Another thing often forgotten: font-sizes where relative to the system, meaning, they where usually bigger on Windows (depending on the system-wide font setting

Another thing often forgotten: font-sizes where relative to the system, meaning, they where usually bigger on Windows (depending on the system-wide font settings) and there was no rational for text-image integration. This became even more severe, when pixels began to shrink with higher display resolutions, where Windows would adjust – i.e. increase – the font-size relatively, while Macs stuck to a positive 72dpi definition for the screen to keep images and text in balance. E.g., you had an image and a few lines of text to its right. Size the layout so that the text will span vertically over the height of the image, when seen on an average Windows system. Now, on a Mac, it's just about 2/3 of the height … (Considering that all layout had to be done using tables, we may begin to understand that you had to be rather defensive in your approaches. Also, complex tables resulted in perceivable rendering times.)