Best place for design custom quotes?

[Anthony Parsons]

and forget about backwards compatibility to older browsers (Only the newest versions within the last year support gradients and other CSS3 methods).

That is so far from accurate, its not funny.

Firefox 3.6 supported gradient. http://www.w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_firefox.asp (2 years now)
Safari 4. http://www.w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_safari.asp (3 years now)
Google Chrome has pretty much always supported it.
Intenet Explorer 5.5 started to support css gradient.

The ease of "webkit" gradient, being a single line or two, that is newer browsers (still some are two years + now), though gradient has been capable in CSS for years... you just had to write a bit more in order to get it to work and hack it for each browser, thus a simple .png gradient has been easier and less time consuming.

Those who don't really write code, instead opt to just accept what a WYSIWYG software program outputs (Dreamweaver, etc), then you may not know such things, which is understandable as most designers don't really "learn" HTML & CSS nowadays, they just learn how to design graphics in a WYSIWYG program that outputs fairly friendly, CSS based code for use. Most designers are graphic designers after all.

Good point about mockups... though not what I was referring to for illustrative purposes vs. actual live sites.

It was also a general statement Forsaken, not a "You must change" statement or such, nor was it directed. So please feel free to stick your sarcasm where it fits.

 

[mrGTB]

It was also a general statement Forsaken, not a "You must change" statement or such, nor was it directed. So please feel free to stick your sarcasm where it fits.

Don't temp me to say it.

 

[AzzidReign]

It was also a general statement Forsaken, not a "You must change" statement or such, nor was it directed. So please feel free to stick your sarcasm where it fits.

lol The only like I see this post getting is from mrGTB, internet troll of the year.

But on topic, Forsaken has picked up this design job for me (which has been a godsend). Within roughly 6 hours or so, he's been able to get much of the design done. So far, I'm happy with how things are progressing

 

[Kim]

But on topic, Forsaken has picked up this design job for me (which has been a godsend). Within roughly 6 hours or so, he's been able to get much of the design done. So far, I'm happy with how things are progressing

Glad you found someone to take on the job for you SevenSins, even happier that you got Forsaken to do it, you are in excellent well qualified, well experienced hands there.

 

[Kim]

That is so far from inaccurate, its not funny.

"So far" from inaccurate would make it accurate, wouldn't it?

 

[iTuN3r]

lol The only like I see this post getting is from mrGTB, internet troll of the year.

But on topic, Forsaken has picked up this design job for me (which has been a godsend). Within roughly 6 hours or so, he's been able to get much of the design done. So far, I'm happy with how things are progressing

Congrats told ya these guys are awesome from every prospect .

 

[Anthony Parsons]

"So far" from inaccurate would make it accurate, wouldn't it?

My bad... had just woken up and having morning coffee, sorry... my brain doesn't function fully until after morning coffee and shower. Awesome pickup!

 

[Forsaken]

That is so far from accurate, its not funny.

Firefox 3.6 supported gradient. http://www.w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_firefox.asp (2 years now)
Safari 4. http://www.w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_safari.asp (3 years now)
Google Chrome has pretty much always supported it.
Intenet Explorer 5.5 started to support css gradient.

The ease of "webkit" gradient, being a single line or two, that is newer browsers (still some are two years + now), though gradient has been capable in CSS for years... you just had to write a bit more in order to get it to work and hack it for each browser, thus a simple .png gradient has been easier and less time consuming.

Those who don't really write code, instead opt to just accept what a WYSIWYG software program outputs (Dreamweaver, etc), then you may not know such things, which is understandable as most designers don't really "learn" HTML & CSS nowadays, they just learn how to design graphics in a WYSIWYG program that outputs fairly friendly, CSS based code for use. Most designers are graphic designers after all.

Good point about mockups... though not what I was referring to for illustrative purposes vs. actual live sites.

It was also a general statement Forsaken, not a "You must change" statement or such, nor was it directed. So please feel free to stick your sarcasm where it fits.

Browsers currently mostly support prefixed implementation, and not the W3C compliant implementation; it is also still in testing and is still being built. Until it is the W3C compliant implementation, it isn't enough to be standard.

The reason why image based gradients are used is because you have greater control in most cases, which isn't always the case with CSS gradients (Seeing as they've been updated within the last year to make them more extensible). They also tend to be quirky and don't always work the same cross-browser (They mostly do now, but there are still issues).

You cannot use a WYSIWYG editor for XenForo, you can only use the code editor mode of something like Dreamweaver for WebDav, and then the only things available are auto-indent, code completion, highlighting and a few other things that are for productivity. Before you run your mouth, at least have the facts straight. The majority of designers (I mean designers, not the ones who do color edits and a few small changes) know how code works, even those that are mostly graphic designers. I myself am a web designer, though I have a background in 3D modeling and animation from Full Sail, and I obviously know how to code. If you've ever seen my sites I keep image usage to a minimum (Most of which is backgrounds for backward compliance) and the average file size is from 1kb to 30kb (For a logo or larger logo that requires a bigger pixel area).

You made a general statement that PSD's were dated; PSD's aren't dated, they're part of the design process and are a requirement for professional work. They're also required for image selection because no site can be completely image-less unless you want something lack luster and boring. Images are part of design, even minimalism, which I've seen you talk about. You don't understand that either as minimalism is more the limiting of elements, and not the complete removal of images. Minimalism is large white space, clean design and relatively sparse (Depending on the designer), not boring image-less design.

The sarcasm is because you obviously don't know what you're talking about, and you lectured designers on design and what to use and what not to use. Sorry, most of us have been doing this for longer than you even realize what CSS3 was capable of, so you really have no right to lecture any of us.

Toodles, I'll not be responding again as I have better things to do and I'm sure Mike/Brogan/Kier won't appreciate it in the slightest to have another thread of back and forth bickering.

 

[Pro]

I really don't feel like reading all the drama in the thread, but I just wanted to drop in and say Forsaken is beast at coding AND graphics. I've paid him to do custom work on my sites multiple times and have never been let down. I am pretty picky too

 

[Dad.]

Anyone? I've tried Audentio or w/e...but it's been a few days and they haven't replied to my request. Any people here looking to do a skin coding job?

Sometimes people never receive our response email, did you check your junk folder? If you tell me your request ID, I can see if it even went through correctly.

 

[AzzidReign]

Doesn't matter now...if you read the thread someone else already picked up and finished the job. Thank you for trying though...