Macaulay 0 #1 June 25, 2002 I wrote this long-ass post in the middle of the night over the weekend, but the forums were down, so I'm posting it now: ____________________________________________________ I've just spent the last few hours examining literally every USPA drop zone's web site. Skydiving has come a long way in terms of aerodynamics. The advances over the past few years have been phenomenal. However, when it comes to Internet technologies, the venues that showcase our advanced support have always been drastically behind. Most drop zones do what they do really, really well. They have great safety records, fun jumps, paid employees, beer at the end of the day, etc, because, understandably, that's where their focus lies. But when it comes to bringing in the wuffo to do the tandem that will keep the drop zone afloat, your average person just may be turned away from skydiving at the web site, as was the case with a friend of mine. In some people's minds, a poor quality web site reflects the quality of the company. This may seem foreign to us, because, being that we are skydivers, none of us were turned away by our drop zone's web site, being that, to date, they've all looked like crap. Being a designer, programmer and skydiver, this sent me on a quest to find if any drop zones out there have made the effort to peer out into the world of marketing beyond the DZ, and utilize the existing technology and design styles to their advantage. No surprise, there weren't too many. Almost every drop zone site uses background tiles of thick, fluffy clouds, sometimes with a little blue mixed in. Not only is it ugly as hell, but think about it... in a sport that more or less demands a lack of clouds, the first thing DZs are doing is stamping clouds all over their sites... often times using the same images as other sites (beknownst to them or not). If I had a dime for every giant typo I came across, right on the home page or huge, flying around one of the countless weak, repulsive Flash intros, I could probably afford to fly to wherever the sun is and jump, rather than write this post at 2:20am. I even came across one drop zone that just took PD's old design and changed the links. To the credit of these primitive, unattractive sites, they were often easy to use and well-organized, until you run into broken links in the navigation, which occur on probably, no joke, 90% of the sites I visited. Yet, there has been some movement, and with any luck, the bar will be raised for drop zones, which are currently notorious for having the ugliest sites on the web. I came across about half a dozen web sites that looked decent and worked well, but still weren't up to par by today's standards for web design, layout and programming. There were only four drop zone web sites that I would consider to be on top of the web design game. I've compiled a list of what I see are their pros and cons, in hopes that maybe some drop zones will take notice: ----------------------------------------------------------- 1.800.FUN.JUMP - Hollister, California http://www.1800funjump.com PROS - Probably the best-looking drop zone site on the web, IMO - Super-easy to use - Printable CONS - Found a number of style and list tag bugs (the above-mentioned "ugly" sites probably have a billion of these, but they are far more noticeable on such an otherwise clean site) - Not really too bad, but the site should use includes, if it doesn't already, as opposed to straight HTML, to better maintain links ----------------------------------------------------------- SKYDIVE OREGON - Molalla, Oregon http://www.skydiveoregon.com PROS - A Flash Intro that is actually good - Design is super-clean - Super-fast-loading - Written in PHP, the ONLY drop zone's site that has moved beyond HTML - Well-organized and easy to use - Printable CONS - As great as the Flash intro is, it's still a Flash intro that must be skipped when you return - There's a pop-behind that whuffos might find useful, but experienced jumpers will find to be a nuisance ----------------------------------------------------------- SKYDIVE CHICAGO - Ottawa, Illinois http://www.skydivechicago.com PROS - Great aesthetic design - Home navigation is easy to use - Nice, subtle use of Flash CONS - The navigation changes and becomes somewhat inconsistent and confusing if not on the home page - Lots of buried pages that don't tell you where you are gets you lost - Frames prevent bookmarking and provide a printing hurdle or blockade for the less web-savvy ----------------------------------------------------------- CENTRAL MAINE SKYDIVING - Pittsfield, Maine http://www.centralmaineskydiving.com PROS - Simple, clean, pretty design - Good use of CSS - Super-fast loading - Printable CONS - The saturation level of the blue is a little bit too much - The quality level of the JPGs could stand to be raised without really adding to the load time - Gives no information to the experienced jumper, but this DZ may focus on students, anyway - Small enough to maintain in HTML, but dynamic languages really are the way to go for even small projects nowadays ----------------------------------------------------------- I also call upon the designers and programmers out there to help your DZ out a bit... at least at a discounted rate (as I did for mine). I did see about eight other sites that looked good and functioned well, but the above four stood out for me. If I missed any, let me know. - Mac Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
narcimund 0 #2 June 26, 2002 Well hmmm. I don't know if responding to this is kosher or not. It might be seen as prohibited advertising in the forums, since I'm a web designer marketing to dropzone clients. I'll just have to chance it. Opinions, Sangiro? I completely agree with you that most DZs have absolutely awful websites. The average homeless person's website is more polished than most DZ sites. Now, on to some specifics: I agree that all four of your examples are attractive to the eye and among the best the industry is offering. I don't agree that all four serve the marketing needs of the DZ particularly well. You're clearly biased towards dynamic languages, but I'm not convinced they're necessary for the brochure sites dropzones need. The advantages in maintainability are still outweighed by the limited market share. There are many more HTML savvy designers working in excellent HTML shops than PHP gurus. I don't believe in building my clients a site that unnecessarily burdens them technologically, and PHP does exactly that, in my opinion. My reviews of the ones you identified: http://www.1800funjump.com This site looks pretty, but it's more about typography than skydiving. The DZ name and knocked back photo on the homepage completely overwhelm the links which are, after all, what the viewer is trying to find. The navbar requires a screen almost 900px wide to be viewed properly. 800 is still a very common screen, and I don't know of any serious site that requires more than 800px 'live space' (most choose between 700 and 750.) is nice for background elements, but the content should be constrained to at most. They should fix the width of the picture on about.html, too. http://www.skydiveoregon.com This site is excellent in my view. It's not as pretty as the others, but it's more effective and educational. While media-savvy, high-tech teenager boys might hop up and down looking at edgy hotshot graphics, they're just reacting to its adherance to the video game style. A website should be a cross between an enticing advertisement and an educational seminar. Skydive Oregon does a nice job of melding the two without making a mess with whizbang graphics. Unfortunately, the cutesy Flash intro is annoying on the second and third visits and pop-behinds are patronizing. Also, the JS is buggy (resizes the main window on some browsers.) http://www.skydivechicago.com Speaking of distracting edgy graphics, this site is a disaster. (Sorry if I'm offending anyone.) This site reminds me more of The Matrix's esthetic than dropzones. We're skydivers, not Star Trek era interior designers. This site's high tech media look gets in the way of its main purpose. Orange??? Where is the sky? How are whuffos enticed? In addition, where do the whuffos click? The skydiving section (only one of the six homepage links) has five technically worded links, three of which transparently lead to advanced topics. I consider it vital that a DZ site which aims to interest both students and upjumpers clearly distinguish their pages. Frames are another disaster. All that said, this site is still far better than 99% of the DZ sites out there. http://www.centralmaineskydiving.com This site is beautiful and with simple design provides a sense of the adventure. I love the very brief descriptions that educate, but leave the viewer wanting to know more. But what about experienced jumpers? Do they even serve us? -- Shameless (shameful?) plug: You're exactly right. DZ owners should hire professionals to build their websites (as all four of these examples clearly did.) Most are letting volunteers put together something with their supermarket brand WYSIWYG website wizards and $5.00 clipart collections. This is unfortunate and serves them badly in the end. End of shameless plug. 'Nuff said. First Class Citizen Twice Over Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Macaulay 0 #3 June 26, 2002 Looks like we're agreed on all points except dynamic languages. By writing a site in PHP/MySQL/CSS, and then giving the client an online SQL admin tool (plus a reference for img, a (just href), and basic text formatting tags), I've had very good results with clients never having to bug me again once their site was up and running. The main advantage for a "brochure" site is that they don't don't have to update nav links on every page of the site. MANY DZ web sites (and straight HTML sites in general) have inconsistent navs and/or broken nav links, due to the fact that they typoed here, or didn't paste there, or forgot to update this page, etc. And don't even get me started on how much time goes into a straight HTML photo gallery vs a PHP/MySQL one. Oh, I wasn't plugging these sites, I just thought they were good examples to illustrate my point. And I see what you mean about a site's design pertaining specifically to skydiving. I was more comparing DZ sites to sites in general. - Mac Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites cyberskydive 0 #4 June 26, 2002 I strongly disagree on the dynamic languge issue. There is so much that can be done, especially in PHP to make the creation, updating, and overall site maintenance a snap. DZO's can have real time site administration to instantly update prices, information, events and all through a familiar web based interface. With more and more people looking online for information it is almost a requirement that a site be dynamic. I'm a programming student and have been building sites for a few years now. By far most of my learning has come from books rewad at home, work, wherever and learning how to use the knowledge I've gained for real world applications blah blah... Did any of you run across skydivemonroe.com? Incomplete site really, but all the information is there. I really do not ever get the chance to have other designers comment on my work. Now believe me I know alot of what your probably going to say, typos?-lol-me-noooooo I think the site sucks personally-lol, as I do everytime I build a site and learn more! I have gotten alot of nice comments onj it tho tear away! email me if ya like.-System.Windows.IUnknown.Crash.Reboot.Crash.Reboot.Freeze.Crash.Reboot.Break.Stuff.dot... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites narcimund 0 #5 June 26, 2002 You've got good points about the dynamic tools. In my practice I've used them only for the truly data-driven areas such as catalogs and user-accessible interactive tools (like these here wonderful forums!) I don't see that the language the site's stored in is a measure of its quality. I've even seen (a small number of) decent sites which are largely rendered GIFs througout. Now THAT'S archaic, but in the right hands, it works! Back to the sites, there are two kinds of websites that really fail: those that don't pay any attention to design and those that pay too much attention. Most DZ sites fail in the first way. In my mind, that's not as serious a crime as the second, though. The point of these things is to bring in good customers, not win prestigious awards. Customers will forgive a cheap, fragile site ("Yeah, the site looks lousy, but I found their phone number. Let's call and get more info!") more than one they can't navigate or which turns them off with tomorrow's 15-minutes-of-fame graphic trendiness. The people who are halfway to deciding to jump want to see, hear, feel, and taste jumping*, not slef-absorbed New York design school class projects. * I leave out smell on purpose. Some of the smells of skydiving are nasty! One guy I jumped with a hundred times made a nasty smell every time we passed 9000 feet on the way up. Pee-yoo! I almost got out early a few times. First Class Citizen Twice Over Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites narcimund 0 #6 June 26, 2002 http://www.skydivemonroe.com/ is one I've looked at before and admired. It's got the direct, uncomplicated, appealing look that I like to see. It tells the story of skydiving to newcomers well. It's clearly created with the audience in mind. Criticisms? I have a few, but they're meant in good faith. I think a simpler navbar would be preferable. 17 items is too many. "Affiliations", "Our Staff", "Hours", "Directions", and "Contact Us" could probably be subsumed under one "About Us" link. "Downloads" could be removed until someone decides to populate it. " Also, there's a lot of HTML bugs. These bugs seem to be slowing down the rendering and scrolling, but don't actually break my browsers. Try testing on both NS Mac and Windows. I'm getting around minute-plus renderings AFTER the download. IE seems to be mostly immune but slow on the scroll. I think the culprit is unbalanced table tags mostly. Your comments about PHP are insightful. Do your clients actually USE these magic tools you've offered them? I have many computer-savvy, office-based business clients who have paid me tens of thousands of dollars for backend content managers which literally never get used. They KNOW they should use them, but they still come to me month after month for content updates. The more I offer them, the more they pay me to build them, but they STILL don't use them. I have exactly one client who's actually self-sufficient and it's only because they hired a go-getter, ambitious young marketing assistant. Finally, PHP has many great uses, as do ASP, perl, etc. But many designers get so advanced they forget to learn HTML and image optimization. Unfortunately, we ALL have to know HTML inside and out. No dynamic language or wysiwyg has surmounted them yet. (Flash might be considered an exception.) They just enhance HTML, when used well. First Class Citizen Twice Over Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites indyz 1 #7 June 26, 2002 My opinions: Archway Skydiving: Good site with no dynamic content. Everything is pretty easy to find. Consistent layout throughout the site. Sky Knights SPC: Not as good but still not bad, and with all dynamic content. A little too "busy" for my tastes, but all of the information is available on the left hand nav bar. Places where a dynamic site is good: Calendars, photo galleries, gear for sale. Not necessary: Front pages, driving directions, contact info, etc. I have run into developers who get really gung-ho and insist on doing an entire site with a database drive template system. I think that leaving most of the site static and only using dynamic content in the places that I mentioned would be best for dropzone sites. Personal opinion, of course. -- Brian Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites narcimund 0 #8 June 26, 2002 Regarding your comment about expired nav links, I use a great HTML editor called BBedit. It's got highly usable templating functions. The tempates guarantee that I'll either have no link errors at all or errors on every page. It's great! Seriously, the points about website owners updating their own content certainly works for some clients, but I've found a high ratio of clients who think they SHOULD manage their own updates to those who actually DO. I bet the larger DZs near cities are more likely to have a staff member who's willing and able to manage the content than the remote family-style DZs. About half of my new clients in the last couple of years have been refugees of previous designers who've abandoned them to something complicated they couldn't manage, so they hire me to save their sites. They don't want to manage their website -- they have businesses to run. The website is what they hire us for. We're not a design-and-run sort of firm. If the client wants ongoing maintenance (which most do), we're more than happy to oblige. First Class Citizen Twice Over Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites cyberskydive 0 #9 June 26, 2002 the boys at chicagoland always do a great job on their sites...and they scored a pretty good domain name! http://www.skydive.com On the editor note, I scored a freeware editor thats pretty awesome, just started using it (as opposed to notepad ) supports multip0le languages, very good freeware http://sourceedit.com/ /-System.Windows.IUnknown.Crash.Reboot.Crash.Reboot.Freeze.Crash.Reboot.Break.Stuff.dot... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Macaulay 0 #10 June 26, 2002 http://www.skydivemonroe.com http://www.archwayskydiving.com http://www.skydiveskyknights.com ...were all taken into consideration. How could I forget the skydiver shouting stuff to the right side of the screen. That really shouldn't be as funny as it is. On Skydive Monroe's site, I would agree that there are just too many items. Skydive Oregon has the same deal, and I think some sections could be collapsed into one, but the approach there was to take all the options and divide them into three sections right in the navigation. Other than that, I just think the colors are a little weird (just my opinion). The tables took no time to render at all, but I'm also running a P4 NW 2GHz, so... I'm also not a fan of Comic Sans, but other than that, the site's good. I have to retract a previous statement, as I did not realise that this site was also PHP (happens when you look at like 150 sites all in one sitting). Archway was one of the sites that I had mentioned earlier (not by name), as being good, but just not a real standout for me. If it had some consistency in the fonts and layout, it'd actually be a really nice site. $150 AFFs?! Awesome... Sky Knights has one major flaw: colors. Seven colors, not including B/W, and all the colors are very saturated and high contrast. Change the colors and the present the logo better, but keep everything else. ----------------------------------------------------------- Content admin tools. I started writing these about four years ago, and I've never had a single client not use one. Doing everything in PHP/MySQL right now, I've found that PHPMyAdmin makes an even better solution than what I've written in the past, and it's free. I guess it all depends. I'm designing about four sites a week right now, on my own, and I have a fulltime job doing non-web work (print work and writing PostScript). If I maintained sites regularly (aside from the occassional fix or addition), I would never get a new client. Hell, I'd be homeless. But that's me. Personally, I would recommend the PHP/MySQL or ASP/XML or ColdFusion or whatever route (OK, maybe not CF). Run the entire site from a single PHP program and write it so the HTML ignorant can type text into a box on a page you bookmarked for them and have it all come out nice n purty. ;) But everyone's got their own way. - Mac Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0 Go To Topic Listing × Sign In Sign Up Forums Dropzones Classifieds Gear Indoor Articles Photos Videos Calendar Stolen Fatalities Subscriptions Leaderboard Activity Back Activity All Activity My Activity Streams Unread Content Content I Started
Macaulay 0 #3 June 26, 2002 Looks like we're agreed on all points except dynamic languages. By writing a site in PHP/MySQL/CSS, and then giving the client an online SQL admin tool (plus a reference for img, a (just href), and basic text formatting tags), I've had very good results with clients never having to bug me again once their site was up and running. The main advantage for a "brochure" site is that they don't don't have to update nav links on every page of the site. MANY DZ web sites (and straight HTML sites in general) have inconsistent navs and/or broken nav links, due to the fact that they typoed here, or didn't paste there, or forgot to update this page, etc. And don't even get me started on how much time goes into a straight HTML photo gallery vs a PHP/MySQL one. Oh, I wasn't plugging these sites, I just thought they were good examples to illustrate my point. And I see what you mean about a site's design pertaining specifically to skydiving. I was more comparing DZ sites to sites in general. - Mac Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
cyberskydive 0 #4 June 26, 2002 I strongly disagree on the dynamic languge issue. There is so much that can be done, especially in PHP to make the creation, updating, and overall site maintenance a snap. DZO's can have real time site administration to instantly update prices, information, events and all through a familiar web based interface. With more and more people looking online for information it is almost a requirement that a site be dynamic. I'm a programming student and have been building sites for a few years now. By far most of my learning has come from books rewad at home, work, wherever and learning how to use the knowledge I've gained for real world applications blah blah... Did any of you run across skydivemonroe.com? Incomplete site really, but all the information is there. I really do not ever get the chance to have other designers comment on my work. Now believe me I know alot of what your probably going to say, typos?-lol-me-noooooo I think the site sucks personally-lol, as I do everytime I build a site and learn more! I have gotten alot of nice comments onj it tho tear away! email me if ya like.-System.Windows.IUnknown.Crash.Reboot.Crash.Reboot.Freeze.Crash.Reboot.Break.Stuff.dot... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
narcimund 0 #5 June 26, 2002 You've got good points about the dynamic tools. In my practice I've used them only for the truly data-driven areas such as catalogs and user-accessible interactive tools (like these here wonderful forums!) I don't see that the language the site's stored in is a measure of its quality. I've even seen (a small number of) decent sites which are largely rendered GIFs througout. Now THAT'S archaic, but in the right hands, it works! Back to the sites, there are two kinds of websites that really fail: those that don't pay any attention to design and those that pay too much attention. Most DZ sites fail in the first way. In my mind, that's not as serious a crime as the second, though. The point of these things is to bring in good customers, not win prestigious awards. Customers will forgive a cheap, fragile site ("Yeah, the site looks lousy, but I found their phone number. Let's call and get more info!") more than one they can't navigate or which turns them off with tomorrow's 15-minutes-of-fame graphic trendiness. The people who are halfway to deciding to jump want to see, hear, feel, and taste jumping*, not slef-absorbed New York design school class projects. * I leave out smell on purpose. Some of the smells of skydiving are nasty! One guy I jumped with a hundred times made a nasty smell every time we passed 9000 feet on the way up. Pee-yoo! I almost got out early a few times. First Class Citizen Twice Over Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
narcimund 0 #6 June 26, 2002 http://www.skydivemonroe.com/ is one I've looked at before and admired. It's got the direct, uncomplicated, appealing look that I like to see. It tells the story of skydiving to newcomers well. It's clearly created with the audience in mind. Criticisms? I have a few, but they're meant in good faith. I think a simpler navbar would be preferable. 17 items is too many. "Affiliations", "Our Staff", "Hours", "Directions", and "Contact Us" could probably be subsumed under one "About Us" link. "Downloads" could be removed until someone decides to populate it. " Also, there's a lot of HTML bugs. These bugs seem to be slowing down the rendering and scrolling, but don't actually break my browsers. Try testing on both NS Mac and Windows. I'm getting around minute-plus renderings AFTER the download. IE seems to be mostly immune but slow on the scroll. I think the culprit is unbalanced table tags mostly. Your comments about PHP are insightful. Do your clients actually USE these magic tools you've offered them? I have many computer-savvy, office-based business clients who have paid me tens of thousands of dollars for backend content managers which literally never get used. They KNOW they should use them, but they still come to me month after month for content updates. The more I offer them, the more they pay me to build them, but they STILL don't use them. I have exactly one client who's actually self-sufficient and it's only because they hired a go-getter, ambitious young marketing assistant. Finally, PHP has many great uses, as do ASP, perl, etc. But many designers get so advanced they forget to learn HTML and image optimization. Unfortunately, we ALL have to know HTML inside and out. No dynamic language or wysiwyg has surmounted them yet. (Flash might be considered an exception.) They just enhance HTML, when used well. First Class Citizen Twice Over Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
indyz 1 #7 June 26, 2002 My opinions: Archway Skydiving: Good site with no dynamic content. Everything is pretty easy to find. Consistent layout throughout the site. Sky Knights SPC: Not as good but still not bad, and with all dynamic content. A little too "busy" for my tastes, but all of the information is available on the left hand nav bar. Places where a dynamic site is good: Calendars, photo galleries, gear for sale. Not necessary: Front pages, driving directions, contact info, etc. I have run into developers who get really gung-ho and insist on doing an entire site with a database drive template system. I think that leaving most of the site static and only using dynamic content in the places that I mentioned would be best for dropzone sites. Personal opinion, of course. -- Brian Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
narcimund 0 #8 June 26, 2002 Regarding your comment about expired nav links, I use a great HTML editor called BBedit. It's got highly usable templating functions. The tempates guarantee that I'll either have no link errors at all or errors on every page. It's great! Seriously, the points about website owners updating their own content certainly works for some clients, but I've found a high ratio of clients who think they SHOULD manage their own updates to those who actually DO. I bet the larger DZs near cities are more likely to have a staff member who's willing and able to manage the content than the remote family-style DZs. About half of my new clients in the last couple of years have been refugees of previous designers who've abandoned them to something complicated they couldn't manage, so they hire me to save their sites. They don't want to manage their website -- they have businesses to run. The website is what they hire us for. We're not a design-and-run sort of firm. If the client wants ongoing maintenance (which most do), we're more than happy to oblige. First Class Citizen Twice Over Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
cyberskydive 0 #9 June 26, 2002 the boys at chicagoland always do a great job on their sites...and they scored a pretty good domain name! http://www.skydive.com On the editor note, I scored a freeware editor thats pretty awesome, just started using it (as opposed to notepad ) supports multip0le languages, very good freeware http://sourceedit.com/ /-System.Windows.IUnknown.Crash.Reboot.Crash.Reboot.Freeze.Crash.Reboot.Break.Stuff.dot... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Macaulay 0 #10 June 26, 2002 http://www.skydivemonroe.com http://www.archwayskydiving.com http://www.skydiveskyknights.com ...were all taken into consideration. How could I forget the skydiver shouting stuff to the right side of the screen. That really shouldn't be as funny as it is. On Skydive Monroe's site, I would agree that there are just too many items. Skydive Oregon has the same deal, and I think some sections could be collapsed into one, but the approach there was to take all the options and divide them into three sections right in the navigation. Other than that, I just think the colors are a little weird (just my opinion). The tables took no time to render at all, but I'm also running a P4 NW 2GHz, so... I'm also not a fan of Comic Sans, but other than that, the site's good. I have to retract a previous statement, as I did not realise that this site was also PHP (happens when you look at like 150 sites all in one sitting). Archway was one of the sites that I had mentioned earlier (not by name), as being good, but just not a real standout for me. If it had some consistency in the fonts and layout, it'd actually be a really nice site. $150 AFFs?! Awesome... Sky Knights has one major flaw: colors. Seven colors, not including B/W, and all the colors are very saturated and high contrast. Change the colors and the present the logo better, but keep everything else. ----------------------------------------------------------- Content admin tools. I started writing these about four years ago, and I've never had a single client not use one. Doing everything in PHP/MySQL right now, I've found that PHPMyAdmin makes an even better solution than what I've written in the past, and it's free. I guess it all depends. I'm designing about four sites a week right now, on my own, and I have a fulltime job doing non-web work (print work and writing PostScript). If I maintained sites regularly (aside from the occassional fix or addition), I would never get a new client. Hell, I'd be homeless. But that's me. Personally, I would recommend the PHP/MySQL or ASP/XML or ColdFusion or whatever route (OK, maybe not CF). Run the entire site from a single PHP program and write it so the HTML ignorant can type text into a box on a page you bookmarked for them and have it all come out nice n purty. ;) But everyone's got their own way. - Mac Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
