|
|
Posted by Mimic on 08/27/05 01:17
Onideus Mad Hatter wrote:
> On Wed, 24 Aug 2005 18:52:33 +0100, Mimic <dev@null> wrote:
>
>
>>Onideus Mad Hatter wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Yeah I don't get all the hype. It's like these people have been
>>>closed up in a box where all they've ever seen has been text only
>>>websites and now that they got one with a few ho hum, outdated CSS
>>>parlor tricks they're all drooling all over themselves. Over in the
>>>REAL web design communities we're all just cockin our heads to the
>>>side and sayin, "Huh?". Especially regarding their 1024x768 non
>>>text-liquid layout, how is THAT supposed to be "cutting edge"? Also I
>>>highly doubt it's as cross browser compatible as people are claiming.
>>>It seems like some screwballs are saying that just because it's W3C
>>>compliant...usually meeting W3C specs means that it's NOT cross
>>>browser compatible since no web browser on the planet ACTUALLY meets
>>>the W3Cs imaginary standards.
>
>
>>Oh pray tell, what and where are these "REAL web design communities" ?
>
>
> Obvious you're not up on places like UltraShock.
>
>
>>Because outside of wally wally land, in the *REAL* world, Zeldman,
>>Bowman, Shea, Berners_Lee et al are highly acclaimed web architects.
>
>
> Who can't even build a liquid text site? *snicker* Apparently the
> "*REAL* world" is a few shades deficient from "wally wally land" where
> we consider people like Brian Zick to be "highly acclaimed web
> architects": http://www.brianzick.com/
>
LOL. If thats what the people of wally wally land consider "highly
acclaimed", then theres your problem. You need to get the fuck out of
wally wally land.
>
>>Not only do these people produce quality, usable and accessible websites
>
>
> That static 1024x768 layout is all about "usable and accessible" is
> it? LOL, I remember when you stupid bitches acted like the whole
> fuckin WORLD was gonna end when I did a static 1024x786 layout on the
> NP Index site...now these stupid bitches do it and it's all "okay"
> because they're "*REAL* world" "highly acclaimed web architects".
>
> *snicker*
>
> Apparently "highly acclaimed" means you can pretty much do an absolute
> shit job and morons like Mimic will still be singin yer
> praises...yeah, remind me not to ever gain THAT status...*shudder*...
>
>
>
>>that are visual appealing,
>
>
> ...that site really isn't that visually appealing. In fact it's a
> very minimalist design, meaning it's supposed to be more functional
> than visually appealing.
>
>
>>they also guide the industry on web standards and practices.
>
>
> Oh?
>
>
>>As such, Berners-Lee heads the W3C,
>
>
> And what a bang up job they're doing of "guiding the industry on web
> standards"...you know, what with how NO WEB BROWSER IN EXISTENCE
> actually meets those standards...which is sorta interesting when you
> consider that the peeps who make up the W3C are corporations like
> Microsoft, Mozilla, etc, etc. I mean, they're setting standards that
> even THEY don't meet...yeah, think about it. You got lied to, Bitch.
>
>
>>Zeldman runs a world renowned emag,
>
>
> A "world renowned emag", eh? ROTFL...yeah, sure kid, sure. I don't
> think ANY "emag" could be considered "world renowned".
>
>
>>has written books
>
>
> ...so have quite literarily hundreds of thousands of other assholes.
>
>
>>and setup the Web Standards Project
>>(WaSP),
>
>
> Oh hey, just what we need, ANOTHER group of assholes who thinks they
> should be the ones setting the "standards".
>
>
>>and people like Shea run sites that develope and aid the
>>webdesign industry, such as the CSSZenGarden.
>
>
> *snore*
>
>
>>Hatter seriously, people are trying to help you.
>
>
> Uh huh, sure kid. All I'm seein is that the same stuff I was doing
> TWO YEARS ago that you were bitching incessantly about is suddenly
> bein slurped up by all you deficient little assholes. Apparently that
> means that *I* set the standards and you stupid bitches are just two
> years out of date.
>
>
>>Whether you believe
>>what we say or not is upto you. But rest assured, you are NOT years
>>ahead of everyone else in webdev. What you are doing isnt done by
>>professionals for the simple fact that it doesnt work and/or isnt
>>suitable or productive.
>
>
> Of course it's not, I mean it requires a shit load of skill to be able
> to use say Flash in a manner that's as productive as deficiently
> easier alternatives (which aren't as cross browser compatible, cross
> platform compatible or cross resolution compatible). There are really
> only a handful of people on the entire fuckin planet who even have
> that level of skill. Because of that, no, it's not something that's
> going to be implemented by every stupid jackass who runs around the
> net claiming to be a "world renown web architect".
>
>
>>You've only just jumped on the Flash craze from
>>the LAST CENTURY,
>
>
> Actually no, Stupid. The "Flash craze" as you call it from the "LAST
> CENTURY" was all about using Flash from an animation
> perspective...however recently Flash has gone from something that used
> to only be good for animation to an incredibly powerful web
> development tool...of course, like I said, it ain't easy (yet) which
> is why the stupid deficient bitches like you haven't all jumped on the
> new Flash bandwagon. But hey, I give ya morons two years, I'm sure
> Flash related app makers will have made it real cookie cutter for you
> drooling retards by then.
>
> --
>
> Onideus Mad Hatter
> mhm ¹ x ¹
> http://www.backwater-productions.net
This post doesnt really need any reply. In one stack of lines, youve
manage to prove how much of a fool you are. How little knowledge you
actually have. And before you moan about proof and arguments, I dont
need to, because EVERYONE else knows what you just said is a load of
bollox, so the only person I would be educating would be you, and we all
know that you never listen - hence no need to back anything up.
--
Mimic
"The man who awaits the rising of the sun, cannot wait forever."
[email: ZGF0YWZsZXhAY2FubmFiaXNtYWlsLmNvbQ==]
Help Stop Spam - www.hidemyemail.net
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|