Today's Posts Follow Us On Twitter! TFL Members on Twitter  
Forum search: Advanced Search  
Navigation
Marketplace
  Members Login:
Lost password?
  Forum Statistics:
Forum Members: 24,254
Total Threads: 80,792
Total Posts: 566,471
There are 974 users currently browsing (tf).
 
  Our Partners:
 
  TalkFreelance     Design and Development     HTML/XHTML/DHTML/CSS :

Firefox problems

Thread title: Firefox problems
Closed Thread  
Page 3 of 7 < 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 >
    Thread tools Search this thread Display Modes  
11-08-2005, 05:24 AM
#21
jono1 is offline jono1
jono1's Avatar
Status: Non-conformist
Join date: Jul 2005
Location: Canberra, Australia.
Expertise:
Software:
 
Posts: 1,172
iTrader: 0 / 0%
 

jono1 is on a distinguished road

  Old

ok first let me say that I understand what you mean. to me padding should like the padding on a padded cell - keeps the contents of the box away from the edges without adding to the actual width of the container. Unfortunately the way that it makes sense for it to work *isnt* the way it works. I don't know why, but I follow the standards.

(a lot of browsers do make use of the Internet Explorer Engine and build from it, adding features; MSN Explorer most prominantly)
MSN Explorer is made by Micro$oft. It's a slightly prettified version of IE with MSN integration features added. It doesn't count. Partly because of that, partly because nobody uses it.

Whether every other browser(...)does it the wrong way or not does not make the right way wrong?
I'm still trying to figure out if that was good sentence structure or not
The fact that every other browser follows the standards set by the body that is responsible for maintaining standards on the web makes every other browser right. Simple

I will add to this post but unfortunately I now have to run off to do a 3-hour I.T. exam

11-08-2005, 12:22 PM
#22
Lord Kalthorn is offline Lord Kalthorn
Lord Kalthorn's Avatar
Status: I love this place
Join date: Jan 2005
Location: Greathanc
Expertise:
Software:
 
Posts: 743
iTrader: 0 / 0%
 

Lord Kalthorn is on a distinguished road

Send a message via MSN to Lord Kalthorn

  Old

Originally Posted by jono1
ok first let me say that I understand what you mean. to me padding should like the padding on a padded cell - keeps the contents of the box away from the edges without adding to the actual width of the container. Unfortunately the way that it makes sense for it to work *isnt* the way it works. I don't know why, but I follow the standards.
How can you just accept something that you do not believe is right? How are proper standards made if not by using what is right and replacing what is wrong? And even then, why force yourself to accept a model that is wrong in a standard that is barely used, when you could accept the correct model in a standard that is used in hundreds of millions of browsers?

Originally Posted by jono1
MSN Explorer is made by Micro$oft. It's a slightly prettified version of IE with MSN integration features added. It doesn't count. Partly because of that, partly because nobody uses it.
Yeah ok maybe MSN Explorer is the wrong one to specify. Of course though, a lot of people do use it. Perhaps a better example of a browser that uses Internet Explorer's Engine is AOL Explorer, which everybody using AOL uses. I do not know how many Internet Explorer powered Browsers there are, but there are a lot more people using them than say Netscape, or probably Opera.

Originally Posted by jono1
I'm still trying to figure out if that was good sentence structure or not
Haha. Yeah... I don't know, just the way it came out at the time It is how you would say it in normal conversation at least.

Originally Posted by jono1
The fact that every other browser follows the standards set by the body that is responsible for maintaining standards on the web makes every other browser right. Simple
Not every other browser does, you yourself have said even Firefox doesn't follow that standard by the word, and have even agreed its box model is wrong. Even vaguely, more than 80% (including MSN, AOL and so on) of all people using the Internet use the right standard. Of all the computers in the world ready to use the Internet, 90% of computers have Internet Explorer. Obviously the standards set of the body that is responsible for maintaining standards on the web are an impotent set of words that nobody reads, made by crusty old men that nobody cares about, who have never designed a website in their lives. The guys on the Intenet Explorer team will have designed websites, they will have helped design your 'standards'. Indeed, the guy working on the Windows Live! Aggregator wrote the book on DHTML. These are people who know the Internet. The W3C were created and put in place before the Internet was anything like it is today. And like other gammy parts of the Internet, surely they should be cut off.

