Re: critique please

Just because you use DHTML, Flash and other non-searchable binary web
applications does not mean you forget the search engines. It just takes a
little more work and expertise. For example, with flash you include
(noflash) and with javascript, you include text hrefs at the bottom.. you
test and create search friendly sites while still using high impact
technology. As member Bob Minnick, who I consider a search engine expert,
has taught; there is a lot more than just using text links to gaining high
ranks at the search engines and there are good ways around the use of binary
streams that don't sacrifice impact and quality.

Since paying attention to his words and websites I've been able to push many
of my pure Flash and other sites to high 1st page rankings. You just don't
have to dumb it down to achieve this.

> Less technology, yes. I have reduced the technology of my web design
site---I took out rollovers on my menu which was > Javascript based, and
other fancy wingdings and hits quadrupled overnight. I found the same
results with my  clients.

...Highly improbable in that it takes a while... maybe a couple of months.
for the bots to re-spyder a site.

> Google for "Spokane Web Designers.

Take out "Spokane" and try. Such a limiting keyword might be similar to
using a domain as a keyword in that it doesn't show anything.

> And re less graphic impact, I do not recommend Flash/shockwave graphics
because it interferes with some search engines

Again, very easy to work around as well as very easy to work around for
older browsers using sniffers and such.. but the point is that Clients often
want the impact that Flash, Animation and such provide. If you can provide
this as well as search engine friendliness, then you're in business.

> I live out in the country and I know that you cannot use a 58K or faster
modem out here as it still only operates at 28K or > slower. So everyone who
lives in the country cannot access such sites or it takes interminably long
to download such pages

You don't have to sacrifice anything to achieve fast loading pages. I often
use a little flash, java and javascript while keeping most index pages under
50k or so. You just have to be careful and thrifty. .. Let me give you an
example of being careful and understanding how it works.

You mention somewhere in your site that you might use a bigger logo on the
1st page then much smaller ones on other pages to save download times. You
see, once that bigger logo is already in cache from the index page, download
times would be faster if you used that preloaded image on the other pages..
switching to another size regardless of how little it might be adds.
Furthermore you end up with a little framed box on top.

Moreover, careful attention to things like javascript preload commands can
get larger images in while the visitor is reading or doing something on the
site.. ready to be displayed when needed.

> Are you saying you surf with 1280 resolution?

No, I surf at 1600 res. I don't full screen my browser either, but most
people do.

> It is my understanding that most surfers are still using 800x600 and I
have designed my sites for that resolution. I do a lot of > surfing myself
because I am a researcher on a lot of topics and when you get up to 1280
resolution the print gets too small > on lots of sites so I don't use it
when surfing myself.

Text does not get small at higher res when you have a larger browser.. it
stays proportional. Yes, it's smaller compared to the dimensions of the
viewing area, but not in size. For example, text is approximately the same
size on a 15 inch monitor at 640x480 as it is on a 17 at 800x600 and a 19 at
1024x768 at a 21 at 1280x1024.. not exactly, but you see the point.

As monitors get larger and larger, you're seeing higher and higher
resolutions being useds. After all, the point of a larger monitor is usually
to fit more on the screen. My point is that it might be likely that people
with lots of money might own larger monitors and have higher resolutions.
With a maxed browser, your % table widths pull elements where you didn't
intend.

I don't suggest that you change from designing for 800x600. I suggested that
you use more fixed cell widths to keep the page from being unfriendly to
higher resolutions. You wouldn't get a 6 inch wide side border that way for
the few who might use higher res. Again, you're trying to pay attention to
standards such that your site looks as intended to older stuff.. why not to
newer stuff as well? It's not hard to pay attention to both is my point.

> >running apps in less than full screen windows, as most mac users do,
>
> Why do you believe this is just a Mac problem?
>
> > is more
> >sophisticated,

I didn't say it was a Mac problem.. notice. I said that it was more
sophisticated the way Mac users do it. But, that's not important. Full
screen surfing is the way most PC owners do it and that's 95% of what is
selling so you have to pay attention to it. Mac users get into a good habit
of running apps in less than max screened windows because it's not so easy
to max a window.. but that's good in that it promotes a more intuitive
understanding of multi-tasking IMO.

> BASICALLY, most of my focus is on those who are not high income. I try to
make my sites accessible for all those folks who cannot utilize todays
higher technology--which most search engines won't accept anyway. That is
probably hurting my chances at clients who want those fancy wingdings but I
just need to be creative and find other ways to get around this--and thus my
asking for help on this list.

I understand, but you seemed to be asking why Web Site buyers might not be
purchasing from you. Who you wish to target a website that you build for a
client is your and his business, obviously. Business owners often have high
incomes and associated high tech items. That might be your target for a Web
design site and that's different than the target for Parkway Chevrolet,
where you're right.. you want to appeal to everyone and maybe not show off
the "wing-dings."

Final point and I've made it over and over... we don't have to sacrifice
impact, pizzazz, and technology to gain search engine friendliness, old
browser compatibility, cross platform compatibility, or slow modems. We can
appeal to both with a little time and effort. We have the tools to do so..
that's part of the reason for CSS and DHTML (javascript). We just don't have
to dumb it down to accoumplish your goals.


> take care
> Lori Eldridge
> www.loriswebs.com
>

Take care and again, I really wish you good luck in your endeavor.. and BTW,
I own and use a number of Macs..

-Craig

HTML: hwg-critique mailing list archives, maintained by Webmaster @ IWA