Do you think the eNOM PDQ look is ugly?

[mole]

I wouldn't mind getting one myself, except I think it looks aweful.

 

[system0]

i wouldnt say awful

but i do think it would be good if they offered different variations of designs instead of just different colours

 

[Anthony Ng]

Sorry, it's terrible. But ALL templates look terrible, and it's also the reason why I still haven't put up anything to resell domain registration. :cry:

 

[domainduck]

PDQ is clean, simple and functional.

It's an instant business for $99 bucks a year plus the domain name.

For non-design people or busy people, PDQ is great.

my quacks...

 

[tino]

Enom's PDQ is far too compressed. Why crunch everything in that tiny space (aligned at the LEFT Yuck)?!?!?

DNRocket.com is my PDQ Site (Theme; blue) I really don't like it, but there isn't much I can do...

Please ENOM... USE THE SCREEN! Do not confine yourself to that 776 wide table.
Furthermore, everyone who's name is at ENOM can use anyones PDQ for modifying thier domain. In my opinion only the account mapped to the PDQ account + subaccounts should be able to do this!

Tino

 

[RON2]

Forget the PDQ, it's too ugly and hard to customize. Getting an API like dramsystem.com is a much better deal.

 

[GiantDomains]

Ugly...um, yea, and how about diluted. Everyone and their cousin has a PDQ site.

I agree with -rj-, dramsystem is great, and very customizable. If enom changes their API, they are quick to get a patch out.

 

[ComScout.com]

Enom PDQ sucks because there is no way I cannot see visitor stats of where my visitors are coming from... I am going for dramsystem.com .... very soon!

 

[isdtv]

PDQ doesn't look great, and not really search engine friendly.. but there isn't much can be done.

 

[Anthony Ng]

Just when I was about to post that it was terrible, I noticed that this was actually an old thread, and I had already posted the same remark (post #3). More than 18 months later, if you ask me again, I'll say it again: it's TERRIBLE!

 

[Steen]

LOL, nameslave.

 

[GiantDomains]

Just when I was about to post that it was terrible, I noticed that this was actually an old thread, and I had already posted the same remark (post #3). More than 18 months later, if you ask me again, I'll say it again: it's TERRIBLE!

Ditto! Same comment 18 months later

Just realized -RJ- changed his name

 

[Nexus]

Just when I was about to post that it was terrible, I noticed that this was actually an old thread, and I had already posted the same remark (post #3). More than 18 months later, if you ask me again, I'll say it again: it's TERRIBLE!

Bah, I think my PDQ site looks great! :-D The functions perform more than adequately, and enterprising developers have a solid amount of customizeability they can employ if they are creative enough. Er, PM me if you'd like to see my PDQ site...

I think most "vanilla" PDQ sites look pretty blande. I'll agree that far. A dram site is a little nicer... but its a big headache ultimately. There are better ways to spend your time. I remember having a bug where a customer could not renew. All DRAMS could tell me was that it was eNom's fault, and stopped replying to my questions. With the code being encrypted, I couldn't even get in there and solve the problem. Horrible. Migrated my clients to PDQ and haven't looked back.

~ Nexus