New Website part Du (need help from the PC folks)

[Morgan J Segal]

Any of you PC folks having trouble seeing the whole site? Is it cropped? Any other problems?

www.morgansegal.com

[John Jovic]

No problems. I'm on the current IE with all updates. I had a navigate around and it all seems good.
JJ

[Shane Parker]

It's looking great Morgan! However, I thought I'd point out one small issue that you may or may not care about. Anyone using IE6 with Windows XP SP2 or IE7 will have to first "click" on your site to activate the flash content. I won't bore you with the details, they can be found all over the web (one place: http://www.baekdal.com/articles/Technology/microsoft-ie-activex-update/)

Basically, you should look into a different way to add swf content. Specifically, use a javascript method or similar instead of using the deprecated <embed> tags. Here's a method I use that I've been very happy with (I code in XHTML instead of HTML, but it should work with HTML just fine):

http://blog.deconcept.com/swfobject/

It will validate both HTML and XHTML strict.

Other than that, the site is very easy to navigate and looks great!

[edit] Oh, and your HTML page is missing a <!DOCTYPE> declaration. Sorry, that's the geeky side of me speaking :~)

[Drew Phillips]

I'm on a 1280x800 screen and it looks great. Probably the most important is if it works on a 1024x768 screen.

By the way, I love the info tabs that go with some of the photos. On automobile photo #8 you forgot to mention the hard work of your assistant that helped produce the shot.

[John Thawley]

In a word: Stunning.

JT

[Morgan J Segal]

Sorry, that's the geeky side of me speaking

I guess so because I did not understand a word you said;)

I passed on the info though

[Todd Corzett]

Very well done. When it first loaded in my normal browser window (omniweb) the sides were cut-off, but one click to maximize the window and I was good to go. With Firefox it is perfect!

-Todd...

Edit: Oops, on a Mac here (sometimes I need to read the subjects more :rolleyes: )

[Keith Schoeler]

Looks good on this PC.

Only feedback would be the possibility of adding keyboard controls for the gallery, specifically arrow functionality to scroll through. Most flash galleries allow for this.

Looks nice!

[Erik Anderson]

Looks and feel great. The images seem to load a bit slow for me, but then again, it's lunchtime and we don't have a lightning fast connection here. :)

[Mike Ditz]

Hey Mo-fo

It looks good on my old school G4 Mac (I know, it's not a PC...) in Safari, but stalls on the opening page in IE.
On the bio page, you may want to change the driving classic Lotus line to rebuilding the engine in the classic Lotus:p

[Morgan J Segal]

Hey Mo-fo

but stalls on the opening page in IE.
How so? Do you mean that you have to click it twice as Shane noted?

Edit: I see what you mean


On the bio page, you may want to change the driving classic Lotus line to rebuilding the engine in the classic Lotus:p

Not rebuilding it yet. The drive yesterday was awesome! you missed out

[John Thawley]

Hey Mo-fo

It looks good on my old school G4 Mac (I know, it's not a PC...) in Safari, but stalls on the opening page in IE.



Considering IE for Mac hasn't been supported for over two years, does it really matter?

JT

[Shane Parker]

Anyone using IE on Mac should be shot :D

[Mike Ditz]

I just tried it again and it worked fine in IE...

[Mike Ditz]

Considering IE for Mac hasn't been supported for over two years, does it really matter?

JT

Because not everybody updates regularly. Sometimes it's more reliable to stick with what you know works rather than changing.

[John Thawley]

Because not everybody updates regularly. Sometimes it's more reliable to stick with what you know works rather than changing.


But, that's point. IE doesn't work on a Mac. The last version was IE5. I'm guessing most Mac users are a little more savvy than the average bear. :)

JT

[Jeff Boerio]

The only "cropping" comes into play for people whose browsers are not set to 1024x768. Scrollbars have been disabled on the page, so that's why you'll see the cropped/clipped home page.

Some very nice, creative photography!

Jeff

[Morgan J Segal]

The only "cropping" comes into play for people whose browsers are not set to 1024x768. Scrollbars have been disabled on the page, so that's why you'll see the cropped/clipped home page.

Some very nice, creative photography!

Jeff

OK, we added the scrollbar functionality. Initially, I was hoping to avoid that because I never liked when I can't see the whole page in one take, that's why we were going with the pop up design.

