SitePoint Sponsor

User Tag List

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 51 to 75 of 85
  1. #51
    SitePoint Enthusiast bennettpr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    56
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    DON'T GIVE UP!
    Bob - as people have said so far - you've done a good job getting the site working in a variety of version 5 browsers. Netscape 4x, and IE <4 are notoriously bugg-ridden browsers filled with proprietary code to pass proprietary tags from the browser wars of the late 90's ( http://www.google.com/search?q=%22browser+wars%22 ).

    What you have encountered is the reason why a lot of developers have been pushing for standards compliance in browsers, so rather than write different sites for different browsers, they can write code that adheres to standards and push browser companies to build browsers that interpret standards-compliant code in the same way regardless of platform or OS.

    You've done a good job. Chances are you understand a lot more than you realise.

    Hang in there
    on the bandwagon.....
    http://bennettpr.blogspot.com

  2. #52
    SitePoint Addict myrdhrin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Montreal
    Posts
    211
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by bennettpr
    DON'T GIVE UP!

    What you have encountered is the reason why a lot of developers have been pushing for standards compliance in browsers, so rather than write different sites for different browsers, they can write code that adheres to standards and push browser companies to build browsers that interpret standards-compliant code in the same way regardless of platform or OS.
    That is so well said... and more reason to have all those standards discussed openly so these standards can really be designed and evolved into widely adopted solutions.

    That being said... mistakes and not so standard ideas are usually where the best innovations somes from
    Jean-Marc (aka Myrdhrin)
    M2i3 - blog - Protect your privacy with Zliki

  3. #53
    SitePoint Evangelist Worldbuilder's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Boston, MA
    Posts
    481
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Bob M
    http://home.earthlink.net/~nomorabito/index.html

    Thanks so much for all the help I get in these forums--so far
    I have been able to center my site, and have it show up the same on IE (5.2), and Netscape (7.1) on the Mac-- and IE (5.5) and Netscape (7.1) on the PC side (I use Virtual PC)--and Safari, (1.0) on the Mac-

    BUT--
    Using an older Mac Power PC, OS 8.5, Netscape 4.7, it looks HORRIBLE!!

    Please tell me how I can change my existing code (as I've said, I'm new at this, and am only making this site to help share my tabs, and help people,and this has been more than a labor of love!!), so that Iit looks the same on the older browser also--

    and please give me SPECIFIC EXAMPLES of what to change. .I need all the help I can get!!
    This is so very much appreciated, and I thank you all for ALL YOUR HELP!
    Thanks-Bob Morabito
    Bob, didn't you ask this at DS, too?! LOL!

  4. #54
    SitePoint Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    NY
    Posts
    68
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Worldbuilder
    Bob, didn't you ask this at DS, too?! LOL!

    YEP!!lol!!!

    I got a lot more help here tho!!

    Bob

    PS--When I first started out trying to find information, the first forum I found was DS, and then I found this one here, and have really gotten a lot fo help in these forums--thanks, all!

  5. #55
    SitePoint Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    NY
    Posts
    68
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by bennettpr
    DON'T GIVE UP!
    Bob - as people have said so far - you've done a good job getting the site working in a variety of version 5 browsers. Netscape 4x, and IE <4 are notoriously bugg-ridden browsers filled with proprietary code to pass proprietary tags from the browser wars of the late 90's ( http://www.google.com/search?q=%22browser+wars%22 ).

    What you have encountered is the reason why a lot of developers have been pushing for standards compliance in browsers, so rather than write different sites for different browsers, they can write code that adheres to standards and push browser companies to build browsers that interpret standards-compliant code in the same way regardless of platform or OS.

    You've done a good job. Chances are you understand a lot more than you realise.

    Hang in there
    Hi, Bennettpr-
    THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR KIND WORDS OF ENCOURAGEMENT!!!!!

    WOW--you made my day--!!

    I now see the problems first hand, and the amount of questions aimed at this sort of thing, and I definitely agree with what you wrote..
    Thanks again--this site is really a labor of love for me, and am finishing up the beginning of a major portion of it.

    Bob

  6. #56
    SitePoint Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    NY
    Posts
    68
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by myrdhrin
    Bob M,

    There is one question you should ask yourself before trying to please everyone with all their different browsers...

    "Who are you trying to reach with your site"?

    It's impossible to please everyone as it is impossible to design a seat that will be comfortable to anybody who'd like to sit on it.

    The people you're trying to reach will have a lot in common, most probably, they'll be using the same level of technology (either advanced browsers, older browsers, fully compliant, designed for disabilities, to run on very old machine, only text based). Find out who you'd like to reach, that will give you a lot of detail on the framework and standard you should be using.

    I worked on a project not too long ago where we had to make sure that the website appeared great on Netscape 4ish... why? because it was to be used by priests in Africa and the average machine they had access could run anything more powerfull than that.

    As you will taylor the content of your site to some specific people, you can also taylor the standard you'll be using to better reach those same people.
    Well, the answer to this would be "EVERYONE', as simple and probably naiive as that may sound.
    The actual site itself was not really in my mind, but getting out the information in it I would of loved to have, was..and I had no concept, that it would look different on differnt machines, PC, and Mac, and then different versions of browsers..

    My son told me, and I went to the library, and boy, that started it all..

    Thanks so much for replying--what you write makes a lot of sense, for professional programmers, aiming to please a client, who may already have a target audience in mind but this is a free site, and I am just a "hunt and peck" programmer, hoping that everyone intertested in what's there will stop by, and not be tuned away, because it might look bad in a different versioned browser.
    Much help is being gotten in these forums, and I appreciate it.
    Bob

  7. #57
    SitePoint Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    south central
    Posts
    4
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    To relate to the start of this thread and what redox said, it's true, unless you want it to look right go Flash.

    I dropped XHTML and CSS two months ago, pretty soon I'll know so much ColdFusion and Actionscripting that I'll be able to do flashremoting and integrate a database and program a completely Flash Forum ( my aim ).

    If you take what Flash can do in terms of animation, and make a dynamic forum, people will never look down on you

    aww a flash forum it' still makes me dribble in thought..

    Wait awhile for CSS to standardise, remember Flash is always standard, no matter how much of a non-prioprietary coder you are, knock up a bottle of flash ( or coldfusion ) and I bet I can convince you that Macromedia products are ta shizznit!

    There's an article on ColdFusion on the Sitepoint blog stuff, a great read, it downplays a few of the myths about ColdFusion, remember it's pretty much straight programming logic, and if you want OOP you can go with JSP and integrate them into your CF app. ColdFusion does it's processing in bytecode, this is potentially faster than PHP in some instances.

  8. #58
    Custom User Text tonyskyday's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    240
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Don't forget, many users strongly dislike flash sites. They want information. They want to click a link and be taken to more information, without waiting around while a spot of light dances around and a button pops up and down!

    Also, is there not a compatibility issue with flash? Aren't you really saying that a flash site will look the exact same on any browser it works on?

  9. #59
    SitePoint Addict will_'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Asheville, NC
    Posts
    206
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Flash has inherent useability, accessibility, and search engine findability problems.

    Besides, Flash doesn't work on every browser, which makes it a moot point in regards to the original question asked in this post.

  10. #60
    SitePoint Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Edinburgh, Scotland
    Posts
    90
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by paladin
    So what? No one is using that anymore. I would imagine the percentage of your website visitors that would be using OS 8.5 might be about .001%. I know this because I have used Macs all my life and am very active in the online Mac community. No one is using that horrible ancient system anymore. Over half the Mac installed base has already upgraded to OS X. If you want your site to look good for Mac users focus on Safari and IE 5 under OS X. That's all you should be worrying about.
    Could you tell us all what you based this comment on?
    My dad has only just (last year) upgraded to an iMac LCD from his 1987-vintage SE which had nowhere near the spec required to get on the internet at all. This was only done because he felt that this was his last chance to be able to upgrade without losing all of his work - he was still perfectly happy with the machine itself.
    Upgrading to OSX is only possible if you have a G3 or better - there are thousands of 68000's still in use so this advice is rather misleading.
    Incidentally the Mac that I use at home is a Quadra 650 using Mosaic. I have been able to scrounge much newer PC's for free, but no-one ever seems to throw away an old Mac. That tells me something.

    Mozilla does not appear to be currently available for 68000 or PPC, but the current OSX build (as of 1 minute ago) was quoted as 15.2MB - this equates to a bare minimum of 45 minutes on a 56k modem, and don't even think about installing IE over a modem - it took me more than 45 minutes last time I tried that on a PC, and thats with broadband.

  11. #61
    ☆★☆★ silver trophy vgarcia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    in transition
    Posts
    21,235
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by ipx
    To relate to the start of this thread and what redox said, it's true, unless you want it to look right go Flash.

    I dropped XHTML and CSS two months ago, pretty soon I'll know so much ColdFusion and Actionscripting that I'll be able to do flashremoting and integrate a database and program a completely Flash Forum ( my aim ).

    If you take what Flash can do in terms of animation, and make a dynamic forum, people will never look down on you

    aww a flash forum it' still makes me dribble in thought..
    Have you even thought this through? Let me set an example for you:
    I go to your Flash-written forum. I sign up. I view a really cool thread. I want to bookmark the page because I found the information useful. OH WAIT! I can't, since it's in Flash.

    That's just one reason all-Flash doesn't work all the time. Sure you may get the same look everywhere*, but you stand to lose a lot in terms of search engines and usability.

