The Lounge is rated PG. If you're about to post something you wouldn't want your
kid sister to read then don't post it. No flame wars, no abusive conduct, no programming
questions and please don't post ads.
> If they expect everything to look snappy in IE7 too, then you're screwed.
That's where we were for this release, and what I'm trying to avoid in the future.
For anyone that still needs to estimate what it would take a competant designer with a lot of CSS experience to make a site that looks good in Chrome/FF look pixel perfect in IE7 a good estimate is +100-150%. And, yes I mean multiply your IE7 estimate by 2 or 2.5 And, no I'm not the one that did it (I just did the web application).
My strategy is to support the latest 4 major browsers, which usually are IE, Firefox, Chrome and Safari, then support the 3 most important mobile web browsers, Safari on IOS, Android Browser, Windows Phone IE. For backward compatibility a focus on functionality over design, it should work but it may not look exactly the same and usually i test on the last 4 major versions of a browser, when available.
We are quite similar. We will support whichever browser/version we choose but will get to N% of observed users. This applies for desktop and mobile seperately (although percentages change and measurement is by country). For internal-use corporate customers we name the versions that make up the N% of browsers/devices and if you want something not on the list you pay to get it added. Otherwise we end up spending lots of effort supporting X.Y.Z for 0.008% of user base. Using percentage rather than direct naming means we guarantee to keep adapting to market trends.
LOL. Entertaining. A perfect example of how many people debate politics.
If your actions inspire others to dream more, learn more, do more and become more, you are a leader.-John Q. Adams You must accept one of two basic premises: Either we are alone in the universe, or we are not alone in the universe. And either way, the implications are staggering.-Wernher von Braun Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former.-Albert Einstein
I feel as if the guy has been singled out, not because he was doping but because he was too successful. Unless the USADA is full of idiots they already know you aren't going to win the Tour without some sort of doping - and that is what bothers me a bit.
He wasn't targetted because he was doping but because he was too damn good at it and he won too many times. Had we won 3 Tours they'd of ignored him entirely. The point? Don't pretend to be against doping when in fact you're just against too much of it. The hypocrisy there bothers me.
I experience a form of this every day on the way to work. I can go 5mph over the speed limit and the cops don't care. However, if you make it obvious (10mph) over then they'll nail you. In both cases the law is being broken - so it isn't really the law that matters - but rather, who is being obnoxious about it.
Maybe the rule should be changed from No Doping to No Being Obnoxious.