SitePoint Sponsor

User Tag List

View Poll Results: What do you prefer to design/concentrate more for?

Voters
71. You may not vote on this poll
  • Internet Explorer

    65 91.55%
  • Netscape Navigator

    4 5.63%
  • Opera

    1 1.41%
  • other..

    1 1.41%
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 26 to 38 of 38
  1. #26
    SitePoint Zealot DarkMonkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2001
    Location
    uk
    Posts
    170
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Netscape follows the standards better than IE, in that IE just creates it's own stuff in typically erratic manner, although I'm probably guilty of using a lot of it anyway. Netscape could certainly do with adding more CSS compliance, although I think they've done that with NS6.

  2. #27
    The Hiding One lynlimz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2000
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    2,103
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Originally posted by DarkMonkey
    Netscape follows the standards better than IE, in that IE just creates it's own stuff in typically erratic manner, although I'm probably guilty of using a lot of it anyway. Netscape could certainly do with adding more CSS compliance, although I think they've done that with NS6.
    not really. I would just make it simple.
    think about it.
    Netscape 6 complies with the standards.
    Most web pages that are properly created are shown the same as in with IE and Mozilla (Netscape 6).
    But its a different case in Netscpae 4.

    You say Netscape follows the standards better than IE.
    Then why do you say that it should add more CSS Compliance? IE supports CSS better then Netscape.

    You might be getting your points wrong. As what you might be refering to is leniency on one's code.

    IE is more forgiving.
    "Imagination is more important than knowledge. Knowledge is limited. Imagination encircles the world."
    -- Albert Einstein

  3. #28
    SitePoint Enthusiast Spridel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2001
    Location
    San Diego
    Posts
    93
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I've come to loathe Netscape. It gives me nothing but problems. I design for IE and then spend as much time trying to make it look right in NN. I'm just waiting for Netscape to die. I wish Microsoft had been <i>more</i> successful in their attempts to quash NN.

  4. #29
    Wanna-be Apple nut silver trophy M. Johansson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2000
    Location
    Halmstad, Sweden
    Posts
    7,400
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    NS6 works pretty well with CSS, I would say!

    This is the way we all should do:

    Keep our code standards-compliant, clean and proper. This way, it works in the browsers, and if it doesn't, the browser can go f**k itself.

    The reason IE is more popular that NS is that IE accepts sloppy coding to a greater extent than NS.

    BUT, have you all heard of XHTML? For you who doesn't know, it's the next version of HTML - kind of. XHTML has a bunch of new cool things, but vital in this discussion is that it DOES NOT ALLOW ANY ERRORS. None whatsoever. Check this out:

    Code:
    <B><FONT SIZE=1>COOL</B></FONT><BR>
    The above code is perfectly valid using HTML, but will not work in XHTML. The above code have several errors:

    1. You cannot use capital letters in XHTML code. Everything must me lower-case. I.e. <html> is valid, <HTML> is not.

    2. All attributes must be surrounded with quotes. I.e.
    <font size="1"> is valid <font size=1> is not.

    3. Improper tag placing. You must place the tags properly:
    <font size="1"><b>COOL</b></font> is valid, but
    <b><font size="1">COOL</b></font> is not.

    4. ALL tags, including <br> tags must be closed.
    ie. <br></br> is valid, <br> is not. There is a workaround here, though <br />.

    XHTML will, in time, force the websites to use more clean coding, and thus, NS will gain more ground again. (maybe) I find NS6 to be a quite nice browser, overall <gasp!> - and I wouldn't say it's dead yet. Why? Well, apart from being a nice browser:

    1. Linux is becoming more and more usable for Joe Schmoe, and Netscape has a huge market and support there, after all.
    2. Mozilla - mozilla has HUGE potential, it's NOT to be ignored.

    Oh, and about load time, don't forget IE has a HUGE edge on load time because it is loaded into memory at windows startup.
    Mattias Johansson
    Short, Swedish, Web Developer

    Buttons and Dog Tags with your custom design:
    FatStatement.com

  5. #30
    Team SitePoint AlexW's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2000
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    832
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    It gives me nothing but problems. I design for IE and then spend as much time trying to make it look right in NN.
    I would tend to think that if developed your sites from the beginning with Netscape, IE and Opera in mind you'd have a much easier time at the end.

    It's kinda like designing a tank, and when it's almost finished, checking to see it floats too. There are things you just wouldn't have done from the start if you knew your tank had to be seaworthy as well.

    (ok,..ok,. it's a pretty stretched analogy, but you get the picture)
    Alex Walker
    SitePoint Developer
    SitePoint - Learnable

  6. #31
    SitePoint Enthusiast norfett's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2000
    Location
    Sheffield, UK
    Posts
    95
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I'm sorry, but there is no way in hell that you can say NS6 is a good browser - it is way behind IE 5/6 and here are a few words describing it.

