Do you use IE?

@fredmvMar 09.2004

If so, why? If you’ve not yet realized, IE is far behind in terms of support for ~~[url=http://www.w3.org/]~~Web standards[/url], functionality (e.g., tabbed browsing, pop-up blocking, etc.), security, among other things (including ~~[b]~~incorrectly implementing the HTTP protocol[/b]).

You might consider reading the excellent article: [url=http://ashitaka-san.home.comcast.net/yayrant/ieharmful.html]~~[i]~~Internet Explorer Considered Harmful[/i][/url] for a decent look over why IE should not be used and why you should consider using a ~~[url=http://www.mozilla.org/produts/firefox/]~~real browser[/url]. Mozilla, as far as I’m concerned, is the de facto standard as to what a browser should be. Secure; easy to use; implements Web standards correctly; fast; free (of which Opera is not).

Also remember that Mozilla is open-source. Should bugs be found, they are reported to ~~[url=http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/]~~Bugzilla[/url] instantly and corrected in the next release. For more information on Mozilla, you might check:

~~[list]~~

~~[*]~~

~~[url]~~http://www.mozilla.org/about/[/url]

~~[*]~~

~~[url]~~http://www.mozilla.org/products/firefox/why/[/url]

~~[*]~~

~~[url]~~http://www.mozillazine.org/[/url]

[/list]

to post a comment

Full-stack Developer

80 Comments(s) _↴

@AskalonMar 09.2004 — #Ok, I do like to use Firefox, but one of the websites I enjoy will not display correctly.

check out [URL=http://www.planetside.com]planetside[/URL]

There is a map that is not displayed in the right upper side.

I know it is most likley a Mozilla issue, but for all other websites, I use FF.

@fredmvauthorMar 09.2004 — #Actually, however, it isn't Mozilla's fault. Rather, the author of that site. It's not displaying correctly (or at all) due to the author's incorrect or otherwise faulty code. Don't worry though, it's a common misconception to most that if a site displays incorrectly in Mozilla, and correct in IE, that Mozilla's doing something wrong. This is actually completely incorrect. It's either the markup or other code (e.g., JavaScript) used is non-standard, and/or IE is screwing something up or perhaps being too forgiving.

@VladdyMar 09.2004 — #For pages developed by ignorant (that was very sugar-coated ?) webshmasters, use "View page in IE" extension: http://texturizer.net/firefox/extensions/#ieview

@spufiMar 09.2004 — #Speaking of extensions, the [URL=http://www.chrispederick.com/work/firefox/webdeveloper/]Web Developer[/URL] one is a must have. I just figured out how to open "view source" in a tab too. He changed it to open in a window for v.61. To change it, go in the Options section.

@SamMar 09.2004 — #[i]Originally posted by spufi [/i]

[B]Speaking of extensions, the [URL=http://www.chrispederick.com/work/firefox/webdeveloper/]Web Developer[/URL] one is a must have. I just figured out how to open "view source" in a tab too. He changed it to open in a window for v.61. To change it, go in the Options section. [/B][/QUOTE]
I've been having some problems with this extension, and have been talking to Chris Pederick about it, and he says it is behaving differently on my computer than his, and I was wondering if anyone else was experiencing this. The things I've noticed are:

disabling images doesn't disable css background images

if any of the Outline or Information items are selected, they go away on refresh (even with Options -> Persist styles enabled)

has anyone else noticed this, or is it just something wierd with my computer(s)?

@buntineMar 09.2004 — #I also use Firefox and am not disagreeing with anyone, but, you do create all your web sites so they look identical in IE, right?

@fredmvauthorMar 09.2004 — #[i]Originally posted by buntine [/i]

[B]you do create all your web sites so they look identical in IE, right? [/B][/QUOTE]This is actually kind of arguable. You do, of course, first get the site working in the real browser (i.e., Mozilla) and then slightly modify the code — piece by piece — until it appears as desired in IE.

Though, however, if the content is still accessible and it still renders reasonably well in IE then I see no problem with that. You don't always need to be pixel-perfect, rather, just make sure either browser can access it.

This actually brings up another interesting point: wonder if we didn't have to worry about IE? Wonder if everyone used Mozilla? This would make the development process much easier hence quicker simply because:[list=a]

[*]You can use all of your favorite Web standards (e.g., XHTML/XML, SVG, ECMAScript/JavaScript, etc.) to their fullest extent without worrying about IE.

