site review request

[B McDonald]

http://www.galtsvalley.com

Hi all. I've recently made some major stylistic changes to my site and now
it is essentially a new design with some new CSS plumbing. I am hoping that
a few hardy souls can go check it out and tell me how it renders on their
platform/browser combos. I have tested it under W2K, WXP, and System 9 on a
Power Mac 8600:

W2K: IE5.5 and Opera 7.1 (some small issues in Opera)
WXP: IE6 and NS7.1 (in IE6 a strange jerkiness when clicking on links that
are not inline... bottom margins seem to collapse a bit...)
OS9/Mac: IE5.1 and NS6 (very good)

Reports on Mozilla, Firebird, other NS and IE versions, and later Mac
platforms most appreciated!

Brian

[Barry Pearson]

Nikolaos Giannopoulos wrote:

Barry Pearson wrote:

Nikolaos Giannopoulos wrote:

I am aware of what you talk about below. What I said applies. The
reason is that you are talking about a process for automating batch
(non-interactive) actions for lots of files. My problem is highly
interactive processing of relatively few files.

Really. I strongly doubt not.

[snip]

I simply stated a fact. I see no point in continuing this discussion. I am in
the solution business, not the debating business. While I recognise that you
know a lot about your subject matter, I can't see that this discussion will
contribute towards a solution for me.

For some reason, you are pushing your proposal at me without attempting to
identify whether it actually matches my requirements. Then when I say it
doesn't, you dispute my response, rather than take the trouble to see why
there is a difference between your view and mine.

I wonder if you have an agenda that I am unaware of? Do you have a reason for
convincing me (and perhaps others) that your proposal is "the way to go"? I
certainly appear to have inadvertently triggered an emotional response in you!

Perhaps we will be able to discuss other topics on a better footing. But I see
no future in this discussion. Until the next topic, then!

Thanks for your effort.

--
Barry Pearson
http://www.Barry.Pearson.name/photography/
http://www.BirdsAndAnimals.info/
http://www.ChildSupportAnalysis.co.uk/

[Nikolaos Giannopoulos]

Barry Pearson wrote:

Nikolaos Giannopoulos wrote:

I simply stated a fact. I see no point in continuing this discussion.
Likewise.

I am in
the solution business, not the debating business. While I recognise that you
know a lot about your subject matter, I can't see that this discussion will
contribute towards a solution for me.
No problem.

For some reason, you are pushing your proposal at me without attempting to
identify whether it actually matches my requirements. Then when I say it
doesn't, you dispute my response, rather than take the trouble to see why
there is a difference between your view and mine.
No. You were presented with an alternative solution - being in the
"solutions business" I imagine you can appreciate this - that IMO
mitigates "extra effort in downsizing images" BUT keep making erroneous
claims about the suitability of the solution whilest clearly
demonstrating you know very little about it, have zero experience with
it, yet claim to know about it (after the fact).

I wonder if you have an agenda that I am unaware of? Do you have a reason for
convincing me (and perhaps others) that your proposal is "the way to go"?
None that "I" know about ;-)

I certainly appear to have inadvertently triggered an emotional response in you!
Well, when you keep making false claims it does get aggravating - even
if the solution is not palatable for you it may be for others. Letting
false claims slide just doesn't seem fair to others reading this thread
down the road IMO.

Perhaps we will be able to discuss other topics on a better footing. But I see
no future in this discussion. Until the next topic, then!
Sure. Why not.

Thanks for your effort.

Your welcome and likewise.

--Nikolaos

[Jonathan Snook]

Nothing like beating a dead horse but...

My understanding of what Barry did was going between the unsharp mask and
the compression screens repeatedly to achieve the final result. Now
certainly my experience with ImageReady is limited but I always understood
the droplets to be a batch process in that it did step 1, then 2, then 3
without the ability to go back a step.

Jonathan
--
http://www.snook.ca/