopenworld.com for more information, perhaps designers' worries about file sizes, bandwidth and download speeds are finally over? Unfortunately not. As people get used to having greater bandwidth, they'll be expecting even more from the Web - perhaps not in terms of sites having more bells and whistles, but in being able to access several Websites simultaneously and expecting them all to download instantly.
The big screen
--------------
the high end niche sites will be able to become even more radical with full screen streaming video and the like, but that won't change the fundamental point that not all sites require such multimedia. Why insert a pointless Shockwave animation when you can ensure the whole front page of your Website appears in one second flat? This increased bandwidth will be exploited by the best Websites on a user demand basis, but more importantly, it will also be used for the simple purpose of making the Internet we know actually work far faster than it currently does.
In conclusion, good Web design, like any discipline, is something that has to be practised and mastered. While it's easy to pick up the rudiments of putting a Web page together, creating a cohesive, easy to use site is a different matter entirely. The essential questions are: can it be seen anywhere by anyone? If you can create a Website that at least acknowledges the issues of accessibility, usability, download speed, platform and resolution, then half the battle's been won.
Starting from scratch
---------------------
Designers who can transfer their relevant skills from other disciplines to Web design while at the same time recognising that they have to start from scratch will become the people most in demand over the next few years. By being able to understand and switch between 'old' and 'new' media, these designers will be in the rare position of being able to produce projects that work across and exploit their differences, rather than being hampered by them.
Page:
funkygamer wrote:
>Think hard, you could be payed more for doing the same thing somewhere else. Don't let "company loyalty" blur your reasoning on this, the company would drop you in a second if it suited them, likewise, you need to think about you.
I've been thinking hard about this for a while, but with the current state of the industry, it's only just starting to recover. My overall plan is to get some more Backend training and then try to look for something else.
Oxfordshire is pretty bad for money anyway and am concidering moving counties for the irght ammount of cash/Job but currently I have commitments here including my little girl.
>You sound like you are being exposed to some good technologies where you work, so it might be difficult going anywhere smaller, but you sound like you could get a job in a "blue chip" company.
When I started here over 2 1/2 years ago, there was only 3 of us, we are now a tem of 28+ and I have been involved in the growth and development process since day 1. I love it here, and have decided that if the payrise i want doesn't materialise, I'm off asap...
> £35ph about the market rate?
FOr Design work, yes, but for development and backend you can go as high as £60ph!! If you think about how much a company charges for your time, I'm actually on £75ph in company terms, but in phisical, it's much less.
>I ask this because I'm thinking of starting my own company, doing some work part-time to see how I go, if it's any good I might even give up my current job and go it alone.
Do you want a talented Designer/Coder? Only 25K a year!;-)
>Think hard, you could be payed more for doing the same thing somewhere else. Don't let "company loyalty" blur your reasoning on this, the company would drop you in a second if it suited them, likewise, you need to think about you.
I've been thinking hard about this for a while, but with the current state of the industry, it's only just starting to recover. My overall plan is to get some more Backend training and then try to look for something else.
Oxfordshire is pretty bad for money anyway and am concidering moving counties for the irght ammount of cash/Job but currently I have commitments here including my little girl.
>You sound like you are being exposed to some good technologies where you work, so it might be difficult going anywhere smaller, but you sound like you could get a job in a "blue chip" company.
When I started here over 2 1/2 years ago, there was only 3 of us, we are now a tem of 28+ and I have been involved in the growth and development process since day 1. I love it here, and have decided that if the payrise i want doesn't materialise, I'm off asap...
> £35ph about the market rate?
FOr Design work, yes, but for development and backend you can go as high as £60ph!! If you think about how much a company charges for your time, I'm actually on £75ph in company terms, but in phisical, it's much less.
>I ask this because I'm thinking of starting my own company, doing some work part-time to see how I go, if it's any good I might even give up my current job and go it alone.
Do you want a talented Designer/Coder? Only 25K a year!;-)
Graphic design I should think.
So how do you go about getting into it professionally anyway?
Any offical qualifications needed?
Any offical qualifications needed?
Tyla wrote:
> I get paid about 17K a year!!
Tyla, seriously now, from the professional posts you make, and the design work I have seen from you, in Leeds you are worth at least 24-27k, that is just design work alone, never mind coding. Where are you working?
> Unfortunately I work for a publisher and they fail to see
> this as seperate as publishing which is renowned for
> paying badly, but then the job is secure... I'm pushing
> for a payrise as we speak!!
I started out four years ago on 12k for a "traditional" design company, I basically helped them build a good reputation for building web sites. That was using just HTML & Photoshop, and a bit of QTVR. You are right about these types of people not paying much, but when I saw that my boss had a garage as big as my house (to house both his Saab and BMW in, naturally), I knew I needed to change jobs and get into more development work.
Think hard, you could be payed more for doing the same thing somewhere else. Don't let "company loyalty" blur your reasoning on this, the company would drop you in a second if it suited them, likewise, you need to think about you.
