|
Yeah, here
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2018 19:36
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 02:20 |
|
|
darthbob88 posted:End goal, sure, but right now this is just a transitional thing, dipping our metaphorical toe in the water. I have no intention of getting stuck with this setup. As soon as it's bigger than I can easily handle, I'm taking it all professional and spending actual money on it, but not until then. I run a doesn't-make-money-yet startup and use Weebly. I have definitely out grown it a year or so later but drat if it didnt get me on the web for a very reasonable price in 24 hours and accepting credit card payments (stripe) and Paypal in 48. You have to REALLY value your time at nothing if you think that rolling your own for a very basic ecommerce site is the cheaper option. And that includes time you could spend doing other, more productive things. Weebly sounds perfect for your cookie idea, will be up and running in 8 hours, and when they sign up with stripe, which is integrated, they'll get a free credit card reader in the mail so it works to accept IRL money too. They will also be able to maintain it instead of you.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2018 03:24
|
|
|
CarForumPoster posted:I run a doesn't-make-money-yet startup and use Weebly. I have definitely out grown it a year or so later but drat if it didnt get me on the web for a very reasonable price in 24 hours and accepting credit card payments (stripe) and Paypal in 48. You have to REALLY value your time at nothing if you think that rolling your own for a very basic ecommerce site is the cheaper option. And that includes time you could spend doing other, more productive things.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2018 06:45
|
|
|
22 Eargesplitten posted:Are there any good places / communities that will tell a new dev why their site code sucks? I'm going through a Lynda course right now, but I have no illusions that my first website won't be garbage. We will happily tell you why you code sucks.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2018 13:37
|
|
|
It sounds like your doing this just to see if people will buy cookies online. The answer is yes. People will buy pretty much anything online. If stripe's 2.9%+30¢ is putting you in the red, things have already gone horribly wrong. If the cookies are any good at all, then it's just a matter of how well you can market them. Even if they aren't the best in the world, good ad-copy, layout, and marketing will do the job. (Look me in the eye and tell me Oreo's aren't horrible.) and that's where your time should be going. (at least until you can get someone who does marketing and ad-copy all day everyday to re-buid the site into something that really sells  ). spent to make the website come together, and actually look appealing, almost instantly so you can start driving traffic/customers to it and start filling orders is nothing. It's like, two boxes of cookies, three tops.Get those glamorous cookie photos asap. With all the talk of non-uniform and can't control the size, I'm imagining mis-shapen dough-lumps crawling from an oven under their own, unholy power. ... and I'm on your side. Some pictures will fix that. Moto42 fucked around with this message at 14:20 on Aug 27, 2018 |
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2018 14:14
|
|
|
Well I doubt the margin on cookie boxes is that high but maybe, all the other points are valid in that a blank form does nothing to drive a sale. I’m definitely of the school of thought that if it’s a serious business endeavor then the $30 or whatever for Shopify/Squarespace is the way to go. However if it’s more of a hobby then I think Etsy or Facebook (I assume they do payments now?) Most small business that pay small town agencies too much money for a website really just need a well run Facebook page. When getting started there’s just an insurmountable amount of things they do for you and save hours upon hours.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2018 14:34
|
|
|
darthbob88 posted:Stripe does sound good, but it also runs into the cost problem, so I'll probably use that if I upgrade to Shopify. Google Forms would serve well for "Literally A Cookie Order Form Online", if I hadn't already built half of that and am only missing good photos of the cookies. I'm sticking with just the email and Paypal invoices for now. If anybody has any further suggestions, please send them with an order for some cookies. You're also missing an HTTP -> HTTPS redirect
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2018 15:21
|
|
|
When I did small business consulting, one of the most infuriating things I would encounter are small businesses with websites that are still using @gmail, hotmail, et al. addresses.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2018 17:50
|
|
|
I don't know if it's something you looked for, but WooCommerce has out of the box PayPal compatibility that might support your customization needs, and the free version of Ninja Forms/Gravity Forms might help you if you don't want to do full on checkouts. I can PM you a link of a Woo setup I did for someone else with a custom design/contact form. The technical debt would be setup/maintenance and the fiscal debt would be a php/mysql hosting (which is like $5/mo).
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2018 18:30
|
|
|
Moto42 posted:It sounds like your doing this just to see if people will buy cookies online. quote:If the cookies are any good at all, then it's just a matter of how well you can market them. And yeah, I'm interested in making this a semi-professional thing, mostly because my mother can't work at the moment, but I'm still hesitant to take that risk.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2018 20:07
|
|
|
darthbob88 posted:And yeah, I'm interested in making this a semi-professional thing, mostly because my mother can't work at the moment, but I'm still hesitant to take that risk. I don't mean to be a shitter, but literally the people (many of whom are experts in exactly what you're asking about) in this thread have thrown their expertise and knowledge of the best/easiest/cheapest way to do this at you and you've rejected almost every single bit of it. If you don't want the advice stop asking for it. I'd hardly consider $5-20 a month a deal breaker if you're actually serious about this as you've just said you are.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2018 20:45
|
|
|
ModeSix posted:I don't mean to be a shitter, but literally the people (many of whom are experts in exactly what you're asking about) in this thread have thrown their expertise and knowledge of the best/easiest/cheapest way to do this at you and you've rejected almost every single bit of it. If you don't want the advice stop asking for it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2018 22:17
|
|
|
I have a problem that should be like hilariously easy but IDK how to do it. I drew a picture to give an idea. If you can think of a fast way to solve the problem below, let me know.  I need to copy snippets of text and enter them into a table I'd like to be able to do something faster than highlight text->Ctrl+C->Click Ctrl+V in excel. A really fast way to do this would be like: Highlight + keyboard shortcut so thats what i drew. Problem I want to solve with this: Theres a website that I need to save data from very quickly, but which is really effective at preventing that data from being scraped by selenium or the commercial tools. I am thus going to get that data manually. I also need to save some images/pdfs from these pages but that can already be done quickly.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2018 02:15
|
|
|
darthbob88 posted:They're not that bad. Alright, the oatmeal are, but that's the nature of homemade oatmeal cookies. I'm working on photos, but unfortunately, while my family are very good at baking, we are not very good at marketing or photography. I have a friend who's offering assistance in marketing, and I'm prepared to pay a box or two of cookies if you or somebody you know can get me decent pics of them. Put the cookies on a wood surface. Shine a yellowish light on them (an old incandescent bulb would be great). Take a low angle, close up shot of them with your phone. That's pretty much it. Food photography in a nutshell can be summed up as "don't put too much oil on it, and bump up the saturation, especially the reds."
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2018 02:28
|
|
|
darthbob88 posted:Yeah, I know. And the advice is good, but $20+/month is a deal breaker for me right now, especially if I don't get any actual revenue back for it. you don't have enough money to start a business find another way to seize the means of production
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2018 02:34
|
|
|
CarForumPoster posted:Problem I want to solve with this: Have you tried a tool like https://data-miner.io/ or using Phantom.js?
