Eskymo

I must connect my speakers and have another look as I didn't get the sound when I viewed the last time - speakers are always plugged into my iPod.

That's why I use FF for all my browsing as it does everything and the extensions and add ons are brilliant - so many to choose from.

I personally don't like the site at all. Firstly the content isn't for me as I'm not interested in that kind of thing, so that put me off instantly. Secondly it took too long to load, even on broadband, which just makes me bored and go elsewhere. When you click on anything, OK, you get a nice scantily clad lady holding a card and have to wait for even more loading and looking at her might make some men and women satisfied with the wait time, but for me it's just annoying and a bit sexist to be honest. Not for me!

I always create a skeleteon site, but do this after I've created the styling etc. Basically I start off with a layout.html file that has the basic styling of the site and then I convert this to PHP and create all the pages of the site with the correct site structure. It's at this point that I let the client have a look as it gives them a better idea of what the site is going to look like and how it is going to function. It's also a good point in the project to review the sitemap and make any changes to the layout. After the skeleton has been approved I start adding proper graphics and content and images as well as styling the text etc.

Can you post a larger image as that one is tiny and it's very difficult to see the details.

i totally disagree - what's the point in learning how to use software like GIMP or Paint Shop Pro and then having to move to relearn Fireworks or Photoshop - seems like a complete waste of time to me as every program is different. I would choose a program and just stick to it. If you have no budget - get something free like GIMP - it'a apparently very good. If you have a budget decide on what is more important for you and choose a program accordingly. If photo manipulation and good hi res graphics for print as well as web design capabilities are an important mix then splash out on Photoshop. It's complicated and could take a lot of dedication to learn the more complex aspects of the program. On the other hand if you want something that's easy to use, very quick to learn and is solely to design websites, then go for Fireworks - I learnt to use it in a few days, whereas I'm still struggling to understand Photoshop, years after using the first ever version of the software when I was at college to the CS version now available. Not sure how much both programs cost, but I think Fireworks is cheaper - visit the Adobe site as you may still be able to download a 30 day trial and try it out...

I visited the site and couldn't see any paypal buttons anywhere... I did see links to 'Delete HTML' and 'Edit text' which you might want to remove though.

how do you do that then? and what happens if someone has javascript switched off?

I think I might to post that into another thread about Page Rank - oops - not sure where that thread is now. So Sorry for the confusion - I will try and move it. You may find this article interesting: Black Hats

Hi all As you all know I'm no PHP expert, so I'm posting this thread to find out if it is possible to set the year dynamically using PHP. In the footer of most of the sites that I create I have a copyright statement which states the year - all currently set to 2006. When 2007 comes along I'm going to have to go into all the sites and update that to 2007 and just wondered if there was a PHP script I could put in place of the year that would check what year it is and then display it to save me having to go in and do this manually. E

I just did a google search for 'Bookmark page script' and 'print page script' and got the following: Bookmark this page links: One Two The problem is that a lot of these kinds of scripts are browser specific and only work for Internet Explorer. Try the two above and see if they work. Print button script: One Two Three Four

do google offer a payment process like paypal then? Is it any good?

It's always best to get something either writen on paper or within an email as it can always be referred to, whereas a spoken agreement is 'lost' as soon as the conversation is over. You may well remember the conversation and the agreement made, but your client can just as easily 'conveniently foget'. I often send contracts out as PDFs via email and in the email state waht is attached and ask the client to either print out the contract and sign it and send it back, or simply reply to may email and say they agree with what is in the contract - that becomes the signature as the email has a date and time it was sent etc. There is also a way to 'digitally sign' PDF documents, but I can't remember how to do this. p.s. I've sent you a PM regarding contracts from your other thread - and yes I have been busy, so I apologise for the delay.

I also have no idea. Were you trying to use button graphics that you created yourself with the PayPal system?

I think you need to do some looking around at other sites and figure out what makes them successful in pursuading you to think they are 'cool', 'rich' 'bling' etc and then take those ideas on board to influence your designs. I've just had a quick look around and found these that might be of interest...I'm just thinking aloud here as this is the kind of route that I take when coming up with ideas for websites as I think it helps to see what tools other people use to get across the messages I want to convey and then see what I can come up with from those influences... Phono Phunk A simple golden background with a slight gradient on it lifts this site and gives it a nice edge. The logo uses a funky font that emulates the feel the designer wants to get across. The photos used in the header are all sexy/funky/cool/youthful/trendy images using unique angles and quirky subject matter. All this helps to give the site a bling kind of vibe even though the majority of it is text based on a white background. Everything fits together - all the elements are styled intentionally to mix well. Some Random Dude This site uses the same colours that you've used, but doesn't come across as aggressive and in your face. The logo is small and yet still has impact. On your site you've got the guys name really big and I don't think that's necessary, maybe use that space for some imagery that gives you the 'bling/rich' message you want to get across instead. Cabana Digital I chose this site becuase of it's header. The logo uses a crest of arms and is maybe something you could incorporate into your design alongside your guys name - create a logo. A crest of arms has so many implications with regards to money, upbringing, social status etc. The header here uses stylish graphics, gradients, highlights that all have cool/trendy feel to them that could add the 'richness' you're after. Cafe Oper Wien Ok this sites not fantastic, but the combination of red and gold, intricate detailed patterns and the fancy font all add to the 'richness' they want to convey Happy Endings Band Or maybe you want to go for a more 'grungy' feel. Instead of a simple snapshot of a band, the designer has tweaked the photo and made it fit with the grungy background which gives it oomph and more meaning and adds identity to the people depicted. Maybe think about how you use the photography on your site - the snapshot you have of Kevin is very bland and doesn't give me any information about him really. Just some ideas that I thought might help. E

that doesn't come across in your visuals.

It's not very web 2.0. I agree with PV about the navigation and alignment - it all looks a bit disjointed and I think you could work on tying things together a bit more and making elements relate to each other. The colour is also a bit in your face - maybe soften it a bit,

I'm the same - I read a bit of the disclaimer and then got bored.

No I'll just resign!

Fixed it! the css for the 'main' div is now: #main { margin: 0 auto; padding: 10px 30px 25px 30px; background:url(assets/main_top.jpg) no-repeat #ffffff; } and the css for my clear is now: .clear{ clear: both; padding: 0; margin: 0; height: 1px; } I found out that if the clear:both doean't have anything in it or a dimension specified Mozilla won't recognise it. So I put a in there first and that caused the 'main' div to move down by about 18px, so I added a margin of -18px to the css for the clear and that worked in everything apart from MSIE. So decided to ditch that and removed the and added a 1px height to the clear instead - it's barely noticeable. So all fixed. I'll find out that it doesn't work on a mac now and all hell will break loose!!!

OK, I've discovered that Mozilla has a problem rendering clear: both; so I've gone back to my original CSS, but not found a way of fixing this yet.

I'm nearly there with this solution...it seems that Mozilla has a huge probelm with background elements - images and colours. If I add a background colour of #ffffff this starts at the top of the page, if i've got a background image it's the same. So I'm going to do a search on google to see if there's a fix. Will keep you posted.

adding position:relative has no effect in FF but in Mozilla it just brings the background image to the front but doens't change it's position. I got a clearing div in there already, so it's not that either. I'm going to try a work aroud and not use the background image. Instead cut the top of the image and have that in the html at the top of the main div and then creates the border images and have them as backgrounds to the left and right divs and see if that works. Seems a long winded way of doing things, but if it work I may as well do it.

Do you mean above? the 'header' div above the 'main' div has: #header { width: 730px; margin: 0 auto; } and so the bottom margin of that element is already set to zero and the '0' refers to both the top and bottom margins.

Just tried that - it messes everything up even more - it makes the footer go up to the top of the page and cover everything.