A Quote by Mike Davidson

Because the competitive landscape of the web is such that the site which looks and works best gets the most traffic, developers and designers put a premium on the presentation of that content and let structural markup take a back seat.
We at The Web Standards Project turned everything on its head. We said browsers should support the same standards instead of competing to invent new tags and scripting languages. We said designers, developers, and content folks should create one site that was accessible to everyone.
The Web is not a prize to be won, and Mr. Ballmer's attitude is deplorable in the light of what the Web means to the world, to users, to designers and developers, and - to put it into Microsoft parlance - customers.
Even if it's not always the best markup, what are Facebook and Twitter? They're web standards with some scripts. They may not validate, but they're still CSS layouts and simple markup, and that's great!
Somebody has to pay our editors, writers, journalists, designers, developers, and all the other specialists whose passion and tears go into every chunk of worthwhile web content.
Campaign analysts say that Dean has produced the most innovative web site in this year's presidential race. I particularly like today's blog, which consisted of the sentence 'I hate myself,' typed four billion times. In Dean's case, this may be the first instance where the actually entity represented by the web site has crashed more often than the site did.
We tend to think of Steam as tools for content developers and tools for producers. We're just always thinking: how do we want to make content developers' lives better and users' lives a lot better? With Big Picture Mode, we're trying to answer the question: 'How can we maximize a content developers' investment?'
We saw simply distribution was changing, content, premium content, premium stars; we're going to be able to do more in the world as it evolves.
You know, I can be very tough in my answers, and that was good for the magazine because it didn't mix focus points - it was to be extravagant, experimental, innovative. But the web site has made it more human. So the Web site is good for the magazine.
The weird thing about reddit is that, for a community its size - now I'm no longer at reddit, but the public traffic numbers that they put out are, I think with the site about eight million unique visitors a month, or every 30 days, which is a fairly big site.
Direct navigation traffic is by far the most highly targeted form of web traffic available.
What's funny is that an old Web site of mine just had one fake bio, and everyone went crazy for it. So when I made the new Web site, I thought, 'I just need to make this one even more absurd.'
An electronic paper has infinite space because you can bring forth as much content as a reader wants. And the resolution of ads is very high. And when you touch the ad you can interact with the advertiser and the paper will take you to the advertiser's Web site and you can get more information. So ideally there should be a better connection between the ads you're shown and what you're actually interested in.
Times of economic crises can change what the competitive landscape looks like, because when, for example, you have boom times, capital is easy to come by, growth is easy, sometimes what you focus on is, you know, how to accelerate in the boom. During economic crises, the question is, the companies that come out of, you know, that are sailing through that with the best liquidity, both assets on the balance sheet, making money, ability to grow their businesses, get a disproportionate competitive advantage.
Every single element in an advertisement - headline, subhead, photo, and copy - must be put there not because it looks good, not because it sounds good, but because testing has shown that it works best!
It irritates me that everybody concentrates on Gawker, because it's just one of 15 sites and it doesn't even get the most traffic. It's a significant site, but it's not what we are.
The web has introduced a competitive, and some might argue hostile, landscape for long, in-depth, resource-intensive journalism.
This site uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience. More info...
Got it!