Post by: Praxis on March 31, 2004, 10:18:57 am
Would you mind fixing this tiny error on your main page that is giving people all kinds of trouble?
On the main page at www.taldren.com, there is the following code:
<p><img src="maingrafx\Doormat.jpg" width="470" height="350" usemap="#DoorMap" border="0">
at the src="maingrafx\Doormat.jpg", the slash is backwards. It SHOULD read src="maingrafx/Doormat.jpg".
Because of this mistake in your HTML code, the only browser that can view your webpage is Internet Exploiter, er, Exploder, er, Explorer.
While it's good to support the most popular browser (even though its a peice of crap, people just use whats installed on their machine), its a very bad idea indeed to not support everything else.
Netscape, Mozilla, Mozilla Firefox, Safari, and all other web browsers are UNABLE TO VIEW THE IMAGE ON YOUR FRONTPAGE. Without the image, they can't see where the buttons are, which makes it very hard for the user.
Internet Explorer is the only browser without popup blocking and tab browsing that I know of- many people are switching to Mozilla FireFox because of that. As it is right now, Linux users are completely blocked from viewing your site (unless they know the forums.taldren.com address), and Mac users are forced to use Internet Exploiter Mac Edition (a peice of crap). And Windows users with Mozilla *points at self* have to guess where the forums button is.
Please fix this error- its just one character! Thank you.
Post by: Toasty0 on March 31, 2004, 10:27:46 am
It is a known issue and will be rendered correctly in the next version of the site.
Best,
Jerry
Post by: Praxis on March 31, 2004, 10:31:42 am
Quote:
Ok, the flippant response would be to suggest that you fix your browser usage--but that is said in jest.
It is a known issue and will be rendered correctly in the next version of the site.
Best,
Jerry
Fix browser usage...hmmm...considering that only one browser works (IE), and that it is a peice of crap...No thanks.
How long until the next version is out? The same page has been there for AGES...
Post by: Maxillius on March 31, 2004, 11:04:43 am
Post by: Praxis on March 31, 2004, 02:26:24 pm
I've tried Safari. However, Safari is standards based (unlike IE which is full of Microsoft proprietary junk), so it renders the same as Mozilla. No go. Though it works if i type forums.taldren.com...
You use a Mac? What OS version?
Post by: Death_Merchant on March 31, 2004, 02:47:13 pm
I also don't care, as I've setup tabs in Safari to open multiple forum pages with a single click.
No pop-ups, renders faster, and bookmarks auto-synced with all my Macs everywhere.
IE??? What's IE????? Sounds like something you scream when in pain...
IEEEEEEEEEEEE!!!!
Post by: Capt_Spade on March 31, 2004, 02:58:31 pm
Post by: 3dot14 on March 31, 2004, 05:16:28 pm
Quote:
IE - Internet Explorer
All the more reason to scream out in pain...
Post by: Pestalence on March 31, 2004, 08:09:00 pm
because people use different browsers provided by their ISP, which most times is based on something other than Internet Explorer.. or they experiment with browsers that may offer easier use than Internet Explorer...
however let's look at some facts..
Web languages..
internet expolrer works with them all
Images.. internet Explorer allows for almost any type of image to be shown
internet Explorer allows for frames. arrays, transitions, and a host of other stuff to work that other browsers miss or bypass...
internet Explorer self corrects javascripting errors in web pages..
and come to think of it.. The people who developed the internet and are continuing to expand user ability to create more and more dynamic programming abilities for the net.. and guess what they use as their primary and only test bed, in coorporation with Microsoft...
Internet Explorer..
and as for privacy and security issues.. it only takes 5 min to go into Internet Explorer properties and set the securities correctly that will prevent 3rd party cookies and unwanted code from accessing or hijacking your system...
I have used Mozilla, AO Hell's Netscape, and about 10 others.. I keep going back to Internet Explorer as I have found that it is the only browser that allows me to view web pages the tay there were meant to be seen, the way the creator of a web site intnded..
as for those that use other browsers that allow them to prevent resizing the web pages.. IE has that ability also..
override page fonts.. IE has that.. Override Page Colors.. IE has that...
there is not a single thing on the net that you can send me to that IE can't handle....
as for Microsoft ProPriety... what the heck is that?? talking about pop-ups??? just run As-Aware 6 and remove Alexia from the IE 6 SP 1 package.... the pop-ups will be gone...
I mean why does everyone Hate IE when every other browser in the world is trying to be as flexable as IE but keep coming up short??? Why does every other browser try to work like IE and fail??
because IE has the patents and copywrite on every net language out there...
other browsers have to change the way they work by at least 14% to bypass the patent and copywrite laws.. as such, they lose the ability to see certain things on the web...
I mean can someone explain why they want to lose functionality???
I'm really at a loss...
Please someone explain it to me.. what makes Opera or Netscape better than IE when they have problems viewing web pages completely or when they change a page's layout to something other than what the creator made???? I really don't understand.
Post by: Strafer on March 31, 2004, 09:34:25 pm
Post by: Toasty0 on March 31, 2004, 11:09:14 pm
Quote:Quote:
Ok, the flippant response would be to suggest that you fix your browser usage--but that is said in jest.
It is a known issue and will be rendered correctly in the next version of the site.
Best,
Jerry
Fix browser usage...hmmm...considering that only one browser works (IE), and that it is a peice of crap...No thanks.
How long until the next version is out? The same page has been there for AGES...
Why is it that most anti-Ms zealots almost always exhibit some sort of humor handicap?
Anyway, as this is going to be such a serious subject I guess we should treat it with the awesome weight has on so many internet surfing lives...
Code:
Major Versions Count Share(%)
---------------------------------------------------------
OP 0 1 0.00
OP 3 1 0.00
OP 5 2 0.01
OP 6 24 0.06
OP 7 452 1.17
OP ALL 480 1.25
SF 100 21 0.05
SF 125 405 1.05
SF 134 1 0.00
SF 85 143 0.37
SF ALL 570 1.48
NS 2 1 0.00
NS 3 4 0.01
NS 4 316 0.82
NS 5 3094 8.03
NS 6 2 0.01
NS ALL 3417 8.87
IE 2 1 0.00
IE 3 11 0.03
IE 4 94 0.24
IE 5 3983 10.34
IE 6 23925 62.10
IE 7 1 0.00
IE ALL 28015 72.72
A quick scan of those stats show that it is does not make economic sense to waste the man hours writing or re-writing code for a browser that is used by such a tiny fraction of the normal market.
Best,
Jerry
Post by: Death_Merchant on March 31, 2004, 11:28:45 pm
Quote:
Why is it that most anti-Ms zealots almost always exhibit some sort of humor handicap?
Humor handicap???
Come on ToastyO...
IEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!!!!!
That's funny....
Death "The Funny Zealot" Merchant
Post by: Lieutenant_Q on March 31, 2004, 11:30:28 pm
Quote:
IE 2 1 0.00
IE 3 11 0.03
Some ones still using those old things...and where can i get this IE 7 that they are referring to.
Post by: Warden on March 31, 2004, 11:49:54 pm
Quote:
Quote:
IE 2 1 0.00
IE 3 11 0.03
Wonder if that is the new IE to be included with longhorn ? I always thought it was just another .1 or something to 6.
I know you wont be able to download it, 6.0sp1 is the last free IE apparently, but my sources could be wrong.
Post by: Praxis on April 01, 2004, 01:53:10 am
Quote:
A quick scan of those stats show that it is does not make economic sense to waste the man hours writing or re-writing code for a browser that is used by such a tiny fraction of the normal market.
Best,
Jerry
I'm sorry, but you're reasoning is completely flawed.
When you write code, it should be written for INTERNATIONAL STANDARDS. Standards are set by an international organization (rather than a company) and are readable by all the browsers.
ALL of the world's browsers can read HTML.
However, Microsoft Internet Exploiter adds a bunch of proprietary junk AND DOESN'T TELL DEVELOPERS THE DIFFERENCE.
When you write the code, write it with standards, not with proprietary Microsoft junk. If Mozilla can read it, then it will work with all the other browsers, including Internet Explorer.
Additionally...
Wow, it does take many man hours to CHANGE ONE SYMBOL in the entire web page, doesn't it?
Post by: Praxis on April 01, 2004, 02:20:43 am
Quote:
I find threads like this ammusing.. why?
because people use different browsers provided by their ISP, which most times is based on something other than Internet Explorer.. or they experiment with browsers that may offer easier use than Internet Explorer...
however let's look at some facts..
Okay, I have to chuckle at some of your 'facts' here. Here we go.
Quote:
Web languages..
internet expolrer works with them all
okay, heres the thing. So do all the other browsers. Except for one little thing- Internet Exploiter adds a couple of little Microsoft proprietary junk in there. For example, its the only browser that will still work if you put the slash the other way. The problem is that these Microsoft proprietary are undocumented- a web designer can make something and he sees it run in IE, so he ASSUMES it works, but doesn't realize he's just made an IE only page.
Quote:
Images.. internet Explorer allows for almost any type of image to be shown
Wrong- in fact, Internet Explorer is the only browser that does NOT support 8-bit PNG images. Download Mozilla Firefox- much better.
It also has the most security holes.
Quote:
internet Explorer allows for frames. arrays, transitions, and a host of other stuff to work that other browsers miss or bypass...
You've obviously never used another browser in at least a couple years.
Frames, arrays, transitions? These are standards! If a browser didn't have these, it'd be crap. ALL of the browsers i've mentioned (Safari, Camino, Mozilla, FireFox, Netscape, Opera) support these. They also support more image formats, Shockwave and Flash, Java, and all the other web languages.
And yet...
Out of all the browsers I've mentioned, Internet Explorer is the ONLY ONE that does NOT have Tab browsing or popup blocking, and has the most security holes.
Quote:
internet Explorer self corrects javascripting errors in web pages..
Big deal. So do the others.
Quote:
and come to think of it.. The people who developed the internet and are continuing to expand user ability to create more and more dynamic programming abilities for the net.. and guess what they use as their primary and only test bed, in coorporation with Microsoft...
Internet Explorer..
ROFL, wow, now Microsoft is developing the internet and is the only test bed? I knew they were trying to take over the universe, but this...
LOL Microsoft is NOT working with the people who developed the internet, and are hardly doing much to create more dynamic programming abilities. Neither XML or DHTML or Flash or Java were made by Microsoft. The much vaunted .NET was copied off a similar system from someone else and isn't that big of a deal anyway- the system has been around for ages, and was just never really implemented.
Quote:
and as for privacy and security issues.. it only takes 5 min to go into Internet Explorer properties and set the securities correctly that will prevent 3rd party cookies and unwanted code from accessing or hijacking your system...
That locks the front door. What, you never noticed the hundreds of IE patches constantly being hurled at you with Windows update? Theres all kinds of open back doors. Not to mention some coding mistakes allowing web sites to tell you that you're being sent to one site when you're really at another.
Quote:
I have used Mozilla, AO Hell's Netscape, and about 10 others.. I keep going back to Internet Explorer as I have found that it is the only browser that allows me to view web pages the tay there were meant to be seen, the way the creator of a web site intnded..
Old Netscape sucked.
Try the NEW Mozilla FireFox. Not normal Mozilla, but FireFox. You'll see how incredibly better.
Quote:
as for those that use other browsers that allow them to prevent resizing the web pages.. IE has that ability also..
Resizing web page problems? Never had that in Safari or Mozilla. On the other hand i once opened a flash movie that gave me so many IE popups the computer crashed, and also caused all the popups to jump around the screen. Mozilla blocked the popups.
Quote:
override page fonts.. IE has that.. Override Page Colors.. IE has that...
Other browsers have that. What are you bragging about?
Quote:
there is not a single thing on the net that you can send me to that IE can't handle....
www.originalicons.com/smile.html
Quote:
as for Microsoft ProPriety... what the heck is that?? talking about pop-ups??? just run As-Aware 6 and remove Alexia from the IE 6 SP 1 package.... the pop-ups will be gone...
You don't get it, do you...
like they did with MS-Java...they do it again with IE.
They take a perfect product (Java was designed to let you create a program in Java that would run on any OS, be it Windows, Mac, or Linux), then start injecting proprietary additions and 'improvements' into it. They don't document it. The result? A programmer might make something in MS-Java, and it works in Windows, but they don't realize that it doesn't work on a Mac or Linux. Microsoft got sued over this.
They're doing it again with IE.
There's something you don't seem to understand: STANDARDS. The international standards are set by a group of organizations. The standard for the web, for example, is HTML. The standard DVD format is MPEG. This keeps multiple companies from trying to push THEIR formats on to people.
The other browsers ABIDE BY THESE STANDARDS set. They follow the law. A page designed for Mozilla will run fine in Safari and Netscape and Firefox.
Internet Explorer does not. It reads the standards, but it also creates its own set of rules, and doesn't tell developers which are for IE and which are standards.
So IE will read the standards, like a page designed for Mozilla, but sometimes a page made for IE will not always run in other browsers.
Does this make the other browsers inferior? No. Its Microsoft's way of eliminating the competition, by attempting to cut off the other browsers. Fortunately most good web design programs (like Dreamweaver) will make the code work with all browsers, stopping Microsuck in their tracks, but Microsoft Frontpage is infamous for producing IE only pages if they are more complex than a few lines.
Microsoft is in big trouble over this.
Quote:
I mean why does everyone Hate IE when every other browser in the world is trying to be as flexable as IE but keep coming up short??? Why does every other browser try to work like IE and fail??
ROFL...come short? IE needs to be more flexable. It's buggy, easily hackable crap. Microsoft just tries to trick idiots into making IE only web pages- and it works often.
Quote:
because IE has the patents and copywrite on every net language out there...
other browsers have to change the way they work by at least 14% to bypass the patent and copywrite laws.. as such, they lose the ability to see certain things on the web...
WRONG. View the standards arguement.
The other browsers follow international standards- IE does not.
Quote:
I mean can someone explain why they want to lose functionality???
We don't. We want to gain functionality by ditching IE.
Quote:
I'm really at a loss...
Please someone explain it to me.. what makes Opera or Netscape better than IE when they have problems viewing web pages completely or when they change a page's layout to something other than what the creator made???? I really don't understand.
Please. They only have trouble viewing web pages when the designer made faulty IE only code. In 99% of web pages, ALL BROWSERS WILL WORK.
Heck, I made a page in Dreamweaver, it looks BETTER in Safari.
On the other hand, Mozilla and the rest have superior Tabbed-browsing interfaces, built in popup blocking, skinnable interfaces, and many other bits of superiority- AND THEY SUPPORT THE STANDARDS.
I'm not just going to sit by and help Microsoft try to control the standards of the internet by using IE.
Post by: Praxis on April 01, 2004, 02:23:20 am
Quote:
Wonder if that is the new IE to be included with longhorn ? I always thought it was just another .1 or something to 6.
I know you wont be able to download it, 6.0sp1 is the last free IE apparently, but my sources could be wrong.
Correct. IE 7 is for Longhorn. It copies the Safari interface down to the bone (even having the same brushed metal interface, and similar shaped and colored buttons) and popup blocking.
That's right folks, Microsoft is STILL copying Apple, and they're only 5 years behind! (by the time Longhorn comes out)
Post by: Toasty0 on April 01, 2004, 02:49:25 am
Quote:Quote:
A quick scan of those stats show that it is does not make economic sense to waste the man hours writing or re-writing code for a browser that is used by such a tiny fraction of the normal market.
Best,
Jerry
I'm sorry, but you're reasoning is completely flawed.
When you write code, it should be written for INTERNATIONAL STANDARDS. Standards are set by an international organization (rather than a company) and are readable by all the browsers.
Because it works over and above the limtied W3C standards it is flawed?
Additionally, using your logic Netscrape is a total junk browser. Care to guess why and what widely accepted html design it fails to render properly? Don't want to box you in with that table..
Quote:Not true. Some render various html standards in various manners. Some still have not become fully compliant with html 4.0 and CSS 2.0 including IE, NS, and Opera.
ALL of the world's browsers can read HTML.
Quote:
However, Microsoft Internet Exploiter adds a bunch of proprietary junk AND DOESN'T TELL DEVELOPERS THE DIFFERENCE.
*choke*
I don't know if I should start with links to Com and Com+ or go somthing as simple as this:
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=fh;EN-US;ie&Product=iep
and this
http://www.microsoft.com/windows/ie/techinfo/developers/default.asp
Quote:
When you write the code, write it with standards, not with proprietary Microsoft junk. If Mozilla can read it, then it will work with all the other browsers, including Internet Explorer.
So? Why can't the other browser--who I remind you are the least used--instaed find the robustness to read that line of code? If them silly folks at MS can do it why can't others?
Quote:
Additionally...
Wow, it does take many man hours to CHANGE ONE SYMBOL in the entire web page, doesn't it?
Oh, I'm sorry, I meant the man hours involved in bringing your weak-featured, least-used browser up to the robust standards of IE6.1.
Best,
Jerry
Post by: Demandred on April 01, 2004, 05:59:12 am
Quote:Not true. Some render various html standards in various manners. Some still have not become fully compliant with html 4.0 and CSS 2.0 including IE, NS, and Opera.
ALL of the world's browsers can read HTML.
Actually, IE isn't even fully compliant with CSS 1.0. Not to mention the bugs - height:100% should mean exactly that, and it doesn't. It parses in IE as about 120% if you want to create a <div> container for a page. I really couldn't care less about Microsoft additions to their browser but they really should follow standards. They didn't create the internet and they don't own it. Oh, and the standard web language is now XHTML - seperating the presentation layer from the data layer makes a lot of sense.
Post by: Maxillius on April 01, 2004, 09:24:16 am
VERY sweet! Especially with the 2-button mouse that's on a different machine every time I go in there
I want one I want one I want one I want one!!!!!
Post by: Praxis on April 01, 2004, 09:38:41 am
Quote:
Because it works over and above the limtied W3C standards it is flawed?
No, the flawed part of your reasoning is this:
IE uses the standards and also has its own proprietary stuff it can read.
All the other browsers use the standards.
The extra proprietary stuff from IE doesn't have any extra FEATURES, it just lets you write it in a different way.
There is no advantage to writing the web page in the IE-proprietary format (slashes backwards, etc).
So why would you write a web page as IE only and cut off all other browsers, when there is NO ADVANTAGE?
IE does NOT go "over and above the limited W3C standards". The only thing it does is lets you put a slash the other way or write some HTML code a little differently. THIS SERVES NO ADVANTAGE except to lock out non IE users and lock out Linux users COMPLETELY. However, often developers don't realize that the page they just made is IE only.
Did you know that XML and XHTML and DHTML are all W3C standards? CSS style sheets are standards. I'm not sure if Java or Flash are standards, but almost all modern browsers can read them anyway.
And how are the W3C standards limited? You take out HTML, XML, XHTML, DHTML, and CSS, you have no web pages.
So tell me, how does IE go "above and beyond" W3C? All they did was take the same standards and change a bit of the way it could be written to trick people into writing pages for IE only.
IE is only the most popular browser because it is bundled with Windows- most users don't go searching for another browser. They figure, "I have this, here, it works, it must be good" and they don't even realize better alternatives EXIST. If Microsoft were to be forced by the courts to either unbundle IE, or bundle competitor browsers with Windows and give users a choice on what to install, you would see IE's popularity crash through the floor.
Look at the Macintosh case.
Internet Explorer was the default built in browser in Mac OS 9. After a couple years, OS X came out, and the default and only built in browser was Internet Explorer Mac Edition (and since OS X was a completely new OS, there were no other browsers). About two years later, until the release of Jaguarr, there were now Netscape and Mozilla Mac OS X editions, but since IE was bundled, MOST MAC USERS USED THAT. Very similar to whats happening with Windows, no? Then Jaguar(OS 10.2) came out, bundling TWO browsers- Microsoft Internet Explorer Mac edition, and Apple's new Safari (still in beta). Safari was later updated to the 1.0 version.
A year later Panther (OS 10.3) came and had (I believe) Safari 1.2. About a year after Jaguar (and Safari's) release, Microsoft announced that Macs had a very good browser in Safari, and that they would no longer be developing Internet Explorer for lack of popular support.
Within a year of bundling a new browser with the OS IN ADDITION to IE, Apple had completely blown Mac IE's user base out of the water.
Quote:
Additionally, using your logic Netscrape is a total junk browser. Care to guess why and what widely accepted html design it fails to render properly? Don't want to box you in with that table..
You're telling me Netscape fails to render table's properly? You sure it wasn't fixed?
I never actually use netscape, myself- my browser of choice is Mozilla FireFox.
Quote:Not true. Some render various html standards in various manners. Some still have not become fully compliant with html 4.0 and CSS 2.0 including IE, NS, and Opera.
ALL of the world's browsers can read HTML.
Most are HTML 4.0 compliant. CSS is NOT HTML, but CSS is read by most browsers, including Mozilla, properly.
Quote:
*choke*
I don't know if I should start with links to Com and Com+ or go somthing as simple as this:
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=fh;EN-US;ie&Product=iep
and this
http://www.microsoft.com/windows/ie/techinfo/developers/default.asp
See what I mean...you don't know the difference.
to quote:
Internet Explorer for Developers
Develop rich Web-based applications with Internet Explorer 6
Internet Explorer 6 has a powerful programming model that includes:
* support for the Extensible Markup Language (XML)
* enhanced Dynamic HTML features that further enrich Microsoft Windows?based Web development
* increased support for standards based on Internet technologies, which saves time for developers writing rich Web-based applications
-------
XML and DHTML? Those aren't proprietary.
Nothing on those links lists the proprietary Microsoft IE HTML code that is different from the other browsers.
Most of the other browsers can read XML and DHTML.
Quote:
So? Why can't the other browser--who I remind you are the least used--instaed find the robustness to read that line of code? If them silly folks at MS can do it why can't others?
Why should the other browsers abandon standards and copy Microsoft?
Microsoft doesn't release their source code, making it VERY hard to find out all of the little IE only junk Microsoft added into Internet Explorer. Without the source code, they can't find out what the difference is, and I doubt they want to start injecting Microsoft's code into their browsers for fear of being sued for copying.
Quote:
Oh, I'm sorry, I meant the man hours involved in bringing your weak-featured, least-used browser up to the robust standards of IE6.1.
HA! Robust standards? IE 6 uses the exact same standards are the rest of the browsers, and it can read slashes backwards and a few other sloppy details. That's right, sloppy- the standards have strict HTML code, while IE lets the developer be sloppy, get the slashes wrong, and do other stuff to mess up the code and cause it to be IE only.
The other browsers can do everything IE 6 can do and more.
Heck, other than reading sloppily designed IE-only web pages, Mozilla Firefox can do ANYTHING IE can do, be it viewing Flash/Shockwave images, Java, DHTML, XML, XHTML, CSS, standard HTML, or anythingthing else.
Except YOU DON'T HAVE TABBED BROWSING OR POPUP BLOCKING. Muwahaha!
Oh yes, I know that the service pack tacked it on, but Mozilla has had it a good couple YEARS. And you STILL don't have tabbed browsing.
So tell me. WHY would you want to use a browser who's only advantage is that it can read sloppily written code, that has thousands of security vulnerabilities with more being discovered each week, and doesn't have the features that EVERY OTHER MODERN BROWSER has such as Tab browsing and popup blocking?
Post by: Praxis on April 01, 2004, 09:42:11 am
Quote:
Sadly, I don't own one, but the computer lab at the college has 8 G3/500s running OS X 10.3 Panther.
VERY sweet! Especially with the 2-button mouse that's on a different machine every time I go in there
I want one I want one I want one I want one!!!!!
Ah yes, Panther
Don't you love Panther? Have you pressed F9 yet? If not, try it.Open a whole bunch of Windows in Finder, Safari, and IE. Remember, completely FILL THE SCREEN UP with Windows.
Now press F9 and watch what happens
You'll love it. Then try F10, and F11.I recently bought off ebay for $450 an old PowerBook Pismo G3/500 and installed Panther on it. Runs great. I also own a 1 GHz Powerbook G4 (G4 has more performance per mhz than G3). That is one FAST laptop...and the Geforce FX 5200 helps
. And I WISH I had a dual-2 GHz G5...*drool*...BTW if you use the One-button mouse, when you hold Ctrl down on the keyboard, it will function as a right click. Just a quick Mac-hint
Post by: Praxis on April 01, 2004, 09:50:53 am
Do you really want to lock out 30% of the world from viewing your web page by writing it sloppily (so only IE can read it)?
Post by: Toasty0 on April 01, 2004, 10:07:32 am
Quote:
Did you know that XML and XHTML and DHTML are all W3C standards? CSS style sheets are standards. I'm not sure if Java or Flash are standards, but almost all modern browsers can read them anyway.
And how are the W3C standards limited? You take out HTML, XML, XHTML, DHTML, and CSS, you have no web pages.
That question was alrady answered. I think Pestalence posted a compelling answer to your question.
Post by: Toasty0 on April 01, 2004, 10:18:02 am
Quote:
BTW, Toasy? Remember that chart you posted? According to that, 30% of users are NOT running IE. Linux users CAN'T run IE- Mac users have Safari. AOL users have their browser (Based on Netscape, isn't it?). Older Mac users are stuck with IE (OS 9 and 10.0/10.1- OS 9 you can download Netscape, but the Mac edition is crap, and all the new browsers are for OS 10. Some of the browsers work on 10.1, but the majority of the browsers only work on 10.2 or above, so 10.0 and 10.1 users are stuck with IE).
Do you really want to lock out 30% of the world from viewing your web page by writing it sloppily (so only IE can read it)?
Lock out? You mean dumb down my pages, don't you?
Let's see, 72% use IE while the other 28% use a myraid of broswers that all render pages is a slightly different manner and you ask why I don't wish to expend the labor hours testing for that plathora of minor browsers that together add up to 28%--a fractured 28% I should say again.
That's like asking why PC Game makers don't develop their games for both desktop Window's OS and the Linux Kernel?
Best,
Jerry
Post by: Toasty0 on April 01, 2004, 10:22:05 am
Quote:
So tell me, how does IE go "above and beyond" W3C? All they did was take the same standards and change a bit of the way it could be written to trick people into writing pages for IE only.
Trick people?
Pardon me, I thought this was a conversation about brwoser design and usage, not some conspiracy theory about the grassy knoll and a 3rd browser.
*Toasty backs out the door*
Post by: Praxis on April 01, 2004, 10:24:06 am
Quote:Quote:
Did you know that XML and XHTML and DHTML are all W3C standards? CSS style sheets are standards. I'm not sure if Java or Flash are standards, but almost all modern browsers can read them anyway.
And how are the W3C standards limited? You take out HTML, XML, XHTML, DHTML, and CSS, you have no web pages.
That question was alrady answered. I think Pestalence posted a compelling answer to your question.
Yes, but you stated that the standards are 'limited'. They are most certainly not.
Post by: Praxis on April 01, 2004, 01:00:19 pm
Quote:
Lock out? You mean dumb down my pages, don't you?
Let's see, 72% use IE while the other 28% use a myraid of broswers that all render pages is a slightly different manner and you ask why I don't wish to expend the labor hours testing for that plathora of minor browsers that together add up to 28%--a fractured 28% I should say again.
Slightly different to the point of unnoticeable. I coded my page with Dreamweaver and tested it in Safari, Mozilla, and IE. Guess what? Mozilla and Safari rendered it exactly the same. On Mozilla and Safari one of the images was EXACTLY ONE pixel off (almost unnotiecable). Safari rendered the image more clearly than IE as well, smoothing some jagged corners.
I don't think you understand this. Safari, Mozilla, Netscape, and Opera follow the standards TO THE LETTER. That means that they will render the pages almost exactly the same. That means that if it works in one of them, it should work in all of them, AND it should work in Internet Explorer.
Coding a page sloppily will make it IE only (sloppily by slashes the wrong way, using the wrong type of quotes, etc), but if it is done with proper HTML, it will work on ALL standards based browsers- and it will work on ALL of those other 28% of browsers.
Additionally, the new version of Safari can read a number of IE only web pages, and theres a debug option to have Safari tell web pages that it is IE 6 for Windows, so that might slant the numbers a tiny bit toward IE.
Quote:
That's like asking why PC Game makers don't develop their games for both desktop Window's OS and the Linux Kernel?
That's completely different. Linux uses a completely different Kernel and graphics system (OpenGL) than Windows (DirectX). It takes hours upon hours to make something for one or the other
On the other hand, if you make something standards-compliant, it will run in ALL browsers, be it Mozilla, Internet Explorer, Safari, etc.
A better example would be this.
Let's say there were 10 different types of DVD players in the world. All of these DVD players play DVD's in the standard MPEG format. One of these DVD players, the most popular one, plays both MPEG and WMV. 70% of DVD players in the world are that type. However, it is a bit buggy, so a number of people don't like it. And WMV offers no advantages over MPEG.
Now lets say you were the DVD producer for, say, Disney. Would you make your DVD's in MPEG (so ALL DVD players can read it) or WMV (so only the one can read it)?
It's the same for browsers. It's just as easy to make a standards-complaint page as it is to make an IE only one. But there are NO ADVANTAGES to having an IE-only web page- while making a standards-complaint page allows even more people to view your page.
It's as easy as switching the slash the other way around.
Post by: Praxis on April 01, 2004, 01:02:24 pm
Quote:
Trick people?
Pardon me, I thought this was a conversation about brwoser design and usage, not some conspiracy theory about the grassy knoll and a 3rd browser.
*Toasty backs out the door*
It's quite well known that Microsoft will make certain changes to their product and not inform developers that it is ONLY for their product. The developers think that all of the other versions of the product have the same features, and so they don't realize they've made something Microsoft-only.
They did it with MS-Java (and got their butts sued big time over it) and did it again with Microsoft Internet Explorer (and are in the process of getting their butts sued over it).
Post by: Praxis on April 01, 2004, 01:13:28 pm
I opened the web page in Dreamweaver in both Mozilla and IE. The text in IE looked like text, while in Mozilla it was smooth as a Photoshop image.
Here's a good site with a comparison:
http://www.newrecruit.org/archives/2003/june/browsers
He compares IE to Firebird- the new version of FireBird is called FireFox and fixes most of the minor complaints (such as inability to drag a bookmark) he mentions.
101 things you can do in Mozilla that you can't do in IE:
http://www.xulplanet.com/ndeakin/arts/reasons.html
A very in depth browser comparison, but a bit outdated:
http://home.earthlink.net/~intelligentlife/ItemMenu/browsers.html
In fact, Toasty, I went to YOUR personal web page, and it looks perfect in Mozilla Firebird.
Post by: Taldren_Admin on April 01, 2004, 03:15:40 pm
Ann
Post by: Praxis on April 01, 2004, 03:30:04 pm
*cheers*
Cool.
Post by: Towelie on April 01, 2004, 03:32:30 pm
Post by: Towelie on April 01, 2004, 03:35:46 pm
Post by: Taldren_Admin on April 01, 2004, 04:02:30 pm
Quote:
So, when can we get some screenshots of the new website?
Screen shots? Heck very soon you will have a full screen
I don't have much left to do before it can go live but there will be more work to do once it is up. I am already rethinking for the next rev.
Ann
Post by: Death_Merchant on April 01, 2004, 04:36:45 pm
(and Praxis: Your avatar and sig image doesn't display in Safari either
)Perhaps this quote from Dave Hyatt's (one of the key devs for Safari) blog will help:
Safari has draconian XML error handling. If the file isn't well-formed, Safari won't display it. Mozilla does the same, which should come as no surprise, since the two browsers use the same open-source XML parser (expat).
I fall squarely into the draconian camp and agree with Tim Bray. Fully half of the bugs I receive in WebCore are not bugs at all, but are essentially differences in error handling and error recovery between Safari and the dominant Web browser, WinIE. None of these issues occur with XML.
If we lived in a world where browsers could refuse to display malformed content (with useful error notification of course so that authors could easily repair their content), then all of these "bugs" would simply disappear. I could focus my efforts on real DOM and CSS bugs, and not have to waste my time emulating the behavior of WinIE.
Relaxing restrictions on well-formedness is a slippery slope, and where does it end? Consider all the "helpful" rules that exist in HTML today thanks to early versions of Netscape and WinIE. Did you know that any h1-h6 tag can close any other h1-h6 tag? Try it. Open an h1, type some text and then put in a close h2. It will close up the h1 in WinIE and Mozilla. (I haven't yet fixed this "bug" in Safari.) Try specifying a close tag for a paragraph by itself. You'll get an empty paragraph in Safari, Mozilla, and WinIE.
Post by: SL-Punisher on April 01, 2004, 04:39:29 pm
Here's some humor for everyone: Move out of your parents basement and get a life!
KIDDING!
Post by: Death_Merchant on April 01, 2004, 04:48:35 pm
You kidding? I can't tell 'cause my browser won't display the emoticons......
Post by: SL-Punisher on April 01, 2004, 04:55:33 pm
Post by: Praxis on April 01, 2004, 05:47:25 pm
LOL!!!
I had one a year or so ago but both hosting sites no longer exist. I should stick a new one on there from my personal web server...
In fact, I'm gonna add my GFL sig now.
Post by: Praxis on April 01, 2004, 05:56:55 pm
Post by: Death_Merchant on April 01, 2004, 06:29:29 pm
I don't think the forum handles .php properly. Make it a jpeg or something.
BTW: If I point Safari directly to http://targ.ottergoose.net/praxissiggen.php, I can see your sig.
Tre kewl....
Post by: IKV Nemesis D7L on April 01, 2004, 06:38:34 pm
Quote:
Why doesn't it work...argh...
Code:
http://targ.ottergoose.net/praxissiggen.php
As far as I know .php is not an extension associated with images. Perhaps you need to check the image format.
Post by: Sirgod on April 01, 2004, 07:11:16 pm
Stephen
Post by: Toasty0 on April 01, 2004, 09:55:43 pm
Quote:
Maybe you don't see my sig and avatar because I don't have one...
LOL!!!
I had one a year or so ago but both hosting sites no longer exist. I should stick a new one on there from my personal web server...
In fact, I'm gonna add my GFL sig now.
I'd fix you sig for ya Prax, but then it would no longer be well formed, would it?
Try using the image /image tag instead. That's what we in thse part call UBB code.
Also, though you say you have no image, the properties of your avatar come back with this URL http://trekmeshes.starfleet.ch/thumbnails/quantumss1701e.jpg
Lastly, you use Dreamweaver? I use notepad like all good real coders do. None of that plug-n-slug for me. Real coders write their own clean code.
Best,
Jerry
Post by: IKV Nemesis D7L on April 01, 2004, 10:03:37 pm
Quote:Quote:
Maybe you don't see my sig and avatar because I don't have one...
LOL!!!
I had one a year or so ago but both hosting sites no longer exist. I should stick a new one on there from my personal web server...
In fact, I'm gonna add my GFL sig now.
I'd fix you sig for ya Prax, but then it would no longer be well formed, would it?
Try using the image /image tag instead. That's what we in thse part call UBB code.
Also, though you say you have no image, the properties of your avatar come back with this URL http://trekmeshes.starfleet.ch/thumbnails/quantumss1701e.jpg
Lastly, you use Dreamweaver? I use notepad like all good real coders do. None of that plug-n-slug for me. Real coders write their own clean code.
Best,
Jerry
Don't forget. Quote:
"Debugging is twice as hard as writing the code in the first place. Therefore, if you write the code as cleverly as possible, you are, by definition, not smart enough to debug it." - Brian W. Kernighan
Post by: Toasty0 on April 01, 2004, 10:31:24 pm
Thanks for the laugh!
Post by: SL-Punisher on April 02, 2004, 01:05:01 am
FIRE BAD FIRE BAD!
Post by: Monty on April 02, 2004, 02:13:30 am
Quote:
"Debugging is twice as hard as writing the code in the first place. Therefore, if you write the code as cleverly as possible, you are, by definition, not smart enough to debug it." - Brian W. Kernighan
Thats a fantasic quote.
I've decided to give Firefox a chance. I've used Mozilla (1.2 I think) for well over a year now. Firefox makes me feel right at home
So far so good.
I love the integrate google search... where you select text on a page, right click - choose" web search for '...; " and it brings the results up in another tab. I'm not easily pleased - honest!
Post by: Toasty0 on April 02, 2004, 03:01:14 am
Quote:
Grog no like fancy html coder program
FIRE BAD FIRE BAD!
Don't make me bring out the sheep pics again...
Post by: Praxis on April 02, 2004, 09:23:49 am
BTW as for Dreamweaver...
I don't use all the fancy buttons to do the code for me.
I use Dreamweaver ONLY for the Split-View which is quite handy. See, I can type HTMl code in one side of the screen like Notepad, and see what it looks like in real time on the other side of the screen. It's very handy.
And I occasionally use Dreamweaver to add in some popup Javascript menus because I don't know Javascript.
I've always used notepad before though.
Post by: Praxis on April 02, 2004, 09:25:56 am
Quote:
Dangit Prax, you're making us Safari guys look bad
I don't think the forum handles .php properly. Make it a jpeg or something.
BTW: If I point Safari directly to http://targ.ottergoose.net/praxissiggen.php, I can see your sig.
Tre kewl....
Do that again, and hit refresh several times, and look at the different sig images
Quote:
Code:http://targ.ottergoose.net/praxissiggen.php
As far as I know .php is not an extension associated with images. Perhaps you need to check the image format.
The images are jpeg but its within a php script that points to the jpegs. It works great on the GFL site within the img tags...
Post by: Praxis on April 02, 2004, 09:27:11 am
Quote:
Also, though you say you have no image, the properties of your avatar come back with this URL http://trekmeshes.starfleet.ch/thumbnails/quantumss1701e.jpg
Best,
Jerry
Well, I used to have an avatar, the web page it was hosted on is loooong gone, so I had completely forgotten about it.
Post by: Toasty0 on April 02, 2004, 10:18:33 am
Quote:Quote:
Also, though you say you have no image, the properties of your avatar come back with this URL http://trekmeshes.starfleet.ch/thumbnails/quantumss1701e.jpg
Best,
Jerry
Well, I used to have an avatar, the web page it was hosted on is loooong gone, so I had completely forgotten about it.
ok, Praxis, go here to discover how to post an image in your sig: http://forums.taldren.com/ubbthreads/faq.php?Cat=
Best,
Jerry
Post by: Toasty0 on April 02, 2004, 10:22:20 am
Quote:
Well, it's a very simple PHP script that displays a random 1 of 2 images. It works fine on the GFL forum between the img tags, and every time you refresh the page you get a different image. Quite cool. The browser displays it as an image fine.
BTW as for Dreamweaver...
I don't use all the fancy buttons to do the code for me.
I use Dreamweaver ONLY for the Split-View which is quite handy. See, I can type HTMl code in one side of the screen like Notepad, and see what it looks like in real time on the other side of the screen. It's very handy.
And I occasionally use Dreamweaver to add in some popup Javascript menus because I don't know Javascript.
I've always used notepad before though.
The reason I dislike Dreamweaver is that when you do use its features it writes some pretty cluttered code. If you're gonna use an HTML editor I suggest Coffee Cup or Matrix. Cuffee Cup is like 40 dollars and Matrix is free.
FWIW.
Best,
Jerry
Post by: SL-Punisher on April 02, 2004, 05:27:31 pm
Quote:Quote:
Grog no like fancy html coder program
FIRE BAD FIRE BAD!
Don't make me bring out the sheep pics again...
You act as if that's a threat. Bring em out baby Woo hoo!! Ya take it off take it ALL OFF!
Post by: Praxis on March 31, 2004, 10:18:57 am
Would you mind fixing this tiny error on your main page that is giving people all kinds of trouble?
On the main page at www.taldren.com, there is the following code:
<p><img src="maingrafx\Doormat.jpg" width="470" height="350" usemap="#DoorMap" border="0">
at the src="maingrafx\Doormat.jpg", the slash is backwards. It SHOULD read src="maingrafx/Doormat.jpg".
Because of this mistake in your HTML code, the only browser that can view your webpage is Internet Exploiter, er, Exploder, er, Explorer.
While it's good to support the most popular browser (even though its a peice of crap, people just use whats installed on their machine), its a very bad idea indeed to not support everything else.
Netscape, Mozilla, Mozilla Firefox, Safari, and all other web browsers are UNABLE TO VIEW THE IMAGE ON YOUR FRONTPAGE. Without the image, they can't see where the buttons are, which makes it very hard for the user.
Internet Explorer is the only browser without popup blocking and tab browsing that I know of- many people are switching to Mozilla FireFox because of that. As it is right now, Linux users are completely blocked from viewing your site (unless they know the forums.taldren.com address), and Mac users are forced to use Internet Exploiter Mac Edition (a peice of crap). And Windows users with Mozilla *points at self* have to guess where the forums button is.
Please fix this error- its just one character! Thank you.
Post by: Toasty0 on March 31, 2004, 10:27:46 am
It is a known issue and will be rendered correctly in the next version of the site.
Best,
Jerry
Post by: Praxis on March 31, 2004, 10:31:42 am
Quote:
Ok, the flippant response would be to suggest that you fix your browser usage--but that is said in jest.
It is a known issue and will be rendered correctly in the next version of the site.
Best,
Jerry
Fix browser usage...hmmm...considering that only one browser works (IE), and that it is a peice of crap...No thanks.
How long until the next version is out? The same page has been there for AGES...
Post by: Maxillius on March 31, 2004, 11:04:43 am
Post by: Praxis on March 31, 2004, 02:26:24 pm
I've tried Safari. However, Safari is standards based (unlike IE which is full of Microsoft proprietary junk), so it renders the same as Mozilla. No go. Though it works if i type forums.taldren.com...
You use a Mac? What OS version?
Post by: Death_Merchant on March 31, 2004, 02:47:13 pm
I also don't care, as I've setup tabs in Safari to open multiple forum pages with a single click.
No pop-ups, renders faster, and bookmarks auto-synced with all my Macs everywhere.
IE??? What's IE????? Sounds like something you scream when in pain...
IEEEEEEEEEEEE!!!!
Post by: Capt_Spade on March 31, 2004, 02:58:31 pm
Post by: 3dot14 on March 31, 2004, 05:16:28 pm
Quote:
IE - Internet Explorer
All the more reason to scream out in pain...
Post by: Pestalence on March 31, 2004, 08:09:00 pm
because people use different browsers provided by their ISP, which most times is based on something other than Internet Explorer.. or they experiment with browsers that may offer easier use than Internet Explorer...
however let's look at some facts..
Web languages..
internet expolrer works with them all
Images.. internet Explorer allows for almost any type of image to be shown
internet Explorer allows for frames. arrays, transitions, and a host of other stuff to work that other browsers miss or bypass...
internet Explorer self corrects javascripting errors in web pages..
and come to think of it.. The people who developed the internet and are continuing to expand user ability to create more and more dynamic programming abilities for the net.. and guess what they use as their primary and only test bed, in coorporation with Microsoft...
Internet Explorer..
and as for privacy and security issues.. it only takes 5 min to go into Internet Explorer properties and set the securities correctly that will prevent 3rd party cookies and unwanted code from accessing or hijacking your system...
I have used Mozilla, AO Hell's Netscape, and about 10 others.. I keep going back to Internet Explorer as I have found that it is the only browser that allows me to view web pages the tay there were meant to be seen, the way the creator of a web site intnded..
as for those that use other browsers that allow them to prevent resizing the web pages.. IE has that ability also..
override page fonts.. IE has that.. Override Page Colors.. IE has that...
there is not a single thing on the net that you can send me to that IE can't handle....
as for Microsoft ProPriety... what the heck is that?? talking about pop-ups??? just run As-Aware 6 and remove Alexia from the IE 6 SP 1 package.... the pop-ups will be gone...
I mean why does everyone Hate IE when every other browser in the world is trying to be as flexable as IE but keep coming up short??? Why does every other browser try to work like IE and fail??
because IE has the patents and copywrite on every net language out there...
other browsers have to change the way they work by at least 14% to bypass the patent and copywrite laws.. as such, they lose the ability to see certain things on the web...
I mean can someone explain why they want to lose functionality???
I'm really at a loss...
Please someone explain it to me.. what makes Opera or Netscape better than IE when they have problems viewing web pages completely or when they change a page's layout to something other than what the creator made???? I really don't understand.
Post by: Strafer on March 31, 2004, 09:34:25 pm
Post by: Toasty0 on March 31, 2004, 11:09:14 pm
Quote:Quote:
Ok, the flippant response would be to suggest that you fix your browser usage--but that is said in jest.
It is a known issue and will be rendered correctly in the next version of the site.
Best,
Jerry
Fix browser usage...hmmm...considering that only one browser works (IE), and that it is a peice of crap...No thanks.
How long until the next version is out? The same page has been there for AGES...
Why is it that most anti-Ms zealots almost always exhibit some sort of humor handicap?
Anyway, as this is going to be such a serious subject I guess we should treat it with the awesome weight has on so many internet surfing lives...
Code:
Major Versions Count Share(%)
---------------------------------------------------------
OP 0 1 0.00
OP 3 1 0.00
OP 5 2 0.01
OP 6 24 0.06
OP 7 452 1.17
OP ALL 480 1.25
SF 100 21 0.05
SF 125 405 1.05
SF 134 1 0.00
SF 85 143 0.37
SF ALL 570 1.48
NS 2 1 0.00
NS 3 4 0.01
NS 4 316 0.82
NS 5 3094 8.03
NS 6 2 0.01
NS ALL 3417 8.87
IE 2 1 0.00
IE 3 11 0.03
IE 4 94 0.24
IE 5 3983 10.34
IE 6 23925 62.10
IE 7 1 0.00
IE ALL 28015 72.72
A quick scan of those stats show that it is does not make economic sense to waste the man hours writing or re-writing code for a browser that is used by such a tiny fraction of the normal market.
Best,
Jerry
Post by: Death_Merchant on March 31, 2004, 11:28:45 pm
Quote:
Why is it that most anti-Ms zealots almost always exhibit some sort of humor handicap?
Humor handicap???
Come on ToastyO...
IEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!!!!!
That's funny....
Death "The Funny Zealot" Merchant
Post by: Lieutenant_Q on March 31, 2004, 11:30:28 pm
Quote:
IE 2 1 0.00
IE 3 11 0.03
Some ones still using those old things...and where can i get this IE 7 that they are referring to.
Post by: Warden on March 31, 2004, 11:49:54 pm
Quote:
Quote:
IE 2 1 0.00
IE 3 11 0.03
Wonder if that is the new IE to be included with longhorn ? I always thought it was just another .1 or something to 6.
I know you wont be able to download it, 6.0sp1 is the last free IE apparently, but my sources could be wrong.
Post by: Praxis on April 01, 2004, 01:53:10 am
Quote:
A quick scan of those stats show that it is does not make economic sense to waste the man hours writing or re-writing code for a browser that is used by such a tiny fraction of the normal market.
Best,
Jerry
I'm sorry, but you're reasoning is completely flawed.
When you write code, it should be written for INTERNATIONAL STANDARDS. Standards are set by an international organization (rather than a company) and are readable by all the browsers.
ALL of the world's browsers can read HTML.
However, Microsoft Internet Exploiter adds a bunch of proprietary junk AND DOESN'T TELL DEVELOPERS THE DIFFERENCE.
When you write the code, write it with standards, not with proprietary Microsoft junk. If Mozilla can read it, then it will work with all the other browsers, including Internet Explorer.
Additionally...
Wow, it does take many man hours to CHANGE ONE SYMBOL in the entire web page, doesn't it?
Post by: Praxis on April 01, 2004, 02:20:43 am
Quote:
I find threads like this ammusing.. why?
because people use different browsers provided by their ISP, which most times is based on something other than Internet Explorer.. or they experiment with browsers that may offer easier use than Internet Explorer...
however let's look at some facts..
Okay, I have to chuckle at some of your 'facts' here. Here we go.
Quote:
Web languages..
internet expolrer works with them all
okay, heres the thing. So do all the other browsers. Except for one little thing- Internet Exploiter adds a couple of little Microsoft proprietary junk in there. For example, its the only browser that will still work if you put the slash the other way. The problem is that these Microsoft proprietary are undocumented- a web designer can make something and he sees it run in IE, so he ASSUMES it works, but doesn't realize he's just made an IE only page.
Quote:
Images.. internet Explorer allows for almost any type of image to be shown
Wrong- in fact, Internet Explorer is the only browser that does NOT support 8-bit PNG images. Download Mozilla Firefox- much better.
It also has the most security holes.
Quote:
internet Explorer allows for frames. arrays, transitions, and a host of other stuff to work that other browsers miss or bypass...
You've obviously never used another browser in at least a couple years.
Frames, arrays, transitions? These are standards! If a browser didn't have these, it'd be crap. ALL of the browsers i've mentioned (Safari, Camino, Mozilla, FireFox, Netscape, Opera) support these. They also support more image formats, Shockwave and Flash, Java, and all the other web languages.
And yet...
Out of all the browsers I've mentioned, Internet Explorer is the ONLY ONE that does NOT have Tab browsing or popup blocking, and has the most security holes.
Quote:
internet Explorer self corrects javascripting errors in web pages..
Big deal. So do the others.
Quote:
and come to think of it.. The people who developed the internet and are continuing to expand user ability to create more and more dynamic programming abilities for the net.. and guess what they use as their primary and only test bed, in coorporation with Microsoft...
Internet Explorer..
ROFL, wow, now Microsoft is developing the internet and is the only test bed? I knew they were trying to take over the universe, but this...
LOL Microsoft is NOT working with the people who developed the internet, and are hardly doing much to create more dynamic programming abilities. Neither XML or DHTML or Flash or Java were made by Microsoft. The much vaunted .NET was copied off a similar system from someone else and isn't that big of a deal anyway- the system has been around for ages, and was just never really implemented.
Quote:
and as for privacy and security issues.. it only takes 5 min to go into Internet Explorer properties and set the securities correctly that will prevent 3rd party cookies and unwanted code from accessing or hijacking your system...
That locks the front door. What, you never noticed the hundreds of IE patches constantly being hurled at you with Windows update? Theres all kinds of open back doors. Not to mention some coding mistakes allowing web sites to tell you that you're being sent to one site when you're really at another.
Quote:
I have used Mozilla, AO Hell's Netscape, and about 10 others.. I keep going back to Internet Explorer as I have found that it is the only browser that allows me to view web pages the tay there were meant to be seen, the way the creator of a web site intnded..
Old Netscape sucked.
Try the NEW Mozilla FireFox. Not normal Mozilla, but FireFox. You'll see how incredibly better.
Quote:
as for those that use other browsers that allow them to prevent resizing the web pages.. IE has that ability also..
Resizing web page problems? Never had that in Safari or Mozilla. On the other hand i once opened a flash movie that gave me so many IE popups the computer crashed, and also caused all the popups to jump around the screen. Mozilla blocked the popups.
Quote:
override page fonts.. IE has that.. Override Page Colors.. IE has that...
Other browsers have that. What are you bragging about?
Quote:
there is not a single thing on the net that you can send me to that IE can't handle....
www.originalicons.com/smile.html
Quote:
as for Microsoft ProPriety... what the heck is that?? talking about pop-ups??? just run As-Aware 6 and remove Alexia from the IE 6 SP 1 package.... the pop-ups will be gone...
You don't get it, do you...
like they did with MS-Java...they do it again with IE.
They take a perfect product (Java was designed to let you create a program in Java that would run on any OS, be it Windows, Mac, or Linux), then start injecting proprietary additions and 'improvements' into it. They don't document it. The result? A programmer might make something in MS-Java, and it works in Windows, but they don't realize that it doesn't work on a Mac or Linux. Microsoft got sued over this.
They're doing it again with IE.
There's something you don't seem to understand: STANDARDS. The international standards are set by a group of organizations. The standard for the web, for example, is HTML. The standard DVD format is MPEG. This keeps multiple companies from trying to push THEIR formats on to people.
The other browsers ABIDE BY THESE STANDARDS set. They follow the law. A page designed for Mozilla will run fine in Safari and Netscape and Firefox.
Internet Explorer does not. It reads the standards, but it also creates its own set of rules, and doesn't tell developers which are for IE and which are standards.
So IE will read the standards, like a page designed for Mozilla, but sometimes a page made for IE will not always run in other browsers.
Does this make the other browsers inferior? No. Its Microsoft's way of eliminating the competition, by attempting to cut off the other browsers. Fortunately most good web design programs (like Dreamweaver) will make the code work with all browsers, stopping Microsuck in their tracks, but Microsoft Frontpage is infamous for producing IE only pages if they are more complex than a few lines.
Microsoft is in big trouble over this.
Quote:
I mean why does everyone Hate IE when every other browser in the world is trying to be as flexable as IE but keep coming up short??? Why does every other browser try to work like IE and fail??
ROFL...come short? IE needs to be more flexable. It's buggy, easily hackable crap. Microsoft just tries to trick idiots into making IE only web pages- and it works often.
Quote:
because IE has the patents and copywrite on every net language out there...
other browsers have to change the way they work by at least 14% to bypass the patent and copywrite laws.. as such, they lose the ability to see certain things on the web...
WRONG. View the standards arguement.
The other browsers follow international standards- IE does not.
Quote:
I mean can someone explain why they want to lose functionality???
We don't. We want to gain functionality by ditching IE.
Quote:
I'm really at a loss...
Please someone explain it to me.. what makes Opera or Netscape better than IE when they have problems viewing web pages completely or when they change a page's layout to something other than what the creator made???? I really don't understand.
Please. They only have trouble viewing web pages when the designer made faulty IE only code. In 99% of web pages, ALL BROWSERS WILL WORK.
Heck, I made a page in Dreamweaver, it looks BETTER in Safari.
On the other hand, Mozilla and the rest have superior Tabbed-browsing interfaces, built in popup blocking, skinnable interfaces, and many other bits of superiority- AND THEY SUPPORT THE STANDARDS.
I'm not just going to sit by and help Microsoft try to control the standards of the internet by using IE.
Post by: Praxis on April 01, 2004, 02:23:20 am
Quote:
Wonder if that is the new IE to be included with longhorn ? I always thought it was just another .1 or something to 6.
I know you wont be able to download it, 6.0sp1 is the last free IE apparently, but my sources could be wrong.
Correct. IE 7 is for Longhorn. It copies the Safari interface down to the bone (even having the same brushed metal interface, and similar shaped and colored buttons) and popup blocking.
That's right folks, Microsoft is STILL copying Apple, and they're only 5 years behind! (by the time Longhorn comes out)
Post by: Toasty0 on April 01, 2004, 02:49:25 am
Quote:Quote:
A quick scan of those stats show that it is does not make economic sense to waste the man hours writing or re-writing code for a browser that is used by such a tiny fraction of the normal market.
Best,
Jerry
I'm sorry, but you're reasoning is completely flawed.
When you write code, it should be written for INTERNATIONAL STANDARDS. Standards are set by an international organization (rather than a company) and are readable by all the browsers.
Because it works over and above the limtied W3C standards it is flawed?
Additionally, using your logic Netscrape is a total junk browser. Care to guess why and what widely accepted html design it fails to render properly? Don't want to box you in with that table..
Quote:Not true. Some render various html standards in various manners. Some still have not become fully compliant with html 4.0 and CSS 2.0 including IE, NS, and Opera.
ALL of the world's browsers can read HTML.
Quote:
However, Microsoft Internet Exploiter adds a bunch of proprietary junk AND DOESN'T TELL DEVELOPERS THE DIFFERENCE.
*choke*
I don't know if I should start with links to Com and Com+ or go somthing as simple as this:
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=fh;EN-US;ie&Product=iep
and this
http://www.microsoft.com/windows/ie/techinfo/developers/default.asp
Quote:
When you write the code, write it with standards, not with proprietary Microsoft junk. If Mozilla can read it, then it will work with all the other browsers, including Internet Explorer.
So? Why can't the other browser--who I remind you are the least used--instaed find the robustness to read that line of code? If them silly folks at MS can do it why can't others?
Quote:
Additionally...
Wow, it does take many man hours to CHANGE ONE SYMBOL in the entire web page, doesn't it?
Oh, I'm sorry, I meant the man hours involved in bringing your weak-featured, least-used browser up to the robust standards of IE6.1.
Best,
Jerry
Post by: Demandred on April 01, 2004, 05:59:12 am
Quote:Not true. Some render various html standards in various manners. Some still have not become fully compliant with html 4.0 and CSS 2.0 including IE, NS, and Opera.
ALL of the world's browsers can read HTML.
Actually, IE isn't even fully compliant with CSS 1.0. Not to mention the bugs - height:100% should mean exactly that, and it doesn't. It parses in IE as about 120% if you want to create a <div> container for a page. I really couldn't care less about Microsoft additions to their browser but they really should follow standards. They didn't create the internet and they don't own it. Oh, and the standard web language is now XHTML - seperating the presentation layer from the data layer makes a lot of sense.
Post by: Maxillius on April 01, 2004, 09:24:16 am
VERY sweet! Especially with the 2-button mouse that's on a different machine every time I go in there
I want one I want one I want one I want one!!!!!
Post by: Praxis on April 01, 2004, 09:38:41 am
Quote:
Because it works over and above the limtied W3C standards it is flawed?
No, the flawed part of your reasoning is this:
IE uses the standards and also has its own proprietary stuff it can read.
All the other browsers use the standards.
The extra proprietary stuff from IE doesn't have any extra FEATURES, it just lets you write it in a different way.
There is no advantage to writing the web page in the IE-proprietary format (slashes backwards, etc).
So why would you write a web page as IE only and cut off all other browsers, when there is NO ADVANTAGE?
IE does NOT go "over and above the limited W3C standards". The only thing it does is lets you put a slash the other way or write some HTML code a little differently. THIS SERVES NO ADVANTAGE except to lock out non IE users and lock out Linux users COMPLETELY. However, often developers don't realize that the page they just made is IE only.
Did you know that XML and XHTML and DHTML are all W3C standards? CSS style sheets are standards. I'm not sure if Java or Flash are standards, but almost all modern browsers can read them anyway.
And how are the W3C standards limited? You take out HTML, XML, XHTML, DHTML, and CSS, you have no web pages.
So tell me, how does IE go "above and beyond" W3C? All they did was take the same standards and change a bit of the way it could be written to trick people into writing pages for IE only.
IE is only the most popular browser because it is bundled with Windows- most users don't go searching for another browser. They figure, "I have this, here, it works, it must be good" and they don't even realize better alternatives EXIST. If Microsoft were to be forced by the courts to either unbundle IE, or bundle competitor browsers with Windows and give users a choice on what to install, you would see IE's popularity crash through the floor.
Look at the Macintosh case.
Internet Explorer was the default built in browser in Mac OS 9. After a couple years, OS X came out, and the default and only built in browser was Internet Explorer Mac Edition (and since OS X was a completely new OS, there were no other browsers). About two years later, until the release of Jaguarr, there were now Netscape and Mozilla Mac OS X editions, but since IE was bundled, MOST MAC USERS USED THAT. Very similar to whats happening with Windows, no? Then Jaguar(OS 10.2) came out, bundling TWO browsers- Microsoft Internet Explorer Mac edition, and Apple's new Safari (still in beta). Safari was later updated to the 1.0 version.
