Re: [OT] ideal file size of a jpeg or gif image

["Dave Proctor" <daproc@spambait.ozemail.com.au>]

"Michael Kurkowski" <usenet.spam@gunzel.net> wrote in message
8FE5CBE32gunzelT333@203.164.20.149">news:8FE5CBE32gunzelT333@203.164.20.149...
> daproc@spambait.ozemail.com.au (Dave Proctor) wrote in
> <BsNN5.130292$bI6.5096698@news1.giganews.com>:
>
> >> > Web designers mostly design for 800x600 (no higher).
> >> >
> >>
> >> My pages >>>> ARE <<<< designed for 800x600 as this is what I run my
> >> computer at. (sorry about the shouting everyone else)
> >
> >A site which displays photos at higher than 800x600 is NOT designed for
> >800x600 - and repeating your mantra that it is designed for 800x600 won't
> >make it true.
>
> Read what he said, Dave. Pages and a "site" are two different things.

I did read what he said - a "site" is composed of "pages" - if even one of
those pages is not suitable for 800x600, then the "site" is not. It is like
saying the XPT can do 160km/h from Sydney to Melbourne, when it can only do
it from Gerogery to Table Top (or thereabouts).

What he really means is that some, but not all,, of the pages within the
site are designed for 800x600.

> Even a Rodbot could do better.

Pathetic really.

> M.
>
> (:

That smiley won't save your bacon any time soon.

btw, I expected some sort of a reply to a post I made in the "PIE" thread in
alt.ozdebate - why have you been lurking in there anyway? I thought we were
too noisy!

Dave