The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
http://www.chrisjhaig.co.uk/testing.htm
After a little playing about with this box model business and downloading more versions of Internet Explorer, I've come up with the above link.
It doesn't look any different to the original design (as bad as that is) but I would just like any feeback as to the positioning of the content.
Before I was using absolute positioning which looked fine in Internet Explorer 6, but in the likes of Netscape, Opera, Mozilla I'd see text overlapping link boxes and such.
Anyway, if anyone has the time and willingness, could you please go to the above link and let me know of any miss-placings of content, as well as letting me know which browser and Operating System you're using.
I've also noted that I am cutting it really fine on an 800 x 600 res, in that if my browser was not at full screen, the page collapses.
Would anybody consider this a problem??
Do many people still browse with only half the screen filled with the browser??
Any feedback on bad placements would be appreceated.
Thanks.
After a little playing about with this box model business and downloading more versions of Internet Explorer, I've come up with the above link.
It doesn't look any different to the original design (as bad as that is) but I would just like any feeback as to the positioning of the content.
Before I was using absolute positioning which looked fine in Internet Explorer 6, but in the likes of Netscape, Opera, Mozilla I'd see text overlapping link boxes and such.
Anyway, if anyone has the time and willingness, could you please go to the above link and let me know of any miss-placings of content, as well as letting me know which browser and Operating System you're using.
I've also noted that I am cutting it really fine on an 800 x 600 res, in that if my browser was not at full screen, the page collapses.
Would anybody consider this a problem??
Do many people still browse with only half the screen filled with the browser??
Any feedback on bad placements would be appreceated.
Thanks.
Page:
Icarus wrote:
> Everyone's website looks absolutely tiny in 1600x1200.
Look horrible, don't they?! They all look really squashed together. Seems weird when you go back to normal screen.
> Everyone's website looks absolutely tiny in 1600x1200.
Look horrible, don't they?! They all look really squashed together. Seems weird when you go back to normal screen.
Hi
Using 800x600 res.
On NS4, it looks ... well, lets just forget it. As far as the display goes, NS7 is OK, and IE6. Opera 7 is OK too.
But there's something up with the rollovers in NS7 and Opera. When the mouse is over the word "Missions", for example, the pointer indicates that there's no link. To get the "fickle finger of fate", I have to move the mouse between the lower pink border and the baseline of the text, and then it links OK.
Using 800x600 res.
On NS4, it looks ... well, lets just forget it. As far as the display goes, NS7 is OK, and IE6. Opera 7 is OK too.
But there's something up with the rollovers in NS7 and Opera. When the mouse is over the word "Missions", for example, the pointer indicates that there's no link. To get the "fickle finger of fate", I have to move the mouse between the lower pink border and the baseline of the text, and then it links OK.
Works fine on 800x600...
Tyla wrote:
> Was IE5 on NT4! oops!
Oh no, more problems then ...
Was it just that the links/main content boxes were a little small/big, or were the problems a little bigger?
Thanks.
> Was IE5 on NT4! oops!
Oh no, more problems then ...
Was it just that the links/main content boxes were a little small/big, or were the problems a little bigger?
Thanks.
>
> But in IE 5.5, what problems did you encounter??
>
Was IE5 on NT4! oops!
> But in IE 5.5, what problems did you encounter??
>
Was IE5 on NT4! oops!
Everyone's website looks absolutely tiny in 1600x1200.
Thanks for the report.
That's certainly a handy little bit of software you've got there, and I'll try and clean up those errors soon enough.
But in IE 5.5, what problems did you encounter??
I've downloaded 5.0 and 5.5 (as mentioned a few posts back by you) and thought I'd used the right width and heights for them with the box-model hack stuff. The page looks the same in all three versions for me.
That's certainly a handy little bit of software you've got there, and I'll try and clean up those errors soon enough.
But in IE 5.5, what problems did you encounter??
I've downloaded 5.0 and 5.5 (as mentioned a few posts back by you) and thought I'd used the right width and heights for them with the box-model hack stuff. The page looks the same in all three versions for me.
Mozilla 1.5 Fine
IE6 fine
Problems in IE 5.5, this'll be the box model hack and IE5.5's inability to add up correctly!
The markup is excellent, as ofr the CSS. have a read of this report on it:
http://dev.digital-prozac.co.uk/docs/CJH.html
IE6 fine
Problems in IE 5.5, this'll be the box model hack and IE5.5's inability to add up correctly!
The markup is excellent, as ofr the CSS. have a read of this report on it:
http://dev.digital-prozac.co.uk/docs/CJH.html
Thanks you two for checking it for me.
ßulle††™ wrote:
> Is it just the layout we can comment on?
You're more than welcome to comment on any aspect of it, although that is the only page that exists at the moment.
The actual site is online at http://www.gta-vice-city.co.uk but hasn't been coded accurately, meaning it works on Win XP/IE6 ok, but any other browser and you may find it overlapping, etc, which is why I'm testing out some code before re-uploading it.
In all honesty this was never going to be a web site, just a sample for me to try out CSS, but I decided to make a go of it in the end and have had good feedback on it so far ... well, the content, not the design :)
So like I said, you're welcome to comment on it, good/bad points or whatever, but the chances of a re-design are slim because it isn't a site that will be updated with new information. People go to it to find help/tips for the game, and probably won't be back using it when the next one comes out. From what I've been told the people who've used it up to now how found it easy to get to the details they needed, so I'm happy with the basic structure of it.
I'm still using it as a CSS testing base though, and right now I'm looking into this accessibility stuff.
I may make one for the next game though, which I’ll put more effort in to :)
ßulle††™ wrote:
> Is it just the layout we can comment on?
You're more than welcome to comment on any aspect of it, although that is the only page that exists at the moment.
The actual site is online at http://www.gta-vice-city.co.uk but hasn't been coded accurately, meaning it works on Win XP/IE6 ok, but any other browser and you may find it overlapping, etc, which is why I'm testing out some code before re-uploading it.
In all honesty this was never going to be a web site, just a sample for me to try out CSS, but I decided to make a go of it in the end and have had good feedback on it so far ... well, the content, not the design :)
So like I said, you're welcome to comment on it, good/bad points or whatever, but the chances of a re-design are slim because it isn't a site that will be updated with new information. People go to it to find help/tips for the game, and probably won't be back using it when the next one comes out. From what I've been told the people who've used it up to now how found it easy to get to the details they needed, so I'm happy with the basic structure of it.
I'm still using it as a CSS testing base though, and right now I'm looking into this accessibility stuff.
I may make one for the next game though, which I’ll put more effort in to :)
Looks fine on Safari under Mac OS X ...
Page: