In article <slrng23nll.15qa.g.kreme@cerebus.local>, Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:
> In message <doraymeRidThis-A7CA7F.10592106052008@news-vip.optusnet.com.au> > dorayme <doraymeRidThis@optusnet.com.au> wrote: > > In article <slrng1ufgr.15qa.g.kreme@cerebus.local>, > > Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote: > > >> In message <doraymeRidThis-0B1751.13012903052008@news-vip.optusnet.com.au> > >> dorayme <doraymeRidThis@optusnet.com.au> wrote: > >> > what would dialup users or slow broadband think?). > >> > >> Sorry, but I stopped worrying about dialup users 6 years ago when the last > >> person in my family finally got ADSL. I hear there are still people on > >> dialup, but I could not prove it. > > > Why did you ever worry about dialup? Do you make websites only for your > > family? > > Back in 1995 worrying about dialup was sensible as the vast majority of your > visitors were using dialup. Now-a-days, nearly none are.
Depending on who "your" visitors actually are. About 1/6 of US users are still at 56k or less. (Silly me. I think there's a substantial difference between 17% and "nearly none." Would you give me $100 every time I rolled a one on a die if I gave you $10 every time I rolled 2-6? If you wouldn't, you must also think there's a difference.) Among industrialized nations, we're near the middle of the pack. Also, it's not only dial-up that's an issue. Last month I switched from cable to DSL and took a 75% speed hit in the process. There are now pages I visit that take so long to load that Safari 3 (on 10.4) times out. I can work around that by using a different browser or OS X 10.5, but the practical reality is that I don't go to those sites as often as I used to. In that sense, not taking slower connections into account because users with slower connections don't come to your site is more than a bit circular.
-- "Harry?" Ron's voice was a mere whisper. "Do you smell something ... burning?" - Harry Potter and the Odor of the Phoenix
