designing to fit into screen resolution

[K A Nuttall]

If an expert or professional is pissed off, he will just go away
and ignore the subject.This is Internet and nobody forces you to
read things which get on you nerves unless you enjoy gettting
nerved

What you'll occasionally find on techie newsgroups is that some people
like to slag you off rather than help you. This is maybe because they
have problems with insecurity, and like to abuse less-experienced
people as a means of making themselves look superior.

The best thing you can do is ignore those people, and just listen to
the advice of people who want to help.

 

[aa]

Thanks, K A Nuttall,
It is good to meet a reasonable person here, otherwise the place would look
like Terrarium in London's Zoo where the residents spit and hiss at you,
some even attempting to to bite.
I came here first for a tech advice which people gave me in the first 5 or
six replies. Then the others arrived and at that point I got the interst to
the place from clinical view point for I have always been interested in
psycology.
Yet it is good to know that common sense people prevail !

 

[Martin Clark]

aa wrote...

So far with my slice of visitors I never came across anything other then IE6
or higher and XP (with small exceptions for w2k). As to resolution, people
simply do not know and do not seem to care. Most probably they have what
they got by default, which now is most probably 1024x760

This is self-fulfilling. If you design your site so that it looks bad in
anything other than IE, then of course only people using IE will be your
customers. Anyone using anything different will leave your site rapidly
and so you have lost potential customers.

And even those few who browse with half-size browser window, they know to
click a littile (x) at the upper right corner to maximise the window is a
particular web-site looks better this way

Gosh! That really works! The site looks much better if I click the
little x in the upper right corner!

Therefore admitting existence of Macs, Lynux, Opera etc, I believe that
taking into aqccount my customer base and limited resources instead of
spending time on these, it would be more beneficial to spend time on
developing the product

I would have thought it would be beneficial to spend time listening to
suggestions from people who really know what they are talking about. You
have had much advice here that designing to fit screen resolution is
wasted effort. Will a little thought and re-thinking of what you are
aiming to do, you could easily have a site that looks good to anybody,
whatever screen size or resolution they use, or whatever browser or OS.
Unfortunately, you do not seem to want to listen to that sort of advice.

 

[Blinky the Shark]

aa wrote...

Gosh! That really works! The site looks much better if I click
the little x in the upper right corner!

I wondered if anyone else was going to catch that.

 

[Blinky the Shark]

What you'll occasionally find on techie newsgroups is that some
people like to slag you off rather than help you. This is maybe
because they have problems with insecurity, and like to abuse
less-experienced people as a means of making themselves look
superior.

The best thing you can do is ignore those people, and just
listen to the advice of people who want to help.

If he'd seemed willing to learn anything from those people, he
probably wouldn't have been slagged.

 

[dorayme]

If he'd seemed willing to learn anything from those people, he
probably wouldn't have been slagged.

And the standard of willing in this church includes jumping to it
really smartly no matter what... or else!

 

[Jonathan N. Little]

I wondered if anyone else was going to catch that.

Works for me!

 

[Neredbojias]

clue-proof idiot. Enjoy.

This makes about a dozen of you.
So many people pretending to be The Cream of the NG collected together
to join that much efforts to press a single miserable "clue-proof
idiot" for the second day in a row? You made my thread a champion for
number of hate posts, and the Server might go overheated
Boys, you might be genious HTML coders, but socially you might want
psycological help.
This is not the first NG I use, and I watched a number of conflicts
here and there, but for the first time I come acress a bunch of people
so aggressive for no obvious reason.
I wonder if handling HTML can affect mental conditions?

Only if you abuse it regularly...

 

[Neredbojias]

C'mon guys... ease up a bit... this feller is not that bad, you
are pushing him into a corner and he is likely to say things that
he would not say or mean with gentler treatment.

Men are men, not pusilanimous lillies! In case it has escaped your
detection, the masculine 46% of the population tend to communicate by means
other than indirection.

 

[dorayme]

C'mon guys... ease up a bit... this feller is not that bad, you
are pushing him into a corner and he is likely to say things that
he would not say or mean with gentler treatment.

Men are men, not pusilanimous lillies! In case it has escaped your
detection, the masculine 46% of the population tend to communicate by means
other than indirection.[/QUOTE]

Crap. What you don't say is how insecure you all are. This is
indirection big time pal. Talking about time, time for another
visit by Officer Bud White soon Boji...

 

[Neredbojias]

Men are men, not pusilanimous lillies! In case it has escaped your
detection, the masculine 46% of the population tend to communicate by
means other than indirection.

Crap. What you don't say is how insecure you all are. This is
indirection big time pal. Talking about time, time for another
visit by Officer Bud White soon Boji...[/QUOTE]

Men may be insecure at times but the reason is that their mates are so
habitually neurotic.

