Liquid Layouts not always appropriate ?

[Andy Dingley]

No, you could have an army of assistants that will roam the world and
for anyone that accesses the site without the prescribed dimensioned
viewport on their device they would get the "V8-slap-in-the-head" and a
laptop with the "correctly" dimensioned screen. Hmmm, how about to make
things easier the laptops will only have IE on them!

I did _literally_ work on that site. It was the "owner's club" site
for T*sh*b* laptops, circa 2000. We "knew" what the screen size was,
because we knew the product line. We "knew" the browser (IE4) because
we knew what shipped on the default install.

It was the worst site I've ever worked on, built by the most clueless
web design company I've ever worked for. The finished site was a
disaster. Accordingly no-one used it. Even shipping out hardware pre-
wired to go straight to the site, it didn't generate traffic. Even
giving away freebie discounts to popular web retailers, it didn't
generate traffic. It couldn't have been more of a turkey if you'd
roasted it and shoved cranberries up it.

It also had the most inappropriate use of Flash for core navigation
that I've ever seen too.

 

[Travis Newbury]

Would you favour a banner that says "This site best viewed with
Netscape 4" and refuses to serve content otherwise? That's really not
too far from fixed-pixel design.

Actually I think it is quite a distance from the same thing, but you
can say I am wrong all day long, but the fact is in the real world
fixed width has a home on the internet. No matter if you like it or
not.

 

[Travis Newbury]

True. And we definitely disagree. I say this however, you can *choose*
to design with a fixed canvas point of reference but in no way will your
choice ever impose that paradigm to web as it exists.

Fixed width websites are a part of the internet and will continue to
be a part of the internet. No matter what is said in this group.

 

[Travis Newbury]

By your rules though, this is a better site than a fluid design site -
because it meets the author's original artistic concept, which was to
make everything a particular number of pixels wide, come what may.

Please find a quote where I say that Fixed width is better. I have
repeatedly stated that the decision of using fixed width or flexible
was based on what is best for the particular website. I have NEVER
stated that one is better than the other. I have stated that I prefer
fixed width when I browse.

 

[dorayme]

I personally believe that a
home/opening site page should be fluid, really fluid

How personal? Do you have any beliefs that are not particularly
personal? Really fluid? Surely it is not ok for home pages to
leak onto the carpet?

 

[Jonathan N. Little]

It was the worst site I've ever worked on, built by the most clueless
web design company I've ever worked for. The finished site was a
disaster. Accordingly no-one used it. Even shipping out hardware pre-
wired to go straight to the site, it didn't generate traffic. Even
giving away freebie discounts to popular web retailers, it didn't
generate traffic. It couldn't have been more of a turkey if you'd
roasted it and shoved cranberries up it.

LOL! Precious! I'm going to giggle over that one all day.

 

[dorayme]

<[email protected]

,

By your rules though, this is a better site than a fluid design site -
because it meets the author's original artistic concept, which was to
make everything a particular number of pixels wide, come what may.

I don't think this quite fair. You see, Travis does not have
rules - unless you count the rule that anything goes. Nothing is
a simple matter except the bottom line: short-term buckaroos from
'them' to 'me'.

 

[dorayme]

Is that an African Travis or an English Travis?

Well, it sure ain't an African one. They know better than to fly
with whole coconuts.

 

[Jonathan N. Little]

Fixed width websites are a part of the internet and will continue to
be a part of the internet. No matter what is said in this group.

You snipped my argument, sure they will persist because there will
always be those who will continue to ignore what is before them...

 

[Neredbojias]

Well bust mah britches and call me cheeky, on Thu, 24 Jan 2008 18:25:14 GMT
dorayme scribed:

How personal? Do you have any beliefs that are not particularly
personal?

I believe in space, matter, and the 4 secondary forces. That's not too
personal.

Really fluid? Surely it is not ok for home pages to
leak onto the carpet?

