usual cost of a custom web design

[primorudy]

what do yall think is the cost of a usual custom web design these days - this company looks a bit expensive:

http://www.imageworksstudio.com/custom-web-design

I hardly believe a website can cost that much these days - am I missing something?

 

[audiopro]

I'm afraid I will have to disagree with your claim that a CMS is database. A CMS is a collection of modules which can be connected together to create a website. A database is a collection of tables which can be queried to create reports.

As for creating the site in 15 minutes, it may well be possible but not for a newcomer to the software. You say you created a custom content type, is that controlled under Content?

I am not being difficult on purpose but I have seen these claims of easy to use software before, usually by people with many years of experience.

Keith

http://www.studiosoft.co.uk

 

[spamjim]

Keith, it is difficult to share any knowledge with someone who disagrees with blatant facts. You cannot step forward until you let loose of wrong beliefs. A CMS is a database. Most CMS cannot function without a database.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_content_management_systems#PHP

There is a column that shows the required databases to power these CMS's.

Just like in regular database terminology, relating different content types (tables) in Drupal is called a relationship.

https://www.google.com/search?q=drupal+relationships

To create a new content type at DrupalGardens...
Structure->Content Types->Add content type

 

[spamjim]

Here's more on building relationships in a browser interface (using the previous version of Views in Drupal 6). DrupalGardens uses Drupal 7. ...a different interface with similar features.

http://drupaleasy.com/blogs/ultimike/2009/07/using-views-relationships-arguments-attachments

 

[darryncooke]

spamjim is right and I was thinking the same way. A CMS without a database is just useless. In fact CMS is synonymous with database as you need one to store the data. How else is the thing supposed to work.

Darryn Cooke

http://www.darryncooke.com

| Marketing and Creative Services

 

[audiopro]

I am not disputing that it uses a database to store and manipulate data but a CMS is a CMS. My SATNAV would be useless without a database to store data but it is still a SATNAV.

Back to the Drupal questions.
Is it possible to import an existing table into the CMS's database or has each field to be created separately?

Keith

http://www.studiosoft.co.uk

 

[ChrisHirst]

Keith, it is difficult to share any knowledge with someone who disagrees with blatant facts. You cannot step forward until you let loose of wrong beliefs. A CMS is a database. Most CMS cannot function without a database.

spamjim is right and I was thinking the same way. A CMS without a database is just useless. In fact CMS is synonymous with database as you need one to store the data.

Actually you are both wrong! A CMS is simply an INTERFACE to a data store/database NOT the data store/database itself, so, if we are going to argue semantics it is somewhat important to get them right.

Chris.

Indifference will be the downfall of mankind, but who cares?
Time flies like an arrow, however, fruit flies like a banana.
Webmaster Forum

 

[ChrisHirst]

coding does matter. website speed is taken into consideration.

Says who???

Google have certainly SUGGESTED that "speed" MAY be used as a factor but have yet to quantify what " speed" actually means.

Is it the milliseconds it takes for the server to spit out the source code, which is the ONLY thing that can actually be measured by a SE useragent.

Is it the network latency? which is no real measure of "speed" given that Google datacentres are spread around the globe, so should your URLs be "judged" on the server being in Germany (for instance) and the crawler that last visited the URI was from a Google datacentre in India or Australia??

Or maybe it's the rendering time? Which of course can be different depending on the browser and client machine, and of course given that Google's system does NOT load or trigger javascripts, load or render styles, or load images when the URL is requested they do not actually know that either.

What it is the yardstick that "average speed" is measured by?
Is it by URLs on the same server?
The same CIDR allocation?
The same country?
The same continent?
The same marketplace?
The same TLD/ccTLD?

Or something else?



If "coding" matters, how is it that pages created with a crappy WYSI[almostWY[might]G "page builder can be found on "page one" of the results?

Tables and fieldsets aren't good for SEO and you are supposed to do external CSS and javascript

Says who???? Some clueless "expert" who doesn't know his gluteus maximus from his olecranon

Search engineers have NEVER said any such thing, they have NEVER even hinted at that being the case. IN fact ALL the SE spokes men|women|persons say unequivocally the EXACT opposite.

So please, if you are going to tell us all about these "factors" try and get some REAL FACTS not SEOMoz style pseudo scientific bull crap and "buzz phrases" that happen to be "in vogue".

