| LED Digest 1777: Weirdness at Alexa? also HTML Editor Shootout |
|
|
|
================================================== The LED Digest Moderated Discussion List "Effective Online Advertising, Since 1997" pair Networks: The LED's Web Host Hosting and Domain Reg. from a Trusted Leader pair.com for Hosting | pairNIC.com for Domains ================================================== List Moderator: Published by: Adam Audette LED Digest adam,led-digest.com http://www.led-digest.com ................................................ April 7, 2004 Issue #1777 ................................................ .....IN THIS DIGEST..... ==== CONTINUING ================= --== HTML Editors? ==-- ~ Michael Legere "For laying out tables nothing is better than Homesite." ~ Veronica Yuill "Don't use Front Page's proprietary 'bots'!"' ~ Marty R. Milette "...clients want a good solution now, not a perfect solution in a year." --== The Local Search Buzz ==-- ~ Peggy Deras "My web site is very local in its focus..." ~ Greg Watson "...a simple listing does not begin to encompass the incredible wealth of local information..." --== Choosing an SEO ==-- ~ Samantha Mignano "All an SEO does is optimize your rankings." ==== BILLBOARD =================== --== Confused by Alexa's Ranking ==-- ~ Richard Graham ===== CONTINUING ================================= From: Michael Legere Subject: HTML editors > I'd like some opinions on HTML editors... Dreamweaver, > Frontpage (2000 or newer), others? What can you recommend > for a "skilled amateur" (not a pro)? - Carol O'Leary, LED 1771 I use Dreamweaver and Homesite to code my pages. Each has its strong points. For laying out tables nothing is better than Homesite. But for Coldfusion pages you can't beat Dreamweaver (now that Coldfusion Studio is no longer available). Even though Dreamweaver is a WSIWG editor I do 99% of my code by hand. As for Frontpage I avoid it unless a client already has a Frontpage site. Michael Legere http://www.mediainnovationz.com ------- new post - same topic ------- From: Veronica Yuill Subject: HTML editors > I have used Frontpage for several years, and continue to > do so. There is much that I like about it, which is why I stay > with it despite having run into some difficulties with it. There > are also some irritations I experience in using it. - Kurt Francis, LED 1776 When I said in a recent LED that Front Page was a capable HTML editor, I forgot to mention one important proviso: Don't use Front Page's proprietary "bots"! These are nothing but trouble, as Kurt has discovered, and they tie you into using Front Page forever. There are always better ways of providing the same functionality that don't rely on flaky FP extensions. For example: > What Frontpage calls "master borders" are no longer > dependable on mysite. Use server-side includes instead. Once you've set them up, FP will happily allow you to edit pages containing them, and they will work no matter what editor you use. Plus when you make a change to an include file that appears on every page on your site, you only have to upload *one* file and the change will appear on all affected pages immediately. No more hours waiting for FP to clunk through updating all the pages. Note: Dreamweaver's library item feature is similarly lame! If you have common content that appears on many pages, always use SSI -- it will simplify your life enormously, and you'll wonder how you managed without it. > Frontpage also offers handy canned themes... Another inefficient FP speciality! Use template pages, includes, and CSS instead -- it will make it easy to keep all your pages consistent. Again, a change to a single CSS file can change the appearance of every page on your site. I haven't used the latest version of FP, but I'm sure it must offer reasonable support for CSS. HTH Veronica Yuill Archetype Information Technology Ltd http://www.archetype-it.com/english/ ------- new post - same topic ------- From: Marty R. Milette Subject: HTML editors I always tell my friend, "Just because the only tool you know how to use is a hammer -- does NOT mean that every problem is a nail!". I typically use more than half a dozen tools to build sites -- including FrontPage, Dreamweaver, Visual Studio, Corel Paint, and even (you'd hardly believe!) Microsoft Excel, Microsoft SQL Server and Microsoft Access. As much as I hate the 'best of breed' approach -- there are some cases where certain tools just make certain kinds of work faster, easier and more productive. If you develop web sites as a business, rather than a hobby -- you're getting paid to produce RESULTS. The less time you spend, the more money you earn. As I tell my UNIX friends, "clients want a GOOD solution NOW, not a PERFECT solution in a year". Clients don't care a lick about the 'beauty' or 'purity' of your HTML code -- they want a decent looking site, traffic and SALES. (And forget about cross-platform nonsense -- in 10 years of web development, I have yet to meet a client who's EVER asked for it.) Spending months typing in reams of HTML by hand is something I'm capable of doing -- but NOBODY is going to PAY for that level of 'perfectionism'. Spending months producing an entire site in Flash or Shockwave, or using JavaScript for everything (including all navigation) is equally futile. (Spiders can't get into it -- let alone index anything.) What good is having the most beautiful site in the world, if it will never be found? Instead, when I want to whip up a site FAST and get the basic structure and page stubs organized, I'll use FrontPage. The ability to move pages around in the 'Navigation View' and have the HTML for the navigation code and menu heirarchies taken care of automatically is absolutely brilliant. This feature alone saves HUNDREDS of hours of work per site. (Ever have a client who DIDN'T want pages or sections moved around in the heirarchy?) The next step is NOT to make the site 'beautiful' or have 'fancy features' -- the next step is to let the site WORK, and use the statistics reports see what pages ARE attracting TRAFFIC -- and THEN OPTIMIZE those pages first. It amazes