RE: Commercial and Not-For-Profit web site critique request...

by "Webmaster" <webmaster(at)>

 Date:  Mon, 3 Aug 1998 11:05:12 -0400
 To:  "Bonnie Granat" <bgranat(at)>
 Cc:  <hwg-critique(at)>
 In-Reply-To:  neu
  todo: View Thread, Original

Thank you for your comments on the site.

However, I would recommend setting your monitor/laptop to a higher screen
resolution, if possible (judging by some of the other comments you left on
the list, are you even sure of what resolution you are running at? Do you
have a portrait-type monitor that you are flipping to view the pages with?):

This was left to Virginia Blalock:


I'm viewing your site in 480 x 680.
Nice job. I'd like to see narrower columns of text
next to the pictures. The two banners at the top I
definitely would move, if possible."

and this was left to Jim Plunkett:

"Really enjoyed the top pic! Even on my 480 x 640,
it is beautiful and quite clear."

Having been in the IT field for over 15 years, the correct resolution you
are viewing in is most likely 640x480. Now, some statistics on resolution

Taken from a Georgia Tech Survey:

"... One similarity with previous surveys, however, is that a large
percentage of respondents don't know what their resolution is set to (40%).
For the rest, the most common setting is 800x600 (19%) followed by 1024x768
(14%). Although respondents from Europe are more likely to know their
resolution, the ranking is the same. Experts, as we might expect, are more
likely to know their resolution: 27% report having 800x600 and 25% have
1025x768." - Note: the last resolution is a typing error from
itor_Resolution.html), it should read "1024x768".

As a side note: Yours was the first complaint to call attention to a monitor
resolution issue (I will go this far and place a disclaimer on both sites
that indicates these are best viewed at 800x600 resolution). Incidentally, I
was at a client's on Friday, and he was viewing my WebWham site at 640x480.
The graphics and table of services looked a little tight on the page, but he
was not required to scroll horizontally, just vertically... To which
scrolling method are you referring? Horizontal or vertical scrolling?
Vertical is to be expected at any resolution.

And while these stats ( are based on
a web site in Austria, and yes, they do show a 33% usage of 640x480
resolution, this can be attributed to the tendency to hold on to older
technology due to the high cost of import on consumer electronics in this
part of the world.

I will take into consideration the relatively low number of sites that visit
with 640x480 resolution, and will endeavour to gather stats that prove this
out. I am also sorry that you did not stay and view the site (despite the
need to scroll), as there is a lot of information here (I put in about 300
hours a month on the Williamsburgh site). My WebTrends reports have shown a
steady incline in visitor "viewing sessions" and the length of stay on the
site (now averaging 6 minutes - up from 3 minutes just 2 months ago)!


Gil Tennant
Webmaster at WebWham

Designing fine sites like the Williamsburgh Community Web Site -

-----Original Message-----
From: Bonnie Granat [mailto:bgranat(at)]
Sent: Monday, August 03, 1998 8:07 AM
To: webmaster(at)
Cc: hwg-critique(at)
Subject: Re: Commercial and Not-For-Profit web site critique request...

The need to scroll to the right made me leave
immediately. (640 x 480).

webmaster wrote:
> They've been up for a while, and I've had great comments from visitors to
> the sites, just wanted another professional's opinion...
>  Our NEW "little company" site - load time
is slow
> here due to the large number of GIF images on the left (nav buttons). The
> pages are faster once you get past the first page as the only thing to
> change is the banner graphic, the GIF nav button for the page itself, and
> the content on the page. I need to drastically reduce the load time on
> Prod/Serv - now, how to do without losing clarity.
>    This is a community web site we
maintain. I
> may change the background (getting tired of it, and it's been up since
> '97). The community loves this one and it's pretty fast and browser
> for the most part..
> Let me know what you think needs improvement (other than what's already
> mentioned above).
> TIA.
> Gil Tennant
> Webmaster at WebWham
> Creating fine web sites like the Williamsburg Community Web Site:

Bonnie Granat
Technical Writing, Editing, & Consulting

HTML: hwg-critique mailing list archives, maintained by Webmaster @ IWA