What is Digg?Sponsored by Best Buy
Think Choosing a Gift For A Teen Girl Is Impossible? view!
bestbuy.com - Hello-o-o! No WAY! Email, IM, chat, social networking & streaming audio/video are all on Netbooks.
60 Comments
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5Wow, there’s been a lot of feedback. Firstly, let me say that the intention of this article was not primarily to bash Internet Explorer. Rather, it was to address the potential creative, albeit impractical, uses of absolute positioning. It’s not “rigged,” as one person on Digg accused. It’s just simple XHTML.
When I fired up IE for testing, I fully expected it to work, except for the pseudo :hover. To my surprise, it handled the absolutes pretty poorly, so I decided to post it as an example. I never expected it would get to the front page of Digg, so for all the people complaining that this article is irrelevant, you’re right. It was meant for an entirely different target audience.
The debate back and forth about IE verses Firefox, that’s not the point. The important thing is that all browsers move towards web standards. For those that were complaning about IE rendering more pages correctly than Firefox, Opera or Safari, you need to realize this is not because IE is somehow better, but because developers are used to catering to the Windows using majority.
Someone even pointed out that my example page is “unnecessary crap,” but then points out that IE does an admirable job of rendering my main website. What this person failed to understand is that SonSpring.com renders correctly in IE because I paid special attention to make sure that I design around the limitations of this browser. In the case of the example, I decided to “cut loose” so to speak, and design solely for experimental purposes.
So please, if you are baffled by why we as web developers thing that Internet Explorer is a shoddy browser, and want to defend it for rendering web pages “good enough,” then take the time to realize that we specifically design with IE in mind simply because it’s the default, but not because it is praiseworthy. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4"If it was from any other company, we'd only hate it slightly less."
If it was from any other company, we'd probably have the luxury of ignoring it. - CaughtThinking, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2When can we start dividing browsers along political lines so we have more stuff to argue pointlessly about? No Digg.
- chickenrob, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2soo.. what does it do? I don't have IE, just Linux with opera, ff and konq. @Jay and Terry, The point is that if IE adhered to standards, ALL the browsers would display all the websites properly. The reason most web pages render correctly in IE is they were built for (and constrained by) IE. If all the web pages were built for firefox, firefox would render all of them perfectly. But not only that, other standards compliant browsers would all render the site properly, except silly IE, which no one would want...
- dykesat, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2"Firefox people, please give us a real reason that firefox is better."
One Word: ActiveX
... or lack of. Ahh, and that's only one of the "real reasons" that Firefox is better. :) - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Instead of web designers wasting their time coming up with "cool" ***** for a browser to display, they could instead design a page where I can actually easily get to the information I want, and to not be distracted by flashy ***** while reading it! Is that too much to ask for of web designers? Just to give me a usable page where the CONTENT is the number one thing being showed-off?
- CaughtThinking, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Not all designers waste time like that, some are very tasteful and it adds to an experience. I love how everyone here hates Microsoft and IE, when they owe every last iota of "Ajax" to IE. Nice hypocrisy system we have here.
- revans, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Actually, the CSS and XHTML are all in one file. That is what he was refering to.
- AMadeUpName, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1What I have been wondering for some time is why hasn't anyone sued Microsoft for their non-standards compliant browser? How many web design firms waste their time testing their pages in multiple browsers just so that they can appease people. Lets face it time is money and a web designers time is fairly expensive. I don't care what browser a person uses. I think that decision should be based on your personal preference of features in a browser, not if it loads web pages correctly. I think all the browsers should display the same HTML code the same. If a browser company wants to add new features they should get them approved by the W3C and added into the next standard.
- SolariPicasso, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I have noticed that most people will stick with something they know. They know IE, IE was there for them when Netscape took a dirt nap. IE was there for me on my Macintosh, Netscape wasn't. IE is here for me now, yes it could be better, so could a lot of thing, but one thing remains clear, IE is there for ME ®, when I need it. Firefox is a nice browser, I tried to get my wife to use it, she hated it, it was unfamiliar, some of her favorite sites didn't work, she went back to IE, it was there for her also. People want things to just work, most people when it comes to computer are uncomfortable with the pace of change that the Internet places on them and resist, this I believe is the main reason for IE's success. IE is there for Them, it changes slowly and let's users adopt at a more human pace.
- battybattybatt, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Jesus H. Christ on a wiggle-stick!
The differences you forced us to see have absolutely nothing to do with browser differences.
This is an issue of HTML standards not being standard. - diggdeeznutz, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I use all three browsers (Firefox, Opera, IE7b1) I would rank preference in that order as well. I have been testing/using IE7b1 for the past few months and have been unexpectedly impressed. If you can get a hold of a copy, it's worth the try.
- terrya64, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1very lame, why take the time to create a web page that ie does not render properly, When we all know that ie has no problem with most of the websites you will ever go to. I have never once been to a web page with ie that didn't work, but it has happened quite often with opera and firefox. And no I am not a Microsoft fanboy, just stating fact.
- rderveloy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0In the acid test, both IE and Firefox fail. IE fails the worst, but both don't work. So in the strictest sense, both fail and therefore both are not-compliant. I'm not defending either firefox or ie because both have their big pluses and minuses. Some pages work in one and not the other. You also have to realize that Firefox is in a state of continual development. IE6 has been sitting around doing almost nothing until Firefox came along. If you are going to test the abilities of the browsers against each other compare the next versions. IE7 and FireFox 2.0 or whatever.
Only last thing to consider is that FireFox is open-source. Everyone and their mother can just waltz in and see what the latest developments are. IE is closed-source, you're not going to be able to waltz over to Microsoft and ask to see the latest build and test how it complies with standards. I'm not saying that open source is better than closed source or vice versa, it's just different schools of thought. - Dracos, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Ajax is the only innovation MS has come up with in the last decade. Unfortunately, they wrote it as an activeX control, and maybe thought no other browser maker would find it useful. It wouldn"t surprise me if it wasn't even intended for use in web pages ("Live" enhancements to the windows help system, more likely... it's all parsed by mshtml.dll). Now their one innovation is coming back to bite them in the ass.
And by the way, web developers hate IE because IE doesn't follow the W3C standards. If it was from any other company, we'd only hate it slightly less. - oldcyborg, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I can see you have not judged "outcomes" before. hehehehe It ain't over till the fat lady sings, and many of us, who do NOT develop web pages, or browser add ins, don't give a rats ass about the hysteria. All I know, is that when I go to a site, I get to see what is there. NO, won't load, or error codes, or anything. IT just works... Or I get a newer version, when it stops working. No Problemo.....
Thats the average, my friends. Just the simple fact that the average person, just wants to see whats on the website!!!!!! They don't care about anything else....
Cyborg
nah - battybattybatt, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0"... i have designed projects in the past where i used firefox to make some moving CSS boxes..."
And now of course yoiu arent surprised because you probably check your CSS in ALL most likely browsers used, right? - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Mike: The pseudo :hover "effects" don't use any JS or images. That's what I was referring to. ;)
- SupaDawg, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Doesnt look too off in IE7.
I use firefox at home and IE7 at the office. i'll look at her at home in firefox. - dframe, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0It pains me when people don't 'get' the primary reason for Firefox's superiority over Internet Explorer, moreso when they try to pass their opinion as fact.
Here are the real facts: The Web is an evolving medium. The engine that drives it is constantly being tweaked, refined and updated to reflect the needs and requests of a modern era. These changes primarily affect productivity, making the Web easier to develop and expand, and accessibility, making its benefits available to a wider audience.
This work continues on a near daily basis. The Web is not 'finished' and probably never will be.
Now, consider the 'primary' applications we use to access the Web. In one corner we have Firefox, a young and constantly updated browser. Constantly updated to reflect the constant changes to the Web's underlying technology. Facing it we have Internet Explorer, a browser which has remained largely unchaged since version 5 in 1999.
Virtually every update to the Web in the past seven years has been stiffled due to Internet Explorer's stagnancy. The Web's current popularity has existed for around ten years now. Ten years. Seven years. Are we beginning to comprehend this?
I don't care if you use IE over Firefox or vice versa... It just doesn't matter when you consider the situation we are currently in. The Web has essentially been stuck in a rut for seven years thanks to the lack of updates to its most popular browser and helped along by those who don't understand the implications of supporting it.
There is light at the end of the tunnel with IE7 but the damage has been done and many of the people who have posted comments here are evidence of that. To many of you the Web just exists as is - it hasn't evolved nor has it needed to. Your favourite sites work perfectly and that's all that matters, a mindset brought on by a complete lack of visible progress.
I don't expect you to care. I fully expect you to continue selfishly browsing and being happy to let the Web meet your own needs. Hey it's nothing personal... It's the only thing you've come to understand thanks to a certain arcane browser. - Bogtha, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0@captainjy,
> How many Websites do you go to that don't work because you use IE?
None. You know why? Because the web developers have put in extra time and effort to make it work in Internet Explorer. To a certain extent, you need to do that with all browsers, but typical time coding a design would be halved if Internet Explorer was even half as good as other browsers, and more effects would be possible.
This isn't about what websites break in Internet Explorer, it's about what can't be done, or what costs more because of Internet Explorer.
@oldcyborg,
> All I know, is that when I go to a site, I get to see what is there. NO, won't load, or error codes, or anything. IT just works... Or I get a newer version, when it stops working. No Problemo.....
That's very naïve. Web developers have limited time and website owners have a limited budget. You say "no problemo", but the extra costs get passed on to the customer (that's *you*), and you have to go without features that you might appreciate.
@nnonix,
> If your going to make the "standards" argument against IE you have to consider this. Firefox fails the Acid2 test and therefore isn't compliant either. If non-compliance is evil, than Firefox is evil too.
That's a very simplistic way of looking at it. Firefox is a hell of a lot closer to passing the Acid2 test than Internet Explorer.
> Additionally, one could consider Firefox's non-compliance a worse offense than IE's because Firefox was created from what the industry says is "fully compliant source code".
What on earth are you talking about? What "fully compliant source code"? Where are you getting this nonsense? - i6koi, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Please. I use Firefox and it has plenty of issues loading pages that IE can load perfectly. Not to mention the fact that Firefox has an absolutely horrendous memory/resource use problem that still has no real solution. It's a good browser, but let's not get carried away.
- a1lostnomad, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0There are so many things you can do in a good modern browser that you can't do in IE. As a web developer, IE is currently first on my ***** list. I always start out projects building for standards compatibility... but then I have to go back and hack it to work in IE.
- captainjy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0What the hell is the point? How many Websites do you go to that don't work because you use IE? I am not talking about these jackass sites that are scripted for only FF. I am talking about your bank site, Amazon, Buy.com, NewEgg, and even Digg! They all work just fine. Compliant? To who's standards? Quite honestly, as long as I can browse and browse without display or usability issue, I don't give a *****. I am with rc_collins, this IE VS. FF is getting old and pathetic
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0You can complain about IE all you want, but its still used by FAR more people on the internet then any other browser is or probably ever will be, when they allowed Microsoft to continue to distribute it with windoze, that killed the browser wars, you can toot all the firefox horns you want but still, you can design a site that works in IE only and still be okay. All you can do is hope Microsoft will come around eventually.
- nonunique, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0There is a way to check the rigging...use that view source button. Copy and paste the code into a LOCAL text document (*.html, or course), and then open it up in IE...still broken.
- funkkyhippo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0"For your own eternal safety, Internet Explorer should be abandoned. Get firefox"
woot thats great - captainjy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0And who woulda thunk it, davidblog just so happens to have a "Save the World with FF" cute little icon on his blog. Amazing...
- bignate, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0@terrya64
You made my point for me. Most websites work fine in IE but fail to in FF or Opera because designers are forced to use BAD CODE to make the pages render properly in IE, and unfortunately for the rest of us that makes them render improperly in the other browsers.
The whole idea behind standards is to make things render properly in ALL BROWSERS.
@neotechni
you must have some special magical version of IE6 because mine (6.0.2900) failed miserably on both tests. Firefox failed the Acid2 test, but not nearly as badly as IE. - ColdChilli, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Ya Ya Ya. We all know IE6 is about 3 years old and firefox 1.5 is 1 month old. Of course its going to handle things better.
If/When IE7 comes out and it breaks like this, then bitch up a storm. - humayoon, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Pathetic this got to the front page
- bat-21, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0"Firefox people, please give us a real reason that firefox is better."
There's a plug-in for Firefox called IE Tab. If you come across a page that doesn't render properly in Firefox, just click a button.
There is no equivalent solution for Internet Explorer. - eyrieowl, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0IMHO this is one of the BEST examples of how CSS could be used if people adhered to standards. http://www.meyerweb.com/eric/css/edge/ Check it in Firefox and compare to IE. I've had it bookmarked for a couple years now, wishing I could really make use of the fantastic techniques demoed there.
- _Caboose_, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1'You are using the worst browser in the entire world"
Lmao. Dugg just for that :P - mikeazorin, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1That's kinda cool, dugg. But he lies. "these effects do not use images or JavaScript" but in IE the worst browser thing is an image.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0Is there someone brave, or stupid, enough to admit right here in public that they use IE???
- kevinski, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0Wow…I never would've been able to watch stupid-ass boxes changing colors upon mouseover without Opera. *gasp* Seriously, digg is starting to turn into the ideal Slashdotter's playground, what with all of the anti-Microsoft topics. That "example page" is unnecessary crap. Looking at a normal Web page (such as the SonSpring page that you immediately go to upon clicking the link for this article) shows that - while not entirely accurate - IE does an admirable job of rendering a Web page. It's not perfect, but Microsoft is working on it.
No, I don't use IE; I use Opera. I use Firefox only as a secondary browser. - jaypatel, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1If you think you are "COOL" because you use Firefox....get back to earth dude. I can show 1000s of sites where firefox screws up but IE does a fantastic job. Not that I am not a firefox fan...but puhleeeez, stop bragging about little things from Microsoft and accept the fact that had it not been for MS, your life would have been different (maybe sucking).
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0Problematic? :) is that a joke?
- battybattybatt, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0nice digg-link
- battybattybatt, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0"posted by ilyag (1) at 02:40 PM 1/05/06 score:3+3 Excellent+2 Insightful+1 UsefulRate Comment-1 Off Topic-2 Flame-3 SPAM [block/report]"
Totally agree!!!
But I accidently blocked yer ass, how the ***** do I uinblock someone that I didnt mean to? - Wizzkid, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0Works fine in IE7, ...and IE6 IF I change the user agent to something else... looks rigged >_>
- MrL0Lz, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0im surpised you people dugg this crap. WHO CARES, its IE. we know it sucks, let it go already... NO DIGG
- nnonix, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0If your going to make the "standards" argument against IE you have to consider this. Firefox fails the Acid2 test and therefore isn't compliant either. If non-compliance is evil, than Firefox is evil too. Additionally, one could consider Firefox's non-compliance a worse offense than IE's because Firefox was created from what the industry says is "fully compliant source code". This means the makers of Firefox broke compliance where IE developers never had compliant source code to start with. Considering IE7 displays the CSS demo fine, you could go a step further and say MS is moving toward compliance and Firefox is moving away from it (again, the Acid2 test).
- DJSdotcom, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0Go Nathan!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
- porksoda, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0I think it'd be wiser to get everyone on the internet to focus on producing quality information and content, not on stupid ***** CSS XHTML DHTML floating layer semitranslucent a:hover background no-repeat div boxes which eventually get filled with A BACKGROUND IMAGE THAT DOESN'T MOVE WHEN YOU SCROLL. HOW EREET JOO AR3
If I was president of Internet we'd all have white backgrounds. - SolariPicasso, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0I changed the source code to render the boxes as PX not % and got a similar looking page. The freak on the site does show his obvious distain for IE, however when riding around in a 7 year old car I tend to look at the newer ones and think mine is almost the worst in the world.
- justinp, on 10/12/2007, -2/+0"That's kinda cool, dugg. But he lies. "these effects do not use images or JavaScript" but in IE the worst browser thing is an image."
That is not an 'effect' related to any of the problems he is discussing, it's just the easiest way to accomplish the result he's looking for. That said, he does go on to mention that everything is in a single file (which is obviously not true). So, right and wrong.
(God Digg needs a quote feature badly) - Thurloat, on 10/12/2007, -2/+0exactly why i hate IE. i have designed projects in the past where i used firefox to make some moving CSS boxes, and holy god. you didn't even have to hover OVER the area, as soon as you moved the mouse, thee entire screen started shifting colors and going all crazy. but while in firefox... it displayed perfecty, i didn't even know of this until i put it up and one of my IE friends viewed it and said there's something wrong with your site! HAHA
- KillerX, on 10/12/2007, -2/+0Safari and Firefox - nothing else.
-
Show 51 - 60 of 60 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is