me how many people spend months optimizing and fiddling over tiny details on pages that get no traffic. What a terrible waste of time and effort. An interesting point was also mentioned -- many clients WANT to TAKE OVER the site and maintain it themselves after development. FrontPage is infinitely easier to train someone on than any other product. Especially when the FrontPage Server extensions are installed -- because updating the site turns into a one or two-click operation instead of tedious and error-prone FTP sessions. Lots of great posts in this group! Gotta love it! Marty R. Milette http://www.custom-toolbars.com marty, milette.com ------- new post - new topic ------- From: Peggy Deras Subject: Local search DMOZ has been offering edited-by-a-human, state-based directories for as long as I have been associated with them. I think most submitters don't realize they can submit their sites to more than one relevant category including the state where they do business. My web site is very local in its focus, and I belong to a nation and world wide industry, Kitchen and Bath Design, Products and Installation / Remodeling, which is extremely local. I offer no products to be sold on the web, only personal services to people within driving distance of my office. In three years my site has gone from nothing to providing 70% of my referral business, while decreasing calls from people who really don't want, and can't afford, my services to almost nil. I have been able to reduce my Yellow Pages ad and expenses to an in-line pointer to my web site, so I am actually keeping more money (about 60% savings) in my pocket every month. I credit good research on my part in creating a site which offers content kitchen and bath consumers appreciate. I had a great deal of help from the designer who got the site up and running (Grantastic), but without my own ideas and input it would be just another of the myriad cookie cutter on-line brochures you see in my industry. I get thousands of hits a week because of my site's content and ranking, but few stay for more than a page or two. Those are my potential clients, local people who are looking for me. If I get one new client a week I am as busy as I can handle, since I provide all the services myself. Needless to say I am very happy with my site and results. Thanks also to Adam and this forum and to DMOZ. Between the two I have learned a great deal about what makes a good site. It comes down to one word. Content. Peggy Deras, CKD, CID Kitchen Artworks www.kitchenartworks.com ------- new post - same topic ------- From: Greg Watson Subject: Local search > The key to Local Search is going to be the > *timeliness* of relevant *current* search results. - Greg Watson, LED 1772 > People ask me how listing their site in a locally-smart > search site like ours differs from merely placing an ad > in the Internet Yellow Pages. A big part of the answer is > that the website owner can easily change his descriptive > or ad copy... In this sense, the online Yellow Pages are > years ahead of Google and the other web crawlers. - David Yancey, LED 1773 David seems to defend the "directory" concept as being an all inclusive concept for local search -- while dismissing the concept of local search engine indexing of local content. I was not intending to be critical of David's Directory concept. Local directories have their place, but they are not the only Local Search concept or engine. While David may offer his customers the ability to change their listing, a simple listing does not begin to encompass the incredible wealth of local information that is available or SHOULD be available with *timely* *current* search results. I suggested that two components were critical to the success of Local Search. The first is that local businesses must commit to providing / creating quality local content that is updated on a timely basis. IMO, this is probably the greatest challenge to the success of local search. Regardless of how a user finds local content (whether it is through a local search engine or local directory), they must find quality timely relevant local content. The second issue is local search technologies -- ability to provide *timely* *current* access to local content, which I believe must include multiple search technologies that can provide access to quality timely and current local content (certainly even David's directory listing technology can play a role in that function.) Greg Watson ------- new post - new topic ------- From: Samantha Mignano Subject: Choosing SEO > ... if you contact satisfied clients, be sure to ask > for the results they have seen. If it's just rankings > on a few terms - without an increase in business - > question their satisfaction level. - Tom Anson, LED 1776 Tom, I read your post regarding listings not increasing your business. With respect -- I would say that search engine rankings alone will not increase your business. All an SEO does is optimize your rankings. If the site the customers then reach does not call them to action -- ie to purchase from you, that cannot surely be the fault of the SEO? Or am I missing something? Kind regards Samantha Mignano (nee Jenkins) Snappy Graffix Media www.snappygraffix.com ==== BILLBOARD ==================================== From: Richard Graham Subject: Confusing Alexa > My Alexa ranking at this moment is 261,466... And my > average visits per day is 30-40. I don't understand that > how come a site in the top 2% gets only 30-40 visits per day. - Sunny Jamiel, LED 1775 I'm confused by Alexa as well. My Alexa rank comes out to be 348,670 but my stats show 2,000 plus visitors a day. Does anyone know why this should be? Or is there a more reliable way to judge a site's visitors? Be genki, Richard Graham http://www.GenkiEnglish.net ------------------------------------------------------- The LED Digest is sponsored by pair Networks: pair.com for Hosting | pairNIC.com for Domains Copyright 1995-2004 Adam Audette. All Rights Reserved. ----------------------------------------------------------------- "Wit is educated insolence." - Aristotle |
