Okay, this has been great---spontaneous, passionate, articulate, many-sided, creative, and witty!
Love the idea of "People Doing Cool Stuff...in Maine" booth at farmers markets -- we're organic & local! not to mention at Maine "creative economy" events.
To preserve the appeal and focus of our forum -- let's take further "problems with Maine" threads offline.
On Sat, Apr 26, 2008 at 7:37 AM, <jdistef...@sephone.com> wrote:
> Hi Alana- > i would agree this got a little away from me- > I was only making a comment-
> Thanks for your comments and wit!
> Joe
> > I'm a web/graphic designer and tech support specialist who relocated > > to Maine from NYC. After reading this thread, I plan on setting up a > > booth at the next farmer's market in Portland. If 'Buy Local' works > > for sausage, it can work for CSS!
> > Best, > > Alana
> > On Wed, Apr 23, 2008 at 2:33 PM, Joseph DiStefano > > <jdistef...@sephone.com> wrote: > >> I am quite shocked at the number of Maine companies that feel it > >> necessary > >> to go to developers and other creative resource outside the State.
> >> How can we fight Brain Drain and offer competitive jobs, if the primary > >> customers to businesses like mine/ours don't feel compelled to award > >> projects to us.
> >> A NY, Chicago, Dallas, Seattle address does not make the company any > >> better.
> >> Am I alone in this?
> >> Again - no offense towards anyone- Anne just happened to have been the > >> most > >> recent example... (sorry Ann) > >> but this just appears to be a constant thread especially in some of the > >> more > >> visible Maine businesses that could be exceptional clients to firms > like > >> mine- Not saying that we would have been awarded the project- Any > Maine > >> development firm would have been better than none.
> >> We get our fair share of jobs from away, but it would have been nice to > >> have > >> had an opportunity to be considered, especially since there are so few > >> of > >> them to come by.
> >> If we as a community cannot appreciate that development firms here are > >> just > >> as good as the ones from away- then we may just as well close up shop.
> >> Sorry- I could have blogged it- but why not this venue? We are all at > >> the > >> same party, right?
> >> Best regards,
> >> Joe
> >> Joseph DiStefano > >> Partner > >> Sephone Internet Solutions > >> 175 Exchange Street > >> Bangor, Maine 04401 > >> P 207.262.5040 > >> U www.sephone.com > >> F 207.262.5043 > >> Gotta Website?? Gotta Good Website!!
I remember the days when the lowest common denominator was 640 x 400 screen running Windows 95.
And, ouch, I'm still running a machine with Windows NT, that doesn't support current flash and other programs. Of course, my main machines are XP (no -- not Vista!).
What base level do you assume?
--------------------------------------------------- How do users experience your Progress® application? Are they productive? Does it matter? Do you care? --------------------------------------------------- ======================================================= ARTHUR FINK art...@arthurfink.com www.ArthurFink.com Listening to users, and designing interfaces that work! Consulting and Training in Progress® Call 207.615.5722 =======================================================
> I remember the days when the lowest common > denominator was 640 x 400 screen running Windows 95.
> And, ouch, I'm still running a machine with > Windows NT, that doesn't support current flash > and other programs. Of course, my main machines are XP (no -- not > Vista!).
> What base level do you assume?
> --------------------------------------------------- > How do users experience your Progress® application? > Are they productive? Does it matter? Do you care? > --------------------------------------------------- > ======================================================= > ARTHUR FINK art...@arthurfink.com www.ArthurFink.com > Listening to users, and designing interfaces that work! > Consulting and Training in Progress® Call 207.615.5722 > =======================================================
-----Original Message----- From: maineux@googlegroups.com [mailto:maineux@googlegroups.com] On
Behalf Of jdistef...@sephone.com Sent: Sunday, April 27, 2008 8:11 AM To: maineux@googlegroups.com Subject: [maineux] Re: What's your "base" level browser and operating system?
Although we have a mixed shop- we are predominately using
Mac OSX 10.5 and browsers at 1024 and up.
FYI- we do test on all others
> I remember the days when the lowest common > denominator was 640 x 400 screen running Windows 95.
> And, ouch, I'm still running a machine with > Windows NT, that doesn't support current flash > and other programs. Of course, my main machines are XP (no -- not > Vista!).
> What base level do you assume?
> --------------------------------------------------- > How do users experience your Progress(r) application? > Are they productive? Does it matter? Do you care? > --------------------------------------------------- > ======================================================= > ARTHUR FINK art...@arthurfink.com www.ArthurFink.com > Listening to users, and designing interfaces that work! > Consulting and Training in Progress(r) Call 207.615.5722 > =======================================================
On Sat, Apr 26, 2008 at 5:11 PM, Arthur Fink <art...@arthurfink.com> wrote:
> I remember the days when the lowest common > denominator was 640 x 400 screen running Windows 95.
> And, ouch, I'm still running a machine with > Windows NT, that doesn't support current flash > and other programs. Of course, my main machines are XP (no -- not > Vista!).
> What base level do you assume?
> --------------------------------------------------- > How do users experience your Progress(R) application? > Are they productive? Does it matter? Do you care? > --------------------------------------------------- > ======================================================= > ARTHUR FINK art...@arthurfink.com www.ArthurFink.com > Listening to users, and designing interfaces that work! > Consulting and Training in Progress(R) Call 207.615.5722 > =======================================================
-- Kevin Callahan CallahanPro, Inc. p. 207.691.2997 w. www.callahanpro.com e. ke...@callahanpro.com
Interesting- as it is a rare case when we are asked to deliver a site < 1024; and that is mostly when the site is an intranet or a small/specific audience and known hardware is limited-
Majority of our clients and their browser stats indicate that the vast majority of their customers (over 85%) have browser at least at 1024, some even higher-.
For those that dont know- Google Analytics has a great tool, once installed, that provides this info- and tools that show how visitors use the site too.
> IE6 & 7 (and soon, 8 though I've not yet had the courage to install the > beta > ;) > Firefox > Safari
> By default our application runs at 800px wide, though many clients push it > beyond that. Not usually all the way out to 1000, though often around > 900+.
> Personally, I can't wait for the day that IE6 is buried forever, though me > thinks that's still a long way off...
> -k
> On Sat, Apr 26, 2008 at 5:11 PM, Arthur Fink <art...@arthurfink.com> > wrote:
>> I remember the days when the lowest common >> denominator was 640 x 400 screen running Windows 95.
>> And, ouch, I'm still running a machine with >> Windows NT, that doesn't support current flash >> and other programs. Of course, my main machines are XP (no -- not >> Vista!).
>> What base level do you assume?
>> --------------------------------------------------- >> How do users experience your Progress(R) application? >> Are they productive? Does it matter? Do you care? >> --------------------------------------------------- >> ======================================================= >> ARTHUR FINK art...@arthurfink.com www.ArthurFink.com >> Listening to users, and designing interfaces that work! >> Consulting and Training in Progress(R) Call 207.615.5722 >> =======================================================
> -- > Kevin Callahan > CallahanPro, Inc. > p. 207.691.2997 > w. www.callahanpro.com > e. ke...@callahanpro.com
