another semi web site shot to hell?
in [Design]
|
From: Eeyore on 28 Sep 2006 13:53 Joerg wrote: > > But your site IS rather bland ;-) > > Yep, got to spice it up some. But that needs time, ideas, more time, and > my arts skills are not that great. Hiring someone for that is an option > but then again when I see what has become of sites where they did hire > "web experts" I might keep it bland for a while ;-) May I recommend my brother-in-law ? He's *very* adept with code and knows all too well the usual flaws that sites exhibit. Graham
From: Joerg on 28 Sep 2006 14:04 Hello Frank, >>Yes, I thought about some pics, schematics etc. The one problems most >>consultants have is that they aren't allowed to do that. Often they aren't >>even allowed to use a successful relationship as reference. One of my >>current contracts with a large company goes as far as prohibiting the >>disclosure of the very existence of that contract. > > You don't have to list all your projects, just a couple. You can use > pictures of different boards, different schematics. You can alter the > story a bit. That is not a blatant cheat, it's only to show/tell > that you are for real and to do some justice to yourself. > That's what I was planning to do. Some I am allowed to disclose. Schematics are a big no-no though and I really don't want to fake anything. Also wanted to compile the list of publications although that usually doesn't draw much from non-academic circles. > > >>>The second link, "Where can Analog Consultants..." gives me a >>>dull page with a long lecture. It is unreadable, as it prints >>>too wide, all over the screen from left to right. After reading >>>the first paragraph, I feel lectured, and what hangs is that I >>>probably have wasted a lot of money, and am facing a redesign >>>from scratch. >>> >> >>What browser are you using? It doesn't do that with Mozilla, Netscape, >>Opera and my copy of IE. Re redesign I just want to be honest. About half >>of my assignments begin when it's really too late from a biz point of view >>and require a redesign of crucial parts or of the whole thing. Something >>that was clearly avoidable had they called me or someone else in half a >>year earlier. There are a few sad stories there. > > > The first paragraph ("It isn't possible to furnish...") is displayed > as 3 lines and a 4th line with just one word. That is what I call > impossible to read. Newspapers print their articles in columns, because > otherwise they would also become unreadable. > Ok, tried again. I cannot make that error happen no matter how odd I twist the shape of the browser window. What's your browser? > >>Ok, can't understand the neck thing but one of the fears many clients have >>is that a consultant does his or her thing and then the company is hooked >>for life. Because none of their engineers is "in the know" afterwards. I >>don't work that way. But I could give you some horror stories where others >>did that to clients and I had to pick up the pieces. Or whatever pieces >>they had. Undocumented reems of assembler and so on. > > > Yes, but advertisement talk quickly turns into a stupid lecture, insulting > the reader. Be brief. And no need to rub in disasters. Use a bit more > positive language. And cut 95% of the text as it is. Short texts, some > bulleted lists, etc. > Good idea, although I don't think one can cut 95% :-) Believe it or not but I have one new client who, when they saw that page, said that one of the stories is exactly what happened to them. > >>>Rolling down to the bottom, still feeling lectured and that my >>>own thoughts aren't much worth, you say "If you think that >>>analog consultants might be the answer....". Sheesh! >>> >>Well, sometimes they are the answer. Even when the problem appears to be >>SW or FPGA related. That's why I give example and those are cases that >>really happened. Got to have a punch line but you are probably right, I >>may have to think of a better one here. > > It reads as too negative. You are a damn good expert, so don't be shy, > or use reservative language with to much use of 'if' and 'might'. > Good point. The ifs, mights and believes are remnants from the time when I ran a division. Any public corporate statements we made had to be "lawyer-proof" so most of us got used to that lingo. > >>>Stop ranting about dollar calculators and hire a consultant >>>yourself, this time for your web site ;) He won't advice >>>Flash - no worries. He'll make a nice sober design that does >>>you justice, that is inviting, that is not lecturing, that >>>looks trust worthy, that can be found etc. >>> >> >>I might try that again. When I tried before everyone absoultely wanted to >>convince me that the site needs frames and all that stuff. Which I don't >>want. > > Of course, make clear what you (don't) want. Extensive use of high end > designer pictures, like glass sky crapers and business men in front of > it, is not what you want. It would give a false impression. But a good > picture of a breathtaking view in your neighboorhood is nice and useable. > Couple of small insets of pictures with (perhaps) parts of your desk > with some notes and diagrams, part of your lab or workbench, a circuit > under test, a close-up of a scope probe in use, things like that. May > seem silly, but now you only have loads of dull text and I don't even > know if you can handle a screwdriver. > The view out of my office window is very picturesque. Maybe I use that. > Oh, and you don't need frames indeed. Most layout tricks can be done in > tables. OTH, a page with frames is not the end of the world. Your > current web page has 82 errors in it, so stop pretending as if you know > what is right or wrong about frames. Simply demand from your web designer > that the final result generates zero errors : > > http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.analogconsultants.com > Thanks! That is an interesting tool. Although, even ONSemi comes up with 139 errors ... > And once your website looks better, you have to make sure it can be > found. Did you ever tried to find yourself, not using your name as > a search parameter? > I did. Google and Yahoo found it. Also lots of others. But it's certainly not search-optimized yet. -- Regards, Joerg http://www.analogconsultants.com
From: Joerg on 28 Sep 2006 14:11 Hello Jim, >>>My site is bland, but not as bland as yours... got two consulting >>>inquiries TODAY from the site ;-) >> >>That is indeed pretty good. Are those serious ones or just tire kickers? > > Actually both today were law firms seeking expert witness help. They > appear serious. > Well, I get some of those as well but mostly they are not serious in the end. Sometimes I point-blank ask the calling attorney why on earth a case this clear-cut isn't settled out of court. Then they say "That's what I don't understand either" and sure enough it does settle. Other times they seem to prefer folks with a PE but then end up with engineers who don't have any medical device background. No idea how they survive a case without years of FDA exposure. > >>Do you think it happened because of the embedded key words? > > Yes. My oldest son helped me do the site originally, with lots of > advice on how to "play" the keyword game. > Yep, got to work on those key words here. -- Regards, Joerg http://www.analogconsultants.com
From: Homer J Simpson on 28 Sep 2006 14:49 "Frank Bemelman" <f.bemelmanq(a)xs4all.invalid.nl> wrote in message news:451b8067$0$11073$e4fe514c(a)dreader24.news.xs4all.nl... > The second link, "Where can Analog Consultants..." gives me a > dull page with a long lecture. It is unreadable, as it prints > too wide, all over the screen from left to right. After reading > the first paragraph, I feel lectured, and what hangs is that I > probably have wasted a lot of money, and am facing a redesign > from scratch. At least you aren't paying for it. I got some sample CDs (Learn VB .Net, Learn VC# .Net) and was appalled by them. They start off with some guy reading text to you at a monotonous tone and it goes downhill from there. The user interface is badly designed and has bugs in it. I can't say I have ever come across a programmer who can't read, so who the hell are they for? There's no opportunity to offer feedback so I continue to get 'special offers' from them although I never have and never will pay for anything as bad as this. On the real thing there is one interactive item - they deleted this from the demos. Yeah, like I'll pay $60 for these. I can buy O'Reilly books at a discount and read at my own speed.
From: Rich Grise on 28 Sep 2006 14:56
On Thu, 28 Sep 2006 16:57:42 +0000, Joerg wrote: > My site is more of a little stake in the ground, didn't want to have > that dreaded "under construction" sign. You mean this one? http://www.abiengr.com/~sysop/KeyZilla/images/const2a.gif Cheers! Rich |