| We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| IE is being neglected | |
|---|---|
| Topic Started: Aug 9 2009, 07:29 PM (902 Views) | |
| ElementalAlchemist | Aug 12 2009, 12:02 PM Post #31 |
ERROR: This title does not exist.
  ![]](http://209.85.62.24/static/1/pip_r.png)
|
http://acid3.acidtests.org View it in Opera, then view it in Fx, then view it in IE. IE8's engine is significantly improved, but it's still far from perfect. * This judgment is based on more than just Acid3. Edited by ElementalAlchemist, Aug 12 2009, 12:03 PM.
|
 |
 
|
| cvn-tv-dip | Aug 12 2009, 01:45 PM Post #32 |
Retired Soliloquist
|
That's not true anymore. More and more people are becoming aware of Firefox and other alternative browsers. Google - a popular name - has come up with its own Chrome, so the percentage of people still being unaware about alternate browsers is dropping significantly. Mac products come with Safari standard, and there's an Apple movement to popularize Macintosh to students with discounts and interlinked Apple brands, making them more attractive. When Microsoft introduced the new Windows, Vista, that caused compatibility issues with their programs, and came with other flaws, guess who the people blamed? Microsoft. You can't expect them to treat Microsoft as perfect. People are indeed learning that you need the correct software to do correct things, and getting the correct browser's no different from that. Now IE8 I can understand trying to cooperate with it. But people still using IE6 generally shouldn't expect anyone else to help them unless they take the proper steps (and it's not hard) to switch browsers. I just don't understand why people still use IE6 when they're two whole versions behind, and there are numerous alternatives for people. This "battle" isn't for the sake of fighting Microsoft but to have the freedom of designing sites and codes as you want, and if a program is too substandard, you need to encourage it to follow you, not the other way around. Sure, you should try to achieve some backward compatibility, but you can't help it if your site is too advanced and requires up-to-date browsers. It's just like many new, advanced programs won't support OS before XP. If these users stick with this browser, they're basically siding with the group that made it, and it's too bad, but you need to tell them that they need upgrades to meet the proper requirements. Edited by cvn-tv-dip, Aug 12 2009, 01:59 PM.
|
|
|
|
| Paper | Aug 12 2009, 08:11 PM Post #33 |
Member
|
Oh you love it really. I don't bring people into disrepute, I only do it to you. Time to get off your mighty white horse. (nah I'm just being cheeky now) And your wrong, it's down to stupidity, I tell you. Pure, unadulterated, human stupidity. Not stupidity in a bad way. Or an insulting way. Just in the field of computing.
Hey you blamed them for being ignorant, not me.
Duh. They worked in XP and suddenly stopped working in Vista. People aren't THAT stupid. And don't forget, people have continuously had to put up with Windows version changes throughout their lives. They're pretty used to the idea that there are different Windowses, but not different browsers other than IE. Firefox however has a good reputation and even the computer illiterate are now beginning to take it up. Eventually we'll get there, but that day is not today. But I agree, we can't make our codes sub-standard for the sake of IE. However, I don't believe there are things that can't be done in IE that could be done in Firefox. IE is just going to make it a little more difficult than Firefox. Anyway, we're never going to agree. I'm right. End of argument. Just kidding! I think we all agree on the idea that it makes sense for the user to be told to use another browser to get full functionality of a code, rather than to be left with something broken. I think IE 8 was as a big a waste of time as IE 7. Now we have to cope with effectively two different rendering engines. At least, if one thing, Microsoft should have some form of consistency OR abandon their way and go with the truth and light. The user isn't going to understand what to do if a website is broken in IE 8, they're just going to leave the page! Edited by Paper, Aug 12 2009, 08:21 PM.
|
|
|
|
| Reid. | Aug 12 2009, 08:59 PM Post #34 |
|
C'est un piège!
