[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: AOL compliance
I work on a very large website as well, and our manager has decided that
writing for AOL is no longer necessary given the news that aol is working
with netscpe on a new aol browser. Also its possible to Spoof any
browser now with internet explorer which is going to cause one heck of a
mess with that cgi. Although we will stay conscious of other browsers,
we are writing for netscape navigator.....
-------------------------------------------
Andrew Wooldridge (andreww@c2.org) |
http://www.best.com/~wooldri/ |
http://www.c2.org/~andreww/javascript/ |
-------------------------------------------
On Wed, 21 Feb 1996, Andy Augustine wrote:
> To those who are interested, here's an e-mail from a friend doing BIG time sites.
>
>
> ----------
> From: Mattbsmith@aol.com[SMTP:Mattbsmith@aol.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, February 21, 1996 5:01 PM
> To: aug@ix.netcom.com
> Subject: Re: Java World
>
> Andy,
>
> On AOL compliance when designing web pages...
>
> I HATE HATE HATE HATE HATE HATE it, but HAD HAD HAD HAD HAD to do it. For the sole fact the Joe Average is too stupid to set up a PPP
> connection, so he gets his access through AOL. He sees what's out there
> through some cloudy glasses, but he sees it nonetheless. Those of us that are
> building cyberspace - sure, we've got the hot rod of browsers to work with.
> We've got secure sockets, we've got Java, VRML, all teh cool toys. But Joe
> AOL doesn't.
>
> And Joe AOL is the guy who spends his money where he chooses. So, if a
> business wants to hit a target market on the web, they'd better do it AOL
> compliant, or risk looking shitty to the potential customer. Joe AOL doesn't
> KNOW that those garbage characters that are coming up on his screen (right
> below the applet holder that is thrown off to the side) are supposed to do
> something in Netscape - he doesn't care, he just considers it sloppy
> programming on the part of the business. From there, his impression of the
> business' brand goes downhill, creating a lose-lose situation for all
> involved.
>
> It could be awin-win however, if the web designer threw in a simple detection
> CGI, and routed the customer to a Netscape Enhanced - Generic HTML - JAVA
> compliant path for the site. Sure, he's gotta swallow his savvy and pride and
> build a low road AOL version. But figure, that's the version that Joe Average
> is seeing, and it better be damn good. (Well, as "damn good" as you can get
> with AOL) Otherwise, the business paying for the buildout of the site will
> get criticized, and the design firm will most likely get dropped.
>
> I just went through this with a site for a large corporation. They're the
> seventh most recognized brand in the world. (Do your homework - you'll figure
> it out) We had do design a Netscape-non-Netscape road for it. The Netscape
> one looks sweet, the AOL one looks as good as it can using no <CENTER>,
> <TABLE> or <BODY BACKGROUND> TAGS. There's also a Java road, to be released
> in a week. It was disheartening to downgrade our desing for the low road, but
> we had to. And after that was over, a detection CGI throws the user to the
> right place, so the brand image shines through to all people.
>
>
> -Matt
>
>
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> This message came from the mailing list javascript. For help using the
> mailing list software, please send a message to 'majordomo@obscure.org'
> with the message body 'help'. To unsubscribe, send a message to
> 'majordomo@obscure.org' with the message body 'unsubscribe javascript'.
>
--------------------------------------------------------------------
This message came from the mailing list javascript. For help using the
mailing list software, please send a message to 'majordomo@obscure.org'
with the message body 'help'. To unsubscribe, send a message to
'majordomo@obscure.org' with the message body 'unsubscribe javascript'.