Good luck with the ICT Exam!

11-08-2005, 01:01 PM
#23
jono1 is offline jono1
jono1's Avatar
Status: Non-conformist
Join date: Jul 2005
Location: Canberra, Australia.
Expertise:
Software:
 
Posts: 1,172
iTrader: 0 / 0%
 

jono1 is on a distinguished road

  Old

lol thanks the exam didn't go too badly which was a big shock to me considering I've done no study and almost no work in IT all semester


How can you just accept something that you do not believe is right?
I never said I don't believe it's right. It confuses me the way they have implemented it, but then a lot of things in this world don't make sense to me. Such as the fact that the IE dev team recognises W3C standards and has even made press releases to the effect that are endeavouring to bring IE into line with said standards, yet their biggest standards-compliance issue (the box model) is still there in the most recent version of their browser.


How are proper standards made if not by using what is right and replacing what is wrong?
That's exactly what all the standards-compliant browsers are doing. Pushing out the outdated box-model that IE and IE-based browsers use to bring in a more universally accepted way of doing things.


when you could accept the correct model in a standard that is used in hundreds of millions of browsers?
At this point in time I'd like to point out two things.
a) standards compliant browsers such as firefox, camino, opera etc are rapidly gaining market share. Rapidly. As is Mac OSX which means its browser Safari which happens to also comply with standards is also gaining market share. Hundreds of millions of web users may use IE and IE-based browsers now but people are smarting up.
b) along the same lines, every single person I know (except for you evidently) who uses IE or AOL Explorer (which I'm pretty sure is the result of a partership with Microsoft) only use it because it's what comes bundled with their OS or internet package. You are the only person I have ever met who actually chooses to use IE. This is because people by and large are stupid and mostly just go with what's quickest, even if it means sacrificing security and other basic features like tabs (yes I know IE7 has tabbed browsing but at the moment its on less computers than Firefox). Please note that I'm not calling *you* stupid, you choose to use IE and I respect that.


Of all the computers in the world ready to use the Internet, 90% of computers have Internet Explorer.
refer to my above point.


and have even agreed its box model is wrong
ahem. Again, I never said that.


Obviously the standards set of the body that is responsible for maintaining standards on the web are an impotent set of words that nobody reads, made by crusty old men that nobody cares about, who have never designed a website in their lives
Although I can see where you might get that impression (the W3C site is a visual atrocity), that is a massive assumption with largely no basis. The only reason standards aren't largely accepted is because a couple of years back, around when the whole standards thing started to come into focus, Microsoft pretty much decided to forget about their current software and shift all their attention to Vista. So basically apart from the SP2 update where they finally added a popup blocker (that doesn't work most of the time) nothing has been done to IE apart from the constant stream of security fixes. I can only hope the final release of IE 7 will comply with standards a lot more because they've been spending so much time on it while neglecting what everyone is using *now*.


Indeed, the guy working on the Windows Live! Aggregator
the guy working on the what?


wrote the book on DHTML.
yes, what a great success DHTML was. And it's not exactly surprising that a Microsoft guy 'wrote the book' on it, as far as I'm aware the only browser to fully support it is IE.


The W3C were created and put in place before the Internet was anything like it is today
and by bringing in XHTML CSS standards they are bringing the internet into the 21st century, the only problem is the biggest browser in the world seems intent on stopping their efforts.


And like other gammy parts of the Internet, surely they should be cut off.
If they're so gammy, why is it that they are still universally recognised as the web's standards body by everyone *including* Microsoft?

