|
Good point! There's nothing like looking at price information and then seeing it was from 2003. (Been-there-done-that)
|
|
|
|
|
The website and the online manual is pretty important as the product itself. Two succinct examples of this:
1) Printer-Friendly Manual of PHP from http://www.php.net/[^]
2) Anytime Anywhere documentation without installing the fatty bulk MSDN at http://msdn.microsoft.com/[^]
|
|
|
|
|
Vasudevan Deepak Kumar wrote: 1) Printer-Friendly Manual of PHP
Someday, MSDN will be like the PHP manual. They're getting closer - you can now leave comments on MSDN topics. Another decade, and MSDN may well reach the level of quality that php.net had back in 2000... 
every night, i kneel at the foot of my bed and thank the Great Overseeing Politicians for protecting my freedoms by reducing their number, as if they were deer in a state park. -- C hris L osinger, Online Poker Players?
|
|
|
|
|
To be honest, if the product is amazing then the website wouldn't matter - but only if I already knew the product. If I was scouting for software and the website was really really bad, then I wouldn't even bother trialing the software. I guess the reasoning is if they can't be bothered maintaining their website (which isn't exactly hard if its just for a sales pitch), then what hope have they of maintaining any sort of support for a product.
Obviously you can't say that for everything, I know some bad software with great websites, and some great software with crap websites... but generally speaking its how I think things work.
|
|
|
|
|
Agreed, I would not consider purchasing any software (that I did not know) if the web site was poor. I remember several times dismissing a product for this very reason.
John
|
|
|
|
|
I'm totally agree too. When I'm in a mall, I never go into a new store if the shop window doesn't shows me something interesting and well done, I prefer my usual store.
|
|
|
|
|
I think the website is of vital importance to the company.
It is after all - the online salesperson for the company. The first representative that a web user is going to meet, and often the return point for many enquiries.
If I was to walk upto a company and be greeted by disinterested employee's, rude receptionists, and a workplace that shows lack of pride and neatness - would I want to part with my money. Should I put my trust, and the trust of my clients (for who I am developing applications) to a company that show no enthusiam in presenting themselves.
Consider. You are a manager who is about to employ a new person. Of the 2 candidates one is neat, tidy , and well presented and the other well. is disorganised and untidy. Who gives the BEST first impression. Regardless of the skills the first impression is alway the best.
Just my views..
Dave
Coding Coding Coding...
Keep those keyboards coding..
RAW CODE!!
|
|
|
|
|
I agree,
Presentation is king and nothing more so than a web site. I am now a full-time developer however I was previously moon lighting as a deisgner stroke web developer.
To me having a well constructing (not necessarily flashy) web site that presents the companies idea's is key in this day and age, one of the very first things I ask any client is "do you have a web site?".
The web site is no different to a business card, regardless of how good your product is if the market cannot gain visibility of you as a company your product will not sell. When I was working as a web design consultant my company web site promoted me, I feel at least, very well in that many customers assumed they were dealing with a much larger company - hence I was able to win over the more lucrative contracts.
It's unfortunate however we live in a web age, if I was presented with an ill concieved web site I would not consider the company or their products. Saying a web site is not required is no different to the nay sayers who believed the internet was a fad.
Adios,
Fz
|
|
|
|
|
I know many good products that do not have good websites.
|
|
|
|
|
Gautam Jain wrote: I know many good products that do not have good websites.
...even many more that do not have websites at all.
Developer Fantasies
|
|
|
|
|
Depends on the type of product of coarse.
If it's a web design tool and the home page has 200 animated gifs and uses 25 point bright pink font, you may not take their product too seriously
|
|
|
|
|
I wonder what their potential might be if they had a site (or one that was well done) that reflected how good you see you the product/company to be?
|
|
|
|
|
May be true for legacy products and restricted to particular regions alone. But how would they have a global reach?
|
|
|
|
|
yes, well, better NO website than a BAD website... 
V.
No hurries, no worries
|
|
|
|
|
Gautam Jain wrote: I know many good products that do not have good websites.
I don't. None that I would spend money on at least. Also, I do find it hard to believe a company that cares about its products so much would not give a flip about their public website.
OSS is a bit different because there are usually less resources, but I don't see a good reason outside of laziness for an established company to not have a good website.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
