View Poll Results: Is the general quality of Web Development diabolically low?
- 13. You may not vote on this poll
Results 26 to 28 of 28
Aug 1, 2012, 19:36 #26
- Join Date
- Jul 2012
- Sydney, Australia
- 0 Post(s)
- 0 Thread(s)
Just to add on to what the others were saying, validation isn't the only indicator of a good website. A bigger picture view should be taken. From most business owners POV, the indicator of quality is the return on investment they're getting. They don't care about validation if it's performing a vital business role and doing it well. Of course I'm not backing the idea that standards don't matter, but sometimes we just have to use common sense and accept some compromises (be it in design or code) to get the site performing.
Aug 3, 2012, 05:53 #27
- Join Date
- Oct 2005
- Milton Keynes, UK
- 9 Post(s)
- 2 Thread(s)
Quality of code vs user experience is an interesting topic in itself. Code that's working insofar as it does what the user expects can be messy or clean, strict OOP or 50 nested conditionals. The user would know no different.
The problem occurs when something breaks. Bad code is harder to fix and maintain, introducing bugs which negatively impact end users and difficult to maintain spaghetti code creates extra work when it comes to maintenance, making it more expensive for the client and the potential for their site to be down for longer than needed potentially resulting in lost sales.
For users, well written code also tends to be more secure because the developer has actually thought things through. This means there's less likelyhood of a password breach, their details being stolen, etc.
As such, I'd argue that code quality does effect users quite dramatically, they just don't see it!
Aug 7, 2012, 05:57 #28