I need some help, website is looking all chopped up on windows but not on mac os x? I did 3 revisions all look the chopped up any hints or reasons on why? http://getgifts4nothing.com/225/index.html http://getgifts4nothing.com/812/index.html http://getgifts4nothing.com/1415/index.html
The best thing I can recommend is to not use percentages, in your css you have the height set to 100%, when I build websites I try to never use any type of percentages if I want to make the site cross platform. Also when I looked on your code you saved all your images as pngs. That will make the site load much slower than if you were to use either gifs or jpgs.
You may try to clean up your code: remove the property 'height' in your code and set the property 'valign' = "top" You've got too much table cells that break up your layout. Try minimizing them especially those concerned with text ie. your middle column. For such layout you'll need such table: <table> <tr><th colspan="3">Your heading logo</th></tr> <tr> <td>Menu with background images</td> <td>Content</td> <td>Background images</td> </tr> </table>
For the most part, I'd say in general the code is a miserable /FAIL/ just because of the endless table HELL, the use of the IMG tag for presentational images (that **** belongs in your CSS), and the total lack of anything resembling MODERN markup. As I've said of a great number of pages of late, there is more of 1997 to this code than 2008. Of course, the design is a total and miserable /FAIL/ anyways because of the absurdly undersized and illegible fonts. What is that? 8px? LESS? I have to zoom in 300% to make it approach legible in Opera. Out of curiousity, what browser DOES it work in under OSX? I'm seeing it broken in both IE 5.2 and Safari 2 on 10.4.8 - though it works in Safari 3 windows (?!?) Uhm, since when? Right format for the right job. PNG tends to make smaller files than GIF for images that need 17-256 colors. Only ALPHA and 16 bit .png tend to be fat bloated pigs. GIF only makes smaller files if it can be done in 16 colors or less, and even then only if there are less than 4K pixels... given that he's got lineart and gradients, JPEG might not be an attractive option being it's a lossy format. That said he does seem to have 738k of images on a website that shouldn't even break the 100k mark. Piss poor encoding - but since he's working from a Mac, and likely from Adobe, he's already starting out nuetered so far as tools are concerned.
To answer a quote with a quote... Does it work in Firefox or Opera under OSX for you? (does not do so here) Though 99% of your problem is likely from using tables, img tags instead of backgrounds, and raw slicing instead of compositing from the layers in the original design. -- edit -- huh, changed your post while I was replying There's a time limit on editing.
To follow up with some of deathshadow's statements, you may be able to correct some of the issues on your page by writing code that is not deprecated. Take your pages and drop the urls in the w3.org html validator. You'll see which of your tags and attributes are no longer valid.