<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type">
<title></title>
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
Arie Hol wrote:
<blockquote cite="mid459EE2CC.6075.5494C8@localhost" type="cite">
<pre wrap="">On 5 Jan 2007 at 9:12, Chris Smart wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Dear pluggers,
I am a clugger, but wanted to post to the plug list about a new website
that I've launched, <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://makethemove.net">http://makethemove.net</a> (coding by MattV in Albany).
It is a website designed to promote Linux and open source software as
viable alternatives to Windows and other computer systems.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!---->
Nice work, easy on the eye and with a good lay-out.
My aging CRT had bit of a wrestle with the recommended resolution of
1024x768.
Hint : not every body in the world has the most modern whiz bang display
units.
</pre>
</blockquote>
Not to be argumentative Arie, but I wholeheartedly disagree with
keeping website resolutions down to include a broader audience. For
those people who wish to run old CRT screens, fine. But expect the
various headaches that go with them and expect to find some things hard
to view.<br>
<br>
I also wasn't going to bite until I read units capable of greater than
1024x768 described as "the most modern whiz bang display units"!
That's not really accurate...<br>
<br>
My current laptop which I've had for over a year runs every day at
1680x1050 (wide-screen) and my previous laptop did similar (1400x1050
non-wide-screen). I purchased them in 2005 and 2002 respectively. Now
these are LAPTOPS running at their limit, but that's what I wanted AS A
MINIMUM spec. I'd expect MORE from a desktop display. Prior to
switching to laptops for day to day use, I was running desktop CRTs
(17") and from 1997 onwards I was running at 1280x1024 whenever
possible. It has been more than 10 years since I used 1024x768 or
800x600 on a regular basis on my own PCs and I have been encouraging my
clients to own hardware able to do 1024x768 (minimum) since about 2002.<br>
<br>
Now I say all of this simply because I wouldn't want anyone developing
a website to think that expecting it to require 1024x768 as a minimum
is a bad thing - in fact, it's about time.<br>
<br>
If things don't look quite right for those with old CRTs... don't
worry. They'll be used to it soon enough...<br>
<br>
<div class="moz-signature">-- <br>
<title>Jonathan Young of PC-PHIX</title>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; ">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Language" content="en-us">
<meta name="Signature" content="Jonathan Young">
<meta name="Copyright" content="Copyright 1997 to 2004 PC-PHIX">
<font face="Verdana" size="2">
Jonathan Young<br>
Director of PC-PHIX<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:jonathan@pcphix.com">jonathan@pcphix.com</a><br>
<br>
Phone: 0410 455 674<br>
Web: <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.pcphix.com/">http://www.pcphix.com/</a><br>
<br>
</font> </div>
</body>
</html>