What is Digg?Sponsored by Bing
How Many Calories Are In Alcohol? view!
bing.com - Handy guidelines help you get your drink on and keep the weight off.
265 Comments
- jkm1313, on 04/18/2009, -6/+93"Firefox now accounts for 46.5% of all web browsing activity"
Isn't it more like 26%? - mctom987, on 04/18/2009, -6/+74http://www.saveie6.com/
- NiceGuyVan, on 04/18/2009, -11/+74Dugg for insulting ebonics. Getting rid of ebonics is a higher priority than getting rid of IE6
- DeathRay2K, on 04/18/2009, -2/+54It depends on who you ask. It's impossible to get an unbiased view of usage, simply because there's no way to check everybody at all times.
The author used W3C stats, which are biased to the tech-savvy, who are more likely to use Firefox. - NeoTechni, on 04/18/2009, -7/+57Ebonics is significantly worse than standard English.
- Runningflame570, on 04/18/2009, -3/+47Internet Explorer has increased by leaps and bounds over the last few years as they've been forced to or risk facing complete irrelevancy, however even with IE8 having genuinely great CSS 2.1 support they still don't get it at all.
They still refuse to support SVG saddling us with the bloat and insecurity of Flash and have even gone so far as to create their own proprietary Silverlight tech which does some of the same things. They still refuse to support XHTML though every other major browser does. They still are packing proprietary features such as WebSlices into newer versions of IE8.
Let me be clear: There is nothing wrong with non-standard functionality, as long as it does not keep standards from functioning or discriminate. So long as the functionality can be duplicated regardless of OS or license there is nothing wrong with it. Microsoft does not do this and shows no willingness to ever change, they create proprietary features which can only work with IE, or ActiveX, or Windows and they license them under discriminatory terms.
That is wrong and Microsoft continues to be in the wrong for all long as they continue doing that. - drmsux, on 04/18/2009, -5/+43Decent?
http://acid3.acidtests.org/
Firefox (3.1b3): 93
Chrome: 100
Safari: 100
Opera: 100
Safari Mobile (iPhone): 97
IE8: 20 - jggube, on 04/17/2009, -5/+39I'm assuming you're being sarcastic - if so, why is that offensive? Is it not true the Ebonics breaks standard English rules? It's more offensive that you assume it's a racial thing when everyone speaks even just a little bit of Ebonics every day ("sup dawg") - regardless of the color of their skin.
- RonnieW, on 04/18/2009, -3/+35In terms of useful life expectancy, software years are even shorter than dog years, but for some reason IE6 refuses to die.
That made me chuckle :)
But i have to say, as a web developer IE8 is a much much better browser then it's predecessors. - mithrasinvictus, on 04/18/2009, -3/+30IE8 is what IE6 should have been. It's still behind the times. No CSS3 support, no SVG support, they even broke their own proprietary VML support etc.
- scalded, on 04/18/2009, -1/+27The statistics vary because site audiences vary. A blog about standards compliant web developing may see different browser agents than a site about images to insert into the emails that you forward to every person in your Outlook contact list.
The statistics shouldn't matter when you put everything in perspective. One of the reasons you should at least keep IE in consideration is not because those users make up more than half of your visitors, but because they're probably the only users that still view and click ads (yeah, ads still exist on the internet). - gcnaddict, on 04/18/2009, -13/+36IE8 is actually decent with web standards.
IE6... well, we just pretend it doesn't exist anymore. I personally won't be designing any sites compliant with IE6 or IE7. IE8 is now out and runs perfectly, so there's no reason to hold back (unless you run a corporate network and need to ensure compatibility, which, for the most part, shouldn't be a problem. Get on with it already!) - Zarokima, on 04/18/2009, -4/+27To assume that I'm being racist with my remarks is itself bigotry. Noting the simple correlation between use of ebonics and ghetto "gangsta" behaviour, as well as general disagreeableness (especially when juxtaposed to the severe lack of this in anyone of value) is not racist, especially since these qualities are not exclusive to any one race and I never claimed them to be. As absolutely anyone can testify, there are white people in this lowly group (as well as asians and hispanics and whatever else), just as there are successful people of every race.
Next time you might also want to drop the ad hominem asserting racism and try something of substance. - Macintoshreader, on 04/18/2009, -6/+29It gets 20/100 in the Acid 3 test. How exactly is that "decent"? That's horrible. Safari 4 gets 100/100, so does Opera 10 and Chrome 2, and Firefox 3.1 Beta 3 gets 93/100. It's unacceptable that most web browsers are fully standards' compliant and IE isn't.
- sageerrant, on 04/18/2009, -0/+20That part where it says it's a joke helps, too.
- inactive, on 04/18/2009, -4/+23IE is the chicken and watermelon the browser world.
- Edgers, on 04/18/2009, -9/+27IE Really just needs to die.
