UKNM: RE: Fast loading etc.

[John Braithwaite]

John Braithwaite wrote:

> and then Ian Fenn wrote:

> At a creative level I'd have more of a problem with a crappy bloated

> site for a great product or a great site for a dreadful product.

> Technically, I'd agree with you - crappy bloated sites use more

> bandwidth... which slows down access to other sites ultimately.

> 

> John Braithwaite suggests:

> 

> No site has an excuse to be crappy and bloated. Even the ones that offer

> lashings of Flash or Video images should give the user the option (and

> warning) of weight of information that will be transmitted (it's only

> reasonable and fair!): Give me a good reason why a site can be bloated and

> I'll give you a site that no-one goes to.


Then Ian Fenn wrote:

I think you miss my point...


All the best,


And finally, John says (without really wanting to start anything petty on

this list):

It wasn't necessarily directed just at your comment - all I was indicating

that a crappy, bloated site is unnecessary - regardless of what the content

/ product is. Your point is valid, although I would argue that there's no

point running with a dreadful product anyway (forget about spending money on

a site, spend it on R&D / Sourcing a better product). 


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

post new media vacancies for free

uknm-jobschinwag [dot] com

*******************

sponsor the uk-netmarketing list and website, contact

saleschinwag [dot] com

 for more details.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

To unsubscribe or change your list settings go to

http://www.chinwag.com/uk-netmarketing or

helpchinwag [dot] com