Page 3 of 3

Posted: Fri May 20, 2016 4:26 pm
by kevsboredagain
Even myself, as stubborn as I can be, find this is now getting way too pedantic.

I've already explained my images and why they are 600 pixels. It was a design decision and justified by the fact they're only 50kb and I needed a 300-400 pixel range, plus flexibility for different layouts. They're 5 times smaller than the PMP images we're talking about.

I have already posted an example of the PMP images which grow by 4 times, and are inconsistent with images from other parts of the page and I've already posted a video of what I saw and why I looked into the page loading in the first place.

Yes, responsive sites need images that can be displayed at different sizes. Show me some modern, responsive websites that still use 2 sidebars.

The support of PMP is obviously first class and they clearly put a lot of effort to keeping their clients happy. It's a shame that they can't put the same effort into their templates, which have remained almost unchanged since I started in this business 8 years ago. Sure, some are now are responsive but that same dated look from the 90s still hasn't changed. PMP is a brilliant concept and is perfect for many owners but could gain way more customers if they would simply move forward a little faster.

Posted: Fri May 20, 2016 5:16 pm
by Casscat
I love PMP. Their support is indeed excellent, and I think it's still possible to create a fairly individual site from their suite of templates. They are a godsend to the likes of me. As for 'sameness', well you only have to look at all the 'professional' listings sites to see how much they all now rely upon the same interface! Sometimes it's hard to know whose site you're actually on :?