Frequently Asked Forum Questions
Search the HBO News Archives Any All Exact		Search the Halo Updates DBs Halo Halo2		Bungie Webcam HBO XBL Gamertags *Ar's Simple HTML Guide Shishka's Guide for Newcomers The Lowdown on Download Accelerators Red Loser's Anti-Spamming Guide Egg FAQ | More Egg Stuff c0ld's Movie Starter Guide Shishka's HaloPC Pre-Release FAQ 3.1 AutoMagic 117 StripzMaker
Search Older Posts on This Forum: Posts on Current Forum | Archived Posts

I disagree
Posted By: mad.max <max.too@talk21.com>	Date: 10/24/99 6:20 a.m.
In Response To: Browser war! *throws his mouse at DS's head* (Noctavis =PN=) > Almost anyone who has done serious web design has probably > labored under the oppressive stupidity of the chronically-broken > Netscape browser. Au contraire, I find that I have made some perfectly W3C conforming pages which show up perfectly in NS 4 and iCab (iCab didn't even have an unhappy face, which is great!), and then the same page looks terrible in IE, with pictures overflowing onto text, pages which are and inch too wide, and numerous other problems. > For one thing, it can't render tables properly. In NS3 you could > even CRASH the browser by using certain table configurations. ok, that's true, however they've fixed that little (teehee) problem in NS4 and above. And after all, don't 90% of the population use 4.0 upwards browsers these days? > For another, it has real difficulty with a refresh/reload > attempt. (I don't yet know if they fixed that for the newest > release) Never seen it, but then I'm not QUITE sure what you mean. Sometimes it donesn't relaod properly, but you are supposed to hold down shift, so that it reloads from server. (stupid, I know) > IE also conforms to the standards set by the W3C (World Wide Web > Consortium) much better. NS implements a broken document object > model and very poor CSS support. I could be wrong, but in my HTML Dictionary, there are a hell of a lot of things which are IE 4.0 only, and which don't conform to W3C, such as various layering options and CSS things which aren't in the formal definitions. There are some in Netscape too, but I'm sure there aren't as many. > The only drawback to IE is the security holes that have been > found (I won't call them bugs)... but I keep ActiveX turned off > and use other methods to protect myself. Hehe. Nuff said. > You can also configure IE much more... the only thing is that > you can't set up multiple profiles of preferences for different > people as you can in NS. I have to say that I have never needed more configuring for NS. Maybe you are using Navigator instead of Communicator? Dunno if this will make a difference. (actually, I think Communicator is the only one with multiple users, so I wil now shoot myself) I do like ONE thing about IE though, and that is the downlaod manager. It can be a real arse if you are downloading 10+ things in NS, and they each create a new download box. And you can continue halted downloads more easily in IE too although you can do it in NS 4.x. > I'd love to kick both Mozilla/NS and Microsoft in the gut and > tell them to get their acts together... if only Mozilla/NS would > implement VBScript support and IE tuned up JScript to accept > Netscape's JavaScripting code without a hitch. I personally think that iCab rules. It is small, fast as hell, and conforms TO THE LETTER to the W3C rules. Ok, it costs about 45DM, but that is hardly anything (about $7?) There is one final thing, might it be possible that the mac and Windows versions of IE and NS are different. I mean, it is obvious that Microsoft would make IE work amazingly well with Windows, but probably don't care a HUGE amount about the Mac, and NS hate Microsoft, and is in cahoots with Mac, so would therefore try to make the Mac version better? (Not an excuse for a platform war, it is a valid point) mad.max

Message Index

Some Stats, for those who keep track	Louis Wu	10/24/99 12:22 a.m.
IE!?!	Daft Shadow =PN=	10/24/99 12:41 a.m.
Browser war! *throws his mouse at DS's head*	Noctavis =PN=	10/24/99 3:30 a.m.
I disagree	mad.max	10/24/99 6:20 a.m.
Re: I disagree	Noctavis =PN=	10/24/99 6:57 a.m.
iCab	CyberBob	10/25/99 3:39 a.m.
Re: iCab	Jägermeister	10/25/99 1:14 p.m.
Re: I disagree	Noctavis =PN=	10/24/99 7:10 a.m.
Read the above one (frickin' laptop mouse) NT	Noctavis =PN=	10/24/99 7:17 a.m.
Hate it when that happens (NT)	mad.max	10/24/99 9:42 a.m.
Re: I disagree	Claude Errera	10/24/99 9:24 a.m.
Missing CSS Support	mad.max	10/24/99 11:21 a.m.
Re: Missing CSS Support	Fractalus =PN=	10/24/99 6:31 p.m.
I do the same thing	SonicStorm	10/25/99 3:02 a.m.
Forced refresh	Noctavis =PN=	10/24/99 8:03 p.m.
Re: I disagree	mad.max	10/24/99 9:41 a.m.
HTML nitty-gritty	Noctavis =PN=	10/25/99 5:03 a.m.
HTML nitty-gritty	Noctavis =PN=	10/25/99 6:25 a.m.
Re: HTML nitty-gritty	mad.max	10/25/99 2:16 p.m.
Re: HTML nitty-gritty	Noctavis =PN=	10/25/99 5:45 p.m.
Re: HTML nitty-gritty	mad.max	10/26/99 11:36 a.m.
yeah, they are different	SonicStorm	10/25/99 2:56 a.m.
Just remembered	mad.max	10/24/99 6:23 a.m.
My Mac is 100% Microcrock free! NT	Jägermeister	10/24/99 5:35 p.m.
Re: Browser war! *throws his mouse at DS's head*	Cheese	10/24/99 8:03 p.m.
Amen Brother! (NT)	SonicStorm	10/25/99 2:52 a.m.
Re: Some Stats, for those who keep track	JoeDaMac	10/24/99 12:13 p.m.
Re: Some Stats, for those who keep track	Mage	10/24/99 12:21 p.m.
Re: Some Stats, for those who keep track	Tsao =PN=	10/24/99 1:47 p.m.
Re: Some Stats, for those who keep track	Mage	10/24/99 3:44 p.m.
Dont forget the macusers here with windows@work nt	CyberBob	10/25/99 3:31 a.m.
Re: Dont forget the macusers here with windows@wor	Jägermeister	10/25/99 1:13 p.m.
What are you guys talking about?	Freewill	10/24/99 12:57 p.m.
Re: IE!?!	SonicStorm	10/25/99 2:49 a.m.
Re: IE!?!	SiliconDream	10/25/99 10:52 a.m.
Re: Some Stats, for those who keep track	Troy Lawlor	10/24/99 6:13 p.m.
Re: Some Stats, for those who keep track	Louis Wu	10/24/99 6:56 p.m.
Re: Some Stats, for those who keep track	Black Marlin	10/25/99 6:31 a.m.