How easy for you when you need eyeglass since it can be purchased online and is able to be gotten with cheap price. Is Zenni Optical that easy to be found based on cheap eyeglasses keyword on google search engine. We can purchase and ask it to ship to our address with flat fee for $4,95 don’t care hoe many you purchase.
zenni-optical
This is not only set as keyword but cheap eyeglasses are really available in Zenni Optical included $ 8 Rx eyeglasses and the others. There are many type of frame and lens you can find there, so it will make full f choices and discover the most suitable eyeglasses for you.
Not only well known online but it also well known in TV about the cheap price of eyeglasses offered by Zenni Optical. As what we can see on Zenni Optical on TV!!! that people are easy to find zenni optical online. Although it offer eyeglasses with cheap prices but it still keep customer satisfy. That is why one f its customers gave High Five to Zenni Optical. So if you are looking for cheap eyeglass, check out first at Zenni Optical.
More info : www.sumintar.com
Rabu, 15 Juli 2009
Top 10 Best Newspaper Websites
As a follow-up to our research on newspaper websites that we published recently, we decided to break out a list of the best examples of “good” newspaper websites. Steve, Todd and I collaborated on the following list, judging sites not only on their web features but also on the design, aesthetics and general usability of the site [Note: this list only covers the top 100 US newspapers in terms of circulation, which is what our study looked at. We're sure that we missed some great smaller papers.].
(1) New York Times: We love the general feeling of the NYT site, which is pleasing to the eye and easy to navigate. The site is loaded with great features, and the website is rumored to be dropping its annoying pay wall, TimesSelect, in the coming months.
(2) Washington Post: Not only do we like the design and the navigability of the Post’s website, but we really love its database applications, which provide interesting tidbits of information difficult to find elsewhere. The Post’s website has been a huge success, and is one of the best examples of newspapers creating an online product that is significantly different from its print product.
(3) USA Today: Social networking. Social networking. Social networking. Did I mention that this site has the most robust social networking features out of any of the newspaper websites we researched? Oh yeah. And this site has social networking.
(4) Houston Chronicle: We like the non-newspaperish feeling that this homepage exudes. It’s significantly different from any other newspaper site. Chron.com offers its users interactive features such as comments and blogs, has a great RSS system made available right on the homepage, and looks good while doing it.
(5) Denver Post: The homepage of this site isn’t much to write home about, but registering with the site automatically gives you your own blog and your own photo gallery for uploading and sharing photos. When you add in some interesting political features, including a voter’s guide and a poll for picking candidates and combine that with alternative content views, internal and external bookmarking features, as well as links from stories to relevant materials, you’ve got all the ingredients necessary to build a great website.
(6) Knoxville News Sentinel: I’m not sure a newspaper website could look any better than this one. When we talk about de-cluttering sites and making them look “clean”, this is what we mean.
(7) Fresno Bee: Great homepage, interesting CrimeMap feature, and overall just a solid site with lots of technology and an easy-to-use format.
(8) Austin American Statesman: We really like the unique layout and coloring of this site’s homepage. We’re also giving this site points for allowing anyone to blog and for linking to many of the site’s blogs directly from the homepage.
(9) Tennessean: The blog-like feel of this site’s homepage helped it make our list. We also like the strong presence of multimedia on the homepage.
(10) San Jose Mercury News: On this homepage, we like the simple layout of the article headlines and descriptions. I also like the inclusion of the box with blog headlines, user photos, forum titles, and podcasts toward the top of the homepage. The site loads a bit slowly and is a little light on the features, but it does have all the core elements of a good site.
What are your favorite newspaper websites? Share them below in the comments or on the Bivings Report Wiki.
Update: We edited the info about the Times dropping Times Select for clarification. It was reported on August 7th that they would be dropping it. They did not drop Times Select on August 7th.
(1) New York Times: We love the general feeling of the NYT site, which is pleasing to the eye and easy to navigate. The site is loaded with great features, and the website is rumored to be dropping its annoying pay wall, TimesSelect, in the coming months.
(2) Washington Post: Not only do we like the design and the navigability of the Post’s website, but we really love its database applications, which provide interesting tidbits of information difficult to find elsewhere. The Post’s website has been a huge success, and is one of the best examples of newspapers creating an online product that is significantly different from its print product.
(3) USA Today: Social networking. Social networking. Social networking. Did I mention that this site has the most robust social networking features out of any of the newspaper websites we researched? Oh yeah. And this site has social networking.
(4) Houston Chronicle: We like the non-newspaperish feeling that this homepage exudes. It’s significantly different from any other newspaper site. Chron.com offers its users interactive features such as comments and blogs, has a great RSS system made available right on the homepage, and looks good while doing it.
(5) Denver Post: The homepage of this site isn’t much to write home about, but registering with the site automatically gives you your own blog and your own photo gallery for uploading and sharing photos. When you add in some interesting political features, including a voter’s guide and a poll for picking candidates and combine that with alternative content views, internal and external bookmarking features, as well as links from stories to relevant materials, you’ve got all the ingredients necessary to build a great website.
(6) Knoxville News Sentinel: I’m not sure a newspaper website could look any better than this one. When we talk about de-cluttering sites and making them look “clean”, this is what we mean.
(7) Fresno Bee: Great homepage, interesting CrimeMap feature, and overall just a solid site with lots of technology and an easy-to-use format.
(8) Austin American Statesman: We really like the unique layout and coloring of this site’s homepage. We’re also giving this site points for allowing anyone to blog and for linking to many of the site’s blogs directly from the homepage.
(9) Tennessean: The blog-like feel of this site’s homepage helped it make our list. We also like the strong presence of multimedia on the homepage.
(10) San Jose Mercury News: On this homepage, we like the simple layout of the article headlines and descriptions. I also like the inclusion of the box with blog headlines, user photos, forum titles, and podcasts toward the top of the homepage. The site loads a bit slowly and is a little light on the features, but it does have all the core elements of a good site.
What are your favorite newspaper websites? Share them below in the comments or on the Bivings Report Wiki.
Update: We edited the info about the Times dropping Times Select for clarification. It was reported on August 7th that they would be dropping it. They did not drop Times Select on August 7th.
Wordpress vs Drupal
At this point, nearly all of the websites we build at The Bivings Group are either in Wordpress or Drupal. Sure, we build custom applications on occasion and sometimes do Flash work that really doesn’t fit in a Content Management System. But mostly we use Wordpress and Drupal.
Both are fantastic open source blogging platforms/content management systems with robust user communities. Both systems have their strengths and weaknesses. They are great alternatives to closed, paid platforms and much more cost effective than custom builds. As a web development shop, using Drupal and/or Wordpress allows us to focus our energies on design and strategy as opposed to reinventing the content management wheel.
After implementing a variety sites using both Wordpress and Drupal over the years, we’ve sort of developed our own unwritten rules as to when to use each platform.
Single Person / Group Blog (Use Wordpress)
If you are building a straight on single person or group blog, I think Wordpress is the way to go. It has all the base functionality you need built in and a robust set of plug-ins if you need to add on. The admin interface is dead simple - anyone with basic computer knowledge can master it in a few minutes. The install of the software is also simple and the templating system is not difficult to master.
Anything you want to do in Wordpress, you can also do in Drupal. But Drupal is more complicated from a design/install perspective, and has tons of features you’d end up turning off/not using for something simple like this.
A good example of a blog like built using Wordpress is our modest blog, The Bivings Report.
Blog Community (Use Drupal)
At a certain point your simple blog sort of crosses a line and becomes a blog community. Here are the things I look for:
* In some cases you are going to want people to navigate directly to an authors blog instead of the main page of the overall blog.
* Your blog has 10+ authors.
* There is the possibility that your commenters may themselves become contributors.
You can accomplish these goals by extending Wordpress. You can also use Wordpress Mu, which a community-version of Wordpress that we don’t think is quite ready for prime time. However, these kinds of sites are pretty much the reason Drupal exists. All the community-based features you need are available right away upon setup with little tinkering required.
A good example of a blog community is TechPresident, which we had nothing to do with building.
Blog Driven Website (Use Wordpress)
With its pages section and various plugins, Wordpress can be used as a full on Content Management System for blog-based websites. Lots of companies (including us) long ago abandoned the old fashioned press release and use blogs as their primary content delivery mechanism. Assuming your overall templating system on the site is pretty straight forward and you don’t have hundreds of pages, Wordpress works perfectly well for these types of sites.
Once again, Drupal can accomplish the same thing but it is a little more complicated to deal with and the admin interface is a little more complicated. It is sort of like driving a Ferrari in bumper to bumper traffic - you will get from point A to point B but you’d ultimately be better off weaving through traffic on a motorcycle.
The Washington Area Women’s Foundation is a good example of a Wordpress-based site that we built. In addition to having all the content editable through Wordpress, we also built a few databases as custom plug-ins.
Full Featured Website (Use Drupal)
At certain points, a site simply becomes too big for it to be sufficiently managed using Wordpress. If you find yourself bumping against any of the following scenarios, you should probably be using Drupal:
* If you have multiple dynamic content types (press releases, news articles, blog posts, etc.). Drupal is great at allowing you to create this stuff on the fly, with Wordpress you are hacking things together.
* If your site has more than a two template design structure (homepage and second levels).
* If you have numerous content blocks on the homepage or in sidebars that you will be editing frequently. Drupal’s block system is great at this kind of stuff.
* If you are trying to start small and expect your site to add tons of features/content moving forward.
We built a site for Monsanto Spain that uses Drupal as a full on Content Management System. This is a good example of this kind of website.
More info : http://www.bivingsreport.com/2007/wordpress-vs-drupal
Both are fantastic open source blogging platforms/content management systems with robust user communities. Both systems have their strengths and weaknesses. They are great alternatives to closed, paid platforms and much more cost effective than custom builds. As a web development shop, using Drupal and/or Wordpress allows us to focus our energies on design and strategy as opposed to reinventing the content management wheel.
After implementing a variety sites using both Wordpress and Drupal over the years, we’ve sort of developed our own unwritten rules as to when to use each platform.
Single Person / Group Blog (Use Wordpress)
If you are building a straight on single person or group blog, I think Wordpress is the way to go. It has all the base functionality you need built in and a robust set of plug-ins if you need to add on. The admin interface is dead simple - anyone with basic computer knowledge can master it in a few minutes. The install of the software is also simple and the templating system is not difficult to master.
Anything you want to do in Wordpress, you can also do in Drupal. But Drupal is more complicated from a design/install perspective, and has tons of features you’d end up turning off/not using for something simple like this.
A good example of a blog like built using Wordpress is our modest blog, The Bivings Report.
Blog Community (Use Drupal)
At a certain point your simple blog sort of crosses a line and becomes a blog community. Here are the things I look for:
* In some cases you are going to want people to navigate directly to an authors blog instead of the main page of the overall blog.
* Your blog has 10+ authors.
* There is the possibility that your commenters may themselves become contributors.
You can accomplish these goals by extending Wordpress. You can also use Wordpress Mu, which a community-version of Wordpress that we don’t think is quite ready for prime time. However, these kinds of sites are pretty much the reason Drupal exists. All the community-based features you need are available right away upon setup with little tinkering required.
A good example of a blog community is TechPresident, which we had nothing to do with building.
Blog Driven Website (Use Wordpress)
With its pages section and various plugins, Wordpress can be used as a full on Content Management System for blog-based websites. Lots of companies (including us) long ago abandoned the old fashioned press release and use blogs as their primary content delivery mechanism. Assuming your overall templating system on the site is pretty straight forward and you don’t have hundreds of pages, Wordpress works perfectly well for these types of sites.
Once again, Drupal can accomplish the same thing but it is a little more complicated to deal with and the admin interface is a little more complicated. It is sort of like driving a Ferrari in bumper to bumper traffic - you will get from point A to point B but you’d ultimately be better off weaving through traffic on a motorcycle.
The Washington Area Women’s Foundation is a good example of a Wordpress-based site that we built. In addition to having all the content editable through Wordpress, we also built a few databases as custom plug-ins.
Full Featured Website (Use Drupal)
At certain points, a site simply becomes too big for it to be sufficiently managed using Wordpress. If you find yourself bumping against any of the following scenarios, you should probably be using Drupal:
* If you have multiple dynamic content types (press releases, news articles, blog posts, etc.). Drupal is great at allowing you to create this stuff on the fly, with Wordpress you are hacking things together.
* If your site has more than a two template design structure (homepage and second levels).
* If you have numerous content blocks on the homepage or in sidebars that you will be editing frequently. Drupal’s block system is great at this kind of stuff.
* If you are trying to start small and expect your site to add tons of features/content moving forward.
We built a site for Monsanto Spain that uses Drupal as a full on Content Management System. This is a good example of this kind of website.
More info : http://www.bivingsreport.com/2007/wordpress-vs-drupal
Does Facebook Drive as much Traffic as Twitter?
I participated in a panel discussion put on by NextGenWeb last week on building communities online. Over the course of the discussion, I mentioned that on the sites I manage Twitter generally drives more traffic than Facebook. Adam Conner from Facebook was also on the panel, and quickly rattled off a few sites for which Facebook is a significant traffic referrer as a way of countering my argument.
The fact that Twitter drives traffic is not news, but I figured I would do some quick research and share my experience as to how Twitter and Facebook compare as traffic drivers. I looked at the May statistics for five sites Bivings’ manages that maintain active presences on both Facebook and Twitter. On Facebook, in all cases the organization’s primary presence on Facebook was a Fan Page. Here is what I found:
* On average, Twitter was the fourth biggest referrer for the sites. It ranged from the third to fifth most popular referrer.
* On average, Facebook was the tenth biggest referrer for the sites. It ranged from sixth to fifteenth most popular referrer.
* Twitter drove more traffic than Facebook on all the sites I looked at, despite the fact that on two of the sites the number of Facebook fans was far greater than the number of Twitter followers (a ratio of three to one).
* Overall, Twitter was responsible for driving two times more traffic than Facebook.
Note that these stats probably underestimate the traffic driven by Twitter, as it doesn’t take into account traffic coming from third party tools like Twhirl and Tweetdeck.
Obviously, this is not a scientific study and the results are anecdotal. Things may also change quickly. But I’m not going to let that stop me from speculating as to why Twitter is driving more traffic on the sites we manage.
Twitter is all about links. Facebook, less so. While my personal Facebook stream is slowly being taken over by people cross publishing their Twitter feeds, the status updates of my friends on Facebook typically don’t include links. And if they do, I typically don’t click on them. On Facebook, I’m much more interested in looking at pictures and engaging in discussions with people than clicking on links to third party sites. Finding and clicking on links is the thing I do most on Twitter.
The level of engagement people have with the pages they are fans of on Facebook is pretty low. Facebook redesigned their pages feature a few months back, and the change definitely made pages more valuable by inserting page updates into users Facebook news feed. But I think users still tend to tune these updates out, and are also pretty good at ignoring the mass messages page administrators can send out through Facebook.
Indeed, last night Patrick Ruffini tweeted that for the projects he is working on he is seeing three times better results from regular Facebook profile pages as compared to fan pages. I’ve seen similar results. Despite Facebook attempts to blur the distinction between pages and profiles, I think users can tell the difference and are much more engaged with their friends on the network than the brands they are fans of.
Ultimately, I think Facebook is still primarily about your friends, while Twitter is more about content discovery (and, increasingly, brands and celebrities). I have no doubt this will change as Facebook continues to grow and tweaks its model further. But for now the nature of Twitter makes it a better driver of traffic than Facebook, at least in my experience.
What has your experience been?
The fact that Twitter drives traffic is not news, but I figured I would do some quick research and share my experience as to how Twitter and Facebook compare as traffic drivers. I looked at the May statistics for five sites Bivings’ manages that maintain active presences on both Facebook and Twitter. On Facebook, in all cases the organization’s primary presence on Facebook was a Fan Page. Here is what I found:
* On average, Twitter was the fourth biggest referrer for the sites. It ranged from the third to fifth most popular referrer.
* On average, Facebook was the tenth biggest referrer for the sites. It ranged from sixth to fifteenth most popular referrer.
* Twitter drove more traffic than Facebook on all the sites I looked at, despite the fact that on two of the sites the number of Facebook fans was far greater than the number of Twitter followers (a ratio of three to one).
* Overall, Twitter was responsible for driving two times more traffic than Facebook.
Note that these stats probably underestimate the traffic driven by Twitter, as it doesn’t take into account traffic coming from third party tools like Twhirl and Tweetdeck.
Obviously, this is not a scientific study and the results are anecdotal. Things may also change quickly. But I’m not going to let that stop me from speculating as to why Twitter is driving more traffic on the sites we manage.
Twitter is all about links. Facebook, less so. While my personal Facebook stream is slowly being taken over by people cross publishing their Twitter feeds, the status updates of my friends on Facebook typically don’t include links. And if they do, I typically don’t click on them. On Facebook, I’m much more interested in looking at pictures and engaging in discussions with people than clicking on links to third party sites. Finding and clicking on links is the thing I do most on Twitter.
The level of engagement people have with the pages they are fans of on Facebook is pretty low. Facebook redesigned their pages feature a few months back, and the change definitely made pages more valuable by inserting page updates into users Facebook news feed. But I think users still tend to tune these updates out, and are also pretty good at ignoring the mass messages page administrators can send out through Facebook.
Indeed, last night Patrick Ruffini tweeted that for the projects he is working on he is seeing three times better results from regular Facebook profile pages as compared to fan pages. I’ve seen similar results. Despite Facebook attempts to blur the distinction between pages and profiles, I think users can tell the difference and are much more engaged with their friends on the network than the brands they are fans of.
Ultimately, I think Facebook is still primarily about your friends, while Twitter is more about content discovery (and, increasingly, brands and celebrities). I have no doubt this will change as Facebook continues to grow and tweaks its model further. But for now the nature of Twitter makes it a better driver of traffic than Facebook, at least in my experience.
What has your experience been?
Rabu, 01 Juli 2009
Bing (search engine)
Bing (formerly Live Search, Windows Live Search, and MSN Search) is a web search engine (advertised as a "decision" engine [1]), Microsoft's current incarnation of its search technology. Unveiled by Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer on May 28, 2009 at the All Things Digital conference in San Diego, Bing is a replacement for Live Search. It went fully online on June 3, 2009,[2] with a preview version released on June 1, 2009. In its first few weeks Bing has been successful in gaining some marketshare.
Notable changes include the listing of search suggestions in real time as queries are entered, and a list of related searches (called "Explorer pane" on the left side of search results), based on semantic technology from PowerSet[4] which Microsoft purchased in 2008.[5] Bing also includes the ability to Save & Share search histories via Windows Live SkyDrive, Facebook, and email.
SUMBER : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MSN_Search
Langganan:
Postingan (Atom)
.gif "Solusi Transaksi Jual Beli Online dan Bisnis Online")
RSS Feed (xml)