You sound like you are being exposed to some good technologies where you work, so it might be difficult going anywhere smaller, but you sound like you could get a job in a "blue chip" company.
> I do freelance to @ £35ph, £75 if Flash is involved!!
I just did a bit of freelance, only charged £10ph though! It was my for last company who needed helping out so I was generous. Is £35ph about the market rate? Do you charge different rates for just design work or just development work, or do you lump them in the same band?
I ask this because I'm thinking of starting my own company, doing some work part-time to see how I go, if it's any good I might even give up my current job and go it alone.
> I get paid about 17K a year!!
Tyla, seriously now, from the professional posts you make, and the design work I have seen from you, in Leeds you are worth at least 24-27k, that is just design work alone, never mind coding. Where are you working?
> Unfortunately I work for a publisher and they fail to see
> this as seperate as publishing which is renowned for
> paying badly, but then the job is secure... I'm pushing
> for a payrise as we speak!!
I started out four years ago on 12k for a "traditional" design company, I basically helped them build a good reputation for building web sites. That was using just HTML & Photoshop, and a bit of QTVR. You are right about these types of people not paying much, but when I saw that my boss had a garage as big as my house (to house both his Saab and BMW in, naturally), I knew I needed to change jobs and get into more development work.
Think hard, you could be payed more for doing the same thing somewhere else. Don't let "company loyalty" blur your reasoning on this, the company would drop you in a second if it suited them, likewise, you need to think about you.
You sound like you are being exposed to some good technologies where you work, so it might be difficult going anywhere smaller, but you sound like you could get a job in a "blue chip" company.
> I do freelance to @ £35ph, £75 if Flash is involved!!
I just did a bit of freelance, only charged £10ph though! It was my for last company who needed helping out so I was generous. Is £35ph about the market rate? Do you charge different rates for just design work or just development work, or do you lump them in the same band?
I ask this because I'm thinking of starting my own company, doing some work part-time to see how I go, if it's any good I might even give up my current job and go it alone.
Whooo Style! wrote:
> Tyla wrote:
>No it aint... I get paid about 17K a year!!
Hey, I'd speak
> to your boss, I've seen guys getting £50 an hour!!!!
Freelance wise, most definately... Unfortunately I work for a publisher and they fail to see this as seperate as publishing which is renowned for paying badly, but then the job is secure... I'm pushing for a payrise as we speak!!
I do freelance to @ £35ph, £75 if Flash is involved!!
> Tyla wrote:
>No it aint... I get paid about 17K a year!!
Hey, I'd speak
> to your boss, I've seen guys getting £50 an hour!!!!
Freelance wise, most definately... Unfortunately I work for a publisher and they fail to see this as seperate as publishing which is renowned for paying badly, but then the job is secure... I'm pushing for a payrise as we speak!!
I do freelance to @ £35ph, £75 if Flash is involved!!
Tyla wrote:
>No it aint... I get paid about 17K a year!!
Hey, I'd speak to your boss, I've seen guys getting £50 an hour!!!!
>No it aint... I get paid about 17K a year!!
Hey, I'd speak to your boss, I've seen guys getting £50 an hour!!!!
funkygamer wrote:
> Good post, I think I will print it out and file it away.... maybe my Search Engine post should have been about that long... :(
Wow... I've finally produced something that people have found useful... yipee!! ***head starting to swell***
I though your search engine post was great and will be filing it myself for future reference. I wrote one ages ago on guidelines for Search GUI's based on the theory of Computers and Human Interaction, maybe I'll post that one one day!... Dull subject, I know, but interesting when looking at the way that non-hardcore computer users interact with a PC and how Designers and Developers take things for granted based on their personal levels of experience and use.
Feeling quite chuffed now...
Back to the job hunting!;-)
> Good post, I think I will print it out and file it away.... maybe my Search Engine post should have been about that long... :(
Wow... I've finally produced something that people have found useful... yipee!! ***head starting to swell***
I though your search engine post was great and will be filing it myself for future reference. I wrote one ages ago on guidelines for Search GUI's based on the theory of Computers and Human Interaction, maybe I'll post that one one day!... Dull subject, I know, but interesting when looking at the way that non-hardcore computer users interact with a PC and how Designers and Developers take things for granted based on their personal levels of experience and use.
Feeling quite chuffed now...
Back to the job hunting!;-)
Whooo Style! wrote:
> woah, my eyes have gone funny...
Excellent post Mr Tyla sir, which has
> eminded me that I must get back into webdesign (and be better at it than last
> time..) the money you guys get is ridiculous..
No it aint... I get paid about 17K a year!!
> woah, my eyes have gone funny...
Excellent post Mr Tyla sir, which has
> eminded me that I must get back into webdesign (and be better at it than last
> time..) the money you guys get is ridiculous..
No it aint... I get paid about 17K a year!!
Wow, great post. Thanks
Page: