What is Digg?Sponsored by Best Buy
Best Buy Employees Turn Carolers For A Day view!
www.youtube.com/bestbuy - Go behind the scenes to see real employees croon their way to star in Best Buy’s holiday campaign.
107 Comments
- AlexFerny, on 10/12/2007, -31/+89This is why all my websites NEVER have any hacks or IE work arounds, I design to the letter of W3C Strict ... and it always parses correctly in Firefox (hell, I have some CSS3 beta now in my designs).
I also have a nice little bit of PHP that detects if the browser is IE and prints the following on the top of the website:
"WARNING: You appear to be running Microsoft Internet Explorer v.
Due to the advanced CSS used on this website it is ADVISED that you use Mozilla Firefox.
Download Firefox @ www.getfirefox.com.
Microsoft Internet Explorer does NOT render things correctly and as such is deprecated & unsupported."
I will NEVER make hacks or seperate work arounds for ANYTHING - and will only design to the letter of W3C.
And those of you who are bound to say "you cant just ignore 70% of the internet", well I can. I've turned down several design "opportunities" because the people were unhappy with it being only Firefox compliant.
The best way to force change away from IE to Firefox is by not using any hacks/workarounds and stating clearly that IE does not support standards and CSS properly. - cesclaveria, on 10/12/2007, -9/+61OK thats a great way to make people realize about alternatives browsers, but you could recommend other browsers besides firefox, like Opera.
- AlexMax, on 10/12/2007, -21/+69I've seen your kind of attitude in the hobbyist community, but in a professional environment, your attitude would never make the grade. The simple fact is that in the real world, your client probably has users that user Internet Explorer, and they probably don't appriciate being a conduit for a vendetta against a web browser, especailly after getting complaints from users that their website is giving them an error of some sort and telling them to install some sort of software that they have no idea what it is.
In the perfect world, everyone would be using Opera. In an almost perfect world, we would all be using Firefox or Konqueror or Safari or whatever else floats your boat. Unfortuniatly, we live in the real world, where Wallgreens and Interenet Explorers are a fact of life. In the real world, your website must cooperate with IE. - jessejoedotcom, on 10/12/2007, -9/+39I don't think you understand. If IE7 is now "standards-compliant" at least when it comes to CSS, then it will ignore the hacks made for IE6, just like all the other browsers do. It doesn't matter what the foundation is. It's not like web sites are detecting your browser and changing the CSS based on them (or at least most sites). The browser is the one processing the CSS code. If IE7 is standards compliant, the IE6 hacks shouldn't affect them.
- jessejoedotcom, on 10/12/2007, -3/+24I just noticed he addressed this in the commants and said it better than I just did:
"Hold on guys... okay, so yes, it is cleaner to use conditional comments rather than CSS hacks. But that doesn't change anything: if you had a conditional stylesheet for IE6, IE7 would still be broken. My beef is not with the method used to include the CSS, but the fact that Microsoft is hiding behind this non-issue to divert attention away from its broken rendering engine.
I'd also like to emphasise that unofficial CSS is actually more acceptable than e.g. unofficial HTML, as the CSS specifications explicitly say how parsers should deal with rules they don't understand.
But in the end, either method is not part of the specs and you need to update your CSS regardless because IE7 fixes a bunch of problems, but doesn't fix enough. Designers are just stuck with a different set of problems to work around.
Personally, I prefer using the CSS hacks because it lets you put the IE-workaround right next to the standards-compliant version. It also means you're less likely to forget to change something in one, but not the other." - tempusrob, on 10/12/2007, -2/+22How does that have *anything* to do with IE7 or the article in question?
- AlexFerny, on 10/12/2007, -4/+23Acid2 test is not designed to show how a browsers renders CORRECT CSS, rather how it renders WRONG CSS.
Firefox may not pass the test, only because it does not always ignore wrong CSS / correct it. CORRECT CSS IS ALWAYS RENDERED CORRECTLY by Firefox
"The CSS used in the test is invalid. This is deliberate, as a means of exposing the ability of user agents to handle invalid CSS properly."
IE cant even display the correct CSS. - superfan99, on 10/12/2007, -5/+23@AlexFerny
I thoroughly enjoy your use of all caps to emphasize words such as ANYTHING, UNLIKE, and NEVER. Of all the causes in this word, browser standards compliance is probably one of the most important and worthy of so many capital letters. Keep on fighting the good fight, my man! - theone3, on 10/12/2007, -1/+17Info on conditionals for those interested
http://www.positioniseverything.net/articles/multiIE.html - hansamurai, on 10/12/2007, -16/+31Meh, Acid tests are overrated. I could care less if IE, Firefox, or Opera passed them, and neither does the rest of the world as shown by Opera's browser share.
- phpirate, on 10/12/2007, -5/+19Opera has everything but two things: The users backing it up and the extentions that firefox has, although I don't care about the hype and most of the extentions are features out of the box for opera.
- pornel, on 10/12/2007, -0/+13You're arguing about CSS3 support!? WTF!? CSS3 is a working-draft! There's no CSS3-compiliant browsers, because there is no CSS3 recommedation to support yet. You cant blame browser for not having unfinished/experimental features.
See CSS2.1 support and Acid2. - ihaterobots, on 10/12/2007, -6/+19@lucas:
when you "hanged" with the firefox users, was that on the east side or the west side? did you have a hand gesture? special colors?
when did the "coolness" of users become criteria for judging software quality?
werd to tha penguin yo. - wvdavis, on 10/12/2007, -6/+18Here is what it boils down to for me (a non-web developer), unless MS forces IE7 down my throat in a "Critical Update", I won't install it. Either way, my primary browsers will be FF and/or Opera.
- MrCrowley, on 10/12/2007, -1/+13If it were my choice, I'd ignore iExplorer. But the choice is not mine : I design websites for my clients, whose target visitors use iExplorer 90% of the time. In view of this, it's pointless to say that Opera or Firefox is a better browser. We have to cope with iExplorer, wether we like it or not. I don't feel I have any right or power to impose Opera or Firefox to my client's clients.
It's just irritating that MS does not help us designers by making their browser standard compliant. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+10@joel
Ad blocker.. Something completely different. It stops images (Ads) from showing within pages like news articles. - AlexFerny, on 10/12/2007, -19/+28@cesclaveria
True, but Firefox is my preference - and having to recomend 3 different browsers at the top of the website would not be every practical.
Besides, I feel Firefox is a better competitor to IE and also is non propriatary, and open source UNLIKE Opera - M2Ys4U, on 10/12/2007, -5/+14The acid test is designed to test the most obscure CSS components...
- codethief, on 10/12/2007, -5/+13They won't need to force it on you as a critical update, WHEN you upgrade to Vista you'll be using it anyhow ;)
- jer2eydevil88, on 10/12/2007, -3/+11I for one welcome an update to IE even if it isn't perfect its still something. The cold hard fact is IE 6 sucks! IE is still trapped back in 2001 but the rest of the world seems to have kept on going... Firefox is great but the majority of users out there don't seem to know about it / care about it yet.
I doubt that anyone is really going to complain about finally having tabs in the most widely used browser on the planet! - Agret, on 10/12/2007, -12/+19"You could recommend other browsers besides firefox, like Opera."
Opera has difficulties with some CSS3 stuff that Firefox is doing fine but other than that it's a good browser. The thing is he doesn't have to reccomend more than one product as long as it complies with proper web standards which is what he wanted.
Firefox is his personal favorite so he has chosen that one, so what? It's like on a torrent site when they tell you "you should client". They don't have to provide more than one choice, as long as it gets the job done. If the user wants more choice he can actively look for it. - Hoov, on 10/12/2007, -2/+9I agree with you, and I'm sure many people on Digg do as well. But the problem is the other 80-90% still using IE who aren't designers. :/
- Fordi, on 10/12/2007, -6/+13"OK thats a great way to make people realize about alternatives browsers, but you could recommend other browsers besides firefox, like Opera."
'cept Opera has incomplete CSS3 support as well.
In fact, the only browser other than FF I know of that has complete CSS3 support is KHTML (also, Safari. Same engine.)
Meanwhile, pulling IE support from Mac was Microsoft's first step in losing browser market dominance: the majority of the type of professional designers that would be using the extended capabilities of CSS use Mac, and now they have no IE7 to test their designs on. They'll get things working right in FF and Safari (thus making them properly w3c compliant), and it'll look 'mostly' right in IE7.
Adding a note for IE browsers saying "Works best in Mozilla Firefox. Click here to upgrade." should be the only IE-specific hack. - puregin, on 10/12/2007, -29/+35Typical Microsoft...
- chris9902, on 10/12/2007, -15/+21@ AlexFerny
I can tell you don't have to design commercial sites because what you said would be like making tyres that only fit one car that 4 people use in the whole world.
Firefox is great but to ignore such a large market share because *you* don't like IE is just stupid and borderline childish. What happens if I visit your site but i'm at work where I can't install FF?
You really need to change your attitude because it's pathetic. - LucasVB, on 10/12/2007, -2/+8The article didn't make something clear for me. IE6 hacks work on IE7 or was that just MS trying to blame someone else?
(I ask because honestly, I have no intentions whatsoever of upgrading to IE7. In fact, IE6 is already blocked in my firewall.) - danlucas, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7He's basically saying that if IE7 was truly standards compliant, Microsoft wouldn't have to send out emails telling people to remove IE7 CSS hacks because a standards compliant browser would ignore the hacks anyway.
- kaboegel, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4you go telling a thousand people in your client's company x's office to install an activex control.. HELOOOOOOO!!!!!
- wvdavis, on 10/12/2007, -5/+9@ codethief - You're assuming that I AM going to upgrade to Vista, the only reason I am running XP on any of my machines is because it came pre-installed on it when I bought it for the kids. Either way, my primary browsers will still be FF and/or Opera.
- Escamillo, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5@AlexFerny
"Besides, I feel Firefox is a better competitor to IE and also is non propriatary, and open source UNLIKE Opera"
Ahh, so rather than your concern being about standards, you're just another on an OSS jihad. Opera passes ACID2, unlike FF, so you should be recommending Opera. But that doesn't fit with your jihad on closed source software. - Acrion, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5From what I just read, they are asking web developers to remove the IE6 hacks to help reinforce the use of IE7. Many developers can make sections of their CSS conditional to certain browsers but this isn't always the case. IE6 is far too widely used to neglect.
I hope Microsoft will take their time in beta and choose a path with IE7 that makes it stand with, not out from other browsers. Developers are punished enough between the JavaScript (DOM) and CSS differences. - Galphanore, on 10/12/2007, -3/+7Microsoft has spent so long making sure we all hate them that they will have to do much more then come part way closer to the standards, they would have to make IE7 perfectly render everything, complete CSS Compliance, and come up with new innovative features that everyone else says "Hey, why didn't we think of that?" about. Microsoft is too much of a corporate behemoth to manage that any time soon. Maybe they'll consider it when their browser is down to a 15% market share.
- AlexFerny, on 10/12/2007, -14/+18Stupid edit time out :(
@AlexMax
You have no idea who I made designs for ..
For a corporate customer I would NEVER do the use Firefox and not IE bar, however I would also never implement any hacks or work arounds for IE.
They are free to hire someone else to change my CSS/HTML to add these hacks but I would not support them - and if I ever had to upgrade the design I would not change anything with these (unless they were breaking compliance or the design then I would remove them). - cadavreexquis, on 10/12/2007, -4/+8All you lovely people getting on your high horse by refusing to put in IE6 hacks into your CSS: congratulations, you obviously don't have to deal with designing web sites for the real world, where a majority of the web surfing populace still use IE and go "Fire-whut?" when you try to bring up alternatives.
- joel.smith, on 10/12/2007, -4/+7Actually, IE7 has a popup blocker builtin.
So, quit downloading screensavers and porn dialers... that should clear up the ad problems. - squarehappy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Really, AlexFerny's opinion is about as uninformed as they come. The ONLY thing important in when 'coding' your HTML and CSS is that your site is equally usable from one browser to another. The user could care less if that requires CSS hacks, Javascript, or anything it might take to achieve cross-browser compliance. The user is not going to see you * html hack and think anything less of you.
Validation ain't gonna save your site either. Go ahead, throw any major website through the HTML validator and see how it fares. Amazon has 1167 errors, but I bet the site works great in just about any browser.
Your users aren't going to change for you, and as has been pointed out already, they often can't. The duty of the web designer is to cater to the user. What else would be the point to having a website, if not for the users? - da404lewzer, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3CoderWiki.com is looking for skilled programmers in HTML, CSS or other programming languages to help document information like this. http://www.coderwiki.com/wiki/
- DoubtingThomas, on 10/12/2007, -5/+8@darthsnoopy
"My problem with your attitude is that you're implying you code to standards to get people to switch from IE, instead of coding to standards because it's the right thing to do."
Where does he imply this? He is just saying he doesn't even bother with placating IE's buggy CSS implementation with ugly hacks. I envy him this luxury. I spent almost 2 hours isolating and "fixing" IE's stupid float bug that hides images. Talk about uglification of of both the CSS and the HTML! - jinexile, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3There are plenty of factors that caused Microsoft to catch up to the rest of the world, you're kidding yourself if you think it wasn't at least in part due to losing 10% of their marketshare in a browser war they fought tooth and nail over from 1995-1999.
- AlexFerny, on 10/12/2007, -8/+11@mc4_a
That depends on the work environment, many places now are adopting FF and OO (Open Office) instead of IE and MS Office - and not all of them are technology places. - pickypg, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3This blog entry is just a difference of opinion.
MS is pointing out that these hacks no longer work and assume that some sites depended on them working to get some sort of effect. The designer was using these hacks to get an effect that actually does display properly when the hacks are ignored by IE 7 (and I checked drupal.org with IE 7 Beta 3, and it looks normal).
This guy went way overboard with this complaint since MS was just trying to help and does not have the time to verify that using said hacks actually hurt the design of the page in IE 7. He even recognized that a web crawler was probably used to determine that they were using CSS hacks.
So, sorry Mr. Designer Guy, but Microsoft does not owe you any sort of an apology after they tried to inform you that there might be a problem with the hacks that clearly DID exist. - Agret, on 10/12/2007, -4/+6"They won't need to force it on you as a critical update, WHEN you upgrade to Vista you'll be using it anyhow ;)"
I doubt it, i'll still be using Firefox IF I "upgrade" to Microsoft Windows NewSkin™ - LabThug, on 10/12/2007, -7/+9"WHEN you upgrade to Vista you'll be using it anyhow"
FF and/or Opera isn't going to work on Vista? This is news to me. Care to present your sources? I have screenshots to disprove them. - jav1231, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Okay, so MS is evil. If you haven't figured this out, you're an idiot. I recommend MAC or Linux to everyone in the home user market. Windows in the workplace is a must. Why? Because that's what's there. If you're running Windows at home and surfing the 'Net, you're either a geek with a secure system or a novice with untold spyware running around on your machine. Most people fall into the latter. I have a computer sitting under my desk now. An older PIII I put together for my niece. Auto Update has to be set to manual due to a bug in AU from Microsoft. Their answer so far? "Yeah, this happens on old hardware." See on old hardware it slams the CPU at 100%. On new hardware it's less and apparently acceptable. I know this has nothing to do with browsers but it shows a cavalier attitude towards their user base. We owe them I suppose or maybe we just can't leave the trough. Is it so surprising they have little incentive to correct their browser?
- phpirate, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2@LucasVB: Sorry, I'll be more specific. Theres massive fanboyism for firefox, thats what I meant. I agree the opera community is great, its filled with a lot of developers which is wonderful as well. Its just a lot of people - most of which aren't tech savvy, will yell at you for not using firefox and put down all other browsers, regardless that opera has better features then firefox.
- jessejoedotcom, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2@ Izzie
You won't even need that - http://www.tatanka.com.br/ies4linux/index-en.html - darthsnoopy, on 10/12/2007, -7/+9@AlexFerny
My problem with your attitude is that you're implying you code to standards to get people to switch from IE, instead of coding to standards because it's the right thing to do. - pornel, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Did anyone actually read what Acid2 tests?
It test well-defined CSS parsing, which includes handling of invalid code, because *future versions of CSS will look invalid* to current browsers. This is crucial for compatibility.
Ofcourse features that don't work in IE can be considered obscure, but these are basic things in non-IE world (display:table, floats and positioning, margins, generated content, z-index).
READ http://www.webstandards.org/action/acid2/guide/
http://www.webstandards.org/action/acid2/guide/ - da404lewzer, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2To be honest, I was willing to put up with IE7. But removing the underscore hacks???
min-height: 100px;
height: auto;
_height: 100px;
thats the only way i know how to do minimum height in IE. lets say you 'took it out' for IE7... then the IE6 browsers (which are still like 80% of the IE browsers out there besides IE5 (ouch)) WOULDN'T WORK! WTF are they thinking?? now how will people design sites?? i think i've found my turning point for firefox...
grr. HEAR ME M$!!! - DoubtingThomas, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2@404UserNotFound:
"I have trouble recommending a Mac with OSX or Linux to anyone who is not proficient with a computer."
Okay, I agree that this applies to LINUX (though user-friendly dists like Ubuntu are quickly closing up this hole) but saying this about a Mac? Mac has always had a tradition of making things as easy on the user possible. This did not change with OSX.
What I find ironic about your post is that you refuse to recommend other OSes due to their apparent complexity. Yet, you admit having to spend the time to manually clean then "immunize" your client's Windows machine from external threats. In the time it took you to do this, I could have had a client's machine set up with Ubuntu able to do everything they needed it to. If it was a Mac, well, they would not have needed me at all :-) -
Show 51 - 100 of 107 discussions
The Digg Toolbar for Firefox lets you Digg, submit content, and keep track of Digg even when you're not on the Digg site. Download the official 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is