[*]Check it in one browser and one browser only — done. Nothing else to worry about like you normally would by checking it in IE then "fixing" it to work correctly with it.

[/list]There are of course more benefits, but I think my point has been made.

@buntineMar 09.2004 — #Ok, now thats all ok. But considering about 90% of your audience wil be using IE, shouldnt you optimise your site for it rather than mozilla?

@SamMar 09.2004 — #[i]Originally posted by fredmv [/i]

[B]This is actually kind of arguable. You do, of course, first get the site working in the real browser (i.e., Mozilla) and then slightly modify the code — piece by piece — until it appears as desired in IE.

Though, however, if the content is still accessible and it still renders reasonably well in IE then I see no problem with that. You don't always need to be pixel-perfect, rather, just make sure either browser can access it.

This actually brings up another interesting point: wonder if we didn't have to worry about IE? Wonder if everyone used Mozilla? This would make the development process much easier hence quicker simply because:[list=a]

[*]You can use all of your favorite Web standards (e.g., XHTML/XML, SVG, ECMAScript/JavaScript, etc.) to their fullest extent without worrying about IE.

[*]Check it in one browser and one browser only — done. Nothing else to worry about like you normally would by checking it in IE then "fixing" it to work correctly with it.

[/list]There are of course more benefits, but I think my point has been made. [/B][/QUOTE]
I agree, although we do still have to play nice with Opera, which can misbehave every once in a while

@buntineMar 09.2004 — #
wonder if we didn't have to worry about IE? Wonder if everyone used Mozilla?
[/quote]

Ohh yes. It definetely would. But i think we will always be plagued with the same problems we have had for years.

@fredmvauthorMar 09.2004 — #[i]Originally posted by buntine [/i]

[B]Ok, now thats all ok. But considering about 90% of your audience wil be using IE, shouldnt you optimise your site for it rather than mozilla? [/B][/QUOTE]Not necessarily. Optimizing it for IE could perhaps introduce proprietary solutions which should be completely avoided. The general rule I go by is: get it working correctly in Mozilla thus you know it's good code, then attempt to get it working in IE sufficiently.

Another interesting point that could be made is this: wonder if all of the subpar developers out there try to optimize their sites for IE and forget about less popular browsers like Mozilla — then, a few years down the road, Mozilla becomes the more popular browser! Their sites are now rendered obsolete and they'll have to get it working correctly in the more dominant (and of course better) browser. Development time and money wasted because they couldn't do it right the first time.

This may not seem likely to some, but if you think about it, it actually is. Microsoft isn't releasing IE7 until Longhorn comes out and when it does, development will not be continued. Think about how many security flaws, even more of a lack of Web standards, and other such things that will arise because of this. Surely, this will be something that will get a lot more people to switch to Mozilla.

@spufiMar 09.2004 — #[i]Originally posted by buntine [/i]

[B]Ok, now thats all ok. But considering about 90% of your audience wil be using IE, shouldnt you optimise your site for it rather than mozilla? [/B][/QUOTE]

Ah, but what if your audience doesn't ballpark 90% use of IE. ? Take away me doing stuff on my site which would push IE totals higher and I still think IE would be maybe 30%. Even being kind and saying 40%, that still leaves a rather large number for Mozilla based browsers and feed readers. Two different feed readers being number two and three for usage on my site. Granted I need to work on some cross browser font size issues I have, but it should be an easy fix.

@PeOfEoMar 10.2004 — #[i]Originally posted by Vladdy [/i]

[B]For pages developed by ignorant (that was very sugar-coated ?) webshmasters, use "View page in IE" extension: http://texturizer.net/firefox/extensions/#ieview [/B][/QUOTE] But this does not help us developers check our sites in ie 5 ?. I am runnign ie 5, 5.5, and 6 side by side, I did what pyro posted on his blog.

@soccer362001Mar 10.2004 — #Yes, I do use IE. But I do also some times use FF.

@fredmvauthorMar 10.2004 — #[i]Originally posted by soccer362001 [/i]

[B]Yes, I do use IE. [/B][/QUOTE]I fail to comprehend why you'd do such a thing.