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2018 07:00
|
|
|
bob dobbs is dead posted:you don't have enough money to start a business
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2018 07:19
|
|
|
Nybble posted:Have you tried a tool like https://data-miner.io/ or using Phantom.js? When I have to scrap websites that have their content beyond complicated login systems or pulled with javascript, I make a Tampermonkey script. Because I am a moron, I simply use jquery to pull the data, so if the website is redesigned, the script will probably break. I have never tried something complicated that actually required a headless chrome (like phantom.js do?). --- Heres a web problem: Users can make their own classifications, so one guy can have Low, Mid, High, and other guy can have Very Low, Medium, High, Very High. So far, so good. But I want to compare items on one classification with the others. It seems a hard problem, and science has already tried to solved it, and there seems to exist a lot of tools and even framework. All of them abandoned, as if all the web believed this was the future, and the next day all the people believing in this died. Leaving behind a lot of 404 links and java tools that work with XML. I believe this is a ontology problem, and what I want is to compare items classified in two different ontologies. Anyone know if this "fad" had something usefull on it? was the problem really solved or it was only a bunch of academia guys stroking each other ego?, I have the real problem these people tried to solve, but from my position is hard to see if they really solved it, or they where just having fun creating fancy tools. Tei fucked around with this message at 09:15 on Aug 28, 2018 |
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2018 08:32
|
|
|
Anyone have any idea what Everlane is doing that is preventing the mobile site from being show in Chrome Inspector? It's always showing the desktop site.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2018 14:20
|
|
|
Looks like poorly implemented server side React? Broken in Chrome and Firefox, cannot tell in Safari.
MrMoo fucked around with this message at 15:26 on Aug 28, 2018 |
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2018 15:16
|
|
|
CarForumPoster posted:I have a problem that should be like hilariously easy but IDK how to do it. I drew a picture to give an idea. If you can think of a fast way to solve the problem below, let me know. I don't know if you want to get that deep into it, but generally in the past when I've had to do it I've regexed the downloaded HTML. So the find capture groups grab the elements you are interested in, and then the output can be \1\t\2\t\3 etc which can be saved as a TSV. That's using an editor like Textpad or Notepad++, if you're willing to write a program to do it then you can obviously capture, build an array, output sheets, etc.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2018 20:27
|
|
|
Are there any easy ways to get basic text editor (add full width images, set text as H1, bold, etc.) inside Node, Django, Flask, or some other standalone thing that could write to a database? I'd like to setup a basic tool for doing CRUD operations for blog posts.
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2018 21:09
|
|
|
The text editor lives on the frontend, totally apart from the database. If I ran into a need for this sort of thing, I'd probably use Quill
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2018 22:57
|
|
|
I'm learning about CSS formatting, and I have a question about flexbox vs traditional display/float formatting. I've heard people talk about doing flexbox and then making a conditional display/float format for people that are for some reason still using IE6 or something. What's the point of using flexbox in that case since you have to set up the display/float as well? Do people tend to do the nice version in flexbox and then something simple and quick for display/float?
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2018 02:11
|
|
|
22 Eargesplitten posted:What's the point of using flexbox in that case since you have to set up the display/float as well? Do people tend to do the nice version in flexbox and then something simple and quick for display/float? Yep, this is what people do. The number of people on IE 6 is minuscule these days, and most sites are going to look broken for those users anyhow, so you can get away with a quick and dirty fallback layout using floats. For me, the difference boils down to polish: flexbox capable users will have an extremely polished, as close to pixel-perfect design as possible, whereas IE 6 users will get a layout that's usable but doesn't look as great as it otherwise could. Depending on the project, you probably don't even need to support IE 6.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2018 15:37
|
|
|
kedo posted:Yep, this is what people do. The number of people on IE 6 is minuscule these days, and most sites are going to look broken for those users anyhow, so you can get away with a quick and dirty fallback layout using floats. For me, the difference boils down to polish: flexbox capable users will have an extremely polished, as close to pixel-perfect design as possible, whereas IE 6 users will get a layout that's usable but doesn't look as great as it otherwise could. if you keep in mind these bugs: https://github.com/philipwalton/flexbugs i've used flex and haven't had a problem but every browser has a bunch of weird open issues against it.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2018 15:59
|
|
|
Do y'all have a recommendation for setting up an email on a custom domain? I'm using Sendgrid to programmatically send emails that look like they come from my custom domain. I'd like users to be able to reply to these emails, and me to reply back. Using Netlify hosting, and Google domains. I can't find any relevant info directly from a Google search, so I assume I need an email service that binds to my domain, and lets me set up an address that matches the one I spoof with Sendgrid. Any recommendations? Is this the right approach? Maybe something like Gsuite? Edit: I think GSuite is the correct answer. Seems to be working. edit: Would anyone mind taking another look at the Tea site I posted a while back? Implemented many style changes, and removed Bootstrap. About to launch. Dominoes fucked around with this message at 05:21 on Sep 3, 2018 |
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2018 23:50
|
|
|
Dominoes posted:edit: Would anyone mind taking another look at the Tea site I posted a while back? Implemented many style changes, and removed Bootstrap. About to launch.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2018 15:33
|
|
|
Thanks a lot! Implemented all your changes except for putting whitespace between the about button and main content.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2018 17:54
|
|
|
Dominoes posted:Thanks a lot! Implemented all your changes except for putting whitespace between the about button and main content. Do you have a min-width set anywhere on the create/pick pages? It's not scaling all the way on my phone, causing the need for some horizontal scrolling.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2018 18:12
|
|
|
Dominoes posted:Thanks a lot! Implemented all your changes except for putting whitespace between the about button and main content. use a linebreak, maybe bold "Questions? Feedback?" - looks nice, imo 
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2018 18:19
|
|
|
Dominoes posted:edit: Would anyone mind taking another look at the Tea site I posted a while back? Implemented many style changes, and removed Bootstrap. About to launch. It feels a little neater and cleaner but it still has a longs way to go. Biggest visual improvements you can make up front: - Just remove the background image with a pure #fff background. It's actually hurting everything and makes the site look dated. - The About button is in too important of a spot. Just throw it in the footer for now until you have a proper nav. - I've counted 5 button colors, you should have a primary button style and a secondary button style. If your layout isn't jiving with that maybe you are using buttons in places you shouldn't. - The questions/feedback button is too long and is doing the same thing the about button is doing where it's taking up really important real estate when it should be in the footer. It's getting in the way of the purchase flow call; to actions. - Your call to actions "Pick flavors" "Do it yourself" mean the same thing to me as a first stop when I don't fully understand the site yet. - The Pick flavors page is sort of a hot mess. Just make it a check list that goes straight down you don't need to conserve the vertical space. - The name/description should just be in it's own step, it's muddying things. - The continue button should always be there, it shouldn't appear only after I make a selection. If I press it before choosing something that's an opportunity to flash a dialog that educates the user. - The description field should be more like a text area. - I like the tea bag idea but you can't use 6px font sizes. For best accessibility try to stay above 12px. I would treat that as two columns with the bag image to the right. - The sizing selection style is visually weird. I would create a check list component that you use in the choose you flavors page and reuse it here with a clear look of "this is what I picked" and "this is what I didn't pick". - On the customize page, your continue button should be on the right. - Checkout also does the same thing where there's no continue button on page load, it's weird. - The change ingredients and size and price buttons should a) be breadcrumb links instead of buttons, and b) be on the top of the page. At the button should just be a primary button to check out. That's all you want from the user at this point. - The checkout form fields should be two columns on desktop, no reason to conserve so much horizontal space here. - Checkout page is still doing that weird thing where you are showing all the fields as invalid because they are empty, but I haven't had a chance to interact with them yet. - You need to have text validation errors. Not just because it's good UX but for accessibility concerns. Now imagine I'm a little older and I get here and I'm a little confused, if I make an error you offer no guidance and you will lose that purchase. - Order summary is messy - Still not sold on how the customize page works but I don't have the time to dive into it right now.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2018 18:20
|
|
|
