Comments on: HTML-Based Church Website Solutions Compared http://ihack.us/2009/01/18/html-based-church-website-solutions-compared/ The Politics of Simplifying Technology Tue, 01 May 2012 18:28:17 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.com/ By: camniomediausa http://ihack.us/2009/01/18/html-based-church-website-solutions-compared/#comment-117 Tue, 22 Dec 2009 19:20:48 +0000 http://ihack.us/2009/01/18/html-based-church-website-solutions-compared/#comment-117 Great Page, I noticed our page wasn’t in here. We are church website design company also named CAMNIO Media. Our website is http://www.camnio.com.

We use CMS and our portfolio or sample page is on http://www.camnio.com/portfolio.html

Great resources! Keep on blogging.

]]> By: sequoiagal http://ihack.us/2009/01/18/html-based-church-website-solutions-compared/#comment-105 Fri, 01 May 2009 17:04:59 +0000 http://ihack.us/2009/01/18/html-based-church-website-solutions-compared/#comment-105 Our church website (www.gpchurch.org) uses WebMedley. It has a lot going for it and is affordable.

]]> By: Dr. Ernie http://ihack.us/2009/01/18/html-based-church-website-solutions-compared/#comment-101 Fri, 23 Jan 2009 22:24:58 +0000 http://ihack.us/2009/01/18/html-based-church-website-solutions-compared/#comment-101 It was very unscientific, but I generally ranked sites higher that had:

good aesthetics (both the site and their templates)
demos
broad features (calendar, photo albums)

I also tended to rank more general solutions (e.g., just hosting, or full church management) lower, since that wasn’t my interest.

I’d love for someone to turn this into a more formal and objective evaluation, say as a Wikipedia page.

]]> By: pdstein http://ihack.us/2009/01/18/html-based-church-website-solutions-compared/#comment-100 Fri, 23 Jan 2009 22:07:10 +0000 http://ihack.us/2009/01/18/html-based-church-website-solutions-compared/#comment-100 I’d be curious to know the criteria you use when making your rankings? What did the sites you ranked high have that the others didn’t?

]]>