Spiders adventures on the web

Would you steal my baby girl?

Well, would you? My baby girl is my creation - OK strictly speaking half my creation - but the principal's there. Course you wouldn't, unless you were some sort of lowlife scum.

So why do some people think its ok to nick other peoples work, their creations, designs, words?

Laziness?
Inadequacy?
Lack of understanding of subject?
Lack of understanding of the meaning of copyright?

We have all visited sites and though "bloody hell, thats really interesting", "that guy explained that really well, he really knows his stuff", "I wish I could write stuff like that..." And most decent people perhaps bookmark the site as something to refer to when they need to get their head round a new concept or something. As part of their learning library as it were.

Then by the time they are seriously experienced enough in the subject to want to write about it on their website they know what to say in their own words because they know their stuff.

On the other hand there's the unscrupulous low life scum, who are great at noticing the latest trends, but don't have the indepth knowledge or the linguistic ability to relate their knowledge. So they visit the websites that the rest of us bookmark and copy their work. This proves what? Oh yeah, they're good at cut n paste, big wow!

I would so love to have a big burning pot to chuck them all in. Unfortunately they more or less get away with it, and end up with less web savvy people bookmarking them cos they think "god that guy knows his stuff!"

For god's sake our web design industry has enough of an image problem without unprofessional tosspots giving more fuel to the "yeah but it's not a real job" mob.

posted by Spiders Webs @ 11:28 PM 0 comments

Ok round 1....

....has begun.

You will be familiar with the plethora of little buttons adorning many a web designers site, you know the ones, member of xx, approved by xx, validated by xx etc.

Well I thought I'd do some digging and see what bones I unearthed. So for round one I have chosen GAWDS The Guild of Accessible Web Designers - Just to point out there is no ulterior motive in picking Gawds first they just got lucky ;-)

I chose a totally random selection of their members sites (ones that I was not already familiar with) and had a looksee.

After junking the ones that came up not found for one reason or another and junking the purely blog/info type sites I was left with a nice roundish 25 web design companies.

Ok 25 at starting blocks.....
Junk 5 for being under construction or reconstruction

20 left....
In no order

Pixelhaus Studios
Nice design, but sadly not all conforming to accessibility standards. Checked a couple of their portfolio examples and even more sadly neither did they.

29digital
Again it looks the look but doesn't come quite up to scratch - It ain't accessible and I'm suspicious about at least some of their portfolio.

Bloody hell, not doing too well so far!!

Webfolk
Lovely delicate feel to this site, lets see how it goes...well, well, at last a company who practise what they preach. Unfortunately some of their portfolio offerings do not offer the same level of accessibility.

CDSM Interactive solutions
What can I say, impressive client names, but less than impressive sites, they don't pass the most basic of validations, contrary to their declaration on their accessibility page - even that page doesn't validate!!

Prodia Webdesign
First I wouldn't have google ads for webdesign companies as one of the first things a client sees on entering my site. Yet another web design company that is so sure their site validates they put a link to the validator... guess what? It doesn't.

Direction
Spanish webdesign company, some very minor errors resulting in non validation. Odd portfolio, good names but no direct links.

Pixelwave Design
Well a few pages are valid! Their portfolio example that was built to "exacting accessibility standards" unfortunately failed basic validation.

W3 Digital
Pretty damn good, some very minor errors, oversights again I think.......but looking at their portfolio I am not too sure, either clients are not bothered or the company isn't.

BigEasy Webdesign
Very very good, if ugly, site. Only one site in portfolio, but that site has a very good level of validity and accessibility.

Romjon
Yeah, a good one. A couple of minor issues with the site and some lovely accessible, valid examples in the portfolio.

Edge of my seat
Very good overall, couple of minor problems again, nice looking site though. Not apparent if there is a portfolio, I couldn't find one, not good for a design company.

Full cream Milk
Coupla minors again, also site doesn't look recently updated.

Black Widow Web Design
Has several level one accessibility issues before we go any further.

Wachenfeld and Golla
Lots of level 2 errors

Accessible web studio ltd
Yyyeeeessssss!!! At long long last. Their site is and what I looked at in their portfolio is a near perfect example of accessible validating web design.

Peach Web Services
With a site so clean and minimalist you would think it easy to get everything perfect, alas not in this case. Portfolio sites likewise need some basic validation work.

Web Dandy
Yet another one that doesn't validate. Portfolio sites ditto.

WHY do webdesigners stick labels on sites saying they validate when they don't.
Is it just to look good?
Is it cos the site did once, but doesn't since they've changed it?

Anyway onwards...

Yellow Pencil
Doesn't validate.

Untied Shoes
First impressions - Nice site design, some nice stuff in the portfolio. However not all content validates. BUT while I was looking round the site I had an odd sort of feeling, gut feeling? deja vue? dunno, but I felt something was not quite right. So I dug a bit deeper and found quite a lot of......Content Copying, Plagiarism, call it what you want. Some of it I have found proof of via archive.org or other credible sites. But there is a lot there. I feel a separate post coming on on this subject....

Back to the business in hand for the time being. The last site in my little experiment.

Pontbren Web Services
Well constructed virtually valid site, sadly following on from my findings at untied shoes I decided to do a bit of checking for copying and guess what? At least one page is copied virtually word for word from a respected source without respecting the conditions of the creative commons licence. (Of course they may have permission from the licence holder?)

So I am saddened overall by these findings, it seems that accessibility and validity are used quite often just as a buzz word, because they think they should. But the reality is they are not using full care to produce sites that are accessible and valid

So my winners
Direction
W3 Digital
BigEasy Webdesign
Romjon
Accessible Web Studio

FIVE out of 25 giving somewhere near the level of service they proclaim.

Comments please.

posted by Spiders Webs @ 10:59 AM 0 comments

Well I dunnit!

After spending years reading other blogs and fitting them up for clients, I bit the bullet and got this one. I think I'm gonna have fun, and piss a few people off, but so be it.....

I'm sick of web companies proudly proclaiming that they do one thing and in reality doing sweet f.a. like it. So I will name and shame them, as well as praise the ones that do do what they say they do.

I'm also fed up to the back teeth of people that think they can make websites, instead of investing in something

• that looks professional
  
• that is constructed professionally
  
• that is compliant with legal regs
• that is optimised well and can be found
  

They get the first free website making package they can find and make something that only their dog would find good, search engines wouldn't have a hope in hell of finding and that does absolutely bugger all for their business.

OR the alternative version, someone who is bright enough to realise they can't make websites but doesn't see why they should pay out good money for one....

they find the first "cheap website design company" they come across who offer 99 pages for $1 and end up with dog food again, but also with a crap view of all web designers.

And finally for my introduction I have had it with "web design companies" who:

• think that flash is the only way to make websites
• think that css is a government department or TV program
• believe that 'frames' are still the way to go
• don't have a portfolio, even if it's small it needs to be there!
• devalue the profession by not being professional

So thats it for now, comments welcome!

posted by Spiders Webs @ 12:31 PM 0 comments