All Forum Comments
Comment by George Lazarette posted on Pentax Hoya merger off at 16/05/2007 - 15:14
Quote:
George, do you really think this is the reason for the annoying lack of consistency we get sometimes across across browsers?
Every web designer I've worked with bends over backwards to get as much cross-browser consistency as possible (and their ego is fed much better by achieving browser agnosticism), but it really isn't as simple as "all you need to do is use standard HTML".
The days of static pages are long gone, and with the degree of interactivity required these days it really is not a trivial exercise.
You must remember that someone, somewhere, has to pay to get these websites developed. In an ideal world the tools would make it all easy, but they don't. And in the absence of indefinite budgets and timescales, perfection is not available.
Frankly, I don't want bells and whistles and irritating music and annoying animations. I just want simple sites that get straight to the point. I actually DO want static pages, pages that don't get in the way and slow you down. I don't want "interactivity" beyond what is essential to get the job done.George Lazarette wrote:
And it's an even bigger shame that some poor saps employ web-designers who put their own egos above the accessibility of the sites they get paid to design.
With any luck the moderators will move these off topic posts off to somewhere less distracting, but I can't let this pass.And it's an even bigger shame that some poor saps employ web-designers who put their own egos above the accessibility of the sites they get paid to design.
George, do you really think this is the reason for the annoying lack of consistency we get sometimes across across browsers?
Every web designer I've worked with bends over backwards to get as much cross-browser consistency as possible (and their ego is fed much better by achieving browser agnosticism), but it really isn't as simple as "all you need to do is use standard HTML".
The days of static pages are long gone, and with the degree of interactivity required these days it really is not a trivial exercise.
You must remember that someone, somewhere, has to pay to get these websites developed. In an ideal world the tools would make it all easy, but they don't. And in the absence of indefinite budgets and timescales, perfection is not available.
If I were commissioning a website, putting "Skip Intro" on it would result in instant dismissal.
Obviously there are some splendid web designers out there, but there are also all too many who think that showing off is a good way to get the message across.
It's the meaningless frippery and unnecessary complexity that gets my goat.
G
Comment by George Lazarette posted on Pentax Photo Gallery at 13/04/2007 - 00:18
Quote:
And it's an even bigger shame that some poor saps employ web-designers who put their own egos above the accessibility of the sites they get paid to design.George Lazarette wrote:
It matters for me because I find that Opera's integrated email system is streets ahead of any other. I do have IE available for when I really have to have it, but it's a pain to have to switch from one to another when websites SHOULD be written in standard HTML that all browsers can use.
Agreed. It was just the view below that struck me as a bit extreme.It matters for me because I find that Opera's integrated email system is streets ahead of any other. I do have IE available for when I really have to have it, but it's a pain to have to switch from one to another when websites SHOULD be written in standard HTML that all browsers can use.
Quote:
I have no intention of switching browsers just to view a web site. If it doesn't work then tough, I don't get to see it, and I certainly don't intend to use IE to view it.
Shame to miss something good for the sake of occasionally having to use a different browser.I have no intention of switching browsers just to view a web site. If it doesn't work then tough, I don't get to see it, and I certainly don't intend to use IE to view it.
G
Comment by George Lazarette posted on Pentax Photo Gallery at 11/04/2007 - 14:22
Quote:
This strikes me as another one of those topics that would provoke outrage were it about camera equipment.
What does it matter which browser you use? What is the religious attachment to any particular one?
I use Firefox and IE, depending on my requirements. If a really cool website that I really liked only worked with Opera, I'd download it and install it, just like if there was a feature of one package that I really needed that wasn't in my usual one, I'd get it if I could afford it.
It's not even like you have to pay for either. Why not just have both, and use either according to expediency?
Depriving yourself of something that might be really good, just because it doesn't work with one thing you'd like to use more, seems a bit daft if it costs nothing.
A bit like not buying the K10D because it doesn't work properly with M-series lenses.
PS Please don't bother working your way through all the analogies and comparisons here. I know they're all rather inexact. Trust me, your life is too short, just as mine is to argue this more rigorously.