11-08-2005, 01:55 PM
#24
Lord Kalthorn is offline Lord Kalthorn
Lord Kalthorn's Avatar
Status: I love this place
Join date: Jan 2005
Location: Greathanc
Expertise:
Software:
 
Posts: 743
iTrader: 0 / 0%
 

Lord Kalthorn is on a distinguished road

Send a message via MSN to Lord Kalthorn

  Old

Originally Posted by jono1
lol thanks the exam didn't go too badly which was a big shock to me considering I've done no study and almost no work in IT all semester
Haha, that's got to be the only thing I miss from not being at College at the moment... the challenge that comes from getting the gain you need, from as little work as physically possible.

Originally Posted by jono1
I never said I don't believe it's right. It confuses me the way they have implemented it, but then a lot of things in this world don't make sense to me. Such as the fact that the IE dev team recognises W3C standards and has even made press releases to the effect that are endeavouring to bring IE into line with said standards, yet their biggest standards-compliance issue (the box model) is still there in the most recent version of their browser.
Lol, I suppose that is true, there are a lot of things in the world that don't make sense. However, this doesn't make sense and there is a better way to do it that does and is the right way to do it. In the world, a lot of things that don't make sense are the right and only way something works, we just don't understand why it works right. As with the standard it it neither the right way it works or the only way. The alternative is proven to work perfectly, and makes sense. Well I suppose you can always pray it is not in there come the Beta 2 or final release; but I will be content in the belief that it probably will be. Perhaps they have not made that change because they decided a long time ago that the box model that the W3C standard suggests is wrong. The Internet Explorer Team are obviously smart enough to fix what is wrong with the W3C standard, and use what isn't.

Originally Posted by jono1
That's exactly what all the standards-compliant browsers are doing. Pushing out the outdated box-model that IE and IE-based browsers use to bring in a more universally accepted way of doing things.
Haha, I am pretty sure that of all the sites in the universe the accepted way of doing things is the way Internet Explorer does them. What is right is not neccersarily what the W3C says, what is right is what makes sense. You take anybody who doesn't know this problem and tell them to make a box model with padding and a margin. Then ask yourself who is right.

Originally Posted by jono1
At this point in time I'd like to point out two things.
a) standards compliant browsers such as firefox, camino, opera etc are rapidly gaining market share. Rapidly. As is Mac OSX which means its browser Safari which happens to also comply with standards is also gaining market share. Hundreds of millions of web users may use IE and IE-based browsers now but people are smarting up.
Rapidly is obviously in the eye of the beholder; much like standards compliance. As far as I am aware Firefox has had... what... they passed 100 Million Downloads last month. That's starting from the first of January let's say. That's 259 Days, up to the 16th which is apparently when they got their 100 Millionth download. That's apparently 386 thousand downloads a day. Now I myself have downloaded Firefox over ten times, so let's half that because a lot of people are going to have done that. What was the number of computer sales this year? I don't know myself, can't find it, but whatever they were way more than 100 million computers with Internet Explorer on them were sold. 100 million isn't even a particularly big number; more people downloaded Microsoft Antispyware than that in its first four months.

Originally Posted by jono1
b) along the same lines, every single person I know (except for you evidently) who uses IE or AOL Explorer (which I'm pretty sure is the result of a partership with Microsoft) only use it because it's what comes bundled with their OS or internet package. You are the only person I have ever met who actually chooses to use IE. This is because people by and large are stupid and mostly just go with what's quickest, even if it means sacrificing security and other basic features like tabs (yes I know IE7 has tabbed browsing but at the moment its on less computers than Firefox). Please note that I'm not calling *you* stupid, you choose to use IE and I respect that.
This is true, got to be said. The bit about Internet Explorer at least, although I am sure more people choose to use it over Firefox than people use Firefox, but overall it is bound to be true and at Firefox's growth I do not imagine it will be true for long. Unfortunately for the world at large people do actually choose to use AOL Explorer, because they have to pay for it. But yeah I get what you mean.