Hope that didn't come off like a dick, just did a lightning fast audit. Just remember your site has one simple high level goal: to sell tea. Every page needs to get the user to the next step, so you need to scrutinize all the elements that aren't essential or aren't providing value, and you need to make sure the site knows how to help a user that is stuck or confused. Also remember to be running analytics and learn the story of your users as the site ages, because it will guide you qualitatively on what needs to be fixed. Now data is really easy to abuse, so make sure you're doing your analytics without as much bias as possible. You'll want to look at things like which page they drop off, how many users are interacting with certain elements, which pages do users spend the most time on and can you figure out objectively why. It actually seems like a really fun project, making a web app for it would be a lot of fun. I can be bought in tea 
The Dave fucked around with this message at 18:37 on Sep 3, 2018 |
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2018 18:28
|
|
|
Love that critique Dave - diving in.The Merkinman posted:Do you have a min-width set anywhere on the create/pick pages? It's not scaling all the way on my phone, causing the need for some horizontal scrolling. FormatAmerica posted:use a linebreak, maybe bold "Questions? Feedback?" - looks nice, imo
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2018 18:33
|
|
|
Dominoes posted:edit: Would anyone mind taking another look at the Tea site I posted a while back? Implemented many style changes, and removed Bootstrap. About to launch. That site requires a lot of effort from the user, there should be at least some recommended or weekly specials. I have a feeling the "create my tea" is a bit 90s and the process should be automatic from selecting the flavours, like it would be nice to see a default option immediately. Also, please resize the images of the teas. Use the <picture> tag if you want to be fancy. I have a feeling you probably only want 5~10 or so levels instead of the super fine granularity current depicted. I have a feeling the pricing granularity is superfluous to the shipping cost, like everything should be $x.99 or similar. MrMoo fucked around with this message at 01:28 on Sep 4, 2018 |
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2018 01:23
|
|
|
kedo posted:Yep, this is what people do. The number of people on IE 6 is minuscule these days, and most sites are going to look broken for those users anyhow, so you can get away with a quick and dirty fallback layout using floats. For me, the difference boils down to polish: flexbox capable users will have an extremely polished, as close to pixel-perfect design as possible, whereas IE 6 users will get a layout that's usable but doesn't look as great as it otherwise could. Thanks, that makes sense. Once I’m confident in my ability to put poo poo together I’m making a website for my roommate’s construction business (deep discount due to being a friend and early adopter). In that case I wouldn’t be surprised if some of the older people he interacts with still have super old XP computers, so maybe it’s worth doing. Maybe not.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2018 04:01
|
|
|
I'm shocked to see people still talking about IE6. The amount of people on browsers older than IE11 is so minuscule now that you are losing money spending any development time on it. If you're really concerned with them, and you shouldn't be, I think it's a better waste of time to put up a "Your browser is not supported" message with a CTA to call/email the business than it is to make sure your page works.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2018 12:43
|
|
|
Yea, the choice use to be "destroy my code to allow it to run on IE6, or not use this feature". Both options, make the code worse, and not using the feature, are too expensive to even consider supporting IE6. If you support IE6 and something like the last version of chrome, your website is either a "hello world" simple, or a nauseating sea of hacks that only exist so the IE6 part runs. --- Internet Explorer 11 bug: The other day I found IE don't like a url like this. code:Maybe I can understand this one, since probably the right way to write it is code:gently caress Internet Explorer, all Versions And Edge. Tei fucked around with this message at 16:22 on Sep 4, 2018 |
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2018 12:51
|
|
|
It's worth grounding yourself in modern stats as well. Supporting IE6/7 was such a big thing when I was doing front-end dev five years ago, and it's easy to keep that mindset for years forward. But look at the stats: https://www.w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_explorer.asp IE only has 3% of the market share and half of that is IE11.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2018 15:45
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 02:20 |
|
|
The Dave posted:It's worth grounding yourself in modern stats as well. Supporting IE6/7 was such a big thing when I was doing front-end dev five years ago, and it's easy to keep that mindset for years forward. But look at the stats: https://www.w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_explorer.asp It's also important to look at *where* people who use browser X are. If you are global company it may make sense. If you are a local TexMex restaurant in Ohio, supporting the last IE6 users in Laos may not be a smart financial move.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2018 16:05
|
|