Is the Professional Look Really Better?

S

Stephen Horrillo

I created two versions of the same basic information. One in Front Page, one
with Mambo. I showed both to a few people and they seem to like the
"amateurish" Front Page version over the Mambo one. I got comments like "the
FP one is less threatening" it's easier to navigate," "easier on the eyes."
I'm new to this but it makes me wonder if IN PRACTICE if a very basic
website isn't better. My FP site is at http://www.brokeragenttraining.com
the Mambo site is at http://www.brokeragenttraining.com/CMS. I personally
would feel more comfortable doing business with someone with the Mambo type
site but that's not the real life feedback I'm getting so far.

--
Warmest regards,

Stephen Horrillo, Realtor / C.Ht.
For MLS & Computer Training: www.BrokerAgentTraining.com
Realtors Earn Over 100% at EXIT: www.over100percent.com
 
S

saz

I created two versions of the same basic information. One in Front Page, one
with Mambo. I showed both to a few people and they seem to like the
"amateurish" Front Page version over the Mambo one. I got comments like "the
FP one is less threatening" it's easier to navigate," "easier on the eyes."
I'm new to this but it makes me wonder if IN PRACTICE if a very basic
website isn't better. My FP site is at http://www.brokeragenttraining.com
the Mambo site is at http://www.brokeragenttraining.com/CMS. I personally
would feel more comfortable doing business with someone with the Mambo type
site but that's not the real life feedback I'm getting so far.
Click to expand...

No comparison - I like the mambo site much better. The FP is very plain
and does nothing to make me want to explore further.

My only suggestion would be to make the text a little larger.
 
T

Travis Hubbard

The best test would be a day or so of adwords splitting the landing
page between the two. Then do an analysis of the conversion rates
between the sites.

That said...mambo/post-nuke, etc sites typically perform better since
they give a nice feel (real company) to the user.

And as long as the spiders can index some text you'll be in decent
shape afa seo is concerned.

FWIW.

Travis
http://www.travishubbard.net
 
J

Jim Cheshire \(JIMCO\)

Stephen said:
I created two versions of the same basic information. One in Front
Page, one with Mambo. I showed both to a few people and they seem to
like the "amateurish" Front Page version over the Mambo one. I got
comments like "the FP one is less threatening" it's easier to
navigate," "easier on the eyes." I'm new to this but it makes me
wonder if IN PRACTICE if a very basic website isn't better. My FP
site is at http://www.brokeragenttraining.com the Mambo site is at
http://www.brokeragenttraining.com/CMS. I personally would feel more
comfortable doing business with someone with the Mambo type site but
that's not the real life feedback I'm getting so far.
Click to expand...

The CMS site is much better. More professional. However, I would add some
cell padding to your tables.

As for "Mambo vs. FrontPage", the issue here is not in the software. It's
in the design method. FrontPage is simply a tool. How you use that tool is
what's going to dictate the result.

As an example, I built my site in FrontPage and I don't think it looks
amateurish.

--
Jim Cheshire
JIMCO
http://www.jimcoaddins.com

Now offering templates ranging from
affordable standard templates to
powerful e-commerce applications!
 
M

Murray

I'm not crazy about the colors, but the mambo site has style. The FP site
(recognizing that it's not the tool it's the tool-er) has none (well, very
little).
 
T

Tom J

As an example, I built my site in FrontPage and I don't think it
looks amateurish.
Click to expand...

I don't think it does either. By going there it also confirmed what I
thought I already knew. The quiz confirmed that over 95% of users have
pop-ups blocked!! ;-)

Tom J
 
S

Stephen Horrillo

The CMS site is much better. More professional. However, I would add
some
cell padding to your tables.

As for "Mambo vs. FrontPage", the issue here is not in the software. It's

in the design method. FrontPage is simply a tool. How you use that tool
is
what's going to dictate the result.

As an example, I built my site in FrontPage and I don't think it looks
amateurish.
Click to expand...

I understand that FP is just a tool but what makes FP good is the ease that
it takes to make changes/updates to the site. It seems that the more
professional the look, in other words the farther you stray away from shared
borders and templates, the harder it is to make global changes to the site.
For example http://balanceandsuccess.com/ looks to me like it was made with
FP and IMO it looks professional, but how easy is it to add pages or change
the navigation?

BTW, I've been to your site before and I never considered the look of it
because I wanted what you had on your site. So in my case the content was
king. In looking at it in light of you asking does it look amateurish, I
would have to say it does not have the look that I would not consider
"professional." But yet it practice it gets the job done and didn't raise
any red flags in my mind back when I visited it. In fact I remember saying
to myself that whoever designed these add-ins must be a genius.

--
Warmest regards,

Stephen Horrillo, Realtor / C.Ht.
For MLS & Computer Training: www.BrokerAgentTraining.com
Realtors Earn Over 100% at EXIT: www.over100percent.com
 
S

Stephen Horrillo

I'm not crazy about the colors, but the mambo site has style. The FP site

(recognizing that it's not the tool it's the tool-er) has none (well, very

little).
Click to expand...

That's just it. I constructed the site using shared borders and the template
a theme that FP provided and that's the way it looks. Of course you can go
through what IMO is extraordinary means to make it look professional but
then who needs Front Page? Might as well use notepad. Right? Or am I missing
something?

Also the main question in my mind is, does (in practice) style really
sell/motivate in a measurable way?

--
Warmest regards,

Stephen Horrillo, Realtor / C.Ht.
For MLS & Computer Training: www.BrokerAgentTraining.com
Realtors Earn Over 100% at EXIT: www.over100percent.com
 
G

Gerry W - for email use my name at dergal 0 com

Jim Cheshire (JIMCO) said:
Stephen Horrillo wrote:
Click to expand...
The CMS site is much better. More professional. However, I would add some
cell padding to your tables.

As for "Mambo vs. FrontPage", the issue here is not in the software. It's
in the design method. FrontPage is simply a tool. How you use that tool is
what's going to dictate the result.

As an example, I built my site in FrontPage and I don't think it looks
amateurish.
http://www.jimcoaddins.com
Click to expand...

all but the banner!!!
http://www.jimcoaddins.com/images/banner/STBanner.gif

;)
 
M

Murray

Or am I missing
something?
Click to expand...

Well, understand that you are considering two extremes here. In my
experience you do not need to go through extraordinary measures to get sites
that look professional *and* are easy to maintain.

I don't know about how you feel, but my site at
http://www.great-web-sights.com seems professional to me. It is as easy as
it comes to maintain. The content is on the individual pages, the
presentation is in the stylesheets, and the navigation is in an include. I
guess it doesn't get any simpler, really.
Also the main question in my mind is, does (in practice) style really
sell/motivate in a measurable way?
Click to expand...

Yes, I think it does. Attention to detail is part of what style is about.
A pleasing visitor experience is another part.

I wish I had some.... 8)
 
T

Tom Pepper Willett

It's a poisonous snake ;-)


--
===
Tom "Pepper" Willett
Microsoft MVP - FrontPage
---
About FrontPage 2003:
http://office.microsoft.com/home/office.aspx?assetid=FX01085802
FrontPage 2003 Product Information:
http://www.microsoft.com/office/frontpage/prodinfo/default.mspx
Understanding FrontPage:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/office/understanding/frontpage/
===
| Stupid Question: WHAT IS MAMBO?
|
| "Stephen Horrillo" wrote:
|
| > I created two versions of the same basic information. One in Front Page,
one
| > with Mambo. I showed both to a few people and they seem to like the
| > "amateurish" Front Page version over the Mambo one. I got comments like
"the
| > FP one is less threatening" it's easier to navigate," "easier on the
eyes."
| > I'm new to this but it makes me wonder if IN PRACTICE if a very basic
| > website isn't better. My FP site is at
http://www.brokeragenttraining.com
| > the Mambo site is at http://www.brokeragenttraining.com/CMS. I
personally
| > would feel more comfortable doing business with someone with the Mambo
type
| > site but that's not the real life feedback I'm getting so far.
| >
| > --
| > Warmest regards,
| >
| > Stephen Horrillo, Realtor / C.Ht.
| > For MLS & Computer Training: www.BrokerAgentTraining.com
| > Realtors Earn Over 100% at EXIT: www.over100percent.com
| >
 
T

Tom Pepper Willett

Stephen:

As a marketing person, my beliefs are that there are lots of theories and
opinions about what works best. Many say Blue lends a feeling of quality and
trust. Red makes people want to act, now! Green makes people want to spend
money.

I am a firm believer in those colors.


--
===
Tom "Pepper" Willett
Microsoft MVP - FrontPage
---
About FrontPage 2003:
http://office.microsoft.com/home/office.aspx?assetid=FX01085802
FrontPage 2003 Product Information:
http://www.microsoft.com/office/frontpage/prodinfo/default.mspx
Understanding FrontPage:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/office/understanding/frontpage/
===
|
|
| > I'm not crazy about the colors, but the mambo site has style. The FP
site
| >
| > (recognizing that it's not the tool it's the tool-er) has none (well,
very
| >
| > little).
|
| What colors do you prefer and why?
|
| --
| Warmest regards,
|
| Stephen Horrillo, Realtor / C.Ht.
| For MLS & Computer Training: www.BrokerAgentTraining.com
| Realtors Earn Over 100% at EXIT: www.over100percent.com
 
S

Stephen Horrillo

I don't know about how you feel, but my site at
http://www.great-web-sights.com seems professional to me. It is as easy
as
it comes to maintain. The content is on the individual pages, the
presentation is in the stylesheets, and the navigation is in an include.
I
guess it doesn't get any simpler, really.
Click to expand...

That site wasn't created using a FP theme right? It looks like you created
your own backround and practically everything else. All you did was use FP
to upload it to your webspace. Right? How did FP aid you in creating this
site?

--
Warmest regards,

Stephen Horrillo, Realtor / C.Ht.
For MLS & Computer Training: www.BrokerAgentTraining.com
Realtors Earn Over 100% at EXIT: www.over100percent.com
 

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments. After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.

Ask a Question

Similar Threads

CMS Versus FP 37
How to reference a document without the .htm 3
No CSS Option In Themes 6
Using Frames and Robot File 8
Two Different Ways Form Validation Errors Display 2
New link not showing. 5
Lost Navigation Structure! 3
Poor Webmaster Personal Sites 158

Top