A year later Panther (OS 10.3) came and had (I believe) Safari 1.2. About a year after Jaguar (and Safari's) release, Microsoft announced that Macs had a very good browser in Safari, and that they would no longer be developing Internet Explorer for lack of popular support.
Within a year of bundling a new browser with the OS IN ADDITION to IE, Apple had completely blown Mac IE's user base out of the water.
Quote:
Additionally, using your logic Netscrape is a total junk browser. Care to guess why and what widely accepted html design it fails to render properly? Don't want to box you in with that table..
You're telling me Netscape fails to render table's properly? You sure it wasn't fixed?
I never actually use netscape, myself- my browser of choice is Mozilla FireFox.
Quote:Not true. Some render various html standards in various manners. Some still have not become fully compliant with html 4.0 and CSS 2.0 including IE, NS, and Opera.
ALL of the world's browsers can read HTML.
Most are HTML 4.0 compliant. CSS is NOT HTML, but CSS is read by most browsers, including Mozilla, properly.
Quote:
*choke*
I don't know if I should start with links to Com and Com+ or go somthing as simple as this:
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=fh;EN-US;ie&Product=iep
and this
http://www.microsoft.com/windows/ie/techinfo/developers/default.asp
See what I mean...you don't know the difference.
to quote:
Internet Explorer for Developers
Develop rich Web-based applications with Internet Explorer 6
Internet Explorer 6 has a powerful programming model that includes:
* support for the Extensible Markup Language (XML)
* enhanced Dynamic HTML features that further enrich Microsoft Windows?based Web development
* increased support for standards based on Internet technologies, which saves time for developers writing rich Web-based applications
-------
XML and DHTML? Those aren't proprietary.
Nothing on those links lists the proprietary Microsoft IE HTML code that is different from the other browsers.
Most of the other browsers can read XML and DHTML.
Quote:
So? Why can't the other browser--who I remind you are the least used--instaed find the robustness to read that line of code? If them silly folks at MS can do it why can't others?
Why should the other browsers abandon standards and copy Microsoft?
Microsoft doesn't release their source code, making it VERY hard to find out all of the little IE only junk Microsoft added into Internet Explorer. Without the source code, they can't find out what the difference is, and I doubt they want to start injecting Microsoft's code into their browsers for fear of being sued for copying.
Quote:
Oh, I'm sorry, I meant the man hours involved in bringing your weak-featured, least-used browser up to the robust standards of IE6.1.
HA! Robust standards? IE 6 uses the exact same standards are the rest of the browsers, and it can read slashes backwards and a few other sloppy details. That's right, sloppy- the standards have strict HTML code, while IE lets the developer be sloppy, get the slashes wrong, and do other stuff to mess up the code and cause it to be IE only.
The other browsers can do everything IE 6 can do and more.
Heck, other than reading sloppily designed IE-only web pages, Mozilla Firefox can do ANYTHING IE can do, be it viewing Flash/Shockwave images, Java, DHTML, XML, XHTML, CSS, standard HTML, or anythingthing else.
Except YOU DON'T HAVE TABBED BROWSING OR POPUP BLOCKING. Muwahaha!
Oh yes, I know that the service pack tacked it on, but Mozilla has had it a good couple YEARS. And you STILL don't have tabbed browsing.
So tell me. WHY would you want to use a browser who's only advantage is that it can read sloppily written code, that has thousands of security vulnerabilities with more being discovered each week, and doesn't have the features that EVERY OTHER MODERN BROWSER has such as Tab browsing and popup blocking?
Post by: Praxis on April 01, 2004, 09:42:11 am
Quote:
Sadly, I don't own one, but the computer lab at the college has 8 G3/500s running OS X 10.3 Panther.
VERY sweet! Especially with the 2-button mouse that's on a different machine every time I go in there
I want one I want one I want one I want one!!!!!
Ah yes, Panther
Don't you love Panther? Have you pressed F9 yet? If not, try it.Open a whole bunch of Windows in Finder, Safari, and IE. Remember, completely FILL THE SCREEN UP with Windows.
Now press F9 and watch what happens
You'll love it. Then try F10, and F11.I recently bought off ebay for $450 an old PowerBook Pismo G3/500 and installed Panther on it. Runs great. I also own a 1 GHz Powerbook G4 (G4 has more performance per mhz than G3). That is one FAST laptop...and the Geforce FX 5200 helps
. And I WISH I had a dual-2 GHz G5...*drool*...BTW if you use the One-button mouse, when you hold Ctrl down on the keyboard, it will function as a right click. Just a quick Mac-hint
Post by: Praxis on April 01, 2004, 09:50:53 am
Do you really want to lock out 30% of the world from viewing your web page by writing it sloppily (so only IE can read it)?
Post by: Toasty0 on April 01, 2004, 10:07:32 am
Quote:
Did you know that XML and XHTML and DHTML are all W3C standards? CSS style sheets are standards. I'm not sure if Java or Flash are standards, but almost all modern browsers can read them anyway.
And how are the W3C standards limited? You take out HTML, XML, XHTML, DHTML, and CSS, you have no web pages.
That question was alrady answered. I think Pestalence posted a compelling answer to your question.
Post by: Toasty0 on April 01, 2004, 10:18:02 am
Quote:
BTW, Toasy? Remember that chart you posted? According to that, 30% of users are NOT running IE. Linux users CAN'T run IE- Mac users have Safari. AOL users have their browser (Based on Netscape, isn't it?). Older Mac users are stuck with IE (OS 9 and 10.0/10.1- OS 9 you can download Netscape, but the Mac edition is crap, and all the new browsers are for OS 10. Some of the browsers work on 10.1, but the majority of the browsers only work on 10.2 or above, so 10.0 and 10.1 users are stuck with IE).
Do you really want to lock out 30% of the world from viewing your web page by writing it sloppily (so only IE can read it)?
Lock out? You mean dumb down my pages, don't you?
Let's see, 72% use IE while the other 28% use a myraid of broswers that all render pages is a slightly different manner and you ask why I don't wish to expend the labor hours testing for that plathora of minor browsers that together add up to 28%--a fractured 28% I should say again.
That's like asking why PC Game makers don't develop their games for both desktop Window's OS and the Linux Kernel?
Best,
Jerry
Post by: Toasty0 on April 01, 2004, 10:22:05 am
Quote:
So tell me, how does IE go "above and beyond" W3C? All they did was take the same standards and change a bit of the way it could be written to trick people into writing pages for IE only.
Trick people?
Pardon me, I thought this was a conversation about brwoser design and usage, not some conspiracy theory about the grassy knoll and a 3rd browser.
*Toasty backs out the door*
Post by: Praxis on April 01, 2004, 10:24:06 am
Quote:Quote:
Did you know that XML and XHTML and DHTML are all W3C standards? CSS style sheets are standards. I'm not sure if Java or Flash are standards, but almost all modern browsers can read them anyway.
And how are the W3C standards limited? You take out HTML, XML, XHTML, DHTML, and CSS, you have no web pages.
That question was alrady answered. I think Pestalence posted a compelling answer to your question.
Yes, but you stated that the standards are 'limited'. They are most certainly not.
Post by: Praxis on April 01, 2004, 01:00:19 pm
Quote:
Lock out? You mean dumb down my pages, don't you?
Let's see, 72% use IE while the other 28% use a myraid of broswers that all render pages is a slightly different manner and you ask why I don't wish to expend the labor hours testing for that plathora of minor browsers that together add up to 28%--a fractured 28% I should say again.
Slightly different to the point of unnoticeable. I coded my page with Dreamweaver and tested it in Safari, Mozilla, and IE. Guess what? Mozilla and Safari rendered it exactly the same. On Mozilla and Safari one of the images was EXACTLY ONE pixel off (almost unnotiecable). Safari rendered the image more clearly than IE as well, smoothing some jagged corners.
I don't think you understand this. Safari, Mozilla, Netscape, and Opera follow the standards TO THE LETTER. That means that they will render the pages almost exactly the same. That means that if it works in one of them, it should work in all of them, AND it should work in Internet Explorer.
Coding a page sloppily will make it IE only (sloppily by slashes the wrong way, using the wrong type of quotes, etc), but if it is done with proper HTML, it will work on ALL standards based browsers- and it will work on ALL of those other 28% of browsers.
Additionally, the new version of Safari can read a number of IE only web pages, and theres a debug option to have Safari tell web pages that it is IE 6 for Windows, so that might slant the numbers a tiny bit toward IE.
Quote:
That's like asking why PC Game makers don't develop their games for both desktop Window's OS and the Linux Kernel?
That's completely different. Linux uses a completely different Kernel and graphics system (OpenGL) than Windows (DirectX). It takes hours upon hours to make something for one or the other
On the other hand, if you make something standards-compliant, it will run in ALL browsers, be it Mozilla, Internet Explorer, Safari, etc.
A better example would be this.
Let's say there were 10 different types of DVD players in the world. All of these DVD players play DVD's in the standard MPEG format. One of these DVD players, the most popular one, plays both MPEG and WMV. 70% of DVD players in the world are that type. However, it is a bit buggy, so a number of people don't like it. And WMV offers no advantages over MPEG.
Now lets say you were the DVD producer for, say, Disney. Would you make your DVD's in MPEG (so ALL DVD players can read it) or WMV (so only the one can read it)?
It's the same for browsers. It's just as easy to make a standards-complaint page as it is to make an IE only one. But there are NO ADVANTAGES to having an IE-only web page- while making a standards-complaint page allows even more people to view your page.
It's as easy as switching the slash the other way around.
Post by: Praxis on April 01, 2004, 01:02:24 pm
Quote:
Trick people?
Pardon me, I thought this was a conversation about brwoser design and usage, not some conspiracy theory about the grassy knoll and a 3rd browser.
*Toasty backs out the door*
It's quite well known that Microsoft will make certain changes to their product and not inform developers that it is ONLY for their product. The developers think that all of the other versions of the product have the same features, and so they don't realize they've made something Microsoft-only.
They did it with MS-Java (and got their butts sued big time over it) and did it again with Microsoft Internet Explorer (and are in the process of getting their butts sued over it).
Post by: Praxis on April 01, 2004, 01:13:28 pm
I opened the web page in Dreamweaver in both Mozilla and IE. The text in IE looked like text, while in Mozilla it was smooth as a Photoshop image.
Here's a good site with a comparison:
http://www.newrecruit.org/archives/2003/june/browsers
He compares IE to Firebird- the new version of FireBird is called FireFox and fixes most of the minor complaints (such as inability to drag a bookmark) he mentions.
101 things you can do in Mozilla that you can't do in IE:
http://www.xulplanet.com/ndeakin/arts/reasons.html
A very in depth browser comparison, but a bit outdated:
http://home.earthlink.net/~intelligentlife/ItemMenu/browsers.html
In fact, Toasty, I went to YOUR personal web page, and it looks perfect in Mozilla Firebird.
Post by: Taldren_Admin on April 01, 2004, 03:15:40 pm
Ann
Post by: Praxis on April 01, 2004, 03:30:04 pm
*cheers*
Cool.
Post by: Towelie on April 01, 2004, 03:32:30 pm
Post by: Towelie on April 01, 2004, 03:35:46 pm
Post by: Taldren_Admin on April 01, 2004, 04:02:30 pm
Quote:
So, when can we get some screenshots of the new website?
Screen shots? Heck very soon you will have a full screen
I don't have much left to do before it can go live but there will be more work to do once it is up. I am already rethinking for the next rev.
Ann
Post by: Death_Merchant on April 01, 2004, 04:36:45 pm
(and Praxis: Your avatar and sig image doesn't display in Safari either
)Perhaps this quote from Dave Hyatt's (one of the key devs for Safari) blog will help:
Safari has draconian XML error handling. If the file isn't well-formed, Safari won't display it. Mozilla does the same, which should come as no surprise, since the two browsers use the same open-source XML parser (expat).
I fall squarely into the draconian camp and agree with Tim Bray. Fully half of the bugs I receive in WebCore are not bugs at all, but are essentially differences in error handling and error recovery between Safari and the dominant Web browser, WinIE. None of these issues occur with XML.
If we lived in a world where browsers could refuse to display malformed content (with useful error notification of course so that authors could easily repair their content), then all of these "bugs" would simply disappear. I could focus my efforts on real DOM and CSS bugs, and not have to waste my time emulating the behavior of WinIE.
Relaxing restrictions on well-formedness is a slippery slope, and where does it end? Consider all the "helpful" rules that exist in HTML today thanks to early versions of Netscape and WinIE. Did you know that any h1-h6 tag can close any other h1-h6 tag? Try it. Open an h1, type some text and then put in a close h2. It will close up the h1 in WinIE and Mozilla. (I haven't yet fixed this "bug" in Safari.) Try specifying a close tag for a paragraph by itself. You'll get an empty paragraph in Safari, Mozilla, and WinIE.
Post by: SL-Punisher on April 01, 2004, 04:39:29 pm
Here's some humor for everyone: Move out of your parents basement and get a life!
KIDDING!
Post by: Death_Merchant on April 01, 2004, 04:48:35 pm
You kidding? I can't tell 'cause my browser won't display the emoticons......
Post by: SL-Punisher on April 01, 2004, 04:55:33 pm
Post by: Praxis on April 01, 2004, 05:47:25 pm
LOL!!!
I had one a year or so ago but both hosting sites no longer exist. I should stick a new one on there from my personal web server...
In fact, I'm gonna add my GFL sig now.
Post by: Praxis on April 01, 2004, 05:56:55 pm
Post by: Death_Merchant on April 01, 2004, 06:29:29 pm
I don't think the forum handles .php properly. Make it a jpeg or something.
BTW: If I point Safari directly to http://targ.ottergoose.net/praxissiggen.php, I can see your sig.
Tre kewl....
Post by: IKV Nemesis D7L on April 01, 2004, 06:38:34 pm
Quote:
Why doesn't it work...argh...
Code:
http://targ.ottergoose.net/praxissiggen.php
As far as I know .php is not an extension associated with images. Perhaps you need to check the image format.
Post by: Sirgod on April 01, 2004, 07:11:16 pm
Stephen
Post by: Toasty0 on April 01, 2004, 09:55:43 pm
Quote:
Maybe you don't see my sig and avatar because I don't have one...
LOL!!!
I had one a year or so ago but both hosting sites no longer exist. I should stick a new one on there from my personal web server...
In fact, I'm gonna add my GFL sig now.
I'd fix you sig for ya Prax, but then it would no longer be well formed, would it?
Try using the image /image tag instead. That's what we in thse part call UBB code.
Also, though you say you have no image, the properties of your avatar come back with this URL http://trekmeshes.starfleet.ch/thumbnails/quantumss1701e.jpg
Lastly, you use Dreamweaver? I use notepad like all good real coders do. None of that plug-n-slug for me. Real coders write their own clean code.
Best,
Jerry
Post by: IKV Nemesis D7L on April 01, 2004, 10:03:37 pm
Quote:Quote:
Maybe you don't see my sig and avatar because I don't have one...
