Just finished a site for a client. tell me what you think:

www.reedlife.org

PS: What do you think about customers who want "clones". i get that a lot . Is it that they don't trust your abilities, or they aren't just literate enough, artwise?

What I think:

At first sight, the white gutters came across to me as though the page were broken due to the incorrect use of images. I probably would have gone for a unified image with a gutter of similar color.

As for the "Clones" issue, I think it's the client's way of saying they want a template. In other words, they figure it is cheaper to have a site based on previous work cos it is cheaper than an outright new design. It is then up to you to use your sugar-coated mouth to convince them otherwise so as to maximise your naira levels

Well the site is pretty cool like your R Logo but those picture images should be black since we are black ppl here. since the site has been deliverd no problem your new site should be black.

And for the clone thing, give it to them just make sure your prize is higher than the one you will design yourself.

Back in the early days of the net, with Screens having poor resolutions, using web-safe colors was a big deal. I blv at the time screens could only display a certain range of colors. These days that is no longer the case, so I wdnt personally be concerned about using web-safe colors. Having said that, I am not promoting the abusive use of non-web-safe colors

As for wide vs fixed, I would say it depends on who you ask. I personally prefer fixed width: easier to manage, easier to code for. Yes, wide screen sites contract and expand with differing resolutions. However, if you don't implement the %s right, you end up with horizontal scrolling, which isn't good at all. It is especially tricky when you have a lot of images, with fixed dimensions, on your site. To summarize, you just have to pick your poison. Both have their advantages and disadvantages. I however will still go with fixed width for some time to come.

Selling CMS? Shouldn't be too hard: "If I make the site static, I will have to be around for maintenance. This is because you probably don't know anything about maintaining an html file. This means you will have to pay me more in the long-run. With a CMS however, I set up the pages and all you have to do is enter content. You will probably not need me at all for this. So the choice is yours - more money invested upfront that pays off in the long-run, or you be cheap now and end up either making a mess trying to fix the site yourself/get Okoro, who knows nothing about websites to screw it up for you, or paying me each time you need help".

As for pricing, as na you dey Benin, you know what they can tolerate. Generally speaking though, a good site is worth paying for. As Nigerians (both at home and in the diaspora), we really need to start appreciating good work. As web developers/designers, the onus is on us to make clients understand why it is worth paying so much for a good site. Charging N10,000 per site wouldn't even buy me a bag of garri, not to mention paying for school fees. I wonder how most of these pple survive.

I hope this helps.

May Day!! may day, calling may day, the site is down, send alert