Sacrificing security is a commonly held misconception. People who believe that are still locked in 2004. While people were moving to Firefox, SP2 came out. In the first three months of Firefox being out, more bugs were found in it than in Internet Explorer. As far as I am aware, bugs for Internet Explorer since SP2 and bugs for Firefox version 1 are not that far off each other, even so far down the line. And with upwards of eight times more people using it, that is impressive for Internet Explorer. How many bugs do you think Firefox would have with eight times the users if it has almost as many as Internet Explorer now?

Originally Posted by jono1
ahem. Again, I never said that.
Hmm... maybe not. But you don't think it makes sense, which is just as good.

Originally Posted by jono1
Although I can see where you might get that impression (the W3C site is a visual atrocity), that is a massive assumption with largely no basis. The only reason standards aren't largely accepted is because a couple of years back, around when the whole standards thing started to come into focus, Microsoft pretty much decided to forget about their current software and shift all their attention to Vista. So basically apart from the SP2 update where they finally added a popup blocker (that doesn't work most of the time) nothing has been done to IE apart from the constant stream of security fixes. I can only hope the final release of IE 7 will comply with standards a lot more because they've been spending so much time on it while neglecting what everyone is using *now*.
It is a huge assumption I enjoy them. Actually SP2 is a fantastic fix, and compared to the bugs of 2004 Internet Explorer is fantastically secure. I have seen... five, maybe six security fixes for Internet Explorer since I installed SP2, which wasn't even the beginning of the year, it was early 2004 as a Beta. Firefox on my parents PC has a fix already waiting to install, and I downloaded it a week ago for them. In fact, the Technet Site can show us all the Security Bulletins for Internet Explorer for SP2 within the last year (if you set it for all it seems to pick up updates for all manner of things not connected to Internet Explorer); here. You'll have to set it to the obvious, but if you're interested it is very interesting. I cannot find a Firefox version, but you and I both know over the last year there have at least six fixes for Firefox.

Originally Posted by jono1
the guy working on the what?

yes, what a great success DHTML was. And it's not exactly surprising that a Microsoft guy 'wrote the book' on it, as far as I'm aware the only browser to fully support it is IE.
Ok, it is not the point of what it is called, I call it DHTML, you call it the DOM, eitherway, he wrote the Microsoft Book on it. And he writes sites with it.

Originally Posted by jono1
and by bringing in XHTML CSS standards they are bringing the internet into the 21st century, the only problem is the biggest browser in the world seems intent on stopping their efforts.
XHTML is hardly bringing HTML into the 21st Century. HTML has gone as far as it ever will, XHTML is merely a new more strict way of writing it, it introduces nothing that isn't in HTML before it other than new ways of writing things and more standards for doing everything. It is no more functional than HTML 4, and it still needs JavaScript to bring it to life. HTML will not be in the 21st Century until it becomes more feature rich. It is always going to be a markup language, that is the best way to have it, but they need to stop their serious problem which is that they want your sites to look like their's. They want your site to look like Google, or one of the thousands of open source websites that are coded chiselled onto a tablet of stone, in Greek and thrown at the computer in a vague attempt to get it on the Internet.

Originally Posted by jono1
If they're so gammy, why is it that they are still universally recognised as the web's standards body by everyone *including* Microsoft?
Haha, you know what; I do not know? It is one of the universes little mysteries. Let us just thank God that a businessman is CEO of Microsoft and not me.

11-08-2005, 08:37 PM
#25
xZaft is offline xZaft
Status: Member
Join date: Jul 2005
Location: Massachusetts, US
Expertise:
Software:
 
Posts: 428
iTrader: 0 / 0%
 

xZaft is on a distinguished road

  Old

Ok, just first off. Firefox had many bugs on its first release like last year. IE has had about 30 thousand in 6 versions. I'll leave it at that.

