Ozdachs | Dangerous Common Sense

About Ozdachs

San Francisco Internet Marketer and web designer gets you on the Internet in a cost-effective, responsible way.

Why Your 2002 Site Needs to be Redesigned

The sites of clients I’ve worked with for the longest time are not the ones I feature as examples of my work. The reason for my choice in reference sites became painfully obvious last week when I worked with one of my established clients to refresh her site. The work is still in progress and the new site isn’t yet live, but I’ve already learned alot.

When we worked on the site in 2002, all we were trying to do was to increase her visibility on the Internet. She wanted her clients and prospects to be able to find her site when searching the Internet. She didn’t have much information to share, really, but wanted an Internet calling card so that people would know she was a real business. She also thought she might want to update the information herself.

To meet her needs, we created her website using FrontPage. We optimized her home page for the search phrase “San Francisco Medical Transcription”, and posted the little information we had. In those days of mostly dial-up Internet access, I remember fighting to find small graphics that would decorate the pages.

We thought the site looked great! It even had a JavaScript slide show and a tasteful animated .gif. And, Pacific Medical Transcription shows up #1 in Google when you search for San Francisco Medical Transcription.

Pacific Medical Transcription 2002 web site

But, times, styles, and Internet norms change. Web pages no longer have background texture, mood music, and unrequested animations are either very slick or showing tacky ads, or both. FrontPage is no longer made, and most clients recognize that they don’t have the time to do their own web publishing so they allow web designers to use professional tools and blogs.

Today we expect web pages to be blocky, and we demand good-sized graphics. We want the pages to show up in a number of different browsers, so we expect that the code used to write them conforms to standards. In 2002, you viewed your web page in Internet Explorer. If it looked okay there, you were done. Now you validate your web pages according to international standards, and then you check them with Internet Explorer, Firefox, Safari, and on a smart phone.

What can I say? I just like the result of today’s web development better than I like the look of what we did in 2002. Here’s the prototype of the new site.

Pacific Medical Transcription 2010

The client chose the colors and layout, and we updated the text and added some stock photographs. It’s still a small, calling-card niche on the Internet. But, it looks like a 2010 niche, and will help her prospects feel comfortable with her business.

The shelf life of software — and web sites — is good. They don’t spoil and go bad. On the other hand, a site that hasn’t been touched in 8 years may not show off your business as best it could.

By Ozdachs|2010-05-02T12:35:25-07:00May 2nd, 2010|Web Design|0 Comments

What's Flash Great For?

I often tell business owners why they shouldn’t use Flash. (See this post for an example warning!) I might even tell them too loudly and forcefully, because I feel like I am shouting into the wind when I try to explain that just because Flash is bright and shiny, that doesn’t mean that Flash belongs on your web site.

I’ll admit it. Sometimes, Flash does belong on a web site. It’s an extremely effective tool when used correctly.

Here’s when I suggest using Flash:

When a visual walk-through of your store/home/product functionality will help visitors understand what you’re offering. These uses include:
- Virtual home tours by real estate agents.
- Property tours by innkeepers.
- Room tours by designers.
- Assembly instructions for your products.
- Video of your product in action.
Introductory testimonials or video blogs. These clips let your clients and prospects know more about you, and the warmth of your voice and face can carry the day.
Examples of your work if you’re an animator, videographer, or graphic designer. Showing how snappy and cool you are can help you get new jobs and can even show off your Flash skills for non-web projects such as business presentations.

Still, my recommendation is that these bits of Flash be embedded in a basic, non-Flash web page. And, whatever you do, don’t make your home page require Flash.

I have used Flash in sites, but my Flash objects have been movie-like things for the visitor to watch. I don’t use Flash for site navigation or to trigger any actions.

My first incorporation of Flash was in 2004 for a site redesign of a bed-and-breakfast. I moved the Flash introduction from the home page to a page about the property’s facilities. People looking for a place to stay no longer had to wait 30 seconds or more for the movie to download (remember, most people in 2004 were using dial-up). But, when they clicked on an inside page to see pictures of the guest rooms, the old Flash introduction was a great virtual tour.

There’s an ego problem with Flash, I think. A good Flash movie takes a lot of work and it can look stunning. So, the designers who have just created this Flash masterpiece wants to show off their handiwork. They make the Flash work of art the centerpiece of the web site.

Wrong!

The web site is not about the graphic talent of the web designer (unless the site is the designer’s own). The site should be all about solving a problem for the visitor, your potential client.

And, that’s when Flash can be great. When it’s used as a tool — just like other components of a web page — to show the visitor how you can solve their problem. Whether you’re keeping them from sleeping on the streets or you’re relieving their anxiety about your qualifications, Flash can be a great tool for your site.

By Ozdachs|2010-04-25T06:47:03-07:00April 25th, 2010|Web Design|0 Comments

No Flash in the Pad

My web design approach is to create simple, good-looking pages that attract visitors to my client’s web sites and then to their businesses.

When I first started designing, I had to fight persuade clients that animated cartoon .gif files and unrequested music were not not good additions to their Internet home. Times changed, and the music died down and the animated files became fewer and fewer. But, then, Adobe unleashed a new technology: Flash!

Flash lets web designers put movement and sound into their pages. Done correctly the animation is professional video quality, and the sound can be multi-tracked and amazing. It is terrific tool for presentations and for some online functions such as videos and virtual tours.

But, I have consistently dissuaded clients from using Flash, especially for “welcoming” visitors to their home page. (Why do people feel the need to welcome web site visitors, anyway?? Visitors want to be informed, not welcomed!)

Example of an iPhone blocking Flash. The tiny blue dot in the middle represents the blocked Flash -- the visitor never will see the key content on the center of this page.

My reasons have been:

Flash is more difficult to produce than simple text and photographic web pages. This means more work for me or another designer. More work means greater cost, and most of my clients are very cost conscious.
Search engines don’t understand Flash content very well, if at all. If you want to show up on Google search results, using Flash gives you a handicap to overcome.
Flash can be slow to download and start up. We’ve all seen the Flash screen countdowns, promising that they’re “loading… 55%”. A certain percentage of visitors (potential customers) will click away instead of waiting.

Now Steve Jobs and Apple’s latest gadget, the iPad, re-validates my recommendation to avoid Flash. Jobs has gotten into a slap fight with Adobe, Flash’s makers, about the application. Flash has always been blocked from working on iPhones because Jobs thinks it is buggy and has security flaws, and now he has expanded the ban to keep Flash from working on the hot Apple iPad.

Think about it: if you are a company trying to get business from Internet visitors, you want the hip visitors who can afford things like iPhones and iPads. But, if your site uses Flash, these best prospects won’t see what you’re offering!

Apple’s decision to continue to block Flash reinforces my decision to stay away from Flash as a web development tool. If you are a large corporation with a large budget, you can make Flash and non-Flash versions of your pages — or normal and mobile versions — to get around Apple’s Flash block. But, what a lot of work to use a tool that doesn’t truly benefit most sites.

My recommendation is to save the extra money you’d spend on Flash development and instead spend that on Google ads, updating your site’s content, or creating an email marketing campaign.

Flash doesn’t show up on iPhones or iPads. It’s relatively expensive to develop. Flash just doesn’t make sense for most sites. Sorry, Adobe!

By Ozdachs|2010-11-22T08:29:55-08:00April 20th, 2010|Web Design|1 Comment

How Many Number 1 Pages Do You Have in Google?

A friend said he was recommending me to one of his contacts for Search Engine Optimization. The contact asked, “How many #1 positions does Ozdachs get in Google?”

I was stumped. I produce reports for clients saying where they show up in various search engines for different phrases. But, I have never thought to aggregate the #1 positions for all clients and come up with a number of #1’s for bragging.

Frankly, I don’t think the gross number of top positions is a good metric. I work with my clients to track:

Referral sources for prospects who contact them.
Hits to their web site, including the search phrases used by the visitors.
Search engine result positions for selected phrases in the major search engines.

Tracking the number of #1 positions in Google for a site may be a good marker for success. Or, it that number could be a useless statistic that can be gamed by a Search Engine Optimization company.

I can get almost anyone the #1 position in Google results for a lot of commercially meaningless searches. The easiest example is your company’s name. Your web site is probably already #1 in Google for your business’ name. Search Google for “Ozdachs Consulting” and my site comes back on the top of the list… and I have not done SEO on my own site. My client “Sterck Kulik O’Neill accounting group” shows us #1 when you search for “Sterck Kulik O’Neill”.

These #1 positions aren’t important. If someone knows your business’ name and searches for it, they are already your clients or at least know about you and are considering buying from you.

Search Engine Optimization is most valuable when marketing your site to people who are looking for what you sell but don’t know that your business exists. Those are the prospects who find you when they search Google for terms such as “San Francisco CPA”. Sterck Kulik O’Neill comes up #1 in Google for this search, and that’s a #1 that means business!

How many of those type of #1’s do I have? Not that many. The reason is simple. It takes time and money to earn number one rankings for terms.

For instance, you can optimize each web page for only one search phrase. So, if you want to score well for several phrases, you need to have separate pages tuned for each phrase. “San Francisco CPA” is not the same as “San Francisco accountant”. To have both phrases show up #1 in Google, you will have one page tuned for each phrase and unique content for each page. Then you have to find authoritative sites to point to each of these keyword pages so that Google knows to take each and every one of them seriously.

Most of my clients decide that it’s cost effective to try for one or two top rankings in Google. We identify the most important money-making phrase and tune the home page for it. Tuning more pages for other phrases isn’t too much work, but to get them to rise to the top of the search results requires promoting them and having other sites link to them. To do it right, we really should set up separate web sites — or at least unique sub-domains — for each money term.

I’m up for the task, if my clients want me to spend the time. But, in my space most clients are very happy with having one page show up near the top of Google. When other tuned pages in the site show up reasonably well, they’re ecstatic.

So, how many number 1 pages do my clients have in Google? Enough to keep them happy with my services!

By Ozdachs|2010-04-07T16:56:03-07:00April 7th, 2010|Google, Search Engine Optimization|0 Comments

Flickr vs. SmugMug: My Judgment is Colored

I have been using Flickr for posting photographs online for several years. It’s been a great place to upload photographs for my church’s electronic newsletter, and it’s been a handy place to share dog pictures and other personal visual memories.

I kept my Flickr account even after I stared using Facebook which comes with free photo galleries. The image quality on Flickr is an order of magnitude better than the fuzzed-up, blurry mash that Facebook offers on its photo galleries. Plus, the general public — not just your friends — can wander by your Flickr sets and find photos of things they’re looking for. I’ve enjoyed getting comments from strangers.

But, Flickr washes out and changes the color in some photographs I upload. I notice this fault more on images I have previously manipulated in Photoshop. It’s as if Flickr figures out that I have edited the photo and then tries to do more automatically of whatever editing I had done myself. This pale, over-whiteness of images is particularly annoying when I look at a slide show of my pictures.

This morning I uploaded a set of photographs of a friend’s birthday party to Flickr. Some of the photographs were noticeably bluer/whiter/lighter than they appeared in Photoshop on the same computer monitor. I went back and color-manipulated four images to increase the warmth of the light, and uploaded replacements, trying to make the people less glaringly Caucasian corpse-like. The results were better, but still there’s a sickly paleness on a lot of the faces.

On a whim, I decided to open a trial account on SmugMug. That’s a service which is used a lot by professional photographers — I set up a client with a site there just last month.

Damn! I notice a difference! The photographs on SmugMug are more appropriately vibrant and with the same tone I see in Photoshop. The clarity of the down-sized thumbnails are good, too.

Can you see the same difference? Check out the two slide shows. I suggest making them both full screen to see as much of each photograph as possible. (Remember, these are personal, non-professional photographs. Some are blurry and some show residue of the camera’s flash. That’s how they came out of the camera, and those faults are mine and not either Flickr’s or SmugMug’s.)

SmugMug Album. Click on the “Slideshow” button on the upper-right part of the screen.
Flickr Slide Show. Click on the “Slideshow” link on the third row down and toward the right side of the screen.

SmugMug has other advantages over Flickr. It offers a nicer layout of its photographs, and each set of photographs can be laid out in a different format with a different background. Plus, switching to the next photograph in an album is instantaneous on SmugMug but takes time on Flickr.

Of course, Flickr is significantly less expensive than SmugMug. Flickr is $25/year for a “pro” account while the comparable service from SmugMug is $40/year. My trial SmugMug account uses some customizations and strips out the SmugMug logo from my galleries, and this level subscription is $60/year.

Is the better photo image quality, flexibility in gallery settings, and overall professional feel worth $60 a year to me for my personal photographs. I think so. But, I have 13 more days to make that decision for sure.

By Ozdachs|2010-04-03T12:57:36-07:00April 3rd, 2010|Product Recommendations|3 Comments

Previous 262728 Next