The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only.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.
Darkus wrote:
> Tyla wrote:
>
> I aim to break the £60k mark this year! Plus a coupel of weeks
> working in California.
>
> - why California?
Re working a site which hopefully will involve a few weeks at their offices in California!
> Tyla wrote:
>
> I aim to break the £60k mark this year! Plus a coupel of weeks
> working in California.
>
> - why California?
Re working a site which hopefully will involve a few weeks at their offices in California!
Page:
Mozilla 1.2.1 is far better than IE though.
I got that too.
I don't think there's anything to the site yet though.
I don't think there's anything to the site yet though.
Tyla, your personal site sends me to "Browser Upgrade Recommendation" when I have IE6. Why is this?
At least with this football website I'm making, my dad and co. can update scores and stuff via simple text boxes and they're stored in text files.
They don't have to go into the code at all to update it. I'll include basic HTML stuff under the boxes so that they can easily add pictures and stuff, it should be easy.
It used to be a HTML site made with Frontpage. My Dad didn't have a clue how to do it so I had to update the scores tables all the time.
It's basic but at least it allows them to updae it with their 'limited' knowledge!
They don't have to go into the code at all to update it. I'll include basic HTML stuff under the boxes so that they can easily add pictures and stuff, it should be easy.
It used to be a HTML site made with Frontpage. My Dad didn't have a clue how to do it so I had to update the scores tables all the time.
It's basic but at least it allows them to updae it with their 'limited' knowledge!
phi11ip wrote:
> How does the user update it when they haven't got a clue about
> websites?!?
>
> It just confuses me!
Hello continual support fee
> How does the user update it when they haven't got a clue about
> websites?!?
>
> It just confuses me!
Hello continual support fee
Icarus wrote:
> What does the intro on your site mean, Tyla?
>
> Oh, and you spelt experience wrong.
Cheers... Fixed the typo... The splash screen? It's just expression. A photograph of 2 Prozac tablets... hence digital-prozac.
> What does the intro on your site mean, Tyla?
>
> Oh, and you spelt experience wrong.
Cheers... Fixed the typo... The splash screen? It's just expression. A photograph of 2 Prozac tablets... hence digital-prozac.
I'd never charge for anything that I'd make, purely because it's crap.
And there's one thing that I really don't understand about people designing HTML sites.
How does the user update it when they haven't got a clue about websites?!?
It just confuses me!
And there's one thing that I really don't understand about people designing HTML sites.
How does the user update it when they haven't got a clue about websites?!?
It just confuses me!
phi11ip wrote:
> Seems that every site is trying it on now, although this is the best
> site that I've found so far for designing sites. Still, it's all basic
> HTML and I could probably do better!
>
One of the reasons why there are so many of them about. Everybody thinks they can do better.
I expect to see phi11ipwebdesign.com very soon. :)
> http://www.murdermayhem.com/
>
> Plus the minimum that they charge for design is £50. How could
> anyone pay £50 for that!?!
I think you're being unfair now. The site is nothing spectacular for sure. However its clean, its easy on the eye and the design never gets in the way of the information the site is trying to convey. It has no artistic merit for sure, but thats not a requirement for every site.
Your complaints about the costs are irrelevant too, theres more work gone into that site than is actually visible for sure. Theres the time you might spend talking to the client about what they want, producing a range of possible designs for the client to choose from etc.. The list can be quite extensive for a company. And where as you cannot justify directly charging the client for it, you have to cost it in somehow.
> Seems that every site is trying it on now, although this is the best
> site that I've found so far for designing sites. Still, it's all basic
> HTML and I could probably do better!
>
One of the reasons why there are so many of them about. Everybody thinks they can do better.
I expect to see phi11ipwebdesign.com very soon. :)
> http://www.murdermayhem.com/
>
> Plus the minimum that they charge for design is £50. How could
> anyone pay £50 for that!?!
I think you're being unfair now. The site is nothing spectacular for sure. However its clean, its easy on the eye and the design never gets in the way of the information the site is trying to convey. It has no artistic merit for sure, but thats not a requirement for every site.
Your complaints about the costs are irrelevant too, theres more work gone into that site than is actually visible for sure. Theres the time you might spend talking to the client about what they want, producing a range of possible designs for the client to choose from etc.. The list can be quite extensive for a company. And where as you cannot justify directly charging the client for it, you have to cost it in somehow.
Darkus wrote:
> Tyla wrote:
>
> I aim to break the £60k mark this year! Plus a coupel of weeks
> working in California.
>
> - why California?
Re working a site which hopefully will involve a few weeks at their offices in California!
> Tyla wrote:
>
> I aim to break the £60k mark this year! Plus a coupel of weeks
> working in California.
>
> - why California?
Re working a site which hopefully will involve a few weeks at their offices in California!
Page: