Re: Resolution

> I know I'll get flamed for this, but anyone who refuses to
accommodate a 640
> x 480 user is not doing their job.

I should hope no one would flame for that - it's true

As far as the option goes I wouldn't be too keen on the idea not
because they might not know what resolution is, but because thats just
another thing you are making them think about.  I wouldn't ever
consider using frames, not even if I had an option available for a
"frames/no frames" version... why make the people that do not like
them have to change something just cause thats how you want to do it -
cause you don't make pages for yourself (cept home pages)you make it
for them.. the ones who visit it.  Now to put this letter back on
topic - same the same goes for resolution.  Why make them think about
what resolution they want, when you can just do it simply in the first
place?  If you want your company to stand out, then fix the little
things that buzz in the back of their head. 




---Jake Moore <moore(at)rebeltrail.com> wrote:
>
> I have seen this issue come up many times in this group and I've
remained
> silent, but I think I should finally voice my opinion.
> 
> I have been designing web pages for years now and I usually follow one
> simple rule: "always design to the lowest common denominator". I do
not give
> the average user a lot of credit when it comes to computing
expertise - I
> would bet most average net users would have no idea what
"resolution" is -
> so why confuse them with a welcoming web page that says "please
choose your
> computer's screen resolution". I tried that once and got hordes of
e-mail
> asking me what the user's screen resolution is - like I said - I
don't give
> the average user a lot of credit.
> 
> Designing to a 640 x 480 resolution is a pain, I agree, but us web
designers
> are plagued with incompatibilities in the system, be it browser type,
> browser version, operating system, etc. The challenge is how to get
around
> these issues no matter what type of user visits the web site. It's a
tough
> job, but it is what separates a good web designer from one that is
mediocre.
> I don't know what the stats are for users using 640x480, and I don't
care
> what the exact number is... all I know is that there are a significant
> number of them. Until the day comes when the 640 x 480 resolution
has become
> completely obsolete - I will still cater to these users. Why?
Because it is
> our job to satisfy the needs of our clients - including the ability to
> attract and please the maximum number of users to their web site.
When you
> look at it this way - how can you not design to the "lowest common
> denominator".
> 
> I know I'll get flamed for this, but anyone who refuses to
accommodate a 640
> x 480 user is not doing their job.
> 
> PS: Isn't there are JavaScript applet that detects the resolution
and sends
> the user to the appropriate page? Why not use that?
> 
> 
> ---
> Jake Moore
> Internet Coordinator
> Rebel Trail Web Design
> 1-888-99-REBEL (997-3235)
> http://www.rebeltrail.com
> 
> 
 
 

==
If you go flying back through time, and you see somebody else flying forward into the future, it's probably best to avoid eye contact.

_________________________________________________________
DO YOU YAHOO!?
Get your free (at)yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com

HWG: hwg-graphics mailing list archives, maintained by Webmasters @ IWA