@soccer362001Mar 10.2004 — #One reason is it is the first icon on my quick launch list, secondly my dad has not test to see if his work stuff will work in FF. In other words it is my default browser.

@fredmvauthorMar 10.2004 — #[i]Originally posted by soccer362001 [/i]

[B]One reason is it is the first icon on my quick launch list[/B][/QUOTE]Mozilla would be rather easy to add to it. Actually, however, I'd recommend removing the quick launch icon for IE and replacing it with the one for Mozilla.[i]Originally posted by soccer362001 [/i]

[B]secondly my dad has not test to see if his work stuff will work in FF.[/B][/QUOTE]Unless it's proprietary hence non-standard code, it should work just as good or perhaps better on Mozilla. Depends on what the "work stuff" is though.[i]Originally posted by soccer362001 [/i]

[B]In other words it is my default browser.[/B][/QUOTE]Sorry to hear that. All you'll need to do is launch Mozilla and there should be a "set as default browser" dialog — I think you know what to do from there. ?

@PeOfEoMar 10.2004 — #I agree. There is really no good reason to use ie for browseing. The only reason the rest of us even keep it around is that 90% of the internet uses ie because it is the browser that comes on their computer and we have to make sure it looks ok for them sadly enough. IE6 is not terrible, but when you put it side by side with mozilla it just gets destroyed. Mozilla is far easier to use and is more compliant with w3 standards. Mozilla ff has tabbed viewing, integrated search, popup blocker, quicklink bar, download menu is nice, and the js can easily be disabled. I use all of these features. Also the control pannel is easier (in a time it takes to change stuff way) to use. I mean I have been swapping out proxys on this thing with lightning speed, try that on ie.

@AnacondaAndyMar 10.2004 — #I use to use IE till a friend told me about mozilla, now I use nothing but mozilla! Mozilla ROCKS!?

@Robert_WellockMar 10.2004 — #I use IE occasionally but that is only because it is against Network Polices to introduce additional software.

Out of choice though I use a Mozilla Gecko Engine and have been doing since Netscape 6.0 came out.

@neil9999Mar 10.2004 — #[i]Originally posted by buntine [/i]

[B]Ok, now thats all ok. But considering about 90% of your audience wil be using IE, shouldnt you optimise your site for it rather than mozilla? [/B][/QUOTE]

94% on my site (excluding myself). Most people use IE probably because it comes free with windows. Most people probably have never heard of any other browsers, and if they had they wouldn't know how to download one. IE is satifactory for them, and they probably see no reason to change. As they probably would never have heard of Mozilla, they might be wary of downloading it for fear of viruses.

For these reasons, it is probably best to optimize sites for IE first, as the majority of people use it. Then, check if it works in other major browsers. If not, adapt it but make sure it still works in IE. If it doesn't work in IE, 90%ish of people won't be able to view your webpage.

Neil

@iniquity101Mar 10.2004 — #i use IE...only because i arent allowed to change it as its my dads comp, and he sees no reason to change because it does everything it needs to do for him or so he thinks

@neil9999Mar 10.2004 — #[i]Originally posted by iniquity101 [/i]

[B]i use IE...only because i arent allowed to change it as its my dads comp, and he sees no reason to change because it does everything it needs to do for him or so he thinks [/B][/QUOTE]

Exactly the same for me (but he let me download Netscape [oh joy? ])

Neil

@rpassmoreMar 10.2004 — #I started out using netscape3 a long time ago...then netscape seemed to grow stale...their interface, imho, simply did not grow with the times. IE's ability to minimize the toolbars, and add/change buttons greatly enhanced the browing experience.

Lately, I tried using netscape again, after they added popup blocking and tabbed browsing....but still felt the same about the interface. I've always wished I could get a netscape with IE's interface.......enter FF! (there was much rejoicing)

after reading about FF on this site.....I immediately downloaded it...been using it as my main browser since.

Although a few times I wished they'd have included some IE capabilities, to be flexible....but I just read the post about the IE extension...so now that's taken care of too.

absolutely no reason to use IE anymore.....except in maybe 3-5% of the sites. (haven't tried the IE extension yet...maybe that number will change to 0-1 or 1-2%)

@buntineMar 11.2004 — #
For these reasons, it is probably best to optimize sites for IE first, as the majority of people use it. Then, check if it works in other major browsers. If not, adapt it but make sure it still works in IE. If it doesn't work in IE, 90%ish of people won't be able to view your webpage.
[/quote]
When i was designing sites, it was a [i]must[/i] to design your site for IE. I still dont understand why it has changed.. I still work closely with web designers and graphic artists, all of whom say it is more important that your site works in IE apposed to FF. For the time being atleast.

True, in the future moziila *may* be the dominant browser, but until that time, we should design for the consumer rather than ourselves.

Unless, of coarse, you are designing www.mozillaUsersGroup.org or something similar. lol

Regard,

Andrew Buntine.

@HurstoolMar 11.2004 — #Has anyone in the web community ever considered writing up a petition to Microsoft asking them to fix their browser's errors to comply with the standards, and making a case for why they should spend the time to do so? I, for one, would love to sign that.

@buntineMar 11.2004 — #I dont think they will listen.. MS, just like any large-scale corporation, is after money apposed to satisfaction.

Whilst MS continue to retain over 90% of web surfers, the IE software will not change a considerable amount.

The mozilla browser was designed to satisfy web designers/developers. Thats why we like it so much.

Regards,

Andrew Buntine.

@fredmvauthorMar 11.2004 — #[i]Originally posted by Hurstool [/i]

[B]Has anyone in the web community ever considered writing up a petition to Microsoft asking them to fix their browser's errors to comply with the standards, and making a case for why they should spend the time to do so? I, for one, would love to sign that. [/B][/QUOTE]Microsoft [i]intentionally[/i] does these kind of things, just so you know.

@sciguyryanMar 11.2004 — #I use IE but, I may reconsider due to what you have said....

@SamMar 11.2004 — #I can't seem to get Mozilla by my school's proxy, so [URL=http://www.avantbrowser.com]this[/URL] has proven to the best IE derivative I've found. It has tabbed browsing, which is great, just don't let it install RoboForm

@fredmvauthorMar 11.2004 — #[i]Originally posted by samij586 [/i]

[B]I can't seem to get Mozilla by my school's proxy[/B][/QUOTE]Burn it to CD at home, bring it to school… ?

@iniquity101Mar 11.2004 — #assuming the school computers have cd drives...

@DaveSWMar 11.2004 — #you can use a zip file to get around school firewalls which block all .exe files ?

@SamMar 11.2004 — #no, it installs fine, the browser itself can't get around the proxy.

@JonaMar 11.2004 — #[font=arial]My signature contains a link to an article which gives [url=http://www.xulplanet.com/ndeakin/arts/reasons.html]101 reasons why Mozilla is better than Internet Explorer.[/url][/font]

[b][J]ona[/b]

@steelersfan88Mar 11.2004 — #i hope i'm not the only IE user left standing (strong, that is). I've tried Mozilla, not quite as intriguing as i'd thought it would be ... plus there has got to be some reason that, in your opinions, over 85& of Internet users have gone wrong.

I read Jona's profile link and those 101 reasons don't suit me at all, IE at least doesn't package up junk that half of its users don't use. (Plus if you remember, Windows 95 loadup actually said Microsoft Internet Explorer ... they definately didn't go wrong, not Gates or Allen at least)

And while I despise AOL, have they gone wrong (my favorite baseball team is supported by AOL too! who have, for years 12 years straight, won their division, go braves! they definately didn't go wrong there!)

@SamMar 11.2004 — #Most people aren't going to download another browser, regardless of how much better it is than the one that came with their computer. This is the sole reason that people use IE in my opinion

@PeOfEoMar 11.2004 — #[i]Originally posted by samij586 [/i]

[B]no, it installs fine, the browser itself can't get around the proxy. [/B][/QUOTE] heh, look at the ie internet options and make sure the lan settings are not having it go through your proxy, if so tell mozilla to go through it too. You can specify a proxy you browse through, make sure moz is doing so.

