Please help me pick a Link List script

[Mishi]

I can't meet your price point, uterpie, but I would be remiss if I didn't at least pop in to mention DragonList. Please see my sig for a demo. Based on your post, I think it may be more than you're looking for at the moment.

I know many people are very happy with XPowerLinks, as well.

[uterpie]

Originally Posted by Mishi

I can't meet your price point, uterpie, but I would be remiss if I didn't at least pop in to mention DragonList. Please see my sig for a demo. Based on your post, I think it may be more than you're looking for at the moment.

I know many people are very happy with XPowerLinks, as well.

Hi Mishi! It bums me out that I can't afford DragonList, you and Venturi are good peeps and you helped me a lot at that other place we hang. I'd love to give a little back. Everybody there and everywhere seems to really like your script!

[Mishi]

Originally Posted by uterpie

Hi Mishi! It bums me out that I can't afford DragonList, you and Venturi are good peeps and you helped me a lot at that other place we hang. I'd love to give a little back. Everybody there and everywhere seems to really like your script!

Thanks for the kind words!

Once I get the next version released, I'm going to do a complete overhaul. Maybe I'll do a "lite" version if I get smart enough to figure out how.

Oh, here's a start - what are the bare-minimum features you would want?

[uterpie]

I think the bare minimum features would be (in addition to manual reviewing and listing of links, of course):

- Static pages (not dynamic)
- Recip checker
- Duplicate checker
- Broken link checker
- Blacklist controls

Nothing too fancy. Many of the cheaper and even free scripts can do all this EXCEPT the first bullet. Ultimately THAT's what I'll be paying for. I don't really see much point in a Link List if its not SE friendly.

In researching I've seen a lot of sites that are built on feature-rich scripts but don't utilize most of the fancier user features the script offers (reviews, ratings, report broken link, added on [date], hits, etc). I assume they got the more advanced script for the admin functionality and NOT the user functionality... so if a developer is looking for one spot to trim fat the best bet would probably be to trim the fancier user functionality and leave as much admin as possible. Just my 2 cents.

- uterpie

[Mishi]

Originally Posted by uterpie

I think the bare minimum features would be (in addition to manual reviewing and listing of links, of course):

- Static pages (not dynamic)
- Recip checker
- Duplicate checker
- Broken link checker
- Blacklist controls

Nothing too fancy. Many of the cheaper and even free scripts can do all this EXCEPT the first bullet. Ultimately THAT's what I'll be paying for. I don't really see much point in a Link List if its not SE friendly.

In researching I've seen a lot of sites that are built on feature-rich scripts but don't utilize most of the fancier user features the script offers (reviews, ratings, report broken link, added on [date], hits, etc). I assume they got the more advanced script for the admin functionality and NOT the user functionality... so if a developer is looking for one spot to trim fat the best bet would probably be to trim the fancier user functionality and leave as much admin as possible. Just my 2 cents.

- uterpie

I'll be taking all of this into consideration for the next version. Thanks a lot for the input.

[uterpie]

Hi all! Still haven't decided on a script, but I felt like I had it narrowed down between Hot Links SQL and XPowerLinks until I saw this FAQ for XPowerLinks:
http://faqs.xpowerlinks.com/article5-14.html

So it looks like XPowerLinks output is quasi-static. Wouldn't that put it on par with scripts with dynamic output like Warm Links or IndexU? I mean, how many degrees can there be between static and dynamic output?

Very confused,

- uterpie

[Lemmy]

I guess what it means is that the pages appear static to the SEs and that's all that matters. Not sure though. Maybe someone more knowledgeable can enlighten us.