It matters for me because I find that Opera's integrated email system is streets ahead of any other. I do have IE available for when I really have to have it, but it's a pain to have to switch from one to another when websites SHOULD be written in standard HTML that all browsers can use.This strikes me as another one of those topics that would provoke outrage were it about camera equipment.
What does it matter which browser you use? What is the religious attachment to any particular one?
I use Firefox and IE, depending on my requirements. If a really cool website that I really liked only worked with Opera, I'd download it and install it, just like if there was a feature of one package that I really needed that wasn't in my usual one, I'd get it if I could afford it.
It's not even like you have to pay for either. Why not just have both, and use either according to expediency?
Depriving yourself of something that might be really good, just because it doesn't work with one thing you'd like to use more, seems a bit daft if it costs nothing.
A bit like not buying the K10D because it doesn't work properly with M-series lenses.
PS Please don't bother working your way through all the analogies and comparisons here. I know they're all rather inexact. Trust me, your life is too short, just as mine is to argue this more rigorously.
G
Comment by George Lazarette posted on Pentax Photo Gallery at 11/04/2007 - 11:34
Quote:
It seems that Opera is written in a way that means it ignores the instruction to keep the tables to the left.
Opera is not perfect, but often, when it doesn't work, it is because it is obeying the rules, whilst IE is not, and sadly, people tend to write for IE. Some other browsers dekiberately break rules in order to be compatible with IE.It seems that Opera is written in a way that means it ignores the instruction to keep the tables to the left.
It would be interesting to see what is the truth in this case.
G
Comment by George Lazarette posted on Pentax Photo Gallery at 10/04/2007 - 22:27
Quote:
George - given that Adobe Flash and JavaScript are, by now, both well-established Web technology, I don't think that's a good example of "incompetent coders (who) can't be bothered to write correct html."
Ray.
I was referring to JR's site. The Pentax gallery site certainly seems to work OK on my pc.George - given that Adobe Flash and JavaScript are, by now, both well-established Web technology, I don't think that's a good example of "incompetent coders (who) can't be bothered to write correct html."
Ray.
G
Comment by George Lazarette posted on Pentax Photo Gallery at 10/04/2007 - 19:01
Quote:
I'm cureently looking into the Opera issues for my own site, but if you have such problems with it why not try Firefox 2?
For a number of reasons, not least the superb integrated email system, Opera-lovers don't want to switch just because some incompetent coders can't be bothered to write correct html.I'm cureently looking into the Opera issues for my own site, but if you have such problems with it why not try Firefox 2?
I'm not referring to you, John; I mean the people who wrote Dreamweaver to fit in with Microsoft's proprietary tags and poor implementation of html, rather than with standard html.
Fortunately, such problems are relatively rare.
G
Comment by George Lazarette posted on Pentax Photo Gallery at 10/04/2007 - 14:14
Quote:
Sorry gentlemen, I am in my 67th year So as an occassional poster I would like to claim the record as being the eldest. My great difficulty is not my eyes but keeping a steady hand Later on this evening I shall be going to Mars
Howard
We haven't heard from Peter Elgar yet!Quote:
Mac,
Quote:
Mr. Pearson? Are you and I the senior members of a UK-based forum?
I guess we are - unless there is someone else lurking in the weeds - by the way it's Mike.
Mac,
Quote:
Mr. Pearson? Are you and I the senior members of a UK-based forum?
I guess we are - unless there is someone else lurking in the weeds - by the way it's Mike.
Sorry gentlemen, I am in my 67th year So as an occassional poster I would like to claim the record as being the eldest. My great difficulty is not my eyes but keeping a steady hand Later on this evening I shall be going to Mars
Howard
But let's say mature, rather than old. "Mature photographers" are those who bought a Spotmatic when they were current.
G
Comment by George Lazarette posted on I'm old now.. at 10/04/2007 - 22:39
Golly, Mac, you're older than I am!
But not much.
G
But not much.
G
Comment by George Lazarette posted on I'm old now.. at 09/04/2007 - 22:32
Excellent.
G
G
Comment by George Lazarette posted on Bubbles at 09/04/2007 - 22:07
However, now that the Imaging (camera) Division is making money again, if Hoya do buy Pentax, they are unlikely to close it down. Either they will keep it and develop it, or they will sell it. And no guesses as to who the likely buyer would be.
G