in reply to Re: Re: Image Magick - Sample vs. Scale
in thread Image Magick - Sample vs. Scale

So because of a few people who refuse to upgrade their ancient software, we shouldn't use new things that save time and bandwidth for the other 99.999% of browsers? Guess it's back to gopher then!

  • Comment on Re: Re: Re: Image Magick - Sample vs. Scale

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Image Magick - Sample vs. Scale
by shotgunefx (Parson) on Feb 28, 2003 at 21:37 UTC
    Depends what you're doing. A company that's geared towards their user would certainly care about something like this. If I'm trying to sell someone something, I'm going try hard as hell to make it as easy as possible to purchase from me with as little requirements as possible. Many customers shop from work were their software is not their choice. Merchants want shopper's money, not their HTML compliance. It's about selling stuff. I could care less as long as the work lays out decent and functionally supports their needs. I do support compliance and would love it if everyone actually followed standards. (Things do seem to be getting better in this regard)

    I'm not saying that no one should use PNG files but I think warning of the possibility of such a customer offensive act is certainly worth note. As an aside, it was certainly a difficult problem to debug as the machine required a hard reboot as soon as the page attempted to load which made finding the problem a real bitch. It may not be all PNG files in this situation. Maybe the PNG in question was the PNG of death and hit things just so. I don't know why and don't really care. There was enough angry customers calling my client to put myself off using them in these types of applications for the awhile.

    -Lee

    "To be civilized is to deny one's nature."
[reply]

In Section Seekers of Perl Wisdom