Website Upgrade
I have a website that is more than 10 years old...I want to improve the design and I am not sure if I should redo the entire site or if I can upgrade the look by using a CSS. The URL is www.endyn.com
All the pages are .asp and we have a SQL database that we use to populate the tables on some of the pages.
All help and suggestions is appreciated.
All the pages are .asp and we have a SQL database that we use to populate the tables on some of the pages.
All help and suggestions is appreciated.
SOLUTION
membership
This solution is only available to members.
To access this solution, you must be a member of Experts Exchange.
I agree with Gary... except that there are a number of errors that should be fixed. The single most important thing is that your web site works as it should. And your current site does use CSS for styling.
As far as "21st century", nobody knows what that is. If you want to use a lot of 'fancy features' and different graphics, you should probably start from scratch. The list of changes from the time that site was done essentially require a re-education in web site design. It will not be just some easy changes.
As far as "21st century", nobody knows what that is. If you want to use a lot of 'fancy features' and different graphics, you should probably start from scratch. The list of changes from the time that site was done essentially require a re-education in web site design. It will not be just some easy changes.
SOLUTION
membership
This solution is only available to members.
To access this solution, you must be a member of Experts Exchange.
The extra <html> and <head> tags are coming from an 'include' file and should be removed there.
ASKER
I am not looking to add fancy features. What errors do you see that need to be fixed?
The extra <html> and <head> tags are coming from an 'include' file and should be removed thereAre you psychic Dave?
The comment line above those extra tags implies that and I've seen similar pages that have that problem for exactly that reason. It's unfortunately common in pages of that era.
<!-- CODE USED FOR ROTATING IMAGES IN FRONT PAGE -->
<!-- CODE USED FOR ROTATING IMAGES IN FRONT PAGE -->
ASKER CERTIFIED SOLUTION
membership
This solution is only available to members.
To access this solution, you must be a member of Experts Exchange.
SOLUTION
membership
This solution is only available to members.
To access this solution, you must be a member of Experts Exchange.
ASKER
Thanks for all the comments. I am currently converting the menus to css/list based.
Building a website from scratch these days is hard work id you want it to be easy to maintain, add new content etc.
Unless you have a need for specific server side functionality, you'd be far better off starting again using WordPress. There are loads of free/cheap templates (including responsive ones if you want the site to be mobile friendly) that can be modified to make them 'yours'
Loads of plugins give you lots of functionality, and it's dead easy to add new content.
You can build static pages for most of your content - it doesn't have to be just a blog!
As your site is currently using Classic ASP, which implies it's on a Windows server.
I can see you use www.web.com for hosting, and they also have unix/linux hosting with one click install for WordPress (http://www.web.com/hosting/unix.aspx).
(Windows servers can host PHP & MySQL, needed for WordPress, but WordPress just seems to work better on *nix servers)
You should be able to get a new hosting package with them, set up you new site, then point your domain at the new site when it's ready.
Unless you have a need for specific server side functionality, you'd be far better off starting again using WordPress. There are loads of free/cheap templates (including responsive ones if you want the site to be mobile friendly) that can be modified to make them 'yours'
Loads of plugins give you lots of functionality, and it's dead easy to add new content.
You can build static pages for most of your content - it doesn't have to be just a blog!
As your site is currently using Classic ASP, which implies it's on a Windows server.
I can see you use www.web.com for hosting, and they also have unix/linux hosting with one click install for WordPress (http://www.web.com/hosting/unix.aspx).
(Windows servers can host PHP & MySQL, needed for WordPress, but WordPress just seems to work better on *nix servers)
You should be able to get a new hosting package with them, set up you new site, then point your domain at the new site when it's ready.
WP is overkill for a few dozen static pages.
On the contrary, WP is ideal for small sites.
If you want a site to be relevant and Google to index it and people visit it, fresh content is really important.
I've seen so many small sites that die because keeping them up to date - adding content etc, is fiddly and only the techies can do it - the people who could be adding new content, such as marketing, have no access and the whole process is too difficult.
This site is an example. I'd place money on the fact that, over the past few years, it's hardly had any new content. I don't know what the traffic is, but it's probably low. (as an aside, there is no Google Analytics tracking code on the site either, so the OP, acpo, possibly has little idea about the traffic the site receives either).
Another advantage of WP is that there are plenty of Responsive templates, to make the site mobile friendly.
Currently, the site points some mobile devices at http://www.endyn.com.param.mobi/
This has several disadvantages.
First, the minimum width this site supports is 820px which is way too big for most mobile devices. An iPhone 4 or 5, for example, only supports web pages up to 320px wide (yes, I know the screen is 640px - that's Apple for you), so the mobile site will look poor in most mobile devices.
The next problem is duplicate content, something Google has really cracked down on.
As the sites are on different domains, and don't have any rel=canonical or rel=alternate meta tags to tell Google they are related.
This will have a bad affect on their rankings in Google.
A responsive site will not need a separate mobile version, so this problem goes away.
Acpo, sorry if my critique sounds harsh, but if we can't be honest, there's not much point in doing this.
Changing the menus might make the site look a little better, but it's not going to make any real difference to the number of people who use your site.
If a site's worth having, do it well, and make it work for you. There are loads of resources on how to use WordPress, and you'd time will be far better used learning about this, and setting up a WP site, than trying to wrestle this site into shape.
If you want a site to be relevant and Google to index it and people visit it, fresh content is really important.
I've seen so many small sites that die because keeping them up to date - adding content etc, is fiddly and only the techies can do it - the people who could be adding new content, such as marketing, have no access and the whole process is too difficult.
This site is an example. I'd place money on the fact that, over the past few years, it's hardly had any new content. I don't know what the traffic is, but it's probably low. (as an aside, there is no Google Analytics tracking code on the site either, so the OP, acpo, possibly has little idea about the traffic the site receives either).
Another advantage of WP is that there are plenty of Responsive templates, to make the site mobile friendly.
Currently, the site points some mobile devices at http://www.endyn.com.param.mobi/
This has several disadvantages.
First, the minimum width this site supports is 820px which is way too big for most mobile devices. An iPhone 4 or 5, for example, only supports web pages up to 320px wide (yes, I know the screen is 640px - that's Apple for you), so the mobile site will look poor in most mobile devices.
The next problem is duplicate content, something Google has really cracked down on.
As the sites are on different domains, and don't have any rel=canonical or rel=alternate meta tags to tell Google they are related.
This will have a bad affect on their rankings in Google.
A responsive site will not need a separate mobile version, so this problem goes away.
Acpo, sorry if my critique sounds harsh, but if we can't be honest, there's not much point in doing this.
Changing the menus might make the site look a little better, but it's not going to make any real difference to the number of people who use your site.
If a site's worth having, do it well, and make it work for you. There are loads of resources on how to use WordPress, and you'd time will be far better used learning about this, and setting up a WP site, than trying to wrestle this site into shape.
It's a 17 year old B2B website that ranks very well on Google and pretty much in the number one spot.
Ever changing content is only a small part of SEO and not always a good thing.
Ever changing content is only a small part of SEO and not always a good thing.
I have have 'done' a number or Wordpress sites. I never recommend it for anything other than a blog.
+1 for "WP is overkill for a few dozen static pages."
ASKER