11-08-2005, 09:06 PM
#26
Lord Kalthorn is offline Lord Kalthorn
Lord Kalthorn's Avatar
Status: I love this place
Join date: Jan 2005
Location: Greathanc
Expertise:
Software:
 
Posts: 743
iTrader: 0 / 0%
 

Lord Kalthorn is on a distinguished road

Send a message via MSN to Lord Kalthorn

  Old

Lol, I was going to wait for the rest... but apparently it is not coming. Obviously the meaning of first off has changed since I last used it

Thirty thousand is kind of a vague figure... we've already seen there were 6 Critical bugs in the whole lifetime of Internet Explorer for SP2. That is roughly, a little more than Firefox's lifetime of version 1. Firefox has as you said had many bugs, many is not going to be three quarters, which is around about what you would expect from a browser that has an eighth of the market Internet Explorer has.

If it has as many Critical problems as Internet Explorer has now, when it has barely more market than Opera, how many bugs will it have if it ever achieves its ultimate goal of getting all Internet Explorer's market share?

11-08-2005, 09:16 PM
#27
Jonny is offline Jonny
Status: Member
Join date: Feb 2005
Location: UK
Expertise:
Software:
 
Posts: 335
iTrader: 0 / 0%
 

Jonny is on a distinguished road

  Old

Got a source for that? I'd like to know if that figure is BS like alot of the stuff you say.

11-08-2005, 09:52 PM
#28
Lord Kalthorn is offline Lord Kalthorn
Lord Kalthorn's Avatar
Status: I love this place
Join date: Jan 2005
Location: Greathanc
Expertise:
Software:
 
Posts: 743
iTrader: 0 / 0%
 

Lord Kalthorn is on a distinguished road

Send a message via MSN to Lord Kalthorn

  Old

Haha. You mean the figure of six critical updates since Internet Explorer for SP2 was released under a year ago? Sure, I actually put it up in a post earlier You should read more! I'm afraid it is not a query string page, so you do have to put in the option for checking. Technet's Security Bulletin Site. If you select Internet Explorer 6.0 for SP2 in the Product Dropdown, Windows XP SP2 in the Service Pack Dropdown, keep all the Severity Ranking boxes checked and set it to one year (it has not been out for one year, so this will check everything, but if you put all, it does bring up a good deal of Updates that do not involve Internet Explorer; why I do not know). And there you shall see all the Updates for Internet Explorer for SP2 ever.

A lot of people confuse updates for Windows as Updates for Internet Explorer as well, while some are, most aren't. This Security Bulletin Service tells you specifically, which is why it is so good for pointing out this kind of stuff.

11-08-2005, 09:55 PM
#29
xZaft is offline xZaft
Status: Member
Join date: Jul 2005
Location: Massachusetts, US
Expertise:
Software:
 
Posts: 428
iTrader: 0 / 0%
 

xZaft is on a distinguished road

  Old

That would be 6 bulletins for a few add-ons too. FireFox does add-ons, and gets less errors.

11-08-2005, 10:12 PM
#30
Lord Kalthorn is offline Lord Kalthorn
Lord Kalthorn's Avatar
Status: I love this place
Join date: Jan 2005
Location: Greathanc
Expertise:
Software:
 
Posts: 743
iTrader: 0 / 0%
 

Lord Kalthorn is on a distinguished road

Send a message via MSN to Lord Kalthorn

  Old

Add-ons? You cannot blame the browser for bugs in add-ons you decide to put in it. Not that you even need too. It gives you a pop-up blocker, and short of wanting Tabs by way of the MSN Toolbar you don't need anything. MSN Toolbar of course won't bring up bulletins anyway, it might cause errors though, I cannot vouch for it. Everything will happen.

Closed Thread  
Page 3 of 7 < 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 >


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

  Posting Rules  
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump:
 
  Contains New Posts Forum Contains New Posts   Contains No New Posts Forum Contains No New Posts   A Closed Forum Forum is Closed