Re: Magnifying JPEGs viewed in Safari?

In article <slrng24pqr.g1r.g.kreme@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>,
 Lewis <g.kreme@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:

> >> Back in 1995 worrying about dialup was sensible as the vast majority
of 
> >> your visitors were using dialup. Now-a-days, nearly none are.
> 
> > Depending on who "your" visitors actually are. About 1/6 of US users
are 
> > still at 56k or less. (Silly me. I think there's a substantial 
> > difference between 17% and "nearly none."
> 
> Based on my webserver logs (across a varied collection of sites, most
> not written by me but hosted by me) it is well under 5%.
> 
> The 16-17% that have dialup are not cruising around the web.  They are
> getting their email and going to a small handful of sites that they
> know, and that is all they are doing. Even the very large sites like
Amazon
> and Ebay are obviously not catering to the dialup user as those site
have
> more and more images.
> 
> > Would you give me $100 every time I rolled a one on a die if I gave
> > you $10 every time I rolled 2-6?
> 
> That does that have to do with anything? Are you saying a dialup user is
> just as likely to make a purchase online as a broadband user?  Because
> if so, that is demonstrably false.

I wasn't actually talking about purchasing. I was talking about 
"visitors" about which you claimed "nearly none" are using dial-up 
connections. If you're designing a site that's hostile to dial-up users, 
you're obviously going to skew the numbers for *that* site lower. That's 
self-fulfilling.

But, since you bring up commerce, do you have evidence to share 
sup****ting the idea that dial-up users are substantially less likely to 
buy online? Evidence that doesn't involve a web site that's hostile to 
slower connections?


> > If you wouldn't, you must also think there's a difference.) Among 
> > industrialized nations, we're near the middle of the pack. Also, it's 
> > not only dial-up that's an issue. Last month I switched from cable to 
> > DSL and took a 75% speed hit in the process. There are now pages I
visit 
> > that take so long to load that Safari 3 (on 10.4) times out.
> 
> If they are timing out while you are still receiving data that is a
> whole different problem.

Absolutely true. It's a bug. Does that really matter? The practical 
result is that those pages are not getting my eyeballs (or at least not 
as frequently) until and unless that bug is fixed or obviated by my DSL 
provider ramping up the speed in my area. So as I said, it's not *just* 
an issue of dial-up users. Page size can be an issue for broadband 
users, too.

G

-- 
"Harry?" Ron's voice was a mere whisper. "Do you smell something ...
burning?"
   - Harry Potter and the Odor of the Phoenix