    * Everywhere with a Flash player, which is not necessarily everywhere.

  12. #62
    SitePoint Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    south central
    Posts
    4
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by tonyskyday
    Don't forget, many users strongly dislike flash sites. They want information. They want to click a link and be taken to more information, without waiting around while a spot of light dances around and a button pops up and down!

    Also, is there not a compatibility issue with flash? Aren't you really saying that a flash site will look the exact same on any browser it works on?
    vgarcia, the bookmark is the pitfall, but..

    My forum design, to counter what tony said about wanting information on the go, will have some flashy stuff but I intend to have a please wait and a bar in the center of the screen and when data is loaded comes up right away.

    I think nobody bookmarks forum pages, and all browsers have the potential to work flash, the ones that can't are not used on desktop pc's. Maybe unix mainframes.

    -- I don't think I'm a deformed lunatic and I have thought this through, but just to say something I didn't mention I'm planning to try CSS 3 when it comes about in hope that it's more standardised.

  13. #63
    SitePoint Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    south central
    Posts
    4
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by will_
    Flash has inherent useability, accessibility
    Flash yes.

    But actionscript - no, plugins like libswf, ming, and flash remoting techniques are real bonuses that make it all worthwhile and far more enjoyable than stuffing around with scripts that fetch a browser and bring back that browsers own css file.

    Sometimes one css file can do it all if coded right and I'm not downplaying css to a great extent, I'm just fed up. The best CSS site out there that's truly compatible is macromedias website.

  14. #64
    SitePoint Addict will_'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Asheville, NC
    Posts
    206
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by ipx
    I think nobody bookmarks forum pages
    Look at all the posts in Sitepoint (and signatures too) that refer to *other* posts in Sitepoint by posting a link to them in the thread.

    I bookmark specific Sitepoint links all the time for reference. I imagine others do as well.

    Quote Originally Posted by ipx
    Sometimes one css file can do it all if coded right and I'm not downplaying css to a great extent, I'm just fed up.
    If you are well versed in CSS, it can all of the time. Are you saying that because you are fed up with not being able to get CSS to work right you are going to sacrifice the user's experience and go with Flash/Actionscript?

    How well would a forum page in Flash print? Or be found by search engines?

    It just seems you are backing yourself into a corner when you go with a proprietary, plugin-dependant solution.

  15. #65
    SitePoint Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Saint-Calixte (Québec) - Just north of Montreal (Q
    Posts
    1
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Hi,

    I thought it worth mentioning that the other (non Flash) way to achieve your objective is to create multiple versions of your Website, adapted to the other Web browsers. Of course, you'll need to insert a little script in your default page that detects which browser is used, automatically sending your visitor to the required version.

    Personally, I believe that most clients don't have the budget to do this, unless you happen to cater to a corporate market. Unless this is the case, you need not over-concern yourself with these useability issues.

    If your Website is visible in both IE as well as Netscape, then I'd try designing for Opera, which strictly adheres to the accepted HTML guidelines. If Opera is kind to your masterpiece, then it is, in my experience, a safe bet that both Netscape and IE will be equally tolerant.

    Other than that, it is, at present, a waste of time, energy and money to spend countless hours rewriting your code to be cross-browser compliant.

    Hope I've helped a bit with your dilemna.

    Doc Scribble!
    Quote Originally Posted by Bob M
    http://home.earthlink.net/~nomorabito/index.html

    Thanks so much for all the help I get in these forums--so far
    I have been able to center my site, and have it show up the same on IE (5.2), and Netscape (7.1) on the Mac-- and IE (5.5) and Netscape (7.1) on the PC side (I use Virtual PC)--and Safari, (1.0) on the Mac-

    BUT--
    Using an older Mac Power PC, OS 8.5, Netscape 4.7, it looks HORRIBLE!!

    Please tell me how I can change my existing code (as I've said, I'm new at this, and am only making this site to help share my tabs, and help people,and this has been more than a labor of love!!), so that Iit looks the same on the older browser also--

    and please give me SPECIFIC EXAMPLES of what to change. .I need all the help I can get!!
    This is so very much appreciated, and I thank you all for ALL YOUR HELP!
    Thanks-Bob Morabito
    [SIZE=2]
    Michel A. Di Iorio, Editor/Turnkey Webhosting solutions provider
    "The Write Words to state your message,
    and the World Wide Web to deliver it!"

  16. #66
    ☆★☆★ silver trophy vgarcia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    in transition
    Posts
    21,235
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by ipx
    I think nobody bookmarks forum pages, and all browsers have the potential to work flash, the ones that can't are not used on desktop pc's. Maybe unix mainframes.
    1. I bookmark and link to forum pages all the time. What if I wanted to email a really good thread to a friend of mine? Can't do that on your forum.
    2. My cellphone doesn't have Flash installed. I use the web from my cellphone on occasion. My site works on my cellphone without any extra configuration.

