DS>  The same is true nowadays for websites. My HTML knowledge is VERY   
   DS>BASIC...and it's easier for those who do NOT have a fast computer,   
   DS>and/or who are still on dial-up internet access...and that's true in   
   DS>many of the rural areas of Arkansas. With a simplistic format (no fancy   
   DS>videos, audio, graphics, etc.), it doesn't take the page forever and a   
   DS>day to load up.   
      
   DS>  Besides, when I visit a website, I don't want to have to look to find   
   DS>a needle in a haystack, for the one piece of information I'm looking   
   DS>for.   
      
   DS>  Yet, the "basic site" offends all those with faster computers and DSL   
   DS>or broadband connections, because they want a site with all the bells,   
   DS>whistles, and graphics. The thing is, if a site is "loaded up", those on   
   DS>dial-up internet, with slower computers, or even using speech   
   DS>synthesizers to view pages, will visit that "loaded site" ONLY   
   DS>ONCE...and tell others "what a lousy site it is".   
      
   DS>  In this regard, it's best to have the main page with 2 links...one for   
   DS>the "basic page", and one for the "loaded page". That way, people can   
   DS>choose which one they want. Sometimes, you can get a webmaster to do   
   DS>both pages, but workload wise, it's better to have 2 separate   
   DS>webmasters. To me, it's the K.I.S.S. philosophy...Keep It Short And   
   DS>Simple.   
      
   In my day that was "Keep it Simple Stupid!!  :-)  :-)   
   ---   
    þ SLMR 2.1a þ Typo Tom strikes agaoin   
    * Origin: Check Out Doc's QWK Mail  Via Web BBS > DocsPlace.org  (1:123/140)