Posted by Chaddy2222 on 07/22/07 08:04

On Jul 22, 2:15 pm, "El Kabong" <davelon...@verizon.net> wrote:
> "Neredbojias" <monstersquas...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>
> news:Xns9974AD1D14682nanopandaneredbojias@198.186.190.161...
>
>
>
> > Well bust mah britches and call me cheeky, on Sat, 21 Jul 2007 19:35:22
> > GMT nice.guy.nige scribed:
>
> >> While the city slept, El Kabong (davelon...@verizon.net) feverishly
> >> typed...
>
> >>> In fact, why waste time designing for browsers that stats show
> >>> are used by less than 5% of Web visitors?
>
> >> What great reasoning! Excuse me while I phone my boss and explain that
> >> I'm going to just ignore approximately 250 - 300 unique visitors
> >> (otherwise known as potential customers) to his site every day. I'm
> >> sure he'll understand.
>
> > Wow, and here I thought you were going to miss the point.
>
> > (I believe he was being sarcastic, as you were.)
>
> I dunno, N. maybe I should have been but, to be honest, I wasn't... probably
> because I've never had a site successful enough to attract 6,000 unique
> visitors per day (300/.05) (I'm small potatoes.) However, after checking
> stats for most of my 82 sites, I could only come up with 10 visitors using
> browsers other than IE6 or 7, FF, or Safari. Add that to the fact that,
> realistically, only about 1 out of 50 visitors ever becomes a cash customer,
> (which isn't too bad a close rate,) it's doubtful that any of the 10 "brand
> Xers" were lost sales anyway.
>
> That's not to say that those 10 visitors were *unable* to view the pages as
> presented, just that the sites weren't *optimized* for their brand X
> browsers. But guess what! They're most likely used to that because the
> majority of the sites they visit are not going to be optimized for their
> off-the-wall software either.
>
> No, when my client is looking at doubled or tripled costs for his site's
> design in order to appeal to a handful of nerds who are more interested in
> research (or just being weird) than actually shopping, he'll usually opt to
> ignore those visitors using the geekware. It just boils down to a
> combination of diminished return on investment and good business sense.
>
> We'll leave the experimental stuff to the folks who don't have anything else
> to do with their time or money. After they get it debugged and standardized,
> we'll jump all over it. I realize that, being concerned with the absolute
> correctness of design as this group is, (appropriately,) it isn't likely
> anyone here will agree with my POV, but C'est la vie! I will survive.
>
> But thanks, N, for the vote of confidence... even if it was misplaced.
>
Well, the fact that you don't get that many visitors per day probably
means that for whatever reason they can't find your site properly or
if they do find it then it must be un-useable in some way. So they
leave without buying anything.
What you need to remember is that, the people useing browsers (that
might not be popular) might be willing to spend large amounts of money
(or might be the ones that want to join your non profit group),
whatever. The main thing is, you can't just presume by looking at your
logs that everyone is useing the same browser configgeration.
As an example I am useing IE 6 but I am not useing a visual interface
(IE a screen) to read the majority of your posts.
--
Regards Chad. http://freewebdesign.awardspace.biz

[Back to original message]