Is the Professional Look Really Better?

[Thomas A. Rowe]

There are a wide range of nice, professionally designed themes and templates available from 3rd
Parties for FrontPage, as well as Dreamweaver, for users that don't want to use the default themes
or templates provided and many are free or low cost. These provide additional choices of themes and
templates for those that don't want to take the time and effort to develop a custom site design.
Themes and Templates however can save time in designing a site, so that is why many people use them.

FP is designed to be used by both people who are just getting started in web development, as well as
experience web developers.

Just because an application come with themes, templates, clipart, doesn't mean that they have to be
used. FP as well as Dreamweaver doesn't control the design or look of a web site, the user does by
the choices they make, the skills they have and/or their willingness to move outside the FP or
Dreamweaver provided box.

A commercial/business web site reflect the image of the organization behind the site, is the site
look shabby few people will return. If you visited a local store and the store was in disarray,
etc., what would your opinion be of the ownership, would you return?

--
==============================================
Thomas A. Rowe (Microsoft MVP - FrontPage)
WEBMASTER Resources(tm)

FrontPage Resources, WebCircle, MS KB Quick Links, etc.
==============================================

 

[Thomas A. Rowe]

But you didn't design/create it, it a template based site where you just added content.

--
==============================================
Thomas A. Rowe (Microsoft MVP - FrontPage)
WEBMASTER Resources(tm)

FrontPage Resources, WebCircle, MS KB Quick Links, etc.
==============================================

 

[Stephen Horrillo]

You can pick up some templates (very different from themes) and quite
easily
design a very nice site. In my opinion, a Mambo site is as easy to pick
out
as a FrontPage themed site and I don't particularly like either.

That's why I tried to ask some novices of their opinions. All I know is
Front Page so I can spot one a mile away. But you're right, now that I know
what a Mambo site looks like I will probably be spotting those now. Being
that you don't like either is there any one's that you do like? My host
provides Nexellant and PostNuke. Any suggestions?

BTW, I know I'm looking for shortcuts and that's wrong. When I have the time
I'll learn all this stuff from the ground up but I have too much on my plate
right now to do it right so I'm sort of forced to compromise for now.

--
Warmest regards,

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

 

[Stephen Horrillo]

Everything (other than the fact that I didn't use FP). It managed me
links.
It created and managed my templates and includes. It gave me a wonderful
UI
into the details of the code and the CSS. And it provided a very
convenient
vehicle for me to upload the final site and maintain the files on the
remote
location. What else could I ask for?

Then why didn't you actually use Front Page to create the site?

--
Warmest regards,

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

 

[Chuck Davis]

My definition of quality: "Meets or exceeds the expectations of the client."
in message Although not crazy about the orange/red/gold color scheme, overall the cms
page looks more pro. Perhaps use a different color palette. Maybe red is
physcologically threatening.

 

[Jim Cheshire \(JIMCO\)]

BTW, I know I'm looking for shortcuts and that's wrong. When I have
the time I'll learn all this stuff from the ground up but I have too
much on my plate right now to do it right so I'm sort of forced to
compromise for now.

I don't think that's wrong at all. You can use any one of the vast number
of good quality templates out there and design a great looking site in no
time flat.

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

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

 

[Windsun]

I hear that a lot, and it simply is not true.

It might SEEM true, because it is so easy to get a simple site up and
running with FP, but the same design sense applies to any site, not just FP.
I have seen many sites made with FP that looked as good or better than many
of the so-called professional sites.

It is not the tool at fault, it is who uses it and how. I have seen demo
sites (for themes) made with 2 different methods - FP and Dreamweaver, and
they were virtually identical. Anyone can make a bad site with any software.
That is not a reflection on the software.

 

[Windsun]

You seem to be of the idea that you need some kind of pre-designed theme. If
so, there are hundreds, if not thousands, of professional FP themes you can
buy for $10 to $100. But you don't need themes, or you can make your own
theme. Some of the themes that come with FP are not real good, some are. But
I think that most larger sites don't use themes, or use a minimal theme just
to set the basic tone of the site.

 

[Windsun]

Not really. Same basic content, but you used pre-existing templates. None or
little of the actual design is yours.

 

[Windsun]

I think you need to get past the FP hype.

FP, like anything else, is just a tool. Basically an editing tool, like
Word. It does not think or design. What it does for me is make basic text
editing and site management a lot easier. I don't have time to learn HTML,
Java, and all the other things in depth

If I was a professional site designer I would probably not use FP. But I am
not, my main purpose is to take care of our company websites. Our websites
are what makes us money, not making the websites.

Yes, in many cases it would be nice to be able to sit down and write some
fancy javascript to do all kinds of neat things. But I do not have time for
that. So I try to make them look reasonably professional, but I am not going
to spend hours or weeks learning how to write cgi scripts.

For me FP does what I want it do, and I don't have to spend hours if I need
to make a few simple changes on 1500 pages. I just change the DWT and it is
done.

 

[William Tasso]

While sitting in a puddle Stephen Horrillo scribbled in the mud:


comes burp barf

and don't forget that sticky goo stuff that leaks from both ends

 

[Fat Sam]

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.

Take your Mambo site and make 2 changes....

1. Make the navigation a bit more obvious. At the minute it's too small
and hidden away at the side of the page

2. Put your search box in a more logical place. At the minute, it looks
like it's in a completely random location.

Now take your FP page, and throw it in the bin....

 

[Murray]

It was not the tool I was using at the time. It would have done the same
job, however.

 

[Steve Easton]

FrontPage was not designed to "just" use themes. Themes are just an option.
If you used a theme you didn't "design" anything, you just used an automated process which severely
limited your options.
Kill the theme and start with a new blank page, and then you will be a "designer."


--
Steve Easton
Microsoft MVP FrontPage
95isalive
This site is best viewed............
........................with a computer

 

[GreyWyvern]

And lo, Jim Cheshire (JIMCO) didst speak in
microsoft.public.frontpage.client,alt.www.webmaster:

I didn't ask if my site looked amateurish. I was telling you that I
developed my site (the layout of it) in FrontPage and it does not look
amatuerish.

That's the power of positive thinking!

Grey

 

[GreyWyvern]

And lo, Stephen Horrillo didst speak in
microsoft.public.frontpage.client,alt.www.webmaster:

Could you convert what you said to "webdesign for dummie's" lingo?

Put ads on each site. Whichever makes the most money wins.

However, if more people are clicking on your ads, doesn't that mean your
content isn't interesting enough?

Grey

 

[GreyWyvern]

And lo, Stephen Horrillo didst speak in
microsoft.public.frontpage.client,alt.www.webmaster:

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.

*That* is why you fail.

Unless you're a patent beginner, "look" has nothing to do with the site's
administrative interface.

See Mark Parnell's reply, follow the links, become enlightened.

Grey

 

[GreyWyvern]

And lo, Steve Easton didst speak in
microsoft.public.frontpage.client,alt.www.webmaster:

Kill the theme and start with a new blank page, and then you will be a
"designer."

In only the most general sense of the term. Any WYSIWYG webpage designing
software makes a lot of decisions *for* you, because it tries to guess
what you want to do and do it the way it knows best.

FP and DW are great for getting a quick start. They almost invariably
make for a lousy finish.

Grey

 

[Murray]

I completely disagree with the lousy finish part. Again, it's the user that
makes the start and the finish. A good, experienced user will be able to
use either of those tools to make a site that is nearly HTML authoring tool
agnostic. For example, on my site (http://www.great-web-sights.com), were
it not for the dead giveaway template markup, you would not be able to tell
which authoring system I used, including Notepad.

Or is that covered by the almost invariably part?

 

[Benign Vanilla]

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.

IMHO...you need to evaluate the site, not the tool you used to create it.
Many "webmasters" scoff at anyone that uses FP. FP is in my toolset, but
it's not my only tool.

When you look at a house to purchase do you what kind of hammer they used?