Launching Your New Site

I couldn't come up with a better thread title, so after I lay this inquiry out, please provide a better thread title for me to use.

This inquiry comes from the combination of some threads here and David's great article (I didn't think a comment there would have worked).

When do you Start Promoting

Building your First Site...

There are some other related threads that I'm missing.

So let's say you've taken the kind recommendations from the aforementioned submissions.

Where do you do start to build it?

What I mean by that is, do you build it locally or do you build it on the host with it locked down? Or something in between?


At what stage then do you Open it to the public? Meaning what do you consider as required in place and working at Launch versus items that can be implemented as time goes on?


I don't know if there's some cookbook for this already, but I've scoured and maybe my keyword such technique just sucks.

AA staff, please fee free to edit, merge to a topic already for this, if I've made any sense at all...

Thanks in advance

 

Hmm... well I don't think it matters(much) if you build it locally or already on a host, though I would think it would be easier to build it on a host, if you don't want people to see just .htaccess it. There is not really a certain "time" that a user(admin) should spend on their site, people have different schedules so it all comes down to how much time do they have free. Many people open it with the satisfaction that the board software is installed and they have a name for the site, others take their time to get a nice skin(pre-made or custom) that they think would fit their niche, they try to prepare everything for arrival of users, make everything feel homey and friendly, and write content so the users have things to read.

It also depends on how much interest you have, maybe mid-finishing you lose interest and stop working on it or decide you don't want to modify no more and just open it to the public.

On my site I opened it for the old members to join, I wanted to test the registration progress, avatar uploads signature uploads, etc. I wanted my site to be good for them, although some users though I had opened the board completely, regardless of how many times I told them it was just 'BETA'.

IMO, users functionality comes first, how it works to the front end user and how it works for the visitors, content second and modifications comes last.
X3 It just depends, depends, depends~

 

I'll be building my on my server host and just .htaccess it like FMB said. That way I don't have to worry about uploads getting corrupted while uploading the final product from home to the host, my upload speed is shitty.

For this new project of mine I'm not going to open it until I get a custom skin and some other stuff for it and some content posted.

 

Thanks

I have a subdomain system that I use off my main domain for building and testing sites. It's really all preference at this point, but I find being able to edit the files directly on the server and not have to upload/reupload them, and actually having the software on the environment it will be run under, the easiest way.

Every site needs to have a plan for existence. Depending on the site you'll need to have the core functionality complete (wether it be forums, or just articles).

You can generally open a site when its 99% bug free. Never open a site that is flooded with bugs, incomplete features, or half assed ones. It will lead to a ton of end user frustration which will hurt your chances for success (both long and short term).

There is a cookbook for it, its called "AdminAddicts Recipes for a successful site"...only available by posting questions

 

I should have stated a little more clearly that this inquiry is based on the premise of everything being planned out -- hosting, branding, campaign, software, mods, design, etc. That its all down on paper, so to speak.


@FMB -- Thanks for your points. I get the feel from your experience and it makes sense. When you already have a base of people, that will surely dictate the schedule, release, launch, etc. a little bit differently. Having testers for sure is quite -- invaluable, as I'm sure all of you would agree.


@DM -- I like the subdomain idea. Makes alot of sense and then switching to the main is very easy.


I think the greatest point you make though with regards to build local or remote, is working with the enviroment the site will actually run on. To me, that makes ubersense over a preference.

hahah, funny guy -- AdminAddicts Recipes for a Successful Site. You confirm that my keyword search technique sucks!!



I have had a mix of experience on this, hence my inquiry. One site that had plenty of people to interact and test things out, very valuable, and then the flipside, rarely any feedback. I have to resort in explaining fundamental things. I realized just the level of knowledge was different as opposed to fundamental. Work with the clientele, yo!