Frequently Asked Forum Questions | ||||
Search Older Posts on This Forum: Posts on Current Forum | Archived Posts | ||||
Re: I disagree | |
Posted By: Noctavis =PN= <mobius@xmission.com> | Date: 10/24/99 7:10 a.m. |
In Response To: I disagree (mad.max) > Au contraire, I find that I have made some perfectly W3C
Can you share some of these with me/us? I'd like to dissect the nitty-gritty specifics... If you could toss me either some files or URLs, I'd appreciate it. You say they're perfectly W3C-conforming? Were you using layers or anything of the sort? > ok, that's true, however they've fixed that little (teehee)
No they haven't. NetScrape still has ugly table support. The table-crash bug was fixed, but the rest still has plenty of problems. For instance... if you don't define a very specific (pixel or percentage) width or height for a given table cell, NetScrape has a lot of difficulty adjusting it intelligently in relation to other table cells. Table cells that have been well-defined will expand to fill the page while the undefined cell will shrink to nothingness. > Never seen it, but then I'm not QUITE sure what you mean.
That's just it. Why should you have to hold down shift? It also isn't consistent or reliable.... there have been plenty of times that I've had to close down NS and then reopen it just to view updates to a given page. > I could be wrong, but in my HTML Dictionary, there are a hell of
*Clears throat* A great many of the things that are implemented on only IE are within the standards... which might help to push that balance over a bit in whatever dictionary you're using. It is true that Microsoft likes to throw in a few new tags now and then, but they still conform much more... Most books I have read or browsed that discuss the differences between NS and IE will tell you that IE holds to the standard better. Want to know something really funny? JavaScript originated as a NetScrape language... there has been a new standard for JS called ECMA (or the ECMAscript standard) and Microsoft is following this much better than Netscape has, to date. > I personally think that iCab rules. It is small, fast as hell,
Hrm... to the letter? I was hearing that there are some rather common things that it may not support.... table backgrounds? > There is one final thing, might it be possible that the mac and
The important thing to remember is that NetScape is not really any better than Microsoft in many ways. Were MS destroyed in a nerd-homing cruise missile or ICBM attack (N. Korea is due to have ICBM capability to target the Western half of the U.S. within the next year or two, if they don't starve to death first), Netscape would not be any kinder. They use the same tactics in many things... they're building up a huge juggernaut group of products and services. NetScrape, AOL, Compuserve and Gateway are all interrelated now, financially. AOL/NetScrape have bought up ICQ and other programs. If MS didn't already have a monopoly, Netscape would be the ones we would be hating. -Noctavis |
|
Replies: |
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. |
The HBO Forum Archive is maintained with WebBBS 4.33. |