[Wolves] SQL problem

[sparkes]

On Wed, 2004-03-17 at 16:07, Matthew Revell wrote:
> Chris Procter wrote:
> 
> > For small web-design companies the time it takes to create a nice site for
> > your own business could just as easily be spent building a nice site for
> > someone who will pay, and when you live hand to mouth (as most small
> > companies do) getting paid at the end of the month depends on doing enough
> > paying work during that month.
> 
> Really not good enough :) If an individual or company wants to set 
> themselves up a web expert, of some kind, the only way to prove that 
> expertise is through a practical demonstration.
Am I the only one who heard Fred Dibnah say 'Practical Demostration'
then?

talking of web redesigns I am doing mine after lugradio tonight.  Gotta
keep up with the Langridges ;-)
> 
> I take the point about the time spent on your own site could be spent 
> making money, but I still say they should put in the extra time if they 
> want to be taken seriously; the marketplace doesn't care if they haven't 
> the time to put into designing their own site.
The site should at least have been good when it was designed.  If a
small company is overrun with work the news and other pages on the site
should reflect that and it should be obvious that they can do better but
are short of time.

Many web dev sites don't use any principles of design and reconise any
agreed standards.  That is not good enough, Matt is 100% right here.

> 
> The reall issue, tho', is where companies *do* create a site but one 
> that breaks so many basic rules. They demonstrate their ineptitude in 
> the skills they expert people to pay them for.
The main problem here is that customers just don't understand what they
are paying for.  Many of them think a spinning logo is a good example of
design :-(  many think the old IBM flaming logo thing was a good example
of design and not a piss take.  I used to get asked for flaming logos
back when I freelanced as a designer which is what I am about to start
doing again by the way if anyone has any paying work ;-)

> 
> > Plus the fact that a lot of people out there just have really bad taste but
> > dont realise it.
> 
> I'd say this isn't to do with taste. I don't like the Toyote Corolla but 
> I accept that it adheres to car design principles. The websites I'm 
> talking about are not designed with poor taste: they're created with a 
> flagrant disregard for the principles that the rest of us work so hard 
> to promote.

That's true.  You wouldn't buy a shed on wheels because it is blue and
has shiny wheels and go faster strips.  

But how to you promote something like accessability when the client just
wants a simple website at a price they can afford.  I used to sell
websites at more than twice the price of competitors on the same job
because I could demonstrate I had the skills and experience but about 2
years ago (the last time I freelanced) it seemed that a splash screen
and eyepopping colours designed by a kid out of a bedroom for pence
started winning contracts against sensible ideas.  How do you tell the
client they are wrong without actully saying that or evangalising
something they have no concept of and in most cases don't give a flying
FireFox(tm) about

sparkes