Mernokh

A must-do when it comes to making your site sticky, is to provide a newsletter (or e-zine). It's a great way to keep in touch with visitors. People may come to your site, like it, leave eventually (I suppose they have to some time, right?), and then forget about it, not because it wasn't *sticky* but simply because people forget. A newsletter is the perfect tool to remind them of your site's existence. You can include all kinds of things in it, such as attractive snippets of your site's articles, tips, news and updates, etc. And the best thing, newsletters are so easy to make these days, technology-wise. There are dozens of free providers. The critical step is, and always will be, your content. You have to make the *content* itself sticky, enticing readers to go to your Website again. It's a tightly-knit process, really. All the best, Mernokh

I've tried a Desktop Search software only once, long time ago. Can't say I liked it. Not that it was crappy or anything; actually I remember it looked pretty decent. But I discovered that I don't really need it. In all the Operating Systems I used (and I used quite a bit), the built-in search capability was more than enough for me. Seriously, you either need to search for a certain filename or a string of text inside a text file. In both situation, even Windows's FIND does the job adequately. If you use Microsoft Office, there's an option called something like "System Index," that wades through all your files making a permanent database on your hard disk, which is used to quickly find the results you're looking for.Of course, I realize that not all people are satisified with the built-in search. Personally, I haven't tried it, but I have so much faith in Google that I'd like to hear if someone has used the official (non-Beta) version, and hear what they think about it.All the best,Mernokh

Well done, guy. I think your post is a truly useful one, and I agree with most of what you said, except for one very important thing. I actually majorly disagree with you on it ... You said... This may - only may - be true for amateurish or hobby sites that are not looking for longivity or real exposure. But if your Website is your business, then content is your utmost no.1 priority, All the time. And I'm talking from real-world experience, by the way. I'm not just arguing for the sake of argument. I know you wrote that piece in good heart. But I've been running my own online business for over 6 years now, and so I know a thing or two about good and bad Websites. Trust me when I say, my friend, that I've never seen any Web expert rate content at less than 70%. Some even say it may go up to 90%, but I think that's an exaggaration. Of course the other factors mean a great deal to the over-all success of a Website. What good can a first-class copywriter do if the graphic designer created a childish, useless design? And you also used a great example to make your point: Google.com. Now those are people who truly get it. Their site has a very simple objective: to provide a SEARCH form for their visitors. And since that's the ONLY objective of their home page, you see nothing else to distract visitors. Even as they provide some links to facilitate the search, or links to other parts of the Google network, they provide them as text links, so they are totally unobtrusive. The only people that would notice them are the ones actually looking for them. Great design, if you ask me! Of course, there are a lot of things that go into the making of a good Website, and you mentioned some of the most important ones. Maybe I will add to the list as time goes. Thanks for a great post, guy. Keep up the good work. All the best, Mernokh

Hi Elfo, I do agree with Hatim, it's quite nice for a beginner. You used some nice effects, e.g. font hazing at the ends, distinctive colors of items, etc. But I also agree with him that there are lots of things that could be improved. Think of this post as a helpful, constructive critique (I hope! ). I thought maybe the text that's showing in your graphic meant something that could explain the thinness of the tires and the Y sign in the middle, but I couldn't. I thought it might be your nickname (ElfoReal), but I don't think it is. So yes, I think Hatim made a good point there. Another thing I noticed was the inequality of the indentations of the tire connectors. I know you probably don't understand what I'm talking about, and frankly, I hardly do. Let me explain... The Y circle at the middle of the front tire is connected to the outer circle by 6 metal bands, right? Ok, you see, the indentations of these bands are not the same. One makes an almost straight angle, the other is visibly not. I know it's not that obvious, but I want you to keep in mind one VERY important thing... If you're going to be a *great* designer, you have to pay attention to every detail. But just so you know, I like your graphic. Maybe you could've used another color than the overly-used Red, but still, I get the impression you're gonna do something real good, real soon. Keep it coming, man. Good luck. All the best, Mernokh

Well, Destiny, I think you really don't know how well you are with HTML only because you just don't know exactly what are the boundaries of it. You see, HTML is not that big a language. I can safely bet you know at least 80% of it, since you say you learnt some of it. When it comes to HTML, some is usually much more than you think. With that out of the way, let's talk about how you can make sure you're leaving nothing out. I agree with guy that the W3CSchools is a great learning Website, but it's geared mainly and mostly toward newbies. That's not you, I think. If you ask me, I think you should go to the source itself. If you don't know, HTML's development is moderated by the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C). They are the ones that virtually make HTML. The newest (and final) HTML specification is HTML 4.01. You can find it at the following URL: HTML 4.01 Specification I admit it's not the most fun read you'll ever see, but it's certainly the most comprehensive. And quite frankly, if you just give yourself enough time for the first 4 chapters and not rush through them, you'll get by just fine. Soon, I'm going to be talking some more about why HTML 4.01 is the final specification of HTML, and what is to follow. I trust you'll find some interesting info in that article, Destiny. But until then, I hope you'll do great in your HTML pursuit. All the best, Mernokh

Well, you know, guys... Something I see in every discussion about OSes and really bugs me, is the fact that Microsoft-Haters only speak of how sucky Windows is. Don't get me wrong, I consider myself an avid MS-Hater myself, but I just don't think that's reason enough for me to bash everything they did. I mean, come on, they did some real nice things, right? Yes, their bad (arguably) significantly outweights their good, but still....As for the operating system of my dreams, well, I'm actually working on it. So for those of you who wonder how long does it actually take to learn how to make an OS, let me tell you... - 2 Years (min.) to be sufficiently good at Assembly and C. - 1 year (min.) to learn the basics and inner-workings of OSes. - Somewhere between 6 months and a year to create a complete sketch of how you want your OS to be like - 1-2 years to actually code it, test it, and publish it.Oh boy... Now that I put it like that, I think I'm gonna faint... I never thought I'd spent so much time on this thing. But frankly, for all of you geeks out there, it's a supreme pleasure. :blink:But like Chris Neutral said, this particular timetable only applies to ME. Maybe you're better skilled than I am. Maybe you're smarter. Maybe you have magic abilities, who knows! If so, then by all means, go for it. If you don't come out of it with anything else, at least you'll achieve an unparalleled level of programming potency and experience.Hope I wasn't too boring, but even if I was, I'll see you later.