|
There are some methods that are almost impossible. For example, attempting to find the element a person was "using" (i.e. were they pressing enter on an <input> or were they clicking on the 'Full Reply Screen' button) while submitting a form, for example. Firefox has a built-in, Firefox-exclusive attribute that's in the syntax e.originalEvent.explicitOriginalTarget (if memory serves - and I mentioned this earlier on in the thread as well) that does just that. In order to do the same thing with IE you'd have to do an irritatingly complex set of functions meshed and it'd be all but impossible if you had multiple inputs to monitor whereas with Firefox it becomes quite simple. Like I said before, the vast majority of codes work with IE. Those that don't we can cope with by handling errors. You don't want to spit out a full trace on a page that has an error if you're programming in PHP - from my limited knowledge of PHP anyways. You want a fancy little message that tells the user that something has gone wrong and that the website administrator has been notified. Did people leave myspace when they got the 'error message'? Nope, even the first ones still stuck with it because it was in the format that made it seem nonchalant. It was just "Oops - an error occured. Tech department notified, please reload the page" (it was different than that but that's just the general idea.) The same goes for JavaScript and the like. If something isn't displaying correctly, knock it down a notch into the non-JS-powered version, if there is one, or if it's just a pure JS code modifying something on ZB then remove the functionality which causes errors. For example, Choco has a "emotes" code for the fast reply or something like that and the resize function doesn't work in IE, so he simply disabled it in IE - although you couldn't see it either, it just didn't appear entirely. That's the best alternative for dealing with non-standards-compliant browsers. Also a small message at the top - that appears 3 times or so, with a button that says "Hide Permanently" or the like - that says something like "This page is best viewed in Mozilla Firefox or Google Chrome" with a link to both downloads and then a link explaining what browsers are (in non-jargon terms, with a comparison chart or two.) That's the most elegant solution imo. If they chose to go on with IE, then so be it - end the message the 2nd or 3rd time so they don't get completely irritated at seeing it on every page. |
|
|
| ZapTap | Aug 12 2009, 10:58 PM Post #35 |
|
Want to talk? My inbox is always open
:D
|
The way I see it is that IE has become what Mac OS was in early computers. If you put them all equal then there is one thing ruling out the weakest link. In either one, it's that they require different coding. In IE, it will lose out because it is the odd one out of the rest. In Mac OS, they lost out because they had restrictions on their computers when Windows-based machines didn't. It's up to the developer, but there are pros and cons to either side of the argument, and I will stick with coding them in a manner that works in both without need of being redone to function in IE. |
|
|
|
| Paper | Aug 17 2009, 09:57 AM Post #36 |
|
Member
|
Aeroice, explicitOriginalTarget is Mozilla only, so it is pretty much as useless as IE's methods. Shame on Firefox from that perspective. https://developer.mozilla.org/en/DOM/event/Comparison_of_Event_Targets As for "originalEvent" I can't find any API for it. A search on Mozilla's developer website turns up no results. Google turns up one result - and that's for performing drag and drop operations. Anyway, the below code is a completely cross compatible version of e.originalEvent.explicitOriginalTarget. And it took me all of 15 minutes to find and write this
I looked at Choco's code. He's not done the resize thing correctly. In fact, it doesn't work in Firefox as far as I can tell. Either way, the jqeury plug in he is using has examples on its website, which do work with IE. Edited by Paper, Aug 17 2009, 09:58 AM.
|
|
|
|
| ZapTap | Aug 18 2009, 10:29 PM Post #37 |
|
Want to talk? My inbox is always open
:D
|
the way I see it, it's up to you either make crappy codes and leave out 40% of your potential users, or make decent codes and maintain both your integrity and your userbase hopefully, MS will soon see their errors and fix it, but don't count on it |
|
|
|
| Viral. | Aug 19 2009, 03:31 AM Post #38 |
Member
|
Viral. is taking over your topic to shorten one of those lines
to
|
|
|
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| « Previous Topic · Technology Chat · Next Topic » |
4:55 PM Nov 22