LOL!!!
I had one a year or so ago but both hosting sites no longer exist. I should stick a new one on there from my personal web server...
In fact, I'm gonna add my GFL sig now.
I'd fix you sig for ya Prax, but then it would no longer be well formed, would it?
Try using the image /image tag instead. That's what we in thse part call UBB code.
Also, though you say you have no image, the properties of your avatar come back with this URL http://trekmeshes.starfleet.ch/thumbnails/quantumss1701e.jpg
Lastly, you use Dreamweaver? I use notepad like all good real coders do. None of that plug-n-slug for me. Real coders write their own clean code.
Best,
Jerry
Don't forget. Quote:
"Debugging is twice as hard as writing the code in the first place. Therefore, if you write the code as cleverly as possible, you are, by definition, not smart enough to debug it." - Brian W. Kernighan
Post by: Toasty0 on April 01, 2004, 10:31:24 pm
Thanks for the laugh!
Post by: SL-Punisher on April 02, 2004, 01:05:01 am
FIRE BAD FIRE BAD!
Post by: Monty on April 02, 2004, 02:13:30 am
Quote:
"Debugging is twice as hard as writing the code in the first place. Therefore, if you write the code as cleverly as possible, you are, by definition, not smart enough to debug it." - Brian W. Kernighan
Thats a fantasic quote.
I've decided to give Firefox a chance. I've used Mozilla (1.2 I think) for well over a year now. Firefox makes me feel right at home
So far so good.
I love the integrate google search... where you select text on a page, right click - choose" web search for '...; " and it brings the results up in another tab. I'm not easily pleased - honest!
Post by: Toasty0 on April 02, 2004, 03:01:14 am
Quote:
Grog no like fancy html coder program
FIRE BAD FIRE BAD!
Don't make me bring out the sheep pics again...
Post by: Praxis on April 02, 2004, 09:23:49 am
BTW as for Dreamweaver...
I don't use all the fancy buttons to do the code for me.
I use Dreamweaver ONLY for the Split-View which is quite handy. See, I can type HTMl code in one side of the screen like Notepad, and see what it looks like in real time on the other side of the screen. It's very handy.
And I occasionally use Dreamweaver to add in some popup Javascript menus because I don't know Javascript.
I've always used notepad before though.
Post by: Praxis on April 02, 2004, 09:25:56 am
Quote:
Dangit Prax, you're making us Safari guys look bad
I don't think the forum handles .php properly. Make it a jpeg or something.
BTW: If I point Safari directly to http://targ.ottergoose.net/praxissiggen.php, I can see your sig.
Tre kewl....
Do that again, and hit refresh several times, and look at the different sig images
Quote:
Code:http://targ.ottergoose.net/praxissiggen.php
As far as I know .php is not an extension associated with images. Perhaps you need to check the image format.
The images are jpeg but its within a php script that points to the jpegs. It works great on the GFL site within the img tags...
Post by: Praxis on April 02, 2004, 09:27:11 am
Quote:
Also, though you say you have no image, the properties of your avatar come back with this URL http://trekmeshes.starfleet.ch/thumbnails/quantumss1701e.jpg
Best,
Jerry
Well, I used to have an avatar, the web page it was hosted on is loooong gone, so I had completely forgotten about it.
Post by: Toasty0 on April 02, 2004, 10:18:33 am
Quote:Quote:
Also, though you say you have no image, the properties of your avatar come back with this URL http://trekmeshes.starfleet.ch/thumbnails/quantumss1701e.jpg
Best,
Jerry
Well, I used to have an avatar, the web page it was hosted on is loooong gone, so I had completely forgotten about it.
ok, Praxis, go here to discover how to post an image in your sig: http://forums.taldren.com/ubbthreads/faq.php?Cat=
Best,
Jerry
Post by: Toasty0 on April 02, 2004, 10:22:20 am
Quote:
Well, it's a very simple PHP script that displays a random 1 of 2 images. It works fine on the GFL forum between the img tags, and every time you refresh the page you get a different image. Quite cool. The browser displays it as an image fine.
BTW as for Dreamweaver...
I don't use all the fancy buttons to do the code for me.
I use Dreamweaver ONLY for the Split-View which is quite handy. See, I can type HTMl code in one side of the screen like Notepad, and see what it looks like in real time on the other side of the screen. It's very handy.
And I occasionally use Dreamweaver to add in some popup Javascript menus because I don't know Javascript.
I've always used notepad before though.
The reason I dislike Dreamweaver is that when you do use its features it writes some pretty cluttered code. If you're gonna use an HTML editor I suggest Coffee Cup or Matrix. Cuffee Cup is like 40 dollars and Matrix is free.
FWIW.
Best,
Jerry
Post by: SL-Punisher on April 02, 2004, 05:27:31 pm
Quote:Quote:
Grog no like fancy html coder program
FIRE BAD FIRE BAD!
Don't make me bring out the sheep pics again...
You act as if that's a threat. Bring em out baby Woo hoo!! Ya take it off take it ALL OFF!
Post by: Praxis on March 31, 2004, 10:18:57 am
Would you mind fixing this tiny error on your main page that is giving people all kinds of trouble?
On the main page at www.taldren.com, there is the following code:
<p><img src="maingrafx\Doormat.jpg" width="470" height="350" usemap="#DoorMap" border="0">
at the src="maingrafx\Doormat.jpg", the slash is backwards. It SHOULD read src="maingrafx/Doormat.jpg".
Because of this mistake in your HTML code, the only browser that can view your webpage is Internet Exploiter, er, Exploder, er, Explorer.
While it's good to support the most popular browser (even though its a peice of crap, people just use whats installed on their machine), its a very bad idea indeed to not support everything else.
Netscape, Mozilla, Mozilla Firefox, Safari, and all other web browsers are UNABLE TO VIEW THE IMAGE ON YOUR FRONTPAGE. Without the image, they can't see where the buttons are, which makes it very hard for the user.
Internet Explorer is the only browser without popup blocking and tab browsing that I know of- many people are switching to Mozilla FireFox because of that. As it is right now, Linux users are completely blocked from viewing your site (unless they know the forums.taldren.com address), and Mac users are forced to use Internet Exploiter Mac Edition (a peice of crap). And Windows users with Mozilla *points at self* have to guess where the forums button is.
Please fix this error- its just one character! Thank you.
Post by: Toasty0 on March 31, 2004, 10:27:46 am
It is a known issue and will be rendered correctly in the next version of the site.
Best,
Jerry
Post by: Praxis on March 31, 2004, 10:31:42 am
Quote:
Ok, the flippant response would be to suggest that you fix your browser usage--but that is said in jest.
It is a known issue and will be rendered correctly in the next version of the site.
Best,
Jerry
Fix browser usage...hmmm...considering that only one browser works (IE), and that it is a peice of crap...No thanks.
How long until the next version is out? The same page has been there for AGES...
Post by: Maxillius on March 31, 2004, 11:04:43 am
Post by: Praxis on March 31, 2004, 02:26:24 pm
I've tried Safari. However, Safari is standards based (unlike IE which is full of Microsoft proprietary junk), so it renders the same as Mozilla. No go. Though it works if i type forums.taldren.com...
You use a Mac? What OS version?
Post by: Death_Merchant on March 31, 2004, 02:47:13 pm
I also don't care, as I've setup tabs in Safari to open multiple forum pages with a single click.
No pop-ups, renders faster, and bookmarks auto-synced with all my Macs everywhere.
IE??? What's IE????? Sounds like something you scream when in pain...
IEEEEEEEEEEEE!!!!
Post by: Capt_Spade on March 31, 2004, 02:58:31 pm
Post by: 3dot14 on March 31, 2004, 05:16:28 pm
Quote:
IE - Internet Explorer
All the more reason to scream out in pain...
Post by: Pestalence on March 31, 2004, 08:09:00 pm
because people use different browsers provided by their ISP, which most times is based on something other than Internet Explorer.. or they experiment with browsers that may offer easier use than Internet Explorer...
however let's look at some facts..
Web languages..
internet expolrer works with them all
Images.. internet Explorer allows for almost any type of image to be shown
internet Explorer allows for frames. arrays, transitions, and a host of other stuff to work that other browsers miss or bypass...
internet Explorer self corrects javascripting errors in web pages..
and come to think of it.. The people who developed the internet and are continuing to expand user ability to create more and more dynamic programming abilities for the net.. and guess what they use as their primary and only test bed, in coorporation with Microsoft...
Internet Explorer..
and as for privacy and security issues.. it only takes 5 min to go into Internet Explorer properties and set the securities correctly that will prevent 3rd party cookies and unwanted code from accessing or hijacking your system...
I have used Mozilla, AO Hell's Netscape, and about 10 others.. I keep going back to Internet Explorer as I have found that it is the only browser that allows me to view web pages the tay there were meant to be seen, the way the creator of a web site intnded..
as for those that use other browsers that allow them to prevent resizing the web pages.. IE has that ability also..
override page fonts.. IE has that.. Override Page Colors.. IE has that...
there is not a single thing on the net that you can send me to that IE can't handle....
as for Microsoft ProPriety... what the heck is that?? talking about pop-ups??? just run As-Aware 6 and remove Alexia from the IE 6 SP 1 package.... the pop-ups will be gone...
I mean why does everyone Hate IE when every other browser in the world is trying to be as flexable as IE but keep coming up short??? Why does every other browser try to work like IE and fail??
because IE has the patents and copywrite on every net language out there...
other browsers have to change the way they work by at least 14% to bypass the patent and copywrite laws.. as such, they lose the ability to see certain things on the web...
I mean can someone explain why they want to lose functionality???
I'm really at a loss...
Please someone explain it to me.. what makes Opera or Netscape better than IE when they have problems viewing web pages completely or when they change a page's layout to something other than what the creator made???? I really don't understand.
Post by: Strafer on March 31, 2004, 09:34:25 pm
Post by: Toasty0 on March 31, 2004, 11:09:14 pm
Quote:Quote:
Ok, the flippant response would be to suggest that you fix your browser usage--but that is said in jest.
It is a known issue and will be rendered correctly in the next version of the site.
Best,
Jerry
Fix browser usage...hmmm...considering that only one browser works (IE), and that it is a peice of crap...No thanks.
How long until the next version is out? The same page has been there for AGES...
Why is it that most anti-Ms zealots almost always exhibit some sort of humor handicap?
Anyway, as this is going to be such a serious subject I guess we should treat it with the awesome weight has on so many internet surfing lives...
Code:
Major Versions Count Share(%)
---------------------------------------------------------
OP 0 1 0.00
OP 3 1 0.00
OP 5 2 0.01
OP 6 24 0.06
OP 7 452 1.17
OP ALL 480 1.25
SF 100 21 0.05
SF 125 405 1.05
SF 134 1 0.00
SF 85 143 0.37
SF ALL 570 1.48
NS 2 1 0.00
NS 3 4 0.01
NS 4 316 0.82
NS 5 3094 8.03
NS 6 2 0.01
NS ALL 3417 8.87
IE 2 1 0.00
IE 3 11 0.03
IE 4 94 0.24
IE 5 3983 10.34
IE 6 23925 62.10
IE 7 1 0.00
IE ALL 28015 72.72
A quick scan of those stats show that it is does not make economic sense to waste the man hours writing or re-writing code for a browser that is used by such a tiny fraction of the normal market.
Best,
Jerry
Post by: Death_Merchant on March 31, 2004, 11:28:45 pm
Quote:
Why is it that most anti-Ms zealots almost always exhibit some sort of humor handicap?
Humor handicap???
Come on ToastyO...
IEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!!!!!
That's funny....
Death "The Funny Zealot" Merchant
Post by: Lieutenant_Q on March 31, 2004, 11:30:28 pm
Quote:
IE 2 1 0.00
IE 3 11 0.03
Some ones still using those old things...and where can i get this IE 7 that they are referring to.
Post by: Warden on March 31, 2004, 11:49:54 pm
Quote:
Quote:
IE 2 1 0.00
IE 3 11 0.03
Wonder if that is the new IE to be included with longhorn ? I always thought it was just another .1 or something to 6.
I know you wont be able to download it, 6.0sp1 is the last free IE apparently, but my sources could be wrong.
Post by: Praxis on April 01, 2004, 01:53:10 am
Quote:
A quick scan of those stats show that it is does not make economic sense to waste the man hours writing or re-writing code for a browser that is used by such a tiny fraction of the normal market.
Best,
Jerry
I'm sorry, but you're reasoning is completely flawed.
When you write code, it should be written for INTERNATIONAL STANDARDS. Standards are set by an international organization (rather than a company) and are readable by all the browsers.
ALL of the world's browsers can read HTML.
However, Microsoft Internet Exploiter adds a bunch of proprietary junk AND DOESN'T TELL DEVELOPERS THE DIFFERENCE.
When you write the code, write it with standards, not with proprietary Microsoft junk. If Mozilla can read it, then it will work with all the other browsers, including Internet Explorer.
Additionally...
Wow, it does take many man hours to CHANGE ONE SYMBOL in the entire web page, doesn't it?
Post by: Praxis on April 01, 2004, 02:20:43 am
Quote:
I find threads like this ammusing.. why?
because people use different browsers provided by their ISP, which most times is based on something other than Internet Explorer.. or they experiment with browsers that may offer easier use than Internet Explorer...
however let's look at some facts..
Okay, I have to chuckle at some of your 'facts' here. Here we go.
Quote:
Web languages..
internet expolrer works with them all
okay, heres the thing. So do all the other browsers. Except for one little thing- Internet Exploiter adds a couple of little Microsoft proprietary junk in there. For example, its the only browser that will still work if you put the slash the other way. The problem is that these Microsoft proprietary are undocumented- a web designer can make something and he sees it run in IE, so he ASSUMES it works, but doesn't realize he's just made an IE only page.
Quote:
Images.. internet Explorer allows for almost any type of image to be shown
Wrong- in fact, Internet Explorer is the only browser that does NOT support 8-bit PNG images. Download Mozilla Firefox- much better.
It also has the most security holes.
Quote:
internet Explorer allows for frames. arrays, transitions, and a host of other stuff to work that other browsers miss or bypass...
You've obviously never used another browser in at least a couple years.
Frames, arrays, transitions? These are standards! If a browser didn't have these, it'd be crap. ALL of the browsers i've mentioned (Safari, Camino, Mozilla, FireFox, Netscape, Opera) support these. They also support more image formats, Shockwave and Flash, Java, and all the other web languages.
And yet...
Out of all the browsers I've mentioned, Internet Explorer is the ONLY ONE that does NOT have Tab browsing or popup blocking, and has the most security holes.
Quote:
internet Explorer self corrects javascripting errors in web pages..
Big deal. So do the others.
Quote:
and come to think of it.. The people who developed the internet and are continuing to expand user ability to create more and more dynamic programming abilities for the net.. and guess what they use as their primary and only test bed, in coorporation with Microsoft...
Internet Explorer..
ROFL, wow, now Microsoft is developing the internet and is the only test bed? I knew they were trying to take over the universe, but this...
LOL Microsoft is NOT working with the people who developed the internet, and are hardly doing much to create more dynamic programming abilities. Neither XML or DHTML or Flash or Java were made by Microsoft. The much vaunted .NET was copied off a similar system from someone else and isn't that big of a deal anyway- the system has been around for ages, and was just never really implemented.
Quote:
and as for privacy and security issues.. it only takes 5 min to go into Internet Explorer properties and set the securities correctly that will prevent 3rd party cookies and unwanted code from accessing or hijacking your system...
That locks the front door. What, you never noticed the hundreds of IE patches constantly being hurled at you with Windows update? Theres all kinds of open back doors. Not to mention some coding mistakes allowing web sites to tell you that you're being sent to one site when you're really at another.
Quote:
I have used Mozilla, AO Hell's Netscape, and about 10 others.. I keep going back to Internet Explorer as I have found that it is the only browser that allows me to view web pages the tay there were meant to be seen, the way the creator of a web site intnded..
Old Netscape sucked.
Try the NEW Mozilla FireFox. Not normal Mozilla, but FireFox. You'll see how incredibly better.
Quote:
as for those that use other browsers that allow them to prevent resizing the web pages.. IE has that ability also..
Resizing web page problems? Never had that in Safari or Mozilla. On the other hand i once opened a flash movie that gave me so many IE popups the computer crashed, and also caused all the popups to jump around the screen. Mozilla blocked the popups.
Quote:
override page fonts.. IE has that.. Override Page Colors.. IE has that...
Other browsers have that. What are you bragging about?
Quote:
there is not a single thing on the net that you can send me to that IE can't handle....
www.originalicons.com/smile.html
Quote:
as for Microsoft ProPriety... what the heck is that?? talking about pop-ups??? just run As-Aware 6 and remove Alexia from the IE 6 SP 1 package.... the pop-ups will be gone...
You don't get it, do you...
like they did with MS-Java...they do it again with IE.
They take a perfect product (Java was designed to let you create a program in Java that would run on any OS, be it Windows, Mac, or Linux), then start injecting proprietary additions and 'improvements' into it. They don't document it. The result? A programmer might make something in MS-Java, and it works in Windows, but they don't realize that it doesn't work on a Mac or Linux. Microsoft got sued over this.
They're doing it again with IE.
There's something you don't seem to understand: STANDARDS. The international standards are set by a group of organizations. The standard for the web, for example, is HTML. The standard DVD format is MPEG. This keeps multiple companies from trying to push THEIR formats on to people.
The other browsers ABIDE BY THESE STANDARDS set. They follow the law. A page designed for Mozilla will run fine in Safari and Netscape and Firefox.
Internet Explorer does not. It reads the standards, but it also creates its own set of rules, and doesn't tell developers which are for IE and which are standards.
So IE will read the standards, like a page designed for Mozilla, but sometimes a page made for IE will not always run in other browsers.
Does this make the other browsers inferior? No. Its Microsoft's way of eliminating the competition, by attempting to cut off the other browsers. Fortunately most good web design programs (like Dreamweaver) will make the code work with all browsers, stopping Microsuck in their tracks, but Microsoft Frontpage is infamous for producing IE only pages if they are more complex than a few lines.
Microsoft is in big trouble over this.
Quote:
I mean why does everyone Hate IE when every other browser in the world is trying to be as flexable as IE but keep coming up short??? Why does every other browser try to work like IE and fail??
ROFL...come short? IE needs to be more flexable. It's buggy, easily hackable crap. Microsoft just tries to trick idiots into making IE only web pages- and it works often.
Quote:
because IE has the patents and copywrite on every net language out there...
other browsers have to change the way they work by at least 14% to bypass the patent and copywrite laws.. as such, they lose the ability to see certain things on the web...
WRONG. View the standards arguement.
The other browsers follow international standards- IE does not.
Quote:
I mean can someone explain why they want to lose functionality???
We don't. We want to gain functionality by ditching IE.
Quote:
I'm really at a loss...
Please someone explain it to me.. what makes Opera or Netscape better than IE when they have problems viewing web pages completely or when they change a page's layout to something other than what the creator made???? I really don't understand.
Please. They only have trouble viewing web pages when the designer made faulty IE only code. In 99% of web pages, ALL BROWSERS WILL WORK.
Heck, I made a page in Dreamweaver, it looks BETTER in Safari.
On the other hand, Mozilla and the rest have superior Tabbed-browsing interfaces, built in popup blocking, skinnable interfaces, and many other bits of superiority- AND THEY SUPPORT THE STANDARDS.
I'm not just going to sit by and help Microsoft try to control the standards of the internet by using IE.
Post by: Praxis on April 01, 2004, 02:23:20 am
Quote:
Wonder if that is the new IE to be included with longhorn ? I always thought it was just another .1 or something to 6.
I know you wont be able to download it, 6.0sp1 is the last free IE apparently, but my sources could be wrong.
Correct. IE 7 is for Longhorn. It copies the Safari interface down to the bone (even having the same brushed metal interface, and similar shaped and colored buttons) and popup blocking.
That's right folks, Microsoft is STILL copying Apple, and they're only 5 years behind! (by the time Longhorn comes out)
Post by: Toasty0 on April 01, 2004, 02:49:25 am
Quote:Quote:
A quick scan of those stats show that it is does not make economic sense to waste the man hours writing or re-writing code for a browser that is used by such a tiny fraction of the normal market.
Best,
Jerry
I'm sorry, but you're reasoning is completely flawed.
When you write code, it should be written for INTERNATIONAL STANDARDS. Standards are set by an international organization (rather than a company) and are readable by all the browsers.
Because it works over and above the limtied W3C standards it is flawed?
Additionally, using your logic Netscrape is a total junk browser. Care to guess why and what widely accepted html design it fails to render properly? Don't want to box you in with that table..
Quote:Not true. Some render various html standards in various manners. Some still have not become fully compliant with html 4.0 and CSS 2.0 including IE, NS, and Opera.
ALL of the world's browsers can read HTML.
Quote:
However, Microsoft Internet Exploiter adds a bunch of proprietary junk AND DOESN'T TELL DEVELOPERS THE DIFFERENCE.
*choke*
I don't know if I should start with links to Com and Com+ or go somthing as simple as this:
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=fh;EN-US;ie&Product=iep
and this
http://www.microsoft.com/windows/ie/techinfo/developers/default.asp
Quote:
When you write the code, write it with standards, not with proprietary Microsoft junk. If Mozilla can read it, then it will work with all the other browsers, including Internet Explorer.
So? Why can't the other browser--who I remind you are the least used--instaed find the robustness to read that line of code? If them silly folks at MS can do it why can't others?
Quote:
Additionally...
Wow, it does take many man hours to CHANGE ONE SYMBOL in the entire web page, doesn't it?
Oh, I'm sorry, I meant the man hours involved in bringing your weak-featured, least-used browser up to the robust standards of IE6.1.
Best,
Jerry
Post by: Demandred on April 01, 2004, 05:59:12 am
Quote:Not true. Some render various html standards in various manners. Some still have not become fully compliant with html 4.0 and CSS 2.0 including IE, NS, and Opera.
ALL of the world's browsers can read HTML.
Actually, IE isn't even fully compliant with CSS 1.0. Not to mention the bugs - height:100% should mean exactly that, and it doesn't. It parses in IE as about 120% if you want to create a <div> container for a page. I really couldn't care less about Microsoft additions to their browser but they really should follow standards. They didn't create the internet and they don't own it. Oh, and the standard web language is now XHTML - seperating the presentation layer from the data layer makes a lot of sense.
Post by: Maxillius on April 01, 2004, 09:24:16 am
VERY sweet! Especially with the 2-button mouse that's on a different machine every time I go in there
I want one I want one I want one I want one!!!!!
Post by: Praxis on April 01, 2004, 09:38:41 am
Quote:
Because it works over and above the limtied W3C standards it is flawed?
No, the flawed part of your reasoning is this:
IE uses the standards and also has its own proprietary stuff it can read.
All the other browsers use the standards.
The extra proprietary stuff from IE doesn't have any extra FEATURES, it just lets you write it in a different way.
There is no advantage to writing the web page in the IE-proprietary format (slashes backwards, etc).
So why would you write a web page as IE only and cut off all other browsers, when there is NO ADVANTAGE?
IE does NOT go "over and above the limited W3C standards". The only thing it does is lets you put a slash the other way or write some HTML code a little differently. THIS SERVES NO ADVANTAGE except to lock out non IE users and lock out Linux users COMPLETELY. However, often developers don't realize that the page they just made is IE only.
Did you know that XML and XHTML and DHTML are all W3C standards? CSS style sheets are standards. I'm not sure if Java or Flash are standards, but almost all modern browsers can read them anyway.
And how are the W3C standards limited? You take out HTML, XML, XHTML, DHTML, and CSS, you have no web pages.
So tell me, how does IE go "above and beyond" W3C? All they did was take the same standards and change a bit of the way it could be written to trick people into writing pages for IE only.
IE is only the most popular browser because it is bundled with Windows- most users don't go searching for another browser. They figure, "I have this, here, it works, it must be good" and they don't even realize better alternatives EXIST. If Microsoft were to be forced by the courts to either unbundle IE, or bundle competitor browsers with Windows and give users a choice on what to install, you would see IE's popularity crash through the floor.
Look at the Macintosh case.
Internet Explorer was the default built in browser in Mac OS 9. After a couple years, OS X came out, and the default and only built in browser was Internet Explorer Mac Edition (and since OS X was a completely new OS, there were no other browsers). About two years later, until the release of Jaguarr, there were now Netscape and Mozilla Mac OS X editions, but since IE was bundled, MOST MAC USERS USED THAT. Very similar to whats happening with Windows, no? Then Jaguar(OS 10.2) came out, bundling TWO browsers- Microsoft Internet Explorer Mac edition, and Apple's new Safari (still in beta). Safari was later updated to the 1.0 version.
A year later Panther (OS 10.3) came and had (I believe) Safari 1.2. About a year after Jaguar (and Safari's) release, Microsoft announced that Macs had a very good browser in Safari, and that they would no longer be developing Internet Explorer for lack of popular support.
Within a year of bundling a new browser with the OS IN ADDITION to IE, Apple had completely blown Mac IE's user base out of the water.
Quote:
Additionally, using your logic Netscrape is a total junk browser. Care to guess why and what widely accepted html design it fails to render properly? Don't want to box you in with that table..
You're telling me Netscape fails to render table's properly? You sure it wasn't fixed?
I never actually use netscape, myself- my browser of choice is Mozilla FireFox.
Quote:Not true. Some render various html standards in various manners. Some still have not become fully compliant with html 4.0 and CSS 2.0 including IE, NS, and Opera.
ALL of the world's browsers can read HTML.
Most are HTML 4.0 compliant. CSS is NOT HTML, but CSS is read by most browsers, including Mozilla, properly.
Quote:
*choke*
I don't know if I should start with links to Com and Com+ or go somthing as simple as this:
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=fh;EN-US;ie&Product=iep
and this
http://www.microsoft.com/windows/ie/techinfo/developers/default.asp
See what I mean...you don't know the difference.
to quote:
Internet Explorer for Developers
Develop rich Web-based applications with Internet Explorer 6
Internet Explorer 6 has a powerful programming model that includes:
* support for the Extensible Markup Language (XML)
* enhanced Dynamic HTML features that further enrich Microsoft Windows?based Web development
* increased support for standards based on Internet technologies, which saves time for developers writing rich Web-based applications
-------
XML and DHTML? Those aren't proprietary.
Nothing on those links lists the proprietary Microsoft IE HTML code that is different from the other browsers.
Most of the other browsers can read XML and DHTML.
Quote:
So? Why can't the other browser--who I remind you are the least used--instaed find the robustness to read that line of code? If them silly folks at MS can do it why can't others?
Why should the other browsers abandon standards and copy Microsoft?
Microsoft doesn't release their source code, making it VERY hard to find out all of the little IE only junk Microsoft added into Internet Explorer. Without the source code, they can't find out what the difference is, and I doubt they want to start injecting Microsoft's code into their browsers for fear of being sued for copying.
Quote:
Oh, I'm sorry, I meant the man hours involved in bringing your weak-featured, least-used browser up to the robust standards of IE6.1.
HA! Robust standards? IE 6 uses the exact same standards are the rest of the browsers, and it can read slashes backwards and a few other sloppy details. That's right, sloppy- the standards have strict HTML code, while IE lets the developer be sloppy, get the slashes wrong, and do other stuff to mess up the code and cause it to be IE only.
The other browsers can do everything IE 6 can do and more.
Heck, other than reading sloppily designed IE-only web pages, Mozilla Firefox can do ANYTHING IE can do, be it viewing Flash/Shockwave images, Java, DHTML, XML, XHTML, CSS, standard HTML, or anythingthing else.
Except YOU DON'T HAVE TABBED BROWSING OR POPUP BLOCKING. Muwahaha!
Oh yes, I know that the service pack tacked it on, but Mozilla has had it a good couple YEARS. And you STILL don't have tabbed browsing.
So tell me. WHY would you want to use a browser who's only advantage is that it can read sloppily written code, that has thousands of security vulnerabilities with more being discovered each week, and doesn't have the features that EVERY OTHER MODERN BROWSER has such as Tab browsing and popup blocking?
Post by: Praxis on April 01, 2004, 09:42:11 am
Quote:
Sadly, I don't own one, but the computer lab at the college has 8 G3/500s running OS X 10.3 Panther.
VERY sweet! Especially with the 2-button mouse that's on a different machine every time I go in there
I want one I want one I want one I want one!!!!!
Ah yes, Panther
Don't you love Panther? Have you pressed F9 yet? If not, try it.Open a whole bunch of Windows in Finder, Safari, and IE. Remember, completely FILL THE SCREEN UP with Windows.
Now press F9 and watch what happens
You'll love it. Then try F10, and F11.I recently bought off ebay for $450 an old PowerBook Pismo G3/500 and installed Panther on it. Runs great. I also own a 1 GHz Powerbook G4 (G4 has more performance per mhz than G3). That is one FAST laptop...and the Geforce FX 5200 helps
. And I WISH I had a dual-2 GHz G5...*drool*...BTW if you use the One-button mouse, when you hold Ctrl down on the keyboard, it will function as a right click. Just a quick Mac-hint
Post by: Praxis on April 01, 2004, 09:50:53 am
Do you really want to lock out 30% of the world from viewing your web page by writing it sloppily (so only IE can read it)?
Post by: Toasty0 on April 01, 2004, 10:07:32 am
Quote:
Did you know that XML and XHTML and DHTML are all W3C standards? CSS style sheets are standards. I'm not sure if Java or Flash are standards, but almost all modern browsers can read them anyway.
And how are the W3C standards limited? You take out HTML, XML, XHTML, DHTML, and CSS, you have no web pages.
