Nov 17 2004, 4:29 pm
In response to Mega fart cannon
|
|
Shun Di
 |
Ok, that page doesn't look attractive in either browser.
|
Mega fart cannon wrote:
Some CSS designs won't show up on Firefox, as they do on IE. That page makes validators cry. :( Kind of surprising, since the invisionfree support forums, presumably using a similar template validate perfectly concerning CSS, and pretty well with HTML. | |
Reason #1. It just does.
| |
Smoko wrote:
First of all, it doesnt render CSS proplerly If you dont want to use it, dont, to the people who do, its your own choice, you've heard all the facts and if you want to stick with it, you have been warned. | |
Jiskuha wrote:
http://www.stopie.com Ehh, some of those are just plain wrong and features that ARE in IE. If someone is going to write a page they should better know their information. | |
Yeah, but it seems you have so much trouble installing java, music exetensions, and random plugins people made. It may support a bunch of "Valid" HTML/CSS but it certainly doesn't Function better then anything else. Most of the users can't even make a skin that won't glitch the browser.
| |
Trouble? I've had no trouble with Firefox extensions or skins.
And since WHEN is removing unnecessary bloat but still keeping it available for those few who want it a bad thing? I like my browser sleek, lean, and fast; but I also want certain features. No browser, however good, could ever hope to satisfy everyone out of the box. That's why extensions are such a good thing. It's MY browser. If I want an extra feature, I spend 5 minutes finding it and about 1 minute installing it. Tada, browser update, and the dev team didn't have to lift a finger. You like the Google Toolbar, right? Well, that's basically an IE extension, except they had to mess around with DLLs and crap to get it to work. I had to open and close about five IE windows while it was installing. With Firefox, I go to the extensions page, click Install, confirm the installation, wait a few seconds, and restart the browser. So much simpler. Let's see, what non-standard extensions do I have installed right now... ("Standard" meaning "comes with the browser install".) Image Zoom: Allows you to zoom images in and out freely. (It basically can't be activated it by accident, so it doesn't intrude on browsing.) IE does a limited amount of zooming, but what if you want to zoom in on some pixel art or something? You have to save it to disk and load it up in Paint or whatever. Takes far too long for my liking. On the other hand, some people wouldn't use this functionality. Okay, great! They just don't install it. One less unnecessary feature. Tabbrowser Extensions: Adds extra tab-browsing-related functions. Some of the options in this extension slow down the browser very slightly. I like them, though, so I don't mind. If I did start minding, I could remove the extension. Try doing something like that in IE. Oh, wait; IE doesn't have extensions (or tabs), so you wouldn't be ABLE to have features like these ANYWAY. My bad. Adblock: Best. Ad blocker. Ever. Don't even talk to me about the Google Toolbar. =P I've used both, and I much prefer Adblock. It gives me both the fine control and the power I want from an ad blocker. Of course, it's a bit technical for some, which is fine; they can install an easier-to-use ad blocker (like the Firefox port of the Google Toolbar that somebody made) if they like. The strength of this is that I don't have to use their simplified ad blocker, and they don't have to use my overly-technical-but-more-powerful one. Everyone wins. Gmail Notifier: Google made one of these for IE, but they had to do it through a complicated and non-standard interface. With Firefox, it's in my extensions window like every other extension. There's a standard method for installing it, a standard method for changing its options, a standard method for updating it (and checking for updates), and a standard method for uninstalling it. IE isn't anywhere near this easy to use in terms of extending its functionality. So, to sum up: Extensions good! | |
Bullfinches!
1) I know you're talking about the compression rate. I'm showing how the compression rate matters in spite of your insistence that only the ISP's speed matters. 2) You brought up the ISP speed, so clearly, you're not just talking about the compression rate. 3) The only reason you're talking about the compression rate at all is because of how it affects the end result. 4) If the compression rate didn't affect anything, it would be an abstract concept with no value... and how can you say it always ends up the same? Why talk about it, then? | |
See, crispy, we're not talking about the people that spent there lives trying to reinstall firefox until it worked perfectly.
