Hi Guys,

Few hours I bought my first hosting template and now I need to code it. The person seems to have a fantastic passion for design and coding, but she's asking for $150.00 for coding alone.

Is that to high of a price or is that the standard price for a great coded template?

What would you expect for $150?
3-5 pages with PSD?
Fully coded with xhtml/css?
What else...missing something?

?

Thanks.

$150 is very reasonable.

If it's quality coding then go for it. That's a pretty decent price.

You can't really come to expect things when it comes to web design. Some designers charge thousands for their work, some don't, it really depends on the designer/coder.

Sounds like you have a good deal though, fork out $150 if you don't want to code it yourself ;)

Count in hours of work. If it's a 1 hour job, I would probably not (for the coding only), if it's something that takes a while, why not?

That's a fair price. I remember seeing a post on this forum a couple of days ago that there was someone offering cheap PSD->Xhtml CSS. It was like $15/page and a 48 hour turnaround

http://www.webhostingtalk.com/showthread.php?t=859039

do you have photoshop and dreamweaver? you can do it for free then. photoshop automaticly puts it in dreamweaver format * forgot the button* and organize what you want in dreamweaver

do you have photoshop and dreamweaver? you can do it for free then. photoshop automaticly puts it in dreamweaver format * forgot the button* and organize what you want in dreamweaver

yea, and Photoshop html is crap (tables, nonstandard stuff all over the place, etc.). In my opinion, if you cannot afford to spend $150 on your site, you have no business getting into hosting in the first place.

$ 150 is very reasonable and also quality coding......

Count in hours of work. If it's a 1 hour job, I would probably not (for the coding only), if it's something that takes a while, why not?

That's what anyone hiring, in my opinion, should be dilligent with. 1 week/half ago I got my mini-split fixed without warranty coverage because of age of part, royalty two team guy charged me $125 when I could had gotten it for $85.00 for exactly the same replacement/same labor/same 90 day warranty - was satisfied, but it hit a nerve as this EXACT step-by-steo work could had been completed with same warranty and model for same price.

My point if some of you guys know the inside details:

As long as the site is uploaded and works in xhtml/css and I get a guarantee to work coding in my site from the coder, should I worry from details SPECIFIC details like; having a slow uploading site if hiring someone else, not having the site seen in FireFox and Explorer successfully?

Or is it just the same as long as it's fully coded in xhtml/css? If it isn't, I'll definitely make more dilligence on additional people - if it does matter I guess the intelligent choice would be to stay with the coder.

Your opinion?

THANKS.

That's what anyone hiring, in my opinion, should be dilligent with. 1 week/half ago I got my mini-split fixed without warranty coverage because of age of part, royalty two team guy charged me $125 when I could had gotten it for $85.00 for exactly the same replacement/same labor/same 90 day warranty - was satisfied, but it hit a nerve as this EXACT step-by-steo work could had been completed with same warranty and model for same price.

My point if some of you guys know the inside details:

As long as the site is uploaded and works in xhtml/css and I get a guarantee to work coding in my site from the coder, should I worry from details SPECIFIC details like; having a slow uploading site if hiring someone else, not having the site seen in FireFox and Explorer successfully?

Or is it just the same as long as it's fully coded in xhtml/css? If it isn't, I'll definitely make more dilligence on additional people - if it does matter I guess the intelligent choice would be to stay with the coder.

Your opinion?

THANKS.

As a developer myself, I can tell you 2 things.

- Have the coder validate it via http://validator.w3.org and don't accept any excuses for it not validating (our site does)

- If it doesn't work properly in either Firefox or IE, they are a crappy developer. This is not the 1990's anymore. There is simply no excuse to ignore Firefox (approximately 20-25% market worldwide) or IE (most of the remainder lol).

That is all :)

As a developer myself, I can tell you 2 things.

- Have the coder validate it via http://validator.w3.org and don't accept any excuses for it not validating (our site does)

- If it doesn't work properly in either Firefox or IE, they are a crappy developer. This is not the 1990's anymore. There is simply no excuse to ignore Firefox (approximately 20-25% market worldwide) or IE (most of the remainder lol).

That is all :)

Thanks a lot, should be able to have this running this week as scheduled. Thank you a lot, check my PM.

- Have the coder validate it via http://validator.w3.org and don't accept any excuses for it not validating (our site does)

This.

I smile when I see hosts getting errors, especially some who get 100s(!). :rofl:

$150 is dirt cheap -- in fact, so cheap that you should be wary of its quality.

And not just "IE", but IE6, IE7 and IE8 -- they are NOT the same!!!
Also Firefox, Chrome and Safari

Most "web developers" wouldn't pass a high school intro class in design or coding.

Do you prefer xhtml/css coding or php?
divs or table?

Whilst I validate my code, I know a lot of coders these days don't value the w3 validator as much (reading through various dev blogs anyway). I think it's fine if something doesn't validate but still works in all browsers efficiently, and doesn't validate for a logical reason.

Microsoft should pay coders everytime someone writes a site that works in their POS browsers, the amount of extra work required to make up for their mistakes is a major pain in the arse.

For a quality, xhtml/css coding $150 for 3-5 pages isn't too bad. It's hard to say exactly without seeing the design because obviously one design mite take longer to code than others. Also consider everyone has theri own definition of "quality coding".

hmm, nice price and id imagine that they did a good job. And yes before you pay them i would try and get them to make sure its validated.

before you pay them i would try and get them to make sure its validated.

Most charge 50% upfront(it's a standard) and 50% upon completion. Validation must pass before the second half is paid. Honestly people around here act as if validation is difficult.. ? I don't get it.

Also consider that there are some validation errors that are technically OK to some people's standards. IE. CSS3 elements not yet standard, but widely supported.