That question was alrady answered. I think Pestalence posted a compelling answer to your question.
Post by: Toasty0 on April 01, 2004, 10:18:02 am
Quote:
BTW, Toasy? Remember that chart you posted? According to that, 30% of users are NOT running IE. Linux users CAN'T run IE- Mac users have Safari. AOL users have their browser (Based on Netscape, isn't it?). Older Mac users are stuck with IE (OS 9 and 10.0/10.1- OS 9 you can download Netscape, but the Mac edition is crap, and all the new browsers are for OS 10. Some of the browsers work on 10.1, but the majority of the browsers only work on 10.2 or above, so 10.0 and 10.1 users are stuck with IE).
Do you really want to lock out 30% of the world from viewing your web page by writing it sloppily (so only IE can read it)?
Lock out? You mean dumb down my pages, don't you?
Let's see, 72% use IE while the other 28% use a myraid of broswers that all render pages is a slightly different manner and you ask why I don't wish to expend the labor hours testing for that plathora of minor browsers that together add up to 28%--a fractured 28% I should say again.
That's like asking why PC Game makers don't develop their games for both desktop Window's OS and the Linux Kernel?
Best,
Jerry
Post by: Toasty0 on April 01, 2004, 10:22:05 am
Quote:
So tell me, how does IE go "above and beyond" W3C? All they did was take the same standards and change a bit of the way it could be written to trick people into writing pages for IE only.
Trick people?
Pardon me, I thought this was a conversation about brwoser design and usage, not some conspiracy theory about the grassy knoll and a 3rd browser.
*Toasty backs out the door*
Post by: Praxis on April 01, 2004, 10:24:06 am
Quote:Quote:
Did you know that XML and XHTML and DHTML are all W3C standards? CSS style sheets are standards. I'm not sure if Java or Flash are standards, but almost all modern browsers can read them anyway.
And how are the W3C standards limited? You take out HTML, XML, XHTML, DHTML, and CSS, you have no web pages.
That question was alrady answered. I think Pestalence posted a compelling answer to your question.
Yes, but you stated that the standards are 'limited'. They are most certainly not.
Post by: Praxis on April 01, 2004, 01:00:19 pm
Quote:
Lock out? You mean dumb down my pages, don't you?
Let's see, 72% use IE while the other 28% use a myraid of broswers that all render pages is a slightly different manner and you ask why I don't wish to expend the labor hours testing for that plathora of minor browsers that together add up to 28%--a fractured 28% I should say again.
Slightly different to the point of unnoticeable. I coded my page with Dreamweaver and tested it in Safari, Mozilla, and IE. Guess what? Mozilla and Safari rendered it exactly the same. On Mozilla and Safari one of the images was EXACTLY ONE pixel off (almost unnotiecable). Safari rendered the image more clearly than IE as well, smoothing some jagged corners.
I don't think you understand this. Safari, Mozilla, Netscape, and Opera follow the standards TO THE LETTER. That means that they will render the pages almost exactly the same. That means that if it works in one of them, it should work in all of them, AND it should work in Internet Explorer.
Coding a page sloppily will make it IE only (sloppily by slashes the wrong way, using the wrong type of quotes, etc), but if it is done with proper HTML, it will work on ALL standards based browsers- and it will work on ALL of those other 28% of browsers.
Additionally, the new version of Safari can read a number of IE only web pages, and theres a debug option to have Safari tell web pages that it is IE 6 for Windows, so that might slant the numbers a tiny bit toward IE.
Quote:
That's like asking why PC Game makers don't develop their games for both desktop Window's OS and the Linux Kernel?
That's completely different. Linux uses a completely different Kernel and graphics system (OpenGL) than Windows (DirectX). It takes hours upon hours to make something for one or the other
On the other hand, if you make something standards-compliant, it will run in ALL browsers, be it Mozilla, Internet Explorer, Safari, etc.
A better example would be this.
Let's say there were 10 different types of DVD players in the world. All of these DVD players play DVD's in the standard MPEG format. One of these DVD players, the most popular one, plays both MPEG and WMV. 70% of DVD players in the world are that type. However, it is a bit buggy, so a number of people don't like it. And WMV offers no advantages over MPEG.
Now lets say you were the DVD producer for, say, Disney. Would you make your DVD's in MPEG (so ALL DVD players can read it) or WMV (so only the one can read it)?
It's the same for browsers. It's just as easy to make a standards-complaint page as it is to make an IE only one. But there are NO ADVANTAGES to having an IE-only web page- while making a standards-complaint page allows even more people to view your page.
It's as easy as switching the slash the other way around.
Post by: Praxis on April 01, 2004, 01:02:24 pm
Quote:
Trick people?
Pardon me, I thought this was a conversation about brwoser design and usage, not some conspiracy theory about the grassy knoll and a 3rd browser.
*Toasty backs out the door*
It's quite well known that Microsoft will make certain changes to their product and not inform developers that it is ONLY for their product. The developers think that all of the other versions of the product have the same features, and so they don't realize they've made something Microsoft-only.
They did it with MS-Java (and got their butts sued big time over it) and did it again with Microsoft Internet Explorer (and are in the process of getting their butts sued over it).
Post by: Praxis on April 01, 2004, 01:13:28 pm
I opened the web page in Dreamweaver in both Mozilla and IE. The text in IE looked like text, while in Mozilla it was smooth as a Photoshop image.
Here's a good site with a comparison:
http://www.newrecruit.org/archives/2003/june/browsers
He compares IE to Firebird- the new version of FireBird is called FireFox and fixes most of the minor complaints (such as inability to drag a bookmark) he mentions.
101 things you can do in Mozilla that you can't do in IE:
http://www.xulplanet.com/ndeakin/arts/reasons.html
A very in depth browser comparison, but a bit outdated:
http://home.earthlink.net/~intelligentlife/ItemMenu/browsers.html
In fact, Toasty, I went to YOUR personal web page, and it looks perfect in Mozilla Firebird.
Post by: Taldren_Admin on April 01, 2004, 03:15:40 pm
Ann
Post by: Praxis on April 01, 2004, 03:30:04 pm
*cheers*
Cool.
Post by: Towelie on April 01, 2004, 03:32:30 pm
Post by: Towelie on April 01, 2004, 03:35:46 pm
Post by: Taldren_Admin on April 01, 2004, 04:02:30 pm
Quote:
So, when can we get some screenshots of the new website?
Screen shots? Heck very soon you will have a full screen
I don't have much left to do before it can go live but there will be more work to do once it is up. I am already rethinking for the next rev.
Ann
Post by: Death_Merchant on April 01, 2004, 04:36:45 pm
(and Praxis: Your avatar and sig image doesn't display in Safari either
)Perhaps this quote from Dave Hyatt's (one of the key devs for Safari) blog will help:
Safari has draconian XML error handling. If the file isn't well-formed, Safari won't display it. Mozilla does the same, which should come as no surprise, since the two browsers use the same open-source XML parser (expat).
I fall squarely into the draconian camp and agree with Tim Bray. Fully half of the bugs I receive in WebCore are not bugs at all, but are essentially differences in error handling and error recovery between Safari and the dominant Web browser, WinIE. None of these issues occur with XML.
If we lived in a world where browsers could refuse to display malformed content (with useful error notification of course so that authors could easily repair their content), then all of these "bugs" would simply disappear. I could focus my efforts on real DOM and CSS bugs, and not have to waste my time emulating the behavior of WinIE.
Relaxing restrictions on well-formedness is a slippery slope, and where does it end? Consider all the "helpful" rules that exist in HTML today thanks to early versions of Netscape and WinIE. Did you know that any h1-h6 tag can close any other h1-h6 tag? Try it. Open an h1, type some text and then put in a close h2. It will close up the h1 in WinIE and Mozilla. (I haven't yet fixed this "bug" in Safari.) Try specifying a close tag for a paragraph by itself. You'll get an empty paragraph in Safari, Mozilla, and WinIE.
Post by: SL-Punisher on April 01, 2004, 04:39:29 pm
Here's some humor for everyone: Move out of your parents basement and get a life!
KIDDING!
Post by: Death_Merchant on April 01, 2004, 04:48:35 pm
You kidding? I can't tell 'cause my browser won't display the emoticons......
Post by: SL-Punisher on April 01, 2004, 04:55:33 pm
Post by: Praxis on April 01, 2004, 05:47:25 pm
LOL!!!
I had one a year or so ago but both hosting sites no longer exist. I should stick a new one on there from my personal web server...
In fact, I'm gonna add my GFL sig now.
Post by: Praxis on April 01, 2004, 05:56:55 pm
Post by: Death_Merchant on April 01, 2004, 06:29:29 pm
I don't think the forum handles .php properly. Make it a jpeg or something.
BTW: If I point Safari directly to http://targ.ottergoose.net/praxissiggen.php, I can see your sig.
Tre kewl....
Post by: IKV Nemesis D7L on April 01, 2004, 06:38:34 pm
Quote:
Why doesn't it work...argh...
Code:
http://targ.ottergoose.net/praxissiggen.php
As far as I know .php is not an extension associated with images. Perhaps you need to check the image format.
Post by: Sirgod on April 01, 2004, 07:11:16 pm
Stephen
Post by: Toasty0 on April 01, 2004, 09:55:43 pm
Quote:
Maybe you don't see my sig and avatar because I don't have one...
LOL!!!
I had one a year or so ago but both hosting sites no longer exist. I should stick a new one on there from my personal web server...
In fact, I'm gonna add my GFL sig now.
I'd fix you sig for ya Prax, but then it would no longer be well formed, would it?
Try using the image /image tag instead. That's what we in thse part call UBB code.
Also, though you say you have no image, the properties of your avatar come back with this URL http://trekmeshes.starfleet.ch/thumbnails/quantumss1701e.jpg
Lastly, you use Dreamweaver? I use notepad like all good real coders do. None of that plug-n-slug for me. Real coders write their own clean code.
Best,
Jerry
Post by: IKV Nemesis D7L on April 01, 2004, 10:03:37 pm
Quote:Quote:
Maybe you don't see my sig and avatar because I don't have one...
LOL!!!
I had one a year or so ago but both hosting sites no longer exist. I should stick a new one on there from my personal web server...
In fact, I'm gonna add my GFL sig now.
I'd fix you sig for ya Prax, but then it would no longer be well formed, would it?
Try using the image /image tag instead. That's what we in thse part call UBB code.
Also, though you say you have no image, the properties of your avatar come back with this URL http://trekmeshes.starfleet.ch/thumbnails/quantumss1701e.jpg
Lastly, you use Dreamweaver? I use notepad like all good real coders do. None of that plug-n-slug for me. Real coders write their own clean code.
Best,
Jerry
Don't forget. Quote:
"Debugging is twice as hard as writing the code in the first place. Therefore, if you write the code as cleverly as possible, you are, by definition, not smart enough to debug it." - Brian W. Kernighan
Post by: Toasty0 on April 01, 2004, 10:31:24 pm
Thanks for the laugh!
Post by: SL-Punisher on April 02, 2004, 01:05:01 am
FIRE BAD FIRE BAD!
Post by: Monty on April 02, 2004, 02:13:30 am
Quote:
"Debugging is twice as hard as writing the code in the first place. Therefore, if you write the code as cleverly as possible, you are, by definition, not smart enough to debug it." - Brian W. Kernighan
Thats a fantasic quote.
I've decided to give Firefox a chance. I've used Mozilla (1.2 I think) for well over a year now. Firefox makes me feel right at home
So far so good.
I love the integrate google search... where you select text on a page, right click - choose" web search for '...; " and it brings the results up in another tab. I'm not easily pleased - honest!
Post by: Toasty0 on April 02, 2004, 03:01:14 am
Quote:
Grog no like fancy html coder program
FIRE BAD FIRE BAD!
Don't make me bring out the sheep pics again...
Post by: Praxis on April 02, 2004, 09:23:49 am
BTW as for Dreamweaver...
I don't use all the fancy buttons to do the code for me.
I use Dreamweaver ONLY for the Split-View which is quite handy. See, I can type HTMl code in one side of the screen like Notepad, and see what it looks like in real time on the other side of the screen. It's very handy.
And I occasionally use Dreamweaver to add in some popup Javascript menus because I don't know Javascript.
I've always used notepad before though.
Post by: Praxis on April 02, 2004, 09:25:56 am
Quote:
Dangit Prax, you're making us Safari guys look bad
I don't think the forum handles .php properly. Make it a jpeg or something.
BTW: If I point Safari directly to http://targ.ottergoose.net/praxissiggen.php, I can see your sig.
Tre kewl....
Do that again, and hit refresh several times, and look at the different sig images
Quote:
Code:http://targ.ottergoose.net/praxissiggen.php
As far as I know .php is not an extension associated with images. Perhaps you need to check the image format.
The images are jpeg but its within a php script that points to the jpegs. It works great on the GFL site within the img tags...
Post by: Praxis on April 02, 2004, 09:27:11 am
Quote:
Also, though you say you have no image, the properties of your avatar come back with this URL http://trekmeshes.starfleet.ch/thumbnails/quantumss1701e.jpg
Best,
Jerry
Well, I used to have an avatar, the web page it was hosted on is loooong gone, so I had completely forgotten about it.
Post by: Toasty0 on April 02, 2004, 10:18:33 am
Quote:Quote:
Also, though you say you have no image, the properties of your avatar come back with this URL http://trekmeshes.starfleet.ch/thumbnails/quantumss1701e.jpg
Best,
Jerry
Well, I used to have an avatar, the web page it was hosted on is loooong gone, so I had completely forgotten about it.
ok, Praxis, go here to discover how to post an image in your sig: http://forums.taldren.com/ubbthreads/faq.php?Cat=
Best,
Jerry
Post by: Toasty0 on April 02, 2004, 10:22:20 am
Quote:
Well, it's a very simple PHP script that displays a random 1 of 2 images. It works fine on the GFL forum between the img tags, and every time you refresh the page you get a different image. Quite cool. The browser displays it as an image fine.
BTW as for Dreamweaver...
I don't use all the fancy buttons to do the code for me.
I use Dreamweaver ONLY for the Split-View which is quite handy. See, I can type HTMl code in one side of the screen like Notepad, and see what it looks like in real time on the other side of the screen. It's very handy.
And I occasionally use Dreamweaver to add in some popup Javascript menus because I don't know Javascript.
I've always used notepad before though.
The reason I dislike Dreamweaver is that when you do use its features it writes some pretty cluttered code. If you're gonna use an HTML editor I suggest Coffee Cup or Matrix. Cuffee Cup is like 40 dollars and Matrix is free.
FWIW.
Best,
Jerry
Post by: SL-Punisher on April 02, 2004, 05:27:31 pm
Quote:Quote:
Grog no like fancy html coder program
FIRE BAD FIRE BAD!
Don't make me bring out the sheep pics again...
You act as if that's a threat. Bring em out baby Woo hoo!! Ya take it off take it ALL OFF!