    Buggy.
    Slow - and I *mean* slow.
    cant display tables properly.
    ***** up flash big time.

    An improvement on NS N4? (which incidentally made Netscape hypocrites, seeing as them going on about bundling IE with windows, hmmm, thats funny, didnt see the option to install NN4.x without AOL Instant Messenger - well isnt that the same thing? cheeky buggers)

    Improvement on NN4 - I think not. NS6 is way too buggy, and they should release s/w when its ready, not half finished like NS6.

    Pete

    Edit:


    Try and watch your language, strong feelings about something are still no cause to use improper language in the forums.
    Last edited by Fluffykins; Apr 26, 2001 at 06:47.
    Current Projects:
    Brighton Rockz - The only Albion Fanzine

    Always Skint - THE forums for BHAFC fans

  7. #32
    Wanna-be Apple nut silver trophy M. Johansson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2000
    Location
    Halmstad, Sweden
    Posts
    7,400
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    We really should not be discussing this in the first place, come to think of it, since it is up to our visitors what browser they prefer, not you - but here goes:

    I'm sorry, but there is no way in hell that you can say NS6 is a good browser - it is way behind IE 5/6 and here are a few words describing it.
    Oh, I didn't say it was better than IE, because it isn't, on most accounts. That does not make it bad though. I'm jsut saying it's a decent browser, and I can understand why some people use it.

    Slow - and I *mean* slow.
    I have never had this problem - in fact, NS6 renders webpages much faster than IE on my computer. Dunno why - maybe just me. NS6 load time is surpassed only by black and white though, and is very annoying, I give you that.

    Can't display tables properly.
    (puts on the big cloak and does the dark voice) This is a very serious accusation, and you really should provide proof. As far as I know, NS6 has been rendering my site fine. Netscape will not display pages correctly that are not written correctly. I.e. You can miss the </table> in IE, in NS, you cannot. Could you enlighten us with an example, please?
    Last edited by M. Johansson; Apr 26, 2001 at 10:46.
    Mattias Johansson
    Short, Swedish, Web Developer

    Buttons and Dog Tags with your custom design:
    FatStatement.com

  8. #33
    SitePoint Addict superbird's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2000
    Location
    Swansea, UK
    Posts
    260
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Example from me: it doesn't like bgcolor tags in my tables. Don't know why, my validator says they are HTML4.

    Doesn't have much of a clue about font sizes in my CSS either
    ...KartLink...

  9. #34
    SitePoint Zealot DarkMonkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2001
    Location
    uk
    Posts
    170
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    lynlimz/ But this 'fogiving' nature of IE is not good for browser compliance, many designers who aren't checking it in Netscape think it's fine and get into awful code practice, dispite the standards saying you should close <td><tr><table> tags etc. etc. You dont have to in IE, which, in my opinion, is like ignoring standards rather than adding to them. it makes it a hell of a lot harder for netscape users.

  10. #35
    SitePoint Guru
    Join Date
    Jul 2000
    Location
    Long Island, NY
    Posts
    755
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I'm certainly no design guru, but I just want to say AlexW's point is key for making it easier on yourself when designing a page. Unless it's a very, very simple page, you need to check it in NN every step of the way and will avoid a lot of headaches if you do that. For the present it probably pays to check it in NN4x and 6.
    I don't think that IE should take blame for being too forgiving, though. If designers don't check, well, that's their fault. I'm not a particularly huge Microsoft fan, but building a forgiving browser is just making it more user friendly, and creating a better product for the end user. The bad habits of designers really isn't their problem.

  11. #36
    Wanna-be Apple nut silver trophy M. Johansson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2000
    Location
    Halmstad, Sweden
    Posts
    7,400
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I don't think that IE should take blame for being too forgiving, though. If designers don't check, well, that's their fault.
    Appareantly, it isn't the designers fault! Designers has a tendency to blame Netscape when they do wrong - and Netscape DOES take the hit. I do agree that Netscape should have adapted the "sloppy-code-will-do"-approach, too - but with XHTML coming around, it's tool late anyway, if you ask me.
    Mattias Johansson
    Short, Swedish, Web Developer

    Buttons and Dog Tags with your custom design:
    FatStatement.com

  12. #37
    SitePoint Enthusiast excessus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2001
    Location
    Spain
    Posts
    29
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Aha! Take that, netscrotum-o-hell...
    Lead Designer at www.mcomdesign.com
    Webmaster at www.marbella.com
    Read my comic strip! www.danstrip.com

  13. #38
    Blissed off
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Posts
    422
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Netscape 6 not *that* bad...

    If you do a minimal install then disable all the added crap they add, it's not bad. Not as good as IE mind you, but not too shabby... It's seems to run the teensiest bit slower than IE for me...


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
  •