- Zarokima, on 04/18/2009, -2/+20Hraes, the exact same thing could be said of what southern redneck hicks speak* since it does indeed follow some internal logic. However, like all non-standard dialects of every language, it is worse. Languages are standardized for a damn good reason, and speaking with certain dialects (like ebonics or the aforementioned redneck dialect*) can be indicative of a person's intelligence (or lack thereof). It's also good to note that people who use these "neither objectively better nor worse" dialects never get the good jobs.
*I'm unaware of any good name for this, like ebonics. If anyone knows the name, please reply with it. - Macintoshreader, on 04/18/2009, -5/+23@KingFog:
Acid 3 tests almost all current standards. Here is a list of all the standards which are tested:
DOM Level 2 Traversal (subtests 1-6)
DOM Level 2 Range (subtests 7-11)
Content-Type: image/png; text/plain (subtest 14, 15)
<object> handling and HTTP status codes (subtest 16)
DOM Level 2 Core (subtests 17, 21)
DOM Level 2 Events (subtests 17, 30-32)
CSS Selectors (subtests 33-40)
DOM Level 2 Style (subtest 45)
DOM Level 2 HTML (subtest 60)
DOM Level 2 Views
ECMAScript GC (subtests 26-27)
Unicode 5.0 UTF-16 (subtest 68)
Unicode 5.0 UTF-8 (subtest 70)
HTML 4.0 Transitional (subtest 71)
HTML 4.01 Strict
SVG 1.1 (subtests 74, 78)
SVG 1.1 Fonts (subtests 77, 79)
SMIL 2.1 (subtests 75-76)
ECMAScript Conformance (subtests 81-96)
Data URI scheme (subtest 97)
XHTML 1.0 Strict (subtest 98)
HTTP 1.1 Protocol
How about you do some research and stop making excuses for Microsoft? - NeoTechni, on 04/18/2009, -2/+18"The title is racist."
Only a racist himself would think so. - ZippyV, on 04/18/2009, -0/+15CSS3 is not a recommendation yet.
- inactive, on 04/18/2009, -9/+23@Zarokima - Are you sure you don't mean "***** are scary"? Just sayin'.
- jakem1, on 04/18/2009, -1/+15CSS3 is not complete yet. IE8 is the most CSS2.1 compatible browser available at the moment. If you really want IE to be standards compliant then you can hardly fault them for avoiding incomplete standards.
- Zarokima, on 04/18/2009, -3/+17I claimed it to be neither a cause, nor an effect, but rather an indicator of people and/or areas best avoided. Causation doesn't matter here, as I was talking purely about correlation.
- Zarokima, on 04/18/2009, -6/+19I disagree. Loud, boisterous use of ebonics is usually an indication of who/where you should stay from.
- FutureGuy, on 04/18/2009, -1/+14Its not MS's fault that there are still people out there still using IE6. IE8 is a far better browser, especially when combined with Win7.
- inactive, on 04/18/2009, -0/+13I'm glad we agree that it's not offensive at all.
- bdfariello, on 04/18/2009, -1/+13Wowbagger1's sole reason for existence is to reply to the very first comment in a submission by using an out-dated insult whenever possible.
Seriously, if you haven't already seen him do it, just go ahead and look through his comment history. - j1ggy, on 04/18/2009, -4/+15Microsoft needs to some up with something innovative if they want to succeed in the browser war. Instead, they keep adopting what everyone else has done already, and by the time they do (years later) it's nothing new and exciting. This can be applied to pretty well everything Microsoft has ever released.
- Nanobe, on 04/18/2009, -0/+11The author didn't use W3C stats, because the W3C doesn't collect stats on browser usage. The author used W3Schools stats. W3Schools has no affiliation with the W3C whatsoever; it just has a similar-looking name. The author was incorrect to call it "W3C Schools".
The similarity between the names is very unfortunate, since W3Schools teaches a lot of nonstandard and bad practice markup and techniques that directly violate the W3C standards.
And yes, the W3Schools browser stats are very unrepresentative of the overall browser usage on the Web, because W3Schools only analyzes the server logs of the W3Schools website itself. Clearly, a website that focuses on web developers isn't going to be a representative sample. - Runningflame570, on 04/18/2009, -1/+12In my assessment, anyone who at this late date REQUIRES you to use IE6 anywhere should be fired. There is no excuse for not having updated those ActiveX sites by now to work with other browsers.
- liorgalanti, on 04/18/2009, -17/+27Lets face it. the only good thing IE can do for the world is dying. And if it can take with it the "Operating System" that comes bundled with it that would be even better.