The World of Search is full of speculation, supposition, mis-information, guesswork and total lies. Do NOT add to it.


Chris.

Indifference will be the downfall of mankind, but who cares?
Time flies like an arrow, however, fruit flies like a banana.
Webmaster Forum

 

[primorudy]

all i am saying is. Bar everything else is the same except for the coding (speed, among other things, like the use of CSS instead of tables) I would go with the faster and better coded site outranking the other site.

I have seen sites where fieldsets don't rank well. I am not saying it is one of the biggest factors, like getting links persay, but I am saying that it is a part of crossing your T's and dotting your I's

 

[spamjim]

A CMS is simply an INTERFACE to a data store/database NOT the data store/database itself

I don't understand why this topic has degraded to argued semantics of the finest definitions of "SEO", "coding", "CMS", and "database".

Chris' reasoning means that Microsoft Access, FileMaker Pro, and MySQL are not databases... because those apps are interfaces to data tables. Without allowing an interface, XLS/TXT/CSV files are databases. While that limited definition is basically accurate (

https://www.google.com/search?q=define+database)

it is certainly not marketable to anyone that really needs to manipulate that data.

Is it possible to import an existing table into the CMS's database or has each field to be created separately?

Like any other database, you would need to define each field (column) type. But each row (of actual data) could be mass imported. Each row or record is known as a "node" in Drupal.

https://drupal.org/project/node_import

(Drupal 6)

https://drupal.org/project/feeds

(Drupal 7)

Drupal continues to evolve in data management by introducing entities...

https://drupal.org/node/1261744

And RDF...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xcPf4PeF57Y

 

[spamjim]

Tables and fieldsets aren't good for SEO and you are supposed to do external CSS and javascript

Says who???? Some clueless "expert" who doesn't know his gluteus maximus from his olecranon

A distinction of "tables" is necessary. Valid tables with structured tabular data are suited for SEO. Tables used for page layout are not suited for SEO.

coding does matter. website speed is taken into consideration.

Says who???

I'll bite. I say so. Slow loading web sites do not attract as many page views as more efficient sites. Google can track how quickly a page loads, how long people stay on pages, and how often those pages are accessed. While there is plenty of mystery regarding Google's ranking methods, it is common knowledge that page popularity is a major factor. A site cannot be popular if the user is annoyed with slow page loads.

 

[darryncooke]

Spmjim,

How do you determine page speed? Like Christ said its a very ambiguous term that is used.

Google also doesn't know site data as far as how long a user is on the site or what the bounce rate is etc. unless you share that info with them how would they know that i visited site X and waited 20 seconds for the page to load and then left 20 seconds later?

I know, conspiracy theories aside please, it is possible but I highly doubt it.

Darryn Cooke

http://www.darryncooke.com

| Marketing and Creative Services

 

[audiopro]

I have managed to wean myself off using tables for page layout as CSS is far more powerful and easier to work with but is there any proof that using tables for layout is any worse than using CSS. I have a very old dynamic site which uses tables for layout of the whole site and is right at the top of the list in the major search engines.

Keith

http://www.studiosoft.co.uk

 

[spamjim]

Google also doesn't know site data as far as how long a user is on the site or what the bounce rate is etc. unless you share that info with them how would they know that i visited site X and waited 20 seconds for the page to load and then left 20 seconds later?

You can put on the foil hat now. We're all being watched.

Meet Google Analytics... used on this forum and most every other competently constructed site. Google doesn't give this tool to web developers because of altruism. Web developers are only getting 10% of the usefulness of GA. Google snags the other 90%.

Google is not alone in capturing human data. User-installed search bars (Google, Bing, Yahoo) also snoop and measure content relevance based on human behavior. Some SE's with client-side controls might even get their data by reading personalized content customized for an authenticated user (imagine a search engine indexing some content beyond your password protected wall).

Here's an example of a SE getting data from users instead of from actually indexing a site:

http://searchengineland.com/google-bing-is-cheating-copying-our-search-results-62914

There's very few of us that actually surf the web alone.

is there any proof that using tables for layout is any worse than using CSS

It is not directly related but closely associated in practice. A page constructed from tables is less likely to have semantic markup and a logical flow. A SE will struggle a bit more to make sense of content that zig zags among multiple table cells. (although divs can be sloppily structured as well - see Adobe Muse)

 

[primorudy]

to put it in logical terms:

website speed = the time it takes for your site to load

LOL
camon man quit trying to play devils advocate

 

[darryncooke]

primorudy - the reason i ask that is because the number is arbitrary.

You in Los Angeles and say me in Sydney would have a drastically different time. There are also many different points to calculate from.

Are you calculating based on time for first bit or complete download of info?

I can do a website speed test at pingdom.com and get a respectable time of 2seconds but in reality when I go to the site it is more like 5 or 6.

There are many factors that effect load time so that is why site speed would have to be defined so that a developer would know what they are being judged on accurately.

SPAMJIM

I do not know what their EULA and Privacy Policy is but I do not think they can use that data for their benefit without our approval. Im not saying that in an idealistic manner, but lets assume for arguments sake that companies actually do what they say they will with information.

Darryn Cooke

http://www.darryncooke.com

| Marketing and Creative Services

 

[spamjim]

Darryn, those that issue browser bar add-ons and the "suggested sites" "feature" of IE all have privacy notices that are ignored by most users when they install/enable. Even the license web developers use for GA is pretty scary but we use it anyway.

 

[darryncooke]

I totally agree with you. But I just like to assume that people/companies will do what they say they will. I have a love for disappointment.

Darryn Cooke

http://www.darryncooke.com

| Marketing and Creative Services

 

[ChrisHirst]

Chris' reasoning means that Microsoft Access, FileMaker Pro, and MySQL are not databases... because those apps are interfaces to data tables. Without allowing an interface, XLS/TXT/CSV files are databases. While that limited definition is basically accurate (

https://www.google.com/search?q=define+database)

it is certainly not marketable to anyone that really needs to manipulate that data.

Actually MS Access (the application) and FileMaker Pro (the application) (and there is a clue in the name there) ARE simply interfaces that allow one to create and manipulate data in their respective database formats, and each Access .mdb file can become a database server, as it does NOT need MS Access ((the application)) to be on the machine the data is being accessed on. Merely that the operating system on the machine has ODBC capabilities.

Actually MySQL is a database SERVER, the MySQL database itself is a datafile, stored on, or accessible to, the host machine.

The fact is, that ANYTHING that has organised data contained within its structure IS a database by definition.

It seems that you have the distinction between what is a database and what is a database server somewhat intermingled, and yes I know, so have ~75% of the people who write articles and tutorials etc. This is the reason I am anally retentive pedantic about terminology. Using correct terminology in the discourse is vitally important if we are to be unambiguous about the whole subject, and this thread appears to stand testament to that.


Chris.

Indifference will be the downfall of mankind, but who cares?
Time flies like an arrow, however, fruit flies like a banana.
Webmaster Forum

 

[ChrisHirst]

You in Los Angeles and say me in Sydney would have a drastically different time. There are also many different points to calculate from.

Are you calculating based on time for first bit or complete download of info?

I can do a website speed test at pingdom.com and get a respectable time of 2seconds but in reality when I go to the site it is more like 5 or 6.

There are many factors that effect load time so that is why site speed would have to be defined so that a developer would know what they are being judged on accurately.

My point precisely.

"site speed" without some qualifiers is an arbitrary concept, which of course is why SEs will never quantify it.

As a concept it has the "experts" scrabbling about looking for clues on what is a "good speed" for a URL to be delivered to | loaded by | rendered by a useragent. Just like "Pavlov's dog" they respond to Matt Cutts offering a tit-bit and they are not merely salivating but are champing at the bit to be the first with the nitty-gritty an exciting new factor.
So while they are pratting about to find this out and/or prattling on about how important it is, the SE software engineers can have yet another good laugh at their behaviour.


Chris.

Indifference will be the downfall of mankind, but who cares?
Time flies like an arrow, however, fruit flies like a banana.
Webmaster Forum

 

[spamjim]

...the MySQL database itself is a datafile, stored on, or accessible to, the host machine.

Why call it a "MySQL database" if it might have InnoDB for storage?

The fact is, that ANYTHING that has organised data contained within its structure IS a database by definition.

You have just defined a CMS as a database. If you are going to argue semantics it is somewhat important that you do not argue with yourself.