You think this guy is bad reply to "PhotoShop Logo Design Contest"
 

I was reading through this forum and you guys are just hilarious great job on that guy. I found a few web sites that you would all just love. And these are web designers they get paid for this!!!

I don't even know what to say about this first site just sad
http://www.bedford.net/jelliser/index5.html

This second one has done several sites and charges 500 dollars flat rate.

What is this world coming to we the rest of us have to work and these people get paid for garbage.

Sorry
 

This thread is in reply to the thread "PhotoShop Logo Design Contest"

Now I don't want to get drawn into the slanging match (although it is remarkably funny to read) taking a look at these two sites worries me.

<i>Who</i> would pay for these types of services, not only are the "demo" pages for each of the companies utterly pathetic but so are the sites that these people design.

And $500 for five pages? then $50 an hour after that? are they really trying to tell me that the TeddyBear sight took a minimum of ten hours work?

Golly, I think I'm in the wrong job. The only reason I don't do web design is because I don't think I'm good enough :-/

Sheesh

Shit, if those people are charging for web design, then certainly I could.

Perhaps we should go into Buisness ...

Syc&Twisted Web Design, with added "doesn't suck shit through four inches of plate steel" features and new "not designed by a retard" technology....


Or then again, we could just sit around and laugh heartily at these poor fool's efforts...

I mean come on 10 hours? datalas.com took me around 3 and I wasn't trying, and whilst that's shite it's perfect in comparison to those two....

You know, those two are *so* bad they could almost be hosted on geocities ....

Hey! My site was on Geocities once. Shit, I was just able to yank it off Tripod late last year (Thanks Dave! You're my hero!)

Back in the day, it was nothing for me to spend 13 or 14 hours on the computer, doing stuff with my site. But when I created the War Room page last week, that took about an hour or two.

Shit...from local to international business...I'm on a roll here. :)

The amount one can charge is much more closely tied to sales and marketing than to quality of work.

(Believe me, I know this time)

It bothers me to a certain degree the lack of "quality" sites there are out there, which are, either through poor design, poor choise of colours, poor coding or the fault of the creator generally unusable.

I often end up doing web-design for work, and as the company is linux based with only the one IE box in the entire building I take great care (and I suppose pride) in making sure that everything I do is viewable by Windows and Linux users. True it takes a lot longer but I test everything in IE (5.5 / 6 ) Mozilla, NS6 (which is mozilla), Konquerer and Opera.

Came across www.argos.co.uk the other day which says "you are using Gecko please try a different browser", which seemed to be their response for the phrase "this works in IE only". *If* the company that did their page for them was doing their job properly I wouldn't have seen that ... Coupled with the fact that this seemed to be pointless anyhow as forcing the browser string makes the site work fine and dandy.

I hate to think what the owners of the two sites above would do if they ever ventured into the world of decent design and started having to deal with browsers that support standards (or in the case of IE, don't)

IM(NS)HO, any "Web-Design" firm that can't be bothered to check it's <b>own</b> site for standards compliance should be shot.

<a href="http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.bedford.net%2Fjelliser%2Findex5.html">Site 1</a>

<a href="http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.amandawriter.com%2Fhtml%2Fweb_design.html&charset=%28detect+automatically%29&doctype=%28detect+automatically%29">Site 2</a>

Pathetic, it really is....

Sorry for the rant, but this annoys me, I *try* to take my job seriously and these cretins charge money...

Well, shit...we won't even discuss how jacked up my site is.

[Grammar Nazi]

Some people still don't understand the difference between 'jacked up' and 'jacked off'

[/Grammar Nazi]

I think I used the appropriate term, you fascist.

There is a subtle difference though Syc, you aren't trying to sell your efforts. If you were I'm sure you (like myself) would pay a little more attention to what we were doing.

When our collective half-assed (I know my site is) efforts far surpass theirs when they are selling those skills, well, it's a different matter isn't it ?

Jacked up = non-functional (does not apply to Sycamoreland)

Jacked off = self-pleasured (hmm, maybe)

Datalas, good point. :)

NBN, I didn't know there was an official definition of "jacked up." Where I come from, it generally means "not right."

Personally I prefer the descriptive term "crap", it's far less open to interpretation....

Thats in reference to my site of course, I wouldn't dream of insulting anyone....

:P