Budget sites

In the spring of this year I wrote about the so-called "budget sites", or "sites in 15 minutes." But on Habré this article did not publish for one simple reason - I was not here. Given the jump in interest in this topic, triggered by the topics “ Your life in 15 minutes ” and “ Sites - 15 minutes and it’s ready, ” I want to express my opinion on this issue. The text of the article under the cut.

I am amazed by the “studios” that make the so-called “budget sites” (and if I call things by their names, I get on). What is the basis of the "budget site"? As a rule, this is some kind of public CMS (written, for example, under the outdated PHP 4, holey and unoptimized) and a clumsy template design. It is worth the pleasure, of course, 2-3 times cheaper than a normal site - and therefore is called "budget." The studio itself is also miserable - a normal studio will not do lazy. What happens next? A customer who is far from web-technologies is looking for someone to order a website from him and somehow finds this “studio”. The price suits him (still) and he orders it from them. Everyone is happy - the customer saved; "Studio" - by receiving their pennies; Visitors - the fact that you can laugh at the resulting deformity. But the site is not created to be laughed at.

Let us dwell on the details. Let's start with the engine. I had one familiar director of the studio. So, his "studio" made sites exclusively on the CMS " SmallNuke ". It was something. First, these sites are terribly slow. Secondly, it is enough to go to Google to hack such a site. Thirdly, the URL - for example, the link to the “Contacts” section instead of the normal and clear http://example.com/contacts looked like this: http://example.com/index.php?go=Content&mod=view&id= 10 This list can be continued for a long time, I mentioned only the most conspicuous and understandable even to a non-professional.
')
With regard to design and usability, then on this occasion we can only say one word - horror. It can be a long time to describe how a design should be; even longer, you can talk about the principles of building interfaces. This is outside the scope of this article. I can only say one thing - those “budget sites” did not observe any of these principles.

Why is this so? There are two main reasons, and they are interrelated. The first is because no one wants to do a normal job for such a price. The second - a person who is able to do something normal will never do such a crap. Making such sites is the lot of flawed and incompetent people who are no longer capable of anything. But everyone wants to eat - and such people, instead of going to work as loaders (where they belong), climb into someone else's sphere, dump and flood the Internet "with their products."

I used to think that not having an office on the Internet is a shame for a serious company. Now I think it is better not to have a site at all than to have a “budget site”. For example, I will never order anything from a company with a budget site. The site is the face of the company. This is an indicator of its level. What site - such and services. Yes, I know, most customers don't think so. They think that the main thing is that the site works, and the rest is not important. I agree, people who do not understand the web may not understand that the site is crappy. And if they understand, they will not consider this an important factor. But the site is made for the web-a, for those people who understand this! Here lies a big mistake of customers.

However, it is not the customers that should be blamed, but unfortunate studios that make “budget sites”. My will - I would have to get a license before opening a studio. You can not do fine - go load wagons.