3 ms·

If the user visits your site with an unsupported browser (which in this case may actually perfectly support the features you want), (s)he's going to have a terr

by gcp 15y ago

If the user visits your site with an unsupported browser (which in this case may actually perfectly support the features you want), (s)he's going to have a terrible experience and see a crappy design. So I think you undermined your own argument completely.

___Calv_Dee___ 15y ago
I think I presented a trade-off rather than undermining my own argument although I didn't really clarify that I guess. Essentially you either focus 100% to design and implementing the design via any available technologies (cross-compatible or not) or settle for 80% (20% loss of design and vision from effort in ensuring compatibility). Ultimately it depends how passionate you are about your design. Personally I would rather have 5 people absolutely fall in love with and be moved by my design/interface/experience rather than 100 people being able to simply 'view' it.
politician 15y ago
Is it possible to single out a specific browser to provide an enhanced experience? Yes. Is it possible to deliver a lowest common denominator experience to mobile browsers and IE? Yes. Are these options mutually exclusive? No. Your perspectives are not incompatible.
- wwweston 15y ago
  It's absolutely true that those things aren't exclusive, but as somebody who often uses two rare but capable user-agents (Lynx and the browser on an old Nokia S40), I can testify that in practice, a significant number of websites aren't being created with both in mind, and I think a significant number of designers don't really understand what the lowest common denominator really means. It's very very easy to pay attention to only a handful of user agents, and from what I can see, right now that's trending towards 2-3 desktop browsers + "mobile" (which usually means "the iPhone and maybe one or two Android devices").

3 ms·

If the user visits your site with an unsupported browser (which in this case may actually perfectly support the features you want), (s)he's going to have a terr

by gcp 15y ago

___Calv_Dee___ 15y ago
I think I presented a trade-off rather than undermining my own argument although I didn't really clarify that I guess. Essentially you either focus 100% to design and implementing the design via any available technologies (cross-compatible or not) or settle for 80% (20% loss of design and vision from effort in ensuring compatibility). Ultimately it depends how passionate you are about your design. Personally I would rather have 5 people absolutely fall in love with and be moved by my design/interface/experience rather than 100 people being able to simply 'view' it.
politician 15y ago
Is it possible to single out a specific browser to provide an enhanced experience? Yes. Is it possible to deliver a lowest common denominator experience to mobile browsers and IE? Yes. Are these options mutually exclusive? No. Your perspectives are not incompatible.
- wwweston 15y ago
  It's absolutely true that those things aren't exclusive, but as somebody who often uses two rare but capable user-agents (Lynx and the browser on an old Nokia S40), I can testify that in practice, a significant number of websites aren't being created with both in mind, and I think a significant number of designers don't really understand what the lowest common denominator really means. It's very very easy to pay attention to only a handful of user agents, and from what I can see, right now that's trending towards 2-3 desktop browsers + "mobile" (which usually means "the iPhone and maybe one or two Android devices").