    Quote Originally Posted by ipx
    -- I don't think I'm a deformed lunatic and I have thought this through, but just to say something I didn't mention I'm planning to try CSS 3 when it comes about in hope that it's more standardised.
    I never said you were a deformed lunatic; just that an all-Flash forum is probably not a good idea. I'm sure it would have already been done were it not for search engine, usability, and accessibility issues. Installed base is definitely not a weakness for Flash, but the other issues can make or break a good site, especially one focused on content.

  17. #67
    gingham dress, army boots... silver trophy redux's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Salford / Manchester / UK
    Posts
    4,838
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by ipx
    The best CSS site out there that's truly compatible is macromedias website.
    depends on what you mean by "compatible"...and there's tons of equally well crafted sites out there (ESPN.com, for instance)

    bit of a throwaway comment there, if you don't mind me saying so...
    Attached Images Attached Images
    re·dux (adj.): brought back; returned. used postpositively
    [latin : re-, re- + dux, leader; see duke.]
    WaSP Accessibility Task Force Member
    splintered.co.uk | photographia.co.uk | redux.deviantart.com

  18. #68
    Custom User Text tonyskyday's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    240
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Just had a friend point me to the mini cooper usa web site, for a reason unrelated to this thread, which is heavily flash-based, and notice they provide and address bar where you can copy a url like so: http://www.miniusa.com/link/questions/faqs/top10/

    Intro page: http://www.miniusa.com/crm/mini_entrance.jsp

    -Tony

  19. #69
    SitePoint Addict will_'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Asheville, NC
    Posts
    206
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by tonyskyday
    Just had a friend point me to the mini cooper usa web site, for a reason unrelated to this thread, which is heavily flash-based, and notice they provide and address bar where you can copy a url like so: http://www.miniusa.com/link/questions/faqs/top10/

    Intro page: http://www.miniusa.com/crm/mini_entrance.jsp

    -Tony
    That's a neat trick, and handy too. However why would you want to recreate something that the web browser already provides? Doesn't make sense - break it so you can create it again with proprietary technology,

  20. #70
    Custom User Text tonyskyday's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    240
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by will_
    That's a neat trick, and handy too. However why would you want to recreate something that the web browser already provides? Doesn't make sense - break it so you can create it again with proprietary technology,
    I agree with you, but I just found it interesting that they added that to an otherwise useless site.

    (I mean, how many pop-ups does a site need just to get to the darn content?)

    -Tony

  21. #71
    SitePoint Addict will_'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Asheville, NC
    Posts
    206
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I agree- that's bad planning all the way

  22. #72
    SitePoint Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    NY
    Posts
    68
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Doc Scribble
    Hi,

    I thought it worth mentioning that the other (non Flash) way to achieve your objective is to create multiple versions of your Website, adapted to the other Web browsers. Of course, you'll need to insert a little script in your default page that detects which browser is used, automatically sending your visitor to the required version.

    Personally, I believe that most clients don't have the budget to do this, unless you happen to cater to a corporate market. Unless this is the case, you need not over-concern yourself with these useability issues.

    If your Website is visible in both IE as well as Netscape, then I'd try designing for Opera, which strictly adheres to the accepted HTML guidelines. If Opera is kind to your masterpiece, then it is, in my experience, a safe bet that both Netscape and IE will be equally tolerant.

    Other than that, it is, at present, a waste of time, energy and money to spend countless hours rewriting your code to be cross-browser compliant.

    Hope I've helped a bit with your dilemna.

    Doc Scribble!
    [SIZE=2]
    Hi, Doc Scribble--thank you for replying--yes, I agree--this seems the way to go, having two pages, one that works for the old, and one that works for the new, with a script that directs traffic--

    Thanks so much!
    Bob

  23. #73
    SitePoint Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    south central
    Posts
    4
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by will_
    However why would you want to recreate something that the web browser already provides? Doesn't make sense - break it so you can create it again with proprietary technology,
    Your browser is also biased towards port 80, hyper text transfer, and HTML, Flash sites can be viewed from many other protocols.

  24. #74
    SitePoint Addict will_'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Asheville, NC
    Posts
    206
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by ipx
    Your browser is also biased towards port 80, hyper text transfer, and HTML, Flash sites can be viewed from many other protocols.
    We are talking about the WWW, are we not? Last I checked this was a forum for web developers/designers.

  25. #75
    Yugo full of anvils bronze trophy hillsy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2001
    Location
    :noitacoL
    Posts
    1,859
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    @ redux. Nice screenshot
    that's me!
    Now A Pom. And a Plone Nut
    Broccoli Martinez Airpark


Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •