General Discussions

**The Ape** · 03-18-2006, 09:04 AM

I have never claimed to be the best at what i do. But, i am honest about what i do. I code all of my pages without the help of plug-ins or wysiwyg editors and i am proud of it. So, it's kind of a kick in the face when all of these so-called webmasters ask for reviews of "their" web page that "they" built. I'm sorry, but this is making me furious. I spend way too much time working on the importance of code to have anybody lessen the value of my work by saying their template is their "design" or that they "built" it. Come on. It's even worse when these people are offering templates for sale. Sorry. I'm just venting. Anyone else tired of this?

**praveen** · 03-18-2006, 10:03 AM

once you see a lot of those, you get used to it and you will come to a conclusion that your time could be used for someother good purposes

i have seen a lot of web design firms using tm templates and having the cheek to call it as their design and get away with it.

but thats the way it works i suppose.

why spend some time to cook when ready to eat food is available at ur local supermarket

next time you see something like that,
close the browser, look elsewhere and comeback again after a minute or 2.

**vangogh** · 03-18-2006, 04:14 PM

I can understand how you feel. There are times in my business when I lose a customer because I won't give them a custom design at the price of an inexpensive template.

It's just kind of the nature of things. Just hold onto the knowledge that the sites you create are better than the ready made or WYSIWYG solutions out there. There are people out there who do understand why it's better.

I know it can be frustrating, but that's just the way it is. Not everyone drives a Rolls-Royce. More people are going to buy a Ford.

There's nothing inherrently wrong with using a WYSIWYG or a template or a plugin. They won't have the same quality as the custom site designed by someone knowledgable. All you can do is let people know why they'd be better with your custom work and let them decide.

I think in the end the people who go the cheaper route in the beginning end up paying more for it later.

**SlayersOtaku** · 03-20-2006, 05:19 PM

I'm rather confused. Are you against using a WYSIWYG? Probably I'm just not understand what the issue is with them. Even professional webmasters use WYSIWYG as a way to save time and energy. It's far quicker then hand coding everything you see. Not to say they don't offer a code view for when you work on scripts and the like. But it's so much easier to just click a button, pop a table and edit that way than frustrating over a comma out of place.

As far as templates are concerned, really if the person starts with a template and modifies it to their needs such as an OsCommerce situation, the site is their design. That's my perspective. Now a total out of the box solutions I can definitely agree on. As long as they create something knew out of the template I see little problem.

**Jake** · 03-20-2006, 11:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SlayersOtaku

I'm rather confused. Are you against using a WYSIWYG? Probably I'm just not understand what the issue is with them. Even professional webmasters use WYSIWYG as a way to save time and energy. It's far quicker then hand coding everything you see. Not to say they don't offer a code view for when you work on scripts and the like. But it's so much easier to just click a button, pop a table and edit that way than frustrating over a comma out of place.

As far as templates are concerned, really if the person starts with a template and modifies it to their needs such as an OsCommerce situation, the site is their design. That's my perspective. Now a total out of the box solutions I can definitely agree on. As long as they create something knew out of the template I see little problem.

Exactly. Although I code in Dreamweaver and avoid the design view, which is total crap and never renders anything properly. However, if the code is REALLY bad (tabled, etc), there is no excuse.

**stOx** · 03-21-2006, 12:52 AM

There is more to being a webmaster than being able to code HTML.

Putting together HTML isn't everyones strong point, and i for one find it very tedious to code html. When i go into a project i often like someone to go into it with me.
They do the design, I do the php, SEO and marketing side.

If someone isn't able to find someone to code HTML for them i see nothoing wrong with them using a WYSIWYG editor.

The main selling point of a website is the idea, How the actual page is created isn't the first thing i would judge the site on. In fact, It would be the last thing i judge it on.

**bad_bob00** · 03-21-2006, 05:37 AM

I made my website only by using Notepad, just a case of trial and error. Recently got a free copy of Dreamweaver and now I realise that its a lot easier this way, and more compatible with other browsers - so i'm not really complaining. Agree that its frustrating though.

**The Ape** · 03-21-2006, 09:25 AM

I started out using wysiwyg editors and i actually learned alot from them. I agree that they are more effecient, but those individuals who are introduced to building web pages with something like "geocities page builder",are being lied to. And for those who know html before choosing to use a wysiwyg editor, they are better prepared to fix even the smallest of problems that an individual, who knows nothing of coding, can not identify. For example. When if first started out, i used 1st page 2000. There was a minor bug that would render the width of a table as the height, and vice-versa, when using the table generator. Granted this is not a purely visual based editor (drag-and-drop), it just shows the potential for error and the end result is then a "broken puzzle" that non-coders would struggle over to fix. Not to mention, there is the fact of validation. I don't know anything about dreamweaver, so i don't know how valid the code is, but it's something to consider.

Basically, my initial statement was motivated by individuals who came to Webmaster Talk asking for reviews of their site. I agree, if someone has taken a template and manipulated it, then it is their "design". But, only if they give more credit to the origin of the template. I come across too many people with simple links to a site where they purchased their template, or even links to others who started their page for them, while still proclaiming that they "built the web page", when they actually, bought and built it further, or, built more from someone elses design.

I understand that everyone doesn't have the time or patience to code a web page, but it is more rewarding if you are passionate about the process. I see the process as being no different than painting a picture, and i don't want anyone else to paint my picture for me, or start it for me, and if they did... i would give them more credit. If i was asking for a review of a site that i built from the foundation of a template... i would ask for a review of "our" site and recognize the collaborative effort.

**techwench** · 03-21-2006, 09:31 AM

The biggest slap in the face is when you enter a template contest (GPL required on all templates) and someone takes your entry, changes the color (not even bothering to change the html comments or placeholder text, either), then submits it and WINS the prize you were shooting for...

That sucks.

Big time.

**SlayersOtaku** · 10:56 AM

Really to be an efficiant and better webmaster someone must have an understanding of the code. I'm sure most of us here started with notepad and view source of a website we liked. There is no better way to learn than getting into the trenches and slinging dirty code around. If you don't have the time or resource a template could be appropriate. With even a basic understanding of HTML you can change the site to be different.

I think we should invent a knew title 'Weblord'. Since really anyone can be a webmaster just by having a website and a template. The Weblord is person who can manulipate the code and bend it to his will via matrix style.

**The Ape** · 03-21-2006, 11:09 AM

Quote:

I think we should invent a knew title 'Weblord'. Since really anyone can be a webmaster just by having a website and a template. The Weblord is person who can manulipate the code and bend it to his will via matrix style.

Weblord. HA! Maybe they could have a spin off this site called weblord-talk. Webmaster just sounds like we own something that's not ours... Weblord sounds like we created and control it.

Yes... weblords shall conquer all that is code and the w3c will build new standards based on our creations. Wait... they already do that.

W..weblords
3.. whatever,whatever,whatever
C..conquer