sir_brizz wrote: > Actually, even on a site I run that is targeted at young mothers, > still a massive portion of the reported browsers by Google Analytics > are Firefox (and by massive I mean greater than 20%). Ignoring Firefox > is even more stupid than ignoring IE6, since Firefox pretty closely > follows web standards and your site being utterly broken in Firefox is > probably indicative of your disregard for the standards. > > On Jul 16, 11:02 am, Kirby <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Seriously, I'm NOT complaining. I made a simple suggestion. What >> brought on the complaining was the essentially "go f*ck yerself" reply >> that I got back. >> >> My website has not been updated in AGES. It's not designed for >> firefox because, from a purely business aspect, I really don't care >> about support for FF. I spend my time doing other people's sites. >> Most of them are not designed for firefox because outside the "geek >> zone", no one uses it. That whole "nearly half" number being floated >> around falls to pieces when you separate the wheat from the chaff: >> take that same poll, exclusing hackers, hobbiests, enthusiasts and >> linux zealots, and FF hardly makes a blip on the radar screen. Take >> that same poll and include only Corporate and Industrial users, and >> you find that Corporate America is decidedly IE and will be for a long >> time. And that's where I work. Corporate Intranets. That means IE. >> >> And, yeah, I do agree that changing boats after leaving the shore is >> risky. I'm OK with that. I'm just asking "Is it ok with you that >> 99% of the people who look at your product are going to think >> 'ROACH'?" If so, then Bob's yer uncle, and have a good time. But one >> way or another, ROACH is exactly what 99 out of 100 people are going >> think the instant they see your product. If you're OK with that, then >> more power to ya. >> >> And, yes. I am an information architech. (uhhhh. programmer+) >> >> I'd wager that I've written more code and implemented more systems >> than everyone else in this thread combined. And I am NOT kidding. >> >> Oh,... and have a nice day. ;-) >> >> On Jul 1, 3:26 pm, Kara Rawson <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> >>> @ Mr. kirby >>> >>> you are an idiot. >>> >>> stop complain and being rude to people who volunteer there time. >>> >>> you should spend more time debugging your crappy looking website, >>> >>> www.wallaceinfo.com >>> >>> which doesn't work in FF. >>> >>> on a side note im a professional graphic designer / artist and engineer. >>> >>> i love the FB logo, i think its mad cute. >>> >>> @kirby, i betcha didn't know that it also does more damage to your brand >>> by changing it out after it has beem saturated in the market. secondly >>> why does it matter for something that doesn't get sold. You should >>> download the source and rebrand it with some fancy graphics you think >>> are kewl, and sell it. See how that works out for yea. prolly not well, >>> as no one cares what the logo looks like. to me and prolly 99.9 of other >>> engineers its merely a button to push when you wanna debug a website. >>> >>> i actually take a little offense to you calling yoruself a information >>> systems archtect. do you even know what that is or what they do? >>> >>> kara >>> > > > > Thank you that wwas what i was trying to get at, you put it more elequent than i
k --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Firebug" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/firebug?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