I think we also fixed the IE first click issue


Thanks

[Mark Delbrueck]

Really nice! It feels like the images load much much faster than before as well! One thing: I think the info tabs are really neat, but I think you should have them on every photo. A few are missing...

Mark

[Morgan J Segal]

Really nice! It feels like the images load much much faster than before as well! One thing: I think the info tabs are really neat, but I think you should have them on every photo. A few are missing...

Mark

Eventually, there will be more, but I intentionally did not put tabs on all of them (at least for the car shots) because it would be less interesting and people would be less likely to look at them IMO I also felt that by having them show up randomly would bring more attention to them.

For the portraits, I felt it was necessary to explain who each person was ( couldn't remember the name of the guy with the horse though;) )

[Jeff Boerio]

I didn't know if you understood the "why" of why the web page looked cropped/clipped sometimes. You could always add javascript to your web site to resize the browser. Although, my personal taste is that no one should mess with my browser settings. I *like* my browser the way it is thank you very much.

But then, I never liked pop-up windows either and then I did it on my personal web site once :D

- Jeff

[Morgan J Segal]

I didn't know if you understood the "why" of why the web page looked cropped/clipped sometimes. You could always add javascript to your web site to resize the browser. Although, my personal taste is that no one should mess with my browser settings. I *like* my browser the way it is thank you very much.

But then, I never liked pop-up windows either and then I did it on my personal web site once :D

- Jeff

I don't know why any of this crap works, and don't really want to know (I'm just not that much into computers), I just push buttons ;)

[Antonio Donatelli]

Loads nice and looks good (good work, Mo-Fo!) on my monitors, though I'm also Mac-based, not PC. Nice "camera boner" from Pastrana, BTW. Why does he love doing that so much?

As for IE on the Mac or PC, that's pretty standard still at TONS of magazines, agencies, etc. Just because you're hip enough to run Safari (or Firefox, etc. on the PeeCee), doesn't mean the poor folks butting heads with IT at a cubical-arium have such luxury. Morgan's just doing what he should, testing it among a lot of people so he can make sure that potential clients see it the way they should.

It navigates well and gets the pictures across nicely. If I were an AD I think I'd like it...

[John Thawley]

As for IE on the Mac or PC, that's pretty standard still at TONS of magazines, agencies, etc.


Sorry, that's not true. IE has not been supported for Macs in nearly 3 years. In short... IE for Mac no longer exists. You can barely surf with it.... 99% of the developers I know don't even consider the IE Mac platform in testing.

JT

[Antonio Donatelli]

I'll be sure to tell all my clients that they can no longer browse the web. haha!

[Shane Parker]

I'm all for developing for the lowest common denominator and it's good that Morgan's site happens to work in IE on the Mac. So I don't want to come off sounding like it's not a good idea to try to include everyone (including those on older versions of OSX who might still be using IE for some aweful reason).

However, as JT has pointed out, you cannot even download IE for Mac anymore (http://www.microsoft.com/mac/products/internetexplorer/internetexplorer.aspx?pid=internetexplorer). The last version was released in June of 2003. Furthermore, as far back as late 2004 there were already statistics showing that folks using IE on Mac were less than .000001 (obviously I've forgotten the exact number, but it was insignificant) of all internet surfers. That is hardly worth the headache of trying to develop for a browser that is completely out of standards, is slow, is buggy, and doesn't even support basic technologies on an Intel-based Mac (i.e. Java Applets, etc.). It'd be like developing for NN4!

We're not talking about the "luxury" of running Firefox over IE on Windows here, we're talking about the complete demise of a product -vs- a still-supported product.

In other words, if you happen to test your website in IE for the Mac and it works... GREAT! If it doesn't work and only needs minor updates to make it work, then make them. But PLEASE don't waste precious development time trying to make your site work on a browser that is in use by less than 1% of the worlds population.

[edit] Your reply came in before mine.

In all seriousness, if you have THAT many users still on IE then it is your duty (especially if you're a developer) to tell them the status of IE and that it's probably time for them to think about upgrading. It doesn't have to be as drastic as telling them that they can't browse the web anymore.

[Antonio Donatelli]

FWIW,and I'm NOT trying to hijack Morgan's thread, just clarify something; ie may be STATISTICALLY low in user base by the general population, if you take a survey of your clients, you may be really surprised as to who uses what. I'm guessing Morgan couldn't care less if the average web surfer sees the site, he's more concerned with Joe Agency and Jane Editor who will see his work and hire him. And many of them work in large offices with IT departments that control what software (and sadly sometimes what hardware) they use.

I had a client today that couldn't open files I sent because they were still using an older version of Photoshop so I had to convert them. I can bill for that, but it shows that even as a very progressive company, they can't be on the bleeding edge like some of you with your machines at home. How long was the publishing industry stuck with legacy hardware and OS 9 because of Quark Xpress and all their delays? YEARS!

Morgan is trying to see how his site works on the most possible hardware/software configurations, as he should. I'm pretty sure he knows what most of his potential clients are using, but he's still doing due dilligence to make sure he doesn't miss out on any potential business. As should any of you who want to do this as anything but a hobby.

[Mike Ditz]

. But PLEASE don't waste precious development time trying to make your site work on a browser that is in use by less than 1% of the worlds population.
.
Actually, one percent of the world's population is pretty huge, I think you mean 1% if the computer using population, but then why should anybody pay attention to the measly 7% of the computer users who use macs.

Just like I was amazed when I would see how the client would look at film (you do remember film, don't you?) on some yellowing gooky rubber cement coverd hacked up light table or hold the film up to the window or FL lights, never underestimate the computers or out of date software some people are running.

[John Thawley]

FWIW,and I'm NOT trying to hijack Morgan's thread, just clarify something; ie may be STATISTICALLY low in user base by the general population, if you take a survey of your clients, you may be really surprised as to who uses what. I'm guessing Morgan couldn't care less if the average web surfer sees the site, he's more concerned with Joe Agency and Jane Editor who will see his work and hire him. And many of them work in large offices with IT departments that control what software (and sadly sometimes what hardware) they use.

I had a client today that couldn't open files I sent because they were still using an older version of Photoshop so I had to convert them. I can bill for that, but it shows that even as a very progressive company, they can't be on the bleeding edge like some of you with your machines at home. How long was the publishing industry stuck with legacy hardware and OS 9 because of Quark Xpress and all their delays? YEARS!

Morgan is trying to see how his site works on the most possible hardware/software configurations, as he should. I'm pretty sure he knows what most of his potential clients are using, but he's still doing due dilligence to make sure he doesn't miss out on any potential business. As should any of you who want to do this as anything but a hobby.


First, let me welcome you to the board.

Welcome.

Second, might I suggest you consider that others here also have clients and also have done due dilligence in developing thier web sites, portfolios, and even their business model?

FWIW... I have been in the web development business since 1994.... my first web site went live about 30 days after Marc Andreesen launched Mozilla 1.0 - I have been paid in excess of $150,000.00 to develop web sites for Fortune 500 companies. My company developed a web based content management system in 1996. Beleive me... it's not my hobby.

http://www.c2group.com ....feel free to review the client list. ;)

So thanks for speaking to me as if I'm stupid...

I believe in backward compatibility... but, again, IE 5 for Mac went off the market in 2003. I think Morgan's site is great looking... but my advice to Morgan is if his developer bills any additional time at all debugging the site for IE 5 for the Mac, he should absolutely refuse payment.

Hope you stick around and get to know people better.... and maybe take some time to learn about them before belittling their intelligence?

JT

[Shane Parker]

I wasn't putting my opinion out there to get into a pissing match. I already stated that I believe in developing for the lowest common denominator (which I've been doing for 10 years now, you'll see my personal site below is 100% XHTML and CSS compliant and if you want to see other work that I've done, simply click on the second link below and look at the client list... which represents a small portion of the work I've done). And Antonio had a point when he made the comment about a select group of your customers who might still be using software that's no longer even distributed. I already recognize that there will always be "special" needs and that you just might have to develop for users running IE on Mac OS9 because they just so happen to make up a large base of YOUR users.

My only intent was to point out that unless you are one of those people who HAS to develop for the lowest common denominator (read: a very select and small target market) then don't worry about it. It's that simple.

And, btw, I said LESS than 1% (and it's faaaaar less than 1%) who still use IE/Mac. Safari was the #1 browser on Mac the first year it was out!