- fungie5, on 04/18/2009, -0/+10Netscape was the first widely available browser and made its debut on the PC before MS even thought of creating IE. MS wanted to ultimately tie the Internet to Windows so they bundled IE out with Windows to kill Netscape. As they destroyed Netscape, they introduced their own proprietary html, and CSS extensions as well as active X. Because everyone became an IE user by default with the purchase of a PC, web designers used the MS features for their sites. However, when new browsers tried to enter the market, these proprietary features made most sites break on the new browsers. Remember all the complaints years ago about how FF used to break websites? Well that's why it was happening - there was nothing wrong with the browser's rendering capabilities. THAT'S WHY, for a time, nobody could compete with IE - the contest was effectively fixed in favor of IE. What's changed? These days, more sites are being developed to support recognized web standards and FF has become the browser of choice for testing web standard compliant sites. It's IE that now needs the hacks to work properly.
- Stonekeeper, on 04/18/2009, -4/+14yeah, that's if they didn't release it as an open standard, or choose to patent their additions or do anything that basically hinders adoption. Nobody would slam them for bringing new and fresh ideas into the web field. They'd get slammed for only trying to lock it down to more sales of windows.
- Berkana, on 04/18/2009, -0/+9inaccurate rather, because Ebonics is not spoken by nearly three quarters of the population.
- radialturkey, on 04/18/2009, -0/+9I live in Texas, and the majority speak Standard English very well. There is a much higher percentage of Ebonics speakers than those that would say, "Well lookee here, boy, we gots us a pig dun stuck itself in that there mud."
- Zarokima, on 04/18/2009, -3/+12Please tell me that's a joke.
EDIT: The download link made it obvious. Go click the download link and have a nice chuckle. - inactive, on 04/18/2009, -0/+8But they do have elements of the technique such as drop down menu and floating divisions with dynamic elements. IE has to receive its own CSS for drop down menu systems because it needs span elements over divisions within a floating list.
- inactive, on 04/18/2009, -0/+8African American Vernacular English is the politically correct term!
- azbmr, on 04/18/2009, -0/+8Wow. You aren't a professional web developer ("I personally won't be designing any sites compliant with IE6 or IE7.") and you clearly don't understand mid to large size IT operations ("Get on with it already!"). As ***** and a pain in the ass as it is, you can't tell clients that many people at work won't see the site right (of course, you probably wouldn't tell them that--they'd find out when they go there themselves on their versions of IE6 that they still use).
- gobbleplex, on 04/18/2009, -3/+11Well, next time I want to visit the Acid 3 site I'll know which browser to use.
- mrsteveman1, on 04/18/2009, -3/+11Mixed with a little bit of breaking the law, yea.
- mrBitch, on 04/18/2009, -3/+11@ steve, no he's not getting buried for "speaking the truth", Urelles is getting buried simply for being an idiot.
- Myztry, on 04/18/2009, -3/+11Maybe web designers should start displaying UAC (Useless Access Client) prompts for depreciated browsers like IE6. Microsoft surely would support this, as it's the method they use to annoy people away from older software. (Even if that software was written to Microsoft's own guidelines)
- illiteratewhino, on 04/18/2009, -4/+12Dugg for title alone.
- mrBitch, on 04/18/2009, -0/+8@ B1665r, RE: "... you are bitter about SVG of all things... SVG never was, and its not gonna be, no matter how much you complain about. "
I'm guessing you were trying to say that SVG never was a standard. You are wrong.
SVG is a widely supported standard, and is supported in every other browser. The only browser that has poor SVG support is Microsoft's.
In fact, IE has ZERO support for SVG, since you have to install an Adobe authored plug-in to get just the basic SVG support in IE.
And why do you think it's NOT Microsoft's fault that IE has NO SVG support, unless you install Adobe's SVG plug-in ?
You think that it's Adobe's fault if they no longer support their crappy SVG plug-in for IE ?
Are you an idiot ?
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26646919/
"... While Firefox, Safari and other browsers have built-in support for SVG, Microsoft relies on a plug-in from Adobe Systems Inc. that must be downloaded before Internet Explorer can show SVG objects. This applies even to the recently released "beta" version of Internet Explorer 8." - jakem1, on 04/18/2009, -1/+8Accelerators are actually quite cool and I wish other browsers supported them.
- ijmok, on 04/18/2009, -3/+10I’m not sure, but I believe web activity and user base to be two different things.
basically Firefox users use there’re browser to surf more pages I guess.
But there are less of them - DarkShroud, on 04/18/2009, -0/+7Overall IE8 is pretty damn good. That being said when the CSS3 standard is finished/finalized MS had better update IE for it.
When I install Windows on PCs IE8 is the first thing I install. Installing XP onto a PC is very because the default browser is IE6. Three years ago I didn't mind IE6 that much, now it's painful to use especially with its lack of tabs. IE6 is still alive because of business lock in. I heard many claims when IE8 was released that companies were just now upgrading to IE7. That's disturbing to hear, at least they're getting rid of IE6. :/ - jonsterling, on 04/18/2009, -1/+8@erik753 What the hell is a proverb (in the sense of grammar)? Also, idioms are not an element of grammar. Propositions may be inappropriate with your female colleagues, but I assure you, prepositions are fine.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 273 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is