@fredmvauthorMar 11.2004 — #[i]Originally posted by steelersfan88 [/i]

[B]I've tried Mozilla, not quite as intriguing as i'd thought it would be[/B][/QUOTE]Elaborate a bit? You simply can't honestly say something like that. Perhaps you tried a much earlier version (perhaps pre-1.0 — however, still better than IE). Moreover, remember that Mozilla is the "application suite" — you might consider checking out Mozilla Firefox which is only the browser thus having a smaller memory footprint hence lighter, as well as a few extra cool features.[i]Originally posted by steelersfan88 [/i]

[B]plus there has got to be some reason that, in your opinions, over 85& of Internet users have gone wrong.[/B][/QUOTE]The only reason people use IE for the most part is because it comes with Windows. However, they aren't aware of alternatives. This is why Mozilla evangelism is good — we can get more people using real, actual, browsers as opposed to something like IE. It would make Web development much easier as well as making users' experiences much better.[i]Originally posted by steelersfan88 [/i]

[B]IE at least doesn't package up junk that half of its users don't use.[/B][/QUOTE]You might want to elaboroate here too. Note that, the page you've read is for [i]Mozilla[/i], which of course has tons more stuff with it because it is the "application suite" — if you don't want all that extra stuff, get Mozilla Firefox. Mozilla has always and will always tower over IE in terms of usability and functionality (among other things) regardless as far as I'm concerned, however.[i]Originally posted by steelersfan88 [/i]

[B]Plus if you remember, Windows 95 loadup actually said Microsoft Internet Explorer[/B][/QUOTE]Huh?

@JonaMar 11.2004 — #[i]Originally posted by steelersfan88 [/i]

[B]i hope i'm not the only IE user left standing (strong, that is).[/b][/quote]

[font=arial]Not to speak against you personally, but as far as I'm concerned, if you must be an IE user, I hope you're the only one. :p [/font]

[i]Originally posted by steelersfan88[/i]

[b]plus there has got to be some reason that, in your opinions, over 85& of Internet users have gone wrong.[/b][/quote]

[font=arial]Looks to me like you don't design your sites in CSS, do you? If you did, with (obviously) standards-compliant and valid code (according to the [url=http://www.w3.org/]W3C[/url]), you'd notice that for Mozilla, Netscape and Opera, the site will look fine, yet we must use a lot things to fix IE's CSS formatting bugs, which most people think are "better." They're just unfortunately uneducated users of the Internet without having ever learned true web development skills. [/font]

[i]Originally posted by steelersfan88[/i]

[b]I read Jona's profile link and those 101 reasons don't suit me at all, IE at least doesn't package up junk that half of its users don't use. (Plus if you remember, Windows 95 loadup actually said Microsoft Internet Explorer ... they definately didn't go wrong, not Gates or Allen at least)[/b][/quote]

[font=arial]I use every one of them, and am loving it! Overall Mozilla is a much better browser than Internet Explorer. I, as you, thought otherwise when I first began using the program. Knowing it was for the best, however, I continued using it to design my sites with standards-compliant code (as opposed to my original invalid CSS code which worked in IE). I found that, after learning (re-learning, actually) CSS, my designs looked nicer, were cleaner, and did not work in Internet Explorer as well as they should have or did in other browsers, due to some of the bugs in IE. Within one week of using Mozilla FireBird (version 0.6, I had originally disliked Mozilla because it took a while to open the program, but IE takes just as long now), I moved over and threw IE out the Windows. Many times, when I use IE, it will freeze--Mozilla does this on a rare occasion, but nowhere as often as IE. Now I use Mozilla FireFox (FireBird, 0.8), and have enjoyed the upgrades, plugins, and many other features of the program a million times more than I ever enjoyed Internet Explorer.

On a side note, IE also supports a great deal of non-standards-complaint JavaScript code. This should be hitting your field, by now. Do you use innerHTML? It's wrong--created and supported by IE, but not supported by the W3C. DOM scripting is the way to go, even if it's more code. In fact, if you're in super-strict mode (XHTML 1.0), you can't have a lick of invalid HTML, CSS or JavaScript in your code. If you do, Mozilla will give you an error. However, Internet Explorer doesn't support the application/xml+xhtml MIME type, as Mozilla does. If you can't find it at the W3C's site, don't use it.

If you have Mozilla installed, open it up and type in about:mozilla in the address bar. Do the same in Internet Explorer, and see what comes up.[/font]

[b][J]ona[/b]

@SamMar 11.2004 — #[i]Originally posted by PeOfEo [/i]

[B]heh, look at the ie internet options and make sure the lan settings are not having it go through your proxy, if so tell mozilla to go through it too. You can specify a proxy you browse through, make sure moz is doing so. [/B][/QUOTE]
done all that, no luck, gave it the same proxy settings we give IE (plus a few variations) and it can only access local domains, the proxy kills it whenever it tries to leave the intranet.

@PeOfEoMar 11.2004 — #but are you going through the right port.

You need to know if the proxy is socksv4 or v5 and all that good stuff. I find it hard to believe they would go out of their way to block any one user agent. On our network pub they just block up a butt load of ports so only the standards remain open, ftp headrs, and many websites (but when I use a remote anon proxy I can go around this).

@spufiMar 11.2004 — #[i]Originally posted by steelersfan88 [/i]

[B]plus there has got to be some reason that, in your opinions, over 85& of Internet users have gone wrong. [/B][/QUOTE]

Anti-pop up and Google search tools come with the installed. For IE, the Google bar is a seperate download, and MS is FINALLY adding a patch to counter pop ups.

Pages load faster in Firefox.

Tabbed browsing really altered how I view the net.

Keyboard shortcuts that give me the ability to do neat things on the fly like change the font size if need be.

Open source means a large community of developers who can create even more tools to increase the functionality of the browser. IE? Patches, we don't need no stinkin' patches. ?

I like the idea that if I code my page to a set of standards that it actually looks like it's suppose to, or darn close.

EDIT. I was just listing why I think Firefox is better than IE and why IE users are wrong. Why are they wrong? User ignorance.

@JonaMar 11.2004 — #[font=arial]Another thing that makes me love Mozilla is a plugin I got for it, that lets you modify the CSS code--live. I can actually modify the layout, look, scheme, colors, and more by changing the CSS code in a sidebar of my browser. I can also keep it that way, by overriding the default CSS for that site, or just use it for my web development. If I'm working on designing a site, and something isn't positioned properly, or I am trying to figure out why something isn't working, I can modify the CSS and see the elements on the page as it moves. It's like modifying the code in a WYSI(N)WYG editor, but seeing it change as you modify the code. It's great!! ?[/font]

[b][J]ona[/b]

@steelersfan88Mar 11.2004 — #Here is the Windows start-up screen that I referred to, [URL=http://www.scorpioncity.com/startup/brokewin.png]here[/URL]. While I know many are not aware of alternatives, many don't want to download a new browser, not because they are lazy, but because they are happy with what they have now.

Not as intriguing ... all these posts make it seem that this is like the ultimate browser that surpasses everything. If microsoft ever had a chance, they could probably whip up something that would pay competition to what you think is the best browser. I think it is just another browser that does what I need to do ... browse.

Package all this stuff ... seems that there are way too many options that many users probably don't use. The only things like this in IE are maybe the Profile Assistant.

Jona...Well you missed quite a few people if I'm the only one left standing.

@soccer362001Mar 11.2004 — #[i]Originally posted by steelersfan88 [/i]

[B]i hope i'm not the only IE user left standing (strong, that is). [/B][/QUOTE]
No, I still use IE for most of my browsing. The only time I really use FF is for testing.

@SamMar 11.2004 — #[i]Originally posted by PeOfEo [/i]

[B]but are you going through the right port.

You need to know if the proxy is socksv4 or v5 and all that good stuff. I find it hard to believe they would go out of their way to block any one user agent. On our network pub they just block up a butt load of ports so only the standards remain open, ftp headrs, and many websites (but when I use a remote anon proxy I can go around this). [/B][/QUOTE]
Tried it all, even talked to the domain admin, said he is specifically blocking all user agents other than IE

@JonaMar 11.2004 — #[font=arial]Steelersfan88, the only thing I was ever able to do with IE was browse. I never had anything, and its JavaScript debugger totally sucked eggs. With Mozilla, I can browse, use tabbed browsing (which is much better), and debug my scripts much more efficiently. I used to wonder why people would want to use Mozilla, now I wonder why I wondered that.[/font]

[i]Originally posted by soccer362001[/i]

[b]No, I still use IE for most of my browsing. The only time I really use FF is for testing.[/b][/quote]

[font=arial]Why?[/font]

[b][J]ona[/b]

@JonaMar 11.2004 — #[i]Originally posted by samij586 [/i]

[B]Tried it all, even talked to the domain admin, said he is specifically blocking all user agents other than IE [/B][/QUOTE]

[font=arial]I haven't checked on Mozilla, but in Opera you can have it identify itself as different browsers. ? [/font]

[b][J]ona[/b]

@PeOfEoMar 11.2004 — #[i]Originally posted by samij586 [/i]

[B]Tried it all, even talked to the domain admin, said he is specifically blocking all user agents other than IE [/B][/QUOTE] That is illogical. Why would he do that... its retarded.

@soccer362001Mar 11.2004 — #[i]Originally posted by Jona [/i]

[B][font=arial]Steelersfan88, the only thing I was ever able to do with IE was browse. I never had anything, and its JavaScript debugger totally sucked eggs. With Mozilla, I can browse, use tabbed browsing (which is much better), and debug my scripts much more efficiently. I used to wonder why people would want to use Mozilla, now I wonder why I wondered that.[/font]

[font=arial]Why?[/font]

[b][J]ona[/b] [/B][/QUOTE]
I'll talk to you about this later.

@SamMar 12.2004 — #[i]Originally posted by PeOfEo [/i]

[B]That is illogical. Why would he do that... its retarded. [/B][/QUOTE]
agreed, trying to convince the dirstrict to make firefox the default browser since it was released

@fredmvauthorMar 12.2004 — #[i]Originally posted by steelersfan88 [/i]

[B]they are happy with what they have now.[/B][/QUOTE]Of course, this is [b]only[/b] because they don't know anything else. They think you can only use IE to view the Web (incorrectly, I might add). If they were aware how much more quickly, effiently, and easily things could be done on the Web with Mozilla, I can just about promise you they'd switch instantly — and never look back.[i]Originally posted by steelersfan88 [/i]

[B]all these posts make it seem that this is like the ultimate browser that surpasses everything.[/B][/QUOTE]Because it is — check out that link previously posted about 101 things Mozilla can do that IE cannot. It just may give you some insight as to why Mozilla conquers all. Open-source is also a powerful aspect of the Mozilla world as well.[i]Originally posted by steelersfan88 [/i]

[B]If microsoft ever had a chance, they could probably whip up something that would pay competition to what you think is the best browser.[/B][/QUOTE]Doubt it. And what do you mean if they "had a chance" — I think they've had [b]quite a few[/b] chances by now. Moreover, remember that Microsoft does this kind of stuff [b]intentionally[/b] to piss people like myself and others off. [i]Originally posted by steelersfan88 [/i]

[B]I think it is just another browser that does what I need to do ... browse.[/B][/QUOTE]To an extent. If you read the first article posted by myself (i.e., "Internet Explorer Considered Harmful"), you'll see why this is. IE actually [b]cannot accurately be called a Web browser[/b]. This is simply because it doesn't implement one of the core protocols of the Web (alongside TCP/IP) correctly — HTTP. Also remember that IE has a supbar rendering engine — Trident (IE6+) and Tasman (IE5 and below) — both of which are incredibly quirky, incorrect as well as slow. Gecko is years and years and years ahead and always will be; that's the natual nature of open-source software.[i]Originally posted by steelersfan88 [/i]

[B]seems that there are way too many options that many users probably don't use.[/B][/QUOTE]Not quite right. Some people, like myself, can't even imagine using the Web without tabbed browsing or pop-up blocking. Mozilla gives this to you for free as well as inherently. Moreover, features like extensions are incredibly useful as well — let's see you do half — or even one — of the things that the web developer extension allows you to do in IE. Exactly — you can't. There are tons of other extensions as well: all introducing some kind of extra cool functionality to Mozilla.

Other than functionality for users, Mozilla is great for developers as well. It allows us to use Web standards the way they were meant to be used. Other incredible technologies in which come from Mozilla are things like XUL — complex GUIs created from markup; now that's a cool concept. Also note that Mozilla isn't only a Web browser, but a [b]complete application platform[/b]. Some browsers are even built on top of Mozilla/Gecko (e.g., Galeon, K-Melon, etc.). Fully functional, cross-platform applications can even be created with Mozilla by the means of incredibly cool stuff like XUL, XBL, JavaScript as well as XPCOM.

@PeOfEoMar 12.2004 — #[i]Originally posted by samij586 [/i]

[B]agreed, trying to convince the dirstrict to make firefox the default browser since it was released [/B][/QUOTE] But ask him why he is blocking use for all but ie... it is utterly pointless, he is going out of his way for nothing. Tell him I called him a moron and he needs to change it or I will stab him, lol.

