Hello, I'm Stuart. When I'm not working I can be spotted speeding thru the hills risking life and limb dodging koalas and holyday makers or just relaxing with family and friends.
This area will become my little blog spot as well, reporting on my views on social behaviour, beuracracy and anything else that inflames or delights me on my travels.
Thanks for visiting D69
The cost of your message
Just what is your message worth ? If it fails, what is the cost to your business loosing a customer...
All to often people choose price as the basis for their project and this decision stands to kill their message. When asked recently, what is the difference between a ‘cheap’ site and a more expensive one ? I responded with this:
There can be many factors that contribute to a lower cost. To generalise, it would be fair to say that you get less, but less what? My experience shows that you will pay for a site that fails to address, your identity, your clients needs and web browser standards. If you’re fortunate, then visually it will look pretty, maybe not indicative of the message you want portrayed but it hopefully wont look too bad or standard.
When you’re charging less, time is your biggest expense and as such you cannot expect the designer to invest too much concern for you, your goals and your clients. My approach to site design and construction is to work with the client and identify key markers that will allow all parties to be clear on the role and purpose of the site.
At then end of the day a website is meant to answer questions and provide an insight into you and your business, quickly and succinctly, a site is your “always-on” salesperson. To achieve this level of design and thought, even at the lower end, still requires time and time costs money.
Speed Kills or does it ?
Being a responsible bike rider yet addicted to the exhilaration of a high powered ride, mates and I quite often discuss the seemingly ridiculous steps the government employes to make money.. oops save lives.
Being a responsible bike rider yet addicted to the exhilaration of a high powered ride, mates and I quite often discuss the seemingly ridiculous steps the government employes to make money.. oops save lives.
Fatalities happen, with that many people in cars the law of averages means that unless everyone didn't drive then the likelihood of 2 vehicles hitting each other is high. Step in government, as they must they look at the law of averages and find ways to make money from it. Smoking... it kills people and they'll need hospitalisation but if we tax the smokes then on average we'll make more money from taxes then payout in hospital fees.. win !
Cars are safer, drivers more educated, roads better (sometimes) but people will always go faster than the speed limit *que lightbulb* Lets spend a few million getting some hairdryers that tell if people are speeding, we'll make them pay a high but reasonable fee for the pleasure but rather than taking away their license we'll let them keep on driving so they may do it again. Like smoking if it's THAT dangerous then they should be penalised harder or is this thinking outside the square ?
Note: The end of year "death" results have been tallied and all the squillions of dollars spent on "safety" have seen 8 more people die than in 2006 or 14 less than 2002 with an average of 12 deaths per year for the last 5 years... wasn't all that equipment worth it :'(