We're talking about the people that can't get it to work, after One installation! o_o | |
Hedgemistress wrote:
Bullfinches! Well, i'm sure the ISP's speed matters over the compression rate of a browser, but i could be wrong too. 2) You brought up the ISP speed, so clearly, you're not just talking about the compression rate. We had just begun talking about the compression rate, and the ISP's speed was irrelevant to the conversation. 3) The only reason you're talking about the compression rate at all is because of how it affects the end result. Exactly, it might not effect the end result at all, we all should do a little research. 4) If the compression rate didn't affect anything, it would be an abstract concept with no value... and how can you say it always ends up the same? Why talk about it, then? I would say it doesn't matter, it should be put in a different category. Seeing as how compression is used for pages all over the net, i would think the internet came to be this fast because of compression in browsers and compressing websites. But, i don't even know if that makes sense, so i will be quiet now. :P | |
Kaga-Kami wrote:
See, crispy, we're not talking about the people that spent there lives trying to reinstall firefox until it worked perfectly. I'm in neither category. I installed it ONCE, and it worked PERFECTLY. The only times I've ever reinstalled Firefox were to update it. Remember, Firefox until very recently wasn't a finished product. It was still technically in beta. Bugs were expected. It came from a disadvantage compared to IE. Now, thankfully, most of those bugs have been fixed. As recently as version 0.7, it was a bit clunky in terms of Windows installation, I'll admit, but all those problems are gone now. Version 1.0PR seamlessly installs and works like a dream, first time, and it's properly integrated with Windows. To look at it you'd think it was a native Windows app. So it's not a fair comparison to complain about bugs in previous versions of the product, which is exactly what you're doing. | |
Crispy wrote:
So it's not a fair comparison to complain about bugs in previous versions of the product, which is exactly what you're doing. True, but people do the same for IE. Why, because as quoted they are too lazy to get the update. I'm not really protecting IE so much as I'm just giving good examples of why people shouldn't worry. I've converted probably 4 friends to Netscape from IE. It was as simple as SHOWING them the browser, and letting them use it for a whole 5 minutes. "Hey, this is weird .... wow pretty cool. Dang, IE could never do that.. I'm getting this at home." =P | |
I was with firefox a version before, .06, and nothing was better and they still had all of the errors. Even though it's more of a recent version now, it was buggy back then.
| |
So it's not a fair comparison to complain about bugs in previous versions of the product, which is exactly what you're doing. Of course you were claiming that IE lacks things that it currently does like the popup blocker and several things for managing add ons(which I'm assuming is a similiar concept to extensions). Maybe you should re-evaluate IE before complaining about problems with previous versions. | |
True. I wasn't aware that IE now has a popup blocker, so anything I said about that before should be ignored.
It's good to see that Microsoft has finally caught up in one area (took them long enough) but they're still behind on just about everything else. I see that IE6 makes some references to third-party extensions, but I don't see any user-friendly, centralised method of keeping them all together with a common uninstall/update/customise interface, like Firefox's Extensions window does. | |
It's good to see that Microsoft has finally caught up in one area (took them long enough) but they're still behind on just about everything else. I just noticed it recently when my google tyoolbar starting crapping out on exit. Since it was so buried who knows how long it's been around :P. And aside from some non-standard handling of HTML I don't see how they're behind on everything else. I see that IE6 makes some references to third-party extensions, but I don't see any user-friendly, centralised method of keeping them all together with a common uninstall/update/customise interface, like Firefox's Extensions window does. It's there just have to the tools options menu item, click on the programs panel, then click the Manage Addons button. From there you can easily enable, disable, and update add ons. Not only that but with the .NET framework its incredibly easy to develop add ons. And the main selling point for me is the fact that IE is easy to integrate into an application either for having an internal browser or displaying HTML without writing your own code to handle rendering HTML. Granted I never checked if the other browsers had any kind of developer support for intgrating their browser into your apps but chances are since I use Microsoft development tools the microsoft one is going to be easier to work with anyway. | |
Theodis wrote:
And aside from some non-standard handling of HTML I don't see how they're behind on everything else. See the rest of this thread. Security and lack of adherence to standards are the main problems. It also lacks a number of useful features that the rest of the browser world has had for a while, like tabbed browsing. It's there just have to the tools options menu item, click on the programs panel, then click the Manage Addons button. From there you can easily enable, disable, and update add ons. Manage addons... manage addons... nope, can't see it. Perhaps I don't have the latest version as I thought. *goes and looks* I see M$ have redesigned their site since I was last there... anyway, there's an IE service pack which I don't have. Figures. I really can't be bothered to download such a large file for so little gain (seeing as I never use IE anyway), so I'll just take your word for it. =P Not only that but with the .NET framework its incredibly easy to develop add ons. And the main selling point for me is the fact that IE is easy to integrate into an application either for having an internal browser or displaying HTML without writing your own code to handle rendering HTML. Mozilla has one of those, too! Admittedly it's probably not as easy to use in Windows, but it does have the advantage of working everywhere else as well - something IE will never be able to claim. Granted I never checked if the other browsers had any kind of developer support for intgrating their browser into your apps but chances are since I use Microsoft development tools the microsoft one is going to be easier to work with anyway. I just love Microsoft's lock-them-in marketing policy. "You already use Microsoft product X, so you should Microsoft product Y because you're guaranteed that it's the only thing that's compatible." The worst thing about it is that it works so damn well. =P | |