[kmfrk]

I imagine it'd look fine on a MacBook Air. It doesn't on a 23" monitor, that's for sure.

I want to believe that the people behind it didn't bother to test it on different viewports, but I have created websites that look fine on everything from iPhones to large monitors without writing viewport-specific CSS.

It just seems incredibly sloppy, which is hard to believe for a company like ALA.

[oulipian]

The home page looks terrible on my 13" Macbook Pro, the illustration takes up almost the entire screen. Everything feels oversized and unbalanced.

[DanBC]

> but I have created websites that look fine on everything

Just checking, but really "look fine on everything", or "need to be zoomed in by many people"?

[kmfrk]

Nah, it looks fine. You can zoom in, if you want, of course, but it's entirely readable on a retina screen.

Of course, those have been very sparse in layout such as blogs, so it's not a solution that fits all, but in a case like this, it would work just as well.

A site like Hacker News obviously needs optimization for different viewports.

[DanBC]

> You can zoom in, if you want, of course,

It's pleasing to be in a situation where I can say (about ALA5.0) "you can zoom out, if you want, of course" :p

[bryne]

It's much more likely that you're creating websites that fail accessibility guidelines and that many people are forced to zoom in to read.

100%/16px is standard for article body copy.

[Silhouette]

The intro in the linked article is set with a 24px font size and 960px width. For me, on a good desktop screen, that is uncomfortably large on both counts for a full paragraph of body text.

The main part of the article, set at 18px with about 700px width, is sensible IMHO.