I agree with and support Cat's statement
Printable View
I agree with and support Cat's statement
In that case i dislike it. Ha!
Damn, now thats a rogue.
Hate to say it, but either Wiseman has become more tolerant with Bandwidth issues, or it would be better for you to get rid of a so "heavy" avatar.
Not obstant, leaving this aside, i like a lot that avatar, princess! ^^ very nice images.
I don't thikn it would be that big, besides he agreed with Raij's as well, and both are amazingly cool moving ones.
<font color="#345E81" size="1">[ April 05, 2005 01:23 PM: Message edited by: Dreamer Hyper ]</font>
Hostboard's way faster, so we're far more leninet now, Mel.
There's one thing I've been silent about even knowing it well... That's why I used to make no comments.
Avatars load only once, then they are stored by your browser. Your browser asks the server whether the file has changed or not - the modification date. Once they have been loaded once, they are as fast as any other - 2 latencies.
However, you still don't want larger avatars, because it hurts the first time (and everybody has to download the new avatar); it usually means you're using a larger picture (over 96?96) and this makes avatars look crappy (and deformed, if aspect ratio != 1); and it allows for longer, more annoying animated GIFs (even though I think half real browser users will have them play just once or completely disabled because animations are so annoying while you read). Finally, longer avatars take longer to update and they have a higher probability to fail (i.e. users getting an infamous "red x") under heavy server loads.
So the bottom line is: an efficient avatar is small and non-animated, and most importantly, exactly 96?96 pixels.
Hmm... i was missing Wiseman complaining about animated gifs and huge avatars... xd... anyway, i guess that still in a Internet Environment like this, keeping things small, and simple is mandatory.
A new av for me! Dark, from DNAngel.
Awesome Melfice(I meant your ave [img]tongue.gif[/img] )
who's he?