 

[aa]

I have hit conters on my pages.
It turnes out that the avalanch of unanimous spiteful criticims of the two
trial pages I mentioned here, was based on 2 visitors on one page and on
exactly 0 (ZERO) on the other.
Now I see why the criticim was limited to generalities like "this site is
crap" and why I failed to squeeze a single concrete indication of what
exactly is wrong.
This tells a lot about some people's attitude and usefulness of their
comments

 

[Beauregard T. Shagnasty]

I have hit conters on my pages.

It appears they require JavaScript to be 'counted'. You would not know
then that I visited. Both pages.

It turnes out that the avalanch of unanimous spiteful criticims of the
two trial pages I mentioned here, was based on 2 visitors on one page
and on exactly 0 (ZERO) on the other.

After seeing this (the first page), who would go further?
http://k75s.home.att.net/show/aa.jpg (91 KB)

Now I see why the criticim was limited to generalities like "this site
is crap" and why I failed to squeeze a single concrete indication of
what exactly is wrong. This tells a lot about some people's attitude
and usefulness of their comments

What exactly is wrong ... is nearly everything. Sorry. I would not know
where to begin to tell you how to improve these pages, other than to
study good sites and a few tutorials, and then start over.

 

[Jonathan N. Little]

It appears they require JavaScript to be 'counted'. You would not know
then that I visited. Both pages.

Ditto!

Unfortunately, You, aa, base your reasoning on flawed assumptions.

 

[John Hosking]

I have hit conters on my pages.
It turnes out that the avalanch of unanimous spiteful criticims of the two
trial pages I mentioned here, was based on 2 visitors on one page and on
exactly 0 (ZERO) on the other.
Now I see why the criticim was limited to generalities like "this site is
crap" and why I failed to squeeze a single concrete indication of what
exactly is wrong.
This tells a lot about some people's attitude and usefulness of their
comments

No, it tells a lot about the quality of your hit counters.

Also, you should carefully review the comments you actually received. I
think you will find too many specific details about your sites to for
you to claim either "generalities" or that we didn't really visit.

 

[aa]

It appears they require JavaScript to be 'counted'. You would not know
then that I visited. Both pages.

Please, will you tell me more me about using Javascript hit counters.
Perhaps the counter might be using an AI not to count malicious visitors who
do not buy but just clog the server?

 

[Andy Dingley]

Please, will you tell me more me about using Javascript hit counters.
Perhaps the counter might be using an AI not to count malicious visitors who
do not buy but just clog the server?

You are Mike Corley and I claim my MI5 pounds

 

[Jonathan N. Little]

Please, will you tell me more me about using Javascript hit counters.
Perhaps the counter might be using an AI not to count malicious visitors who
do not buy but just clog the server?

JavaScript hit counters require JavaScript enabled else they don't
count. The keyword here "JavaScript", JavaScript is client-side which
*you* have no control over. Only server-side CGI counters are worth
anything at all.

 

[aa]

Ditto!

Unfortunately, You, aa, base your reasoning on flawed assumptions.

Probably. But after Beauregard placed a screenshot of my site the counter
incremented (BTW, if I had his URL I could have his design in similar
presentation in no time).
Perhaps it is a coincedence, but perhaps your assumptions do flaw
To understand what you consider good, I clicked a link to your site. I was
testing my page for high res and had 1280x1024 at that moment.
Your home page - the quality of the graphics is impressive - I mean it. Yet
to mine mind the page is far from being user-friendly. I never do
generalies. If I critisize I do details:
1. That red-yellow fonts on the tombstone are very cute but practically
unreadable. So after several seconds of straining my eyes I just conceded.
As I said quality should match the purpose. If these words are not supposed
to be read, but are just decorations, then I withdraw this comment
2. I tried to go past Home Page but it was un-clickable with no apparent
navigation. It took me several moments to realise that one should hit that
little spinning disk. True, there is a text instruction in small prints
there to click the disk. But this type of navigation is only good for the
author. If navigation needs text instruction then it is not a navigation.
You probably are aware of the reserches showing that a surfing visitor
spends not more then 2-3 seconds to decide whether to get into a site or
surfe elsewhere.
With that sort of home page a surfer might get pissed off well before those
2-3 secs.
Unless he/she is mesmerized by the tombstone per ce which as I said is cool
3. As I said the picture of the tombsone is made professionaly. But it
puzzles. I thought you are in Undertaker's business. Or do graphic design
for funerals.
4. After all these talks about resolution I was not impressed that at
1280x1024 the whole page collapsed into the upper half of the screen leaving
the bottom half look like a black hole.
Again this is just my personal opinion, but unlike yourself I will not get
pissed off is you ignore it

 

[aa]

This means that if JavaScript is enabled, then JavaScript hit counters do
count
This sounds like a new technology which I missed. Will you please tell me
more about this?