Author Topic: 900 Gobal website looks terrible (Read 14220 times)

Nicanor · « **on:** September 18, 2007, 01:05:12 AM »

I don't know if its my computer or that the 900 Global website looks terribe.

I really can't find any information (well, very little) on the website and what little information it does have has write over on the information that is there on Balls: The Break.

They should take the website down until at least they can fix the small amount of information that is there.

I realize they are a newly formed manufactuer, but even more so that they would have a professional website if they were to have one at all.

--------------------
Nicanor (Ten On The Deck)

Edited on 9/18/2007 9:05 AM

Edited on 9/18/2007 9:06 AM

Edited on 9/18/2007 9:07 AM

Edited on 9/18/2007 9:07 AM

revTrex · « **Reply #76 on:** September 22, 2007, 07:33:06 PM »

I would agree with Djarum -- Roto's site has been, and still is, one of the best. It's simple, with some flashy things.

That being said, I don't think 900G's site is that far off from being one of the best, even as it is now. Click on a ball, you have info. Click on shoes, you have info. And I have never had a problem with reading any of the info, or the layout being messed up with my browser (Firefox on Mac OS X 10.4.10)...

Nicanor · « **Reply #77 on:** September 22, 2007, 07:57:31 PM »

Revtrex,

Near one of the best? Try Lane1bowling.com Lanemasters.com and some of the other ball manufacturing balls comapnies (I didn't like Storm's website either) and then tell me 900 Globals website is one of the best.

Responses that would claim 900 Global's website asbeing one of the best is the reason why readers can't faith in what you write.

Does it have promise, yes. Is there information on the website, yes. Is that all that some readers need or want, yes. But these are the readers that ony read the morning sport page and the comics.

Is it a good website now. NO

--------------------
Nicanor (Ten On The Deck)

revTrex · « **Reply #78 on:** September 22, 2007, 09:00:03 PM »

Readers not having faith in what I write due to my claim that I don't find as much fault with 900G's website as you do? Huh? Where does this even begin to make sense, Nicanor?

I'm sorry, but the flash animation found on other websites is annoying, at best. Legends' and Lane 1's are terrible. Legends' has WAY too much animation, and I have never, ever found myself WANTING to hear Fred Borden or his minions speak about their balls. Lane 1's has ZERO sense of "look" -- quite honestly, it looks dated, like a poor first attempt at using flash animation.

Furthermore, read exactly what I said. "I don't think 900G's site is that far off from being one of the best." As in, with additions, the site could be among a number of sites currently considered good.

I've seen other bowling sites, thank you, which is exactly why I said what I did. The only site that stands out in my mind as being "good" is Roto's. There new site is superb; their old site was just as good too. None of the other companies -- Ebonite, Columbia, Track, Storm, MoRich, Lane 1, Legends, Visionary -- compare well.

Additionally, you comment about how 900G's site would appeal to readers of Sports and Comics is completely wrong. 900G's site, with its bare-bones information delivery, would better serve readers of News, Business, etc. For those who want "fluff" -- Sports, Comics, Entertainment -- the other sites mentioned by you will certainly do.

On a final note, and for the last time, the 900G site is temporary. That being said, and with your desire to criticize the current version, why don't you list out what you think a good website has, and provide linked examples, so that we can all see your stance toward the matter. You pass judgment, but fail to do so in a helpful or beneficial manner. Tell us, then, oh Nicanor -- what is a good website (give an example too!) and WHY.

Nicanor · « **Reply #79 on:** September 22, 2007, 10:54:18 PM »

revTrex,

I think a couple of posts up I wrote my recommendations.

I agree the flash is a lot on some of the websites, but other then that, Lane 1 is an outstanding website with forums of whats next, honor scores, what would you like to see, drill patterns, future and other associatd forums.

900 Globals webiste was just an attempt to put something on the internet fast and cheap. Does the comapny have potential, without question. Does their website ned work: you alreaday have that answer.

--------------------
Nicanor (Ten On The Deck)

justdale · « **Reply #80 on:** September 22, 2007, 11:08:43 PM »

I'm not trying to argue with anyones oppinion, but I think that the website is just fine. Why does every website have to have a bunch of bells and whistles. It is easy to navigate through, they only have 2 balls out right now, and they are a new company.
If any of the people on this site think they can do a better job, submit a web design and see if the compnay will hire you for there web design.
This is just my oppinion, and if you feel like you need to jump on my back and argue, knock yourself out. I will not respond.

--------------------
Dale Williams
Columbia 300 Utah Amateur Staff

Nicanor · « **Reply #81 on:** September 23, 2007, 09:13:51 AM »

Justdale.

I respect your opinion.

Just like I think others should respect mine. I am looking for more information on a website and you're right, it doesn't have to have all the bells and whistles. Someone asked me what I'd like to see, not what I thought the minimum should be.

I personaaly like websites similar to Lane 1 without all the Flash start up. But I don't thinks ts mandatory to have a good and informative website.

This is the day where so many are in "The Ball of the Month Club" and we can get and sell used bowling balls at a good price in great shape. So having the drill sheets available to us on line is good for us and the pro shops we bring our bowling balls to be plugged and drilled.

--------------------
Nicanor (Ten On The Deck)

TheDude · « **Reply #82 on:** September 26, 2007, 09:19:26 AM »

I only deal in facts and these are the following:

The AMF site is horrible, it's not updated often enough.
The 900Global site is not much better.

last year in the 2006 trade show run phil said that mid difs over 0.010 didn't affect or improve ball characteristics. his new break now has mid diff at 0.024(at 15lbs)

facts change and so has the story.

--------------------
Timothy @Juniors Pro-Shops
LaSalle, Quebec
Located inside Pont Mercier Lanes.
Edmonton, Alberta.
Located inside Ed's Rec Room.(WEST ED MALL)

Roto-Grip Star Proshops
Etonic Stabilites Dress wearer.

Montreal, Quebec.

EricThomas · « **Reply #83 on:** September 26, 2007, 09:23:59 AM »

i dont think Phil's stance on that subject has ever changed. The mid diff is what it is, we are not flaunting that as the difference maker in the movement that this ball makes.
--------------------
900 Global/AMF Sales Manager

Dynoboy · « **Reply #84 on:** September 26, 2007, 09:35:22 AM »

Never thought that the looks of a web site can affect my bowling !! Hmmm.
If it looks horrible or bad or what ever, don't look at it. Buy from another company with a beatiful web site and improve your game!!! What an issue, wow!!

newguy · « **Reply #85 on:** September 26, 2007, 09:44:01 AM »

What I actually said is once the diff gets over .015 there is no difference in the performance. That doesn't mean that a mid diff that is higher is bad, it has no effect. Secondly what I have always said is that geometry makes the difference, therefore if you have core design and the rg's and diff are a by product of the design than the mid diff is simple a number is a fall out. If it is greater than .015 than it doesn't add anything to the equation. That is what I said.

Nicanor · « **Reply #86 on:** September 26, 2007, 04:51:24 PM »

OK, did I plug and re-rill my Break for nothing? I drilled it as recommended to get a stronger break point. Which is stronger MB under thumb or 1.5 right of thumb?

I'm so confused.

--------------------
Nicanor (Ten On The Deck)

revTrex · « **Reply #87 on:** September 27, 2007, 11:08:35 AM »

For the last time:

A is the strongest position. B reads the dry, and is more angular. Strong is not = to angular.

First consider pin position. 1 rolls earliest, 2 a little less early, and 3 gives you the most length (and thus the most angle). Therefore, if your sole goal is "long and strong," use 3B. If you want an earlier roll, for heavier/longer volumes of oil, use 1A or 2A.

Per Phil's other post:

"The longer the oil patter the closer to 1A you need to be the shorter the closer to 3b you need to be. It also pertains to volume and lateral dry boards."

Phil then suggested that if you are using a 1A-drilled Break, and it rolls out, there is not enough oil, or there is too much ball surface. If a 2/3B-drilled Break doesn't "really move," there are one of two problems -- there is too much oil (use a stronger drilling, more surface, etc.) or there is not enough oil (the pattern is too short, causing the strong ball to quit...use a weaker ball, like a pearl, which will actually give you more VISIBLE hook).

newguy has answered your question, but it just seems that you don't want to acknowledge this fact. One needs to understand that more hook (stronger) does not always equal more length with angle, or so called visible hook. On the right condition, a weak pearl can visibly hook WAY more than a heavy oil ball, and recover more on the backend. However, this does not mean that the pearl ACTUALLY hooked more -- the heavy oil ball just rolled out, there wasn't enough oil, etc.

Hope this helps.

jls · « **Reply #88 on:** September 27, 2007, 12:19:03 PM »

quote:
For the last time: QUOTE FROM REVTREX

A is the strongest position. B reads the dry, and is more angular. Strong is not = to angular.

First consider pin position. 1 rolls earliest, 2 a little less early, and 3 gives you the most length (and thus the most angle). Therefore, if your sole goal is "long and strong," use 3B. If you want an earlier roll, for heavier/longer volumes of oil, use 1A or 2A.

Per Phil's other post:

"The longer the oil patter the closer to 1A you need to be the shorter the closer to 3b you need to be. It also pertains to volume and lateral dry boards."

Phil then suggested that if you are using a 1A-drilled Break, and it rolls out, there is not enough oil, or there is too much ball surface. If a 2/3B-drilled Break doesn't "really move," there are one of two problems -- there is too much oil (use a stronger drilling, more surface, etc.) or there is not enough oil (the pattern is too short, causing the strong ball to quit...use a weaker ball, like a pearl, which will actually give you more VISIBLE hook).

newguy has answered your question, but it just seems that you don't want to acknowledge this fact. One needs to understand that more hook (stronger) does not always equal more length with angle, or so called visible hook. On the right condition, a weak pearl can visibly hook WAY more than a heavy oil ball, and recover more on the backend. However, this does not mean that the pearl ACTUALLY hooked more -- the heavy oil ball just rolled out, there wasn't enough oil, etc.

Hope this helps.

REVTREX
sir, exactly, all i ever ask was what was the more angular, never ever asked about stronger, asked what was more angular.

now you just posted pos. B as more angular. correct?

now, the drill sheet says pos. A is more angular.

may i read from the scriptures>>>

pos. A will cause the ball to have a more angular backend, while pos. B will have a smoother, continous backend reaction. DOES NOT MENTION STRONGER!!

NOW STEP 2. CLEARLY SHOWS that pos. A is on or under the thumb hole, and pos. B is right of the thumb hole.

thus, someone with an once of brains will conclude that according to the drill sheet, pos. A is more angular. hello anyone home here.

but you sir, just posted that pos. B is more angular!!!!! and it is!!!!!

BUT THAT IS NOT WHAT THE PINK DRILL SHEETS STATES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

so i "foolio" ask a simple question to mr newguy, is this a misprint.

and all he keeps saying is he answered and something about stronger.

NEVER ASKED ABOUT STRONGER, THAT IS SPELLED S T R O N G E R.

ASKED ABOUT ANGULAR, SPELLED A N G U L A R.

and then the babboon squad comes on and says drama king and attn crap.

phil, is the drill sheet a mis print or not.

THIS PERSON POSTING CLEARLY POST THAT B. IS ANGULAR!!!!!

YOU PINK DRILL SHEET STATES A IS ANGULAR.

NOW ANSWER THE QUESTION, AND STOP TRYING TO INSULT ME.

YOUR DRILL SHEET IS EITHER CORRECT, which would mean that the person i am quoting is WRONG.

OR YOUR DRILL SHEET IS WRONG, and the person i am quoting is right.
WHICH MAKES ME "FOOLIO: CORRECT.

NOT TALKING ABOUT STRONGER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

ANGULAR VS. SMOOTHER.

WHAT IS IT WITH YOU PEOPLE FROM TEXAS?

--------------------
jls, proud watcher of womens golf

Edited on 9/27/2007 12:21 PM

Edited on 9/27/2007 12:38 PM

splendorlex · « **Reply #89 on:** September 27, 2007, 12:45:48 PM »

It's silly to say the look of a website doesn't matter. Let's say you got the 900G catalog, and all the names were messed up, the pictures didn't work right, and you basically had a hard time reading the important info, if you could at all. Well, you wouldn't. They wouldn't send out print media that didn't "work" or wasn't right. This is the designer's issue that they didn't test the info adequately on the different platforms to make sure it worked right. That's the designer's JOB. Saying the look of a website isn't important is just silly. The web is an almost entirely VISUAL medium, so the visuals mean everything.

As far as other company's sites, Legends site is terrible. All flash? Ugh! Sure it looks fancy, but fancy don't mean good in web design! Lane 1's site, though good on the content, looks exceedingly dated, like it was designed in 1999. Web 2.0? Hell, they're on web 0.25!! As far as other sites? Storm and Roto have pretty good ones, clean look and plenty of info. The Ebonite family of sites is ok, they're a little "graphic design" heavy for my tastes, and they color schemes they use can make it difficult to read, but overall they're alright. I do like the new Track site, however. The Brunswick site is kind of blah overall. I can't stand the Banger site, mostly due to the scantily clad women, so I don't like to open it at work.

The Morich site is another fine example of 1999 design, meaning it's bad. The Visionary site is one of the worst, due to compatibility issues. They tried to get too fancy, and it just plain doesn't work well.

So overall, I would put the Storm and Ebonite families of sites at the top, and everything else below.
--------------------
Mr. Lebowski, this is Bill Salnicker with the Southern Cal Bowling League, and I just got a, an informal report, that a member of your team, uh, Walter Sobchak, drew a firearm during league play. If this is true of course, it contravenes a number of the league's by-laws, and article 27 of the league...

qstick777 · « **Reply #90 on:** September 28, 2007, 09:40:43 AM »

Well, it looks like the new website is up.

They have a link for the drill sheet under the Break - not there yet, but I'm sure it will be there in time.

Check it out and see if it looks any better.
--------------------
Unoffical Ballreviews.com FAQ

Search Ballreviews entire database here

Author Topic: 900 Gobal website looks terrible (Read 14220 times)

Nicanor

900 Gobal website looks terrible

revTrex

Re: 900 Gobal website looks terrible

Nicanor

Re: 900 Gobal website looks terrible

revTrex

Re: 900 Gobal website looks terrible

Nicanor

Re: 900 Gobal website looks terrible

justdale

Re: 900 Gobal website looks terrible

Nicanor

Re: 900 Gobal website looks terrible

TheDude

Re: 900 Gobal website looks terrible

EricThomas

Re: 900 Gobal website looks terrible

Dynoboy

Re: 900 Gobal website looks terrible

newguy

Re: 900 Gobal website looks terrible

Nicanor

Re: 900 Gobal website looks terrible

revTrex

Re: 900 Gobal website looks terrible

jls

Re: 900 Gobal website looks terrible

splendorlex

Re: 900 Gobal website looks terrible

qstick777

Re: 900 Gobal website looks terrible