For an example, columns should stack in a multi-column layout when page
width shrinks even if someone diddles around with them for such trivial
reasons as height-matching.

 

[Andy Dingley]

LOL! Precious! I'm going to giggle over that one all day.

Try searching the archives for its "Whack-A-Mole" Flash navigation too.

 

[Jonathan N. Little]

Try searching the archives for its "Whack-A-Mole" Flash navigation too.

Awww they changed it! sit4less.com use to have this shooting gallery
navigation system. Chairs would whiz by either right or left and you had
to snag one with your mouse for it to pop open with a larger image and
details! After as while if you did not get to frustrated you would come
to realize that the whizzing will slow if you move your mouse toward the
center of the page.

 

[Travis Newbury]

You snipped my argument, sure they will persist because there will
always be those who will continue to ignore what is before them...

You think they will be around forever because some developers are
inept. I think they will be around for ever because some people like
them.

 

[Travis Newbury]

I don't think this quite fair. You see, Travis does not have
rules - unless you count the rule that anything goes. Nothing is
a simple matter except the bottom line: short-term buckaroos from
'them' to 'me'.

I absolutely believe that anything goes on the web. I believe there
should be no rules, only guidelines.

I, as a web developer should be free to create my site anyway I like
with no regard to popular style, accessibility, or usability. And my
site will reap the rewards of what I have sown. But, if my shitty
designed, unusable website brings me more clients, visitors, and
business, then, then I should not be chastised for it. A perfect
example is my son's site. We went all Flash and visitors, customers,
and profits went up. So HOW in the world can someone say that what we
did was wrong?

And "buckaroos" are all that matter in business.

 

[Jonathan N. Little]

You think they will be around forever because some developers are
inept. I think they will be around for ever because some people like
them.

Well you said the word "inept", after reviewing last years crop on

http://www.webpagesthatsuck.com/

and noting the lack of progress and some of the big names
involved...yeah "inept" fits.

 

[Jonathan N. Little]

http://www.webpagesthatsuck.com/

Also note the percentage of Flash sites that get the award! Not hat you
need to use Flash to make bad sites, it just that Flash is so "good" at
making bad sites!

 

[dorayme]

<[email protected]

,

I absolutely believe that anything goes on the web. I believe there
should be no rules, only guidelines.

When you want to bend normally good rules or go against
intelligent standards, you call them guidelines. There is no need
for this doublespeak. We all know what a rebel you are!

And "buckaroos" are all that matter in business.

Some deals can leave a sour taste in the mouth.

 

[Travis Newbury]

http://www.webpagesthatsuck.com/

Look it's not that I don't think things you say are good for the web.
It's just that I don't believe one should be told they HAVE to do it
that way. If I want to make a inflexible unusable website, then I
don't need someone telling me I am wrong. ESPECIALLY if this
"horrible" website increased activity and profits.

You will never convince me that it is better to have a website that
follows all the rules, but makes less money is better than one that
breaks all the rules and makes money.

 

[Travis Newbury]

Also note the percentage of Flash sites that get the award!

So what? Did anyone ask these horrible website how they are doing?
Has anyone asked them if their visitors like the websites? Probably
not. What you have is some "usability" expert visiting sites and
telling us what THEY think is wrong with no regard to how profitable
that site is to the owner.

Sorry, examples from webpagesthatsuck are meaningless information
unless you speak to the owners of the sites and see if they are
profitable or not, and how their typical customers feel about the
site.

As anecdotal data I stand by my son's site. As soon as we went all
flash, traffic and profits both improved. Typical? Who knows, but
based on the work I get I would say yes. It is typical. At least in
the entertainment industry.

So keep telling me how much our sites sucks as my customers and I cry
about it all the way to the bank. And yes. In business it IS all
about money.

 

[Travis Newbury]

We all know what a rebel you are!

Yea,that's me... Mr. Rebel... (0Lo)