vNES Frequently Asked Questions
Frequently Asked Questions > Concerning Website

For some insane reason, there are these web designers that have this complex about not using tables. I'm not one of them. It's the CSS fanboys that have this insane need to ridicule websites that use tables. CSS is flawed. Horribly. With tables, you can write a page, and it works almost everywhere. Even Phones. With CSS, Explorer doesn't render the same as Firefox, and neither of them render the same as Safari, and Opera is different from the other three. And that doesn't even account for different versions, like Internet Explorer 6 is different from Internet Explorer 7. And none of those situations account for things like Internet Explorer Mobile, or Opera Mobile.

I can be reasonably sure that with tables, they work most of the time. And yet, with CSS, I'd have to spend what little free time I have working out the tiny little bugs that pop up with the menagerie of different browsers, versions, platforms, screen resolutions, and connections. I believe, and I'm rather sure that the general public will back me up on this, that instead of dealing with CSS and div tags, you'd rather that I spend my free time adding games. Why? Because - Content Is King. I don't know why anyone would go to a videogame website to critique the layout. Content will be what drives the Internet for now and forevermore.

Besides that, you know who else uses tables? Google. YouTube. MySpace. Facebook. Wikipedia. eBay. And it's not just websites in English that do that. Baidu, QQ, and Mail.ru do it too.

And then there are those that will complain that my site looks terrible. Personally, I happen to like it. Lots of designers use Photoshop to make their graphics. Here's a shocker: I hate Adobe. With a Passion. This means, of course, that I do not use Photoshop. You wanna know what I use to make the graphics on this website? Microsoft Paint. Seriously. All of the graphics on this website were either made in Microsoft Paint or the image editor in Game Maker 6.1. All of the graphics are further compressed (to the highest point possible) in OptiPNG.

I used to like Macromedia. They sold out. As for active content, I'm stuck between an infamous maker of bloatware, the people responsible for killing Netscape, and a company that keeps pushing a programming language originally for Microwaves. I think you know which one I chose. I'm also aware that it is a wee bit hypocritical to be calling Adobe the maker of bloatware when the Java VM is 7 MB. For those of you who would say that, I'd like to invite you to compare the method that Sun used in Java for sandboxing to the one used in Adobe Flash. Flash is prone to security issues, because it can modify the contents of your computer. Java is comparatively secure, because to add the feature to access files on your computer, the applet has to be signed. If it isn't, then you don't get to. And with signed applets, the user has to consent before the applet starts.

And last, but certainly not least, most people don't use dial-up internet anymore. I do. I value having quick loading times. You are probably staring at that 27 image block up there with the letters. Sure, it takes a few extra seconds to load. Total, those images are a whopping 3.5 kilobytes. The average size of each one of those files - it's 135 bytes. It's a drop in the bucket. If you look hard enough, you'll notice pretty quickly that there aren't any JPEG files on this website. Why? Because JPEG is lossy crap.

vNES Frequently Asked Questions Frequently Asked Questions > Concerning Website

vNES Frequently Asked Questions
Frequently Asked Questions > Concerning Website