[thelist] subject switch: websitesthatsuck.com [wasSwish...> Critiques]

Bill Haenel bill at webmarketingworx.com
Sun Jul 15 00:07:09 CDT 2001


Okay guys, I'm sorry I brought this guy and his stinkin' WPTS site up in the
first place. I guess I was saying that I have committed many of the "evils"
that he warns against, but I think my work is still reasonably OKAY. He has
an opinion, and he is entitled to it, and he might be wrong. (is)

Anyway, far from the original topic now, so maybe hard to totally comprehend
this note if you missed the beginning of the discussion. My point was (at
some point), just because someone asks for advice doesn't mean they want it,
and just because you have advice doesn't mean you should give it, and there
are plenty of people out there offering advice to people who don't want it.
But we'll all get over it.

<HHGTTG tip>
don't panic
</HHGTTG tip>

<tip>
If you're on a PC and you haven't already done this, get an old Mac such as
the Performa series. They make great test machines: They're slow, easy to
set up, and they're cheap ($50-$100!). So you get a pretty good idea of
worst case scenario browsing - like low bit-rate streaming audio is even
next to impossible on one of these things.
</tip>

BH


> -----Original Message-----
> From: thelist-admin at lists.evolt.org
> [mailto:thelist-admin at lists.evolt.org]On Behalf Of Brad Miller
> Sent: Sunday, July 15, 2001 12:32 AM
> To: thelist at lists.evolt.org
> Subject: RE: [thelist] subject switch: websitesthatsuck.com
> [wasSwish...> Critiques]
>
>
> I have to jump in on this one. I will admit this is the first time I have
> seen this site. But OMG who does this guy think he is?
> He mentions "3-D logos look tacky, don't they?"
> Ok well, I have made some really kick ass 3d-logo's for the web.
> I have seen
> many great looking 3d-logos and anyone that can say this, is obviously an
> idiot.
>
> This quote is killing me:
> "Designers believe that when they reduce the value of the parameters the
> angels come down from heaven and also reduce the physical size of
> the image.
> It doesn't work that way because the image is still going to be 121Kb. If
> you take the original image and simply reduce it to the size you want, you
> can cut the file size down to approximately 18Kb. Guess what?
> Your page will
> load faster."
> Ok so he is telling us that people actually say OK I need this
> image that is
> 926x900 to 150 wide. So I will figure out what the image height will be by
> using my great mathematical skills. When in fact I could have
> just saved my
> image that width and had it automatically calculated for me. Holy Sheep
> Shit, what a concept!
> Sorry for the sarcasm but, have you guys looked through this site?
> LMAO at TS
>
> I owe a tip for this rant but I can't think of anything right now, please
> allow me an IOU.
>
> Thanks,
> Brad Miller
> 702-438-7660
> www.rapidfx.com
> www.beldamar.com
> www.dejapc.com
>
>
> ---------------------------------------
> For unsubscribe and other options, including
> the Tip Harvester and archive of TheList go to:
> http://lists.evolt.org Workers of the Web, evolt !
>





More information about the thelist mailing list