@spufiMar 12.2004 — #[i]Originally posted by steelersfan88 [/i]

[B] While I know many are not aware of alternatives, many don't want to download a new browser, not because they are lazy, but because they are happy with what they have now.[/B][/QUOTE]

Again, user ignorance about knowing something is out there that is better. Show somebody who is in pop-up hell Firefox and they will be a instant fan.

[i]Originally posted by steelersfan88 [/i]

[B] ot as intriguing ... all these posts make it seem that this is like the ultimate browser that surpasses everything.[/B][/QUOTE]

Opera and Safari, for the Mac, are really good too. I use Win2K Pro, so I also use Opera for testing. If it wasn't for Firefox, I would be using Opera.

[i]Originally posted by steelersfan88 [/i]

[B]If microsoft ever had a chance, they could probably whip up something that would pay competition to what you think is the best browser.[/B][/QUOTE]

I got a good chuckle out of that. It's going to be how long before IE 7 comes out? Oh yeah, and it will only come out on the new OS. If MS wanted to really kick out the best browser, then they've had plently of time to do so. IE 6 is old already. One of the biggest reasons IE got the large user base that it did was because Netscape dropped the ball big time.

[i]Originally posted by steelersfan88 [/i]

[B]I think it is just another browser that does what I need to do ... browse.[/B][/QUOTE]

Everybody go download Mosaic now!

[i]Originally posted by steelersfan88 [/i]

[B]Package all this stuff ... seems that there are way too many options that many users probably don't use. The only things like this in IE are maybe the Profile Assistant.[/B][/QUOTE]

What's the download size for IE 6 if you needed to? Firefox is 6MB. The extensions are optional. Yes, you don't need to download any of them, but what if a web developer wanted an tool to help design sites? If you are using IE, then you are sitting and waiting. With Firefox, a extension is already out there. I know a guy who made an extension to help search through the Bible. Is it needed by the masses? Probaly not, but it's there if somebody wants it, and that feature would most likely not be added to IE in a super long time if ever.

IE lets you browse the web. Mozilla/Firefox lets you browse it better.

@JonaMar 12.2004 — #[i]Originally posted by spufi [/i]

[B]Everybody go download Mosaic now![/b][/quote]

[font=arial]Haha!! That was hilarious! I've used that browser before![/font]

[i]Originally posted by spufi[/i]

[b]I know a guy who made an extension to help search through the Bible. Is it needed by the masses? Probaly not, but it's there if somebody wants it, and that feature would most likely not be added to IE in a super long time if ever.[/B][/QUOTE]

[font=arial]Hey that's interesting. Where can I find that plugin? ? There's an online Bible reference at www.gospelcom.net that I sometimes use. I don't know about you, but I'd like to have a scripture reference engine at my finger tips, where I can click a box, type in the reference or search term, and it will search (like the Google toolbar for Mozilla), rather than go to a site, find the reference area, go to the Online Bible, and then search. :p [/font]

[b][J]ona[/b]

@pyroMar 12.2004 — #[i]Originally posted by steelersfan88 [/i]

[B]plus there has got to be some reason that, in your opinions, over 85& of Internet users have gone wrong.[/B][/QUOTE]Why do 90% of computer users use Windows? Same reason.

[i]Originally posted by steelersfan88 [/i]

[B]If microsoft ever had a chance, they could probably whip up something that would pay competition to what you think is the best browser.[/b][/quote]What do you mean "ever had a chance"? They've been making browsers far longer than Mozilla has, and as this whole thread has been pointing out, Mozilla is a far superior browser. No, Microsoft has had plety of oppertunity.

@steelersfan88Mar 12.2004 — #Mozilla isn't issued with court issues (i hate sun ... never learn java, right peo) and os design. Mozilla doesn't do all the varied things that Microsoft does (including all of the offline programs).

I see why everyone here likes it so much, because it helps people with correct coding, debugging code, and etc. Well if i need to be the next dave clark, i will be ... i use ie to debug my code and it works fine for me, others might be impatient, but ie is good to me, maybe not all of you.

I do all my code debugging with 2 easy programs ... notepad and ie, nothing more and now downloading anything. why would it matter the download time if windows computