Web developer wanted:

[benny gsr]

Hi,

I am in need of a website for my podiatry business in eastern Melbourne. I am not after anything fancy (ie big budget), with online shopping or anything, just something that gives clients and potential clients some basic info. Even something by Joomla or the like, should be more than adequate. If I have the ability to make simple changes, then that is even better.

To give you some examples layout wise

Meet the Hawksburn Podiatry Team - Podiatry Hawksburn, Podiatry Toorak
Eastern Foot Care - Excellence in foot and ankle care : About us
Knee Pain & Shin Splints - Melbourne Podiatrist

I am hoping to have something up and running within the next few weeks if possible. I also have got some web hosting through Infinite networks (site sponsor)

I don't mind if you are a student, amateur developer or a seasoned pro, however I will need a tax invoice (depends on how much you charge!) so you will more than likely need a ABN.

Please pm me if you might be able to help out, perhaps even with a ball park price guide, or direct me to someone you know.


Thanks in advance!

[uncyherb]

To be perfectly frank, two of those three links are really bad websites that you should be showing to prospective developers to say "I DONT want something like this."

Through the company I work for I designed/created this site:
Laser Eye Surgery Melbourne - Laser vision correction
As an example of a similar vein of client. They can change any content on the site, and any menu items as well. If you want, I'll give you a price guide... but it's not going to be $100 like some kids might offer.

[grfxninja]

Originally Posted by uncyherb

Laser Eye Surgery Melbourne - Laser vision correction

Just thought you should know, there is a spelling mistake in the Disclaimer section at the bottom:

These answers are correct for most people. If you have reason to beleive that you might not fit, or if your question is not answered here then please talk to us.
This information is deliberately non-technical. Please speak to one of our staff before making and decisions.
Website by Blue Pebble Design. SEO by Arrow.

[uncyherb]

Originally Posted by grfxninja

Just thought you should know, there is a spelling mistake in the Disclaimer section at the bottom:

Thx, I'll get them to change it (as they have control of the site's content).

[grfxninja]

Originally Posted by uncyherb

Thx, I'll get them to change it (as they have control of the site's content).

Thought that might have been the case, but thought I'd let you know anyway.

Sorry to the OP for the thread hijack

[benny gsr]

Thanks for all the replies !

I will have to spend some time working my way through the PM's to see your work, however I will personally reply to all.

Uncyherb: I guess I am just looking for something clutter free, In what are they bad examples? Please do tell so I don't make the same mistakes?

[avolve]

PM sent

[harrisonx]

Originally Posted by uncyherb

To be perfectly frank, two of those three links are really bad websites that you should be showing to prospective developers to say "I DONT want something like this."

Well, none of them are really bad. They're probably down the bottom end of a hypothetical "websites ranked by how well they are designed" ladder, but they aren't right down the bottom.

They may not be particularly inspired aesthetics-wise, but they're clean. The layouts aren't terrible, and they're easy enough to use [though the size of the websites play a major factor in that].

Only one is standards-compliant [the home page, at least, validates] and the other two have, surprisingly, almost exactly the same invalid syntax [it looks like they were both built by a MelbourneIT webpage generator that isn't outputting great code]. Though aside from them not validating, they are all built using reasonably modern technologies, there's no table based layouts or anything ancient.

They may not be top-class websites, and they are definitely not anything I would pay for [though I'm a web designer myself so it's a moot point] but from a general layout point of view they aren't really bad at all. They are a good example of what you get for cheap, though, which should be a good indication to the OP that web design is, like so many other things, a field where you get what you pay for.

[tcimac]

Originally Posted by harrisonx

Well, none of them are really bad. They're probably down the bottom end of a hypothetical "websites ranked by how well they are designed" ladder, but they aren't right down the bottom.

I have to agree. One thing that a lot of designers/developers have to understand is that not everyone (consumers and businesses) like flashy tech laden websites.

Some real basic stuff that is like an "extended" business card or brochure is sometimes quite sufficient.

Good luck Benny gsr

[battye]

On a different note, melbournepodiatrist.com.au has a very poorly designed logo. It looks like it was done in Paint, which for a business is something you really don't want. For a very small price (or a favour from a mate who had Photoshop) they could have come up with something a lot better. First impressions count, and the poor logo was what hit me first.

[forgie]

Originally Posted by battye

On a different note, melbournepodiatrist.com.au has a very poorly designed logo. It looks like it was done in Paint, which for a business is something you really don't want. For a very small price (or a favour from a mate who had Photoshop) they could have come up with something a lot better. First impressions count, and the poor logo was what hit me first.

The visibly poor JPEG compression doesn't help either!