Is this a fair assumption of our menu?

[Andy]

I don't think Jennifer Kyrnin from about.com likes our menu very much. Well, not so much the menu but our website because that is what she compains about most in her DHTML menu review.

Is her review fair comment?

http://webdesign.about.com/cs/dynamicht ... nicmnu.htm

If it is, I suppose we better look into it, thought I'd get your opinions first, anybody?

Cheers
Andy

[John]

You know my thoughts!

She completely missed the boat. As you mentioned she complained about the site (I thought the "review" was supposed to be about the product), she complained about missing items (all of which are on your home page which she linked to in her article), she complained that the menu is "expensive" (hmmm - the 'other' menu wants $180 for an educational license) - and on it goes.

You know the three of us - we tell you what we think, good and bad, and I don't see anything to complain about on the site. I am, however, interested in seeing other folks comments.

[Ruth]

Isn't it interesting that there's NO way to contact them and tell them their reviewer is incorrect in a number of things: ...there's NO mention of the license being free license for qualified non profits, or for qualified personal non commercial/business etc. sites [minus a handling charge which is minimal! ] Time to install? However fast your ftp or whatever uploads it and you can put the calls in your page. As to how long it takes to design if that's what she meant, NO company can predict that, it depends on the person. As to the FAQs, How do we tell her 'bosses' she didnt' even bother to CHECK THIS SITE????? FAQS -> DHTML MENU, website login, licensing, purchasing...she must be blind. Expensive? In relation to what? Now, as to the one other thing...browser support...I've never bothered to check since i kind of got the idea from the forum help pages, but that's easy to fix, just put a link or something to a page or whatever that shows which browsers it works in and perhaps the important issues in finicky ones.

I hate not being able to respond to someone who OBVIOUSLY didn't bother to check the menu or even look at this site since she didn't get the faqs section correct and then proceeds to do a 'review'. I RATED HER REVIEW..too bad they had nothing less than 1.

GREAT MENU.

Ruth

[John]

Actually there is, Ruth, but it definitely takes some digging...

webdesign.guide@about.com

I RATED HER REVIEW..too bad they had nothing less than 1.

So did I, and I fully agree!

[kevin3442]

...Is her review fair comment?

In the mood to stir up some sh... uh... stuff for Ms. Kyrnin are we? I'm game.

I think it is, at best, charitable to call her insipient drivel a "review." Were I interested in becoming such a reviewer, where would I have to go to shed the necessary amount of brain tissue?

Her positive comments on HierMenus makes me even wonder if she actually bothers installing and using any of these scripts, of if she just tosses a dart at her "review board" and takes it from there. I don't know about anyone else, but I tried HierMenus quite some time back, along with Milonic (v3) and others, and found Milonic much easier to use and install, much more flexible, and much better supported. I've read from several sources recently that HierMenus now has scaled costs, from $500 for sites with 20 pages or fewer, to $1495.00 for sites with more than 50 pages. Can't verify that on their site though, because you have to email them to get pricing information (how convenient). Compared to these prices, Milonic's commercial license (about 42 bucks U.S. currently) is a drop in the bucket. And for non-profit use... what does she not understand about a "free" license to lead her to think that it's expensive? Maybe she was referring to the administrative cost for free licensing, because God knows that 9 bucks is pretty expensive. Does the competition offer such licensing? Not that I know of!

I personally think the Milonic website is nicely done (I especially like the menu... where can I get one?) I also have never seen a menu script site that offers so many different examples of the menu in use. The site is clean, and I like clean sites. The information that the "reviewer" claims is absent is actually fairly easy to find for anyone spending more than 30 seconds having a look... anyone with a brain that is. In fact, most of the information she claims is lacking can either be found on the home page itself, or linked directly from the home page. Browser compatibility, for example, is spelled out in detail about 3/4 down the home page. And "what do you get for your money?" Duh... let's see, if I buy a t-shirt, what should I expect to get for my money... hmmm... oh, I know... probably a t-shirt! By analogy, when you buy a menu script, what would you expect to get... probably a menu script! Other things available to those purchasing a license are also spelled out in the licensing pages.

And ditto Ruth... How long to install? Again I say, "duh." And her comment on "the FAQ page"... "The FAQ page on the site is mostly an FAQ about the site and how to login and get support." That just tells me that she only looked at the "Website and Logging In" FAQ and missed the other three FAQ pages. Why? Maybe she finds menus too challenging to use???

I better stop now... my blood pressure is on the rise. Think I'll wait a bit, then send Ms. Kyrnin an email.

Kevin

[Ruth]

Thanks for the email address, John. I sent off my complaint. I never saw the browser thingee.......so maybe that was one thing that she said that perhaps needs a more obvious link on the page. Probably there are more like me who don't read all the print

Ruth

[Maz]

I knew about the review, just happened to land there a while back, and thought that this person was so wrong, obviously never even bothered to check the excellent one on one help from the forum, and you don't even have to have a registered copy to ask questions ... unlike some places, where you don't know what the product is untill you purchase it.

I review about.com as for stupid people, I doubt anyone developing a web site would read it.

The real issue here is, that no matter what a webdeveloper or software developer does, there are browser compatibility issues, out with the old, in with the new, and css and xml is changing so fast, no one can predict perfection in this world, all I saw in that review was, that these issues are universal, don't go blaming someone trying to work in this enviroment, go after the big blockbusters who are busting our butts with their invested markets.

The real workers are those surviving in the turmoil and making something to clean up in the wake of their mess.

It wasn't a fair review, send her a free download to check it out for herself.

maz

[fredlongworthhighschool]

Complaint fired off from me too.

I was very angry and the gross inaccuracies from someone who spent less than ten minutes looking at both the program and website.

She completely missed the VERY generous free licensing system provided to schools or the extraordinary level of support from both Andy and the forum.

[Martin]

The author didn't spend enough time to check out the milonic menu system.

A software like this cannot be used "out of the box". It needs some minor knowledge in programming. Maybe the author is not a programmer, probably grown up with a Mac or a microwave ofen

I agree, that the documentation is not perfect, but every question will be answered in the forum. As a registered customer, it is possible to ask questions directly to andy. It worked perfect in the last two years!

So, forget this article!

[John]

Maybe the author is not a programmer, probably grown up with a Mac...

Oh, my - now we have a problem...

Ever try programming a Mac, especially nowadays? Not an easy task. Almost as tough as her "review" was bad

[Ruth]

I'm not a progammer [unless you call punching the channels on the tv remote programming ] and I think my menu came out real nice...it only took patience and all the kind help of the real knowledgeable here.

I do have one suggestion. In one of the menu_data.js files probably way way back at the beginning it had the explanations next to the style items [I'm pretty sure I remember seeing it in one]. Version 3 had these also...that would be a big help to all the newbies with no real knowledge who are downloading the latest versions... Yes, I know there are the style properties and such but for someone who really doesn't have knowledge, having it next to the item is very helpful...it's what got me through version 3. It may not be feasible for all these RCs, maybe for the final though. Just a thought.

Ruth

[Andy]

I've just figured out what is going on here

This Jennifer Kyrnin person is actually a robot.

She claims to work for Symantec and maintains over 5000 of their web pages. That in itself is quite a task and one that I would imagine takes up most of her time.

However, she also seems to have enough time to learn about almost EVERY aspect of the Internet and then write about it. HOW THE HELL IS THIS POSSIBLE? I want some of what she's on please

If you go to this URL: http://webdesign.about.com/ her face pops us in the left corner, then pick ANY of the web design articles on about.com ranging from web servers to XML and she's the expert and knows all about EVERYTHING, she's either a genius, or a fraud?

I've not figured out which one yet but personally, I would find it very difficult to claim to know a tiny fraction of what she knows well enough to be able to write about it, sheesh. Maybe I'm being real dumb here and should know far more than I do but what I'm seeing on about.com doesn't appear to be that accurate, how the hell can it be when it's the same biased person doing all the work.

I take it nobody has had a reply yet to their complaints yet?

Maybe we need to put a review of her reviews on our website?

Oh yeah and by the way, spotted this earlier on Google:



See the bit that says: "Milonic DHTML Menus are very fancy and have a lot of options"

Why has that bit now been removed from the article? Why are they trying their hardest to make our system look like a POS?

Basically, her review is completely slating our hard work and I'm not convinced that this is fair, something fishy going on here me thinks.

I'm all for constructive criticism but this is B/S

Cheers
Andy

[John]

This Jennifer Kyrnin person is actually a robot.

Nope, sorry - that would give her too much credit, none of which she deserves.

She claims to work for Symantec and maintains over 5000 of their web pages. That in itself is quite a task and one that I would imagine takes up most of her time.

Crappola. I've got enough trouble maintaining ~500 and keeping up with stuff. She handles 5000 and writes "reviews"? Bull...

I take it nobody has had a reply yet to their complaints yet?

Zippo. Not one word (and, with her attitude, I'm not really expecting anything).

Maybe we need to put a review of her reviews on our website?

How 'bout a poll?

Why has that bit now been removed from the article? Why are they trying their hardest to make our system look like a POS?

Basically, her review is completely slating our hard work and I'm not convinced that this is fair, something fishy going on here me thinks.

Because somebody obviously paid them (or her) off. The whole thing sucks.

[fredlongworthhighschool]

Crappola. I've got enough trouble maintaining ~500 and keeping up with stuff. She handles 5000 and writes "reviews"? Bull...

More likely she has lackeys that do all the hard work for her and she pops in from time to time to debate on what colour schemes to use for the site!

Does anyone have an email address for somebody higher on the review site? Obviously she is going to sweep all complaints under the carpet if they are directed to her, but if we go to someone more senior than her (a cleaner, maybe? ) action may be taken for her biased grudges.

[John]

Does anyone have an email address for somebody higher on the review site?

Good luck finding something that's really related to her. It took some digging just to find her address.

[Ruth]

I take it nobody has had a reply yet to their complaints yet?

Hmm, I never thought about it, but about the time I sent my email to her/it may spam has taken a rise, 20 or so more a day. I get about 10-15 everyday, or got, now I'm getting 30 to 40. Wonder if there is a connection?

Ruth

[fredlongworthhighschool]

I actually got a reply, hopefully everyone else will have as well by the time you read this:

Thank you for your comments.

While the review was only written about two months ago, it is quite
possible that the Milonic team updated their site to reflect these issues.

If that is the case, then when I go back to re-review these tools their
updates will be taken into account.

Thanks again for your feedback.

Jennifer

[Ruth]

Hmm, two months ago, 4 months ago, the same informtion that is here now was here then, the forum, the samples, the reference lists, the faqs.... The look may have changed but all the things available now I believe were available then... And, I've still not gotten a reply, but then again, maybe I deleted it 'cause I thought it was spam.

Ruth

[John]

Agreed, Ruth. She's trying to defend a position that simply has no defense - her inability to conduct a proper review.

[Hergio]

Seriously, look at the cached versions on Google, all the info was there back when this "review", as inaccurate as it is to call it that, was done. As I am sure it does for all of you, it really urkes me to see this crap. That email was probably just a filler written by some pimply faced intern at the hole in the wall office they review their "5000" topics from. This Milonic menu is the best damn menu around, hands down. Its got the features that beat the pants of all the competitors, plus its dirt cheap. The review was a sham, was supposed to be about the menu and not the site itself, and I wouldnt doubt they were biased from outside sources with some dirty money.