If you guys are so worried about ALWAYS developing for the lowest common denominator, I hope you're still developing for NN4 (hell, even before NN4!), OS2, and all the 'nix and all the other odd-ball OS's and browsers out there because, quite frankly, they make up as much of the market as IE/Mac users.

To reiterate (since people seem to be taking words out of context) unless Morgan, or anybody else, has "special needs end-users" I don't see why you'd have to worry about it. You'll catch the occasional IE/Mac user who gets to your site and, if the site doesn't work for them, they'll simply launch some other browser that they happen to have installed.

[edit] Morgan, I do apologize for going off-thread. However, I do think this info has sparked a good debate that may help future readers. Again, I think your site is great!

[Antonio Donatelli]

First, let me welcome you to the board.

Welcome.

Second, might I suggest you consider that others here also have clients and also have done due dilligence in developing thier web sites, portfolios, and even their business model?

FWIW... I have been in the web development business since 1994.... my first web site went live about 30 days after Marc Andreesen launched Mozilla 1.0 - I have been paid in excess of $150,000.00 to develop web sites for Fortune 500 companies. My company developed a web based content management system in 1996. Beleive me... it's not my hobby.

http://www.c2group.com ....feel free to review the client list. ;)

So thanks for speaking to me as if I'm stupid...

I believe in backward compatibility... but, again, IE 5 for Mac went off the market in 2003. I think Morgan's site is great looking... but my advice to Morgan is if his developer bills any additional time at all debugging the site for IE 5 for the Mac, he should absolutely refuse payment.

Hope you stick around and get to know people better.... and maybe take some time to learn about them before belittling their intelligence?

JT


JT,

Thanks for the welcome! My intention wasn't to speak to anyone as if they weren't intelligent. I shouldn't just jump into a forum and make that kind of impression. I've a lot of years experience as an assistant and as a shooter, and am a member of a lot of forums, have seen similar posts to this one before. These forums are massively helpful in exchange of information to make us all better as both businesspeople and artists.

I do know a couple of people here already, have worked with them. Hope to get to know more of you.

-Antonio

[Jim Sykes]

Hey Morgan, I think the site looks incredible. I really really like it and think its one of the clasiest and nicest photographer sites I have seen. It works smooth, looks clean, loads fast on my cable connection and simply works as it should. Kudos to you and your developer for coming up with the design.

I think most of the browser comments have been made, but I viewed it on Safari on my new Mac Pro for what its worth and if it helps.

[Morgan J Segal]

The company my wife was working for (and still freelances for) still uses OS9 and IE, that company is Harvard Business School Publishing

But you're right, it does not make sense to try and engineer a site for nearly obsolete software or for software that not many people (especially your target audience) are not using.
But then again, my target audience is most likely to be on a Mac and it was pretty much split down the line that PC users (with a few exceptions) were the ones upset by the pop up window design.

I had a guy on the Lotus forum complain that I should not use flash because he does not have it on his 64 bit- machine with his 64 bit browser called Apache ( I never heard of it) Do I care that some computer geek using obscure (or ahead of the curve) equipment and software can't see my site? Ahh, NO

[John Thawley]

The company my wife was working for (and still freelances for) still uses OS9 and IE, that company is Harvard Business School Publishing

But you're right, it does not make sense to try and engineer a site for nearly obsolete software or for software that not many people (especially your target audience) are not using.
But then again, my target audience is most likely to be on a Mac and it was pretty much split down the line that PC users (with a few exceptions) were the ones upset by the pop up window design.

I had a guy on the Lotus forum complain that I should not use flash because he does not have it on his 64 bit- machine with his 64 bit browser called Apache ( I never heard of it) Do I care that some computer geek using obscure (or ahead of the curve) equipment and software can't see my site? Ahh, NO

That's exactly right... you have to draw the line at some point. You can't please all of the people all of the time. :)

[Morgan J Segal]

Hey Morgan, I think the site looks incredible. I really really like it and think its one of the clasiest and nicest photographer sites I have seen. It works smooth, looks clean, loads fast on my cable connection and simply works as it should. Kudos to you and your developer for coming up with the design.

I think most of the browser comments have been made, but I viewed it on Safari on my new Mac Pro for what its worth and if it helps.


Thanks Jimmy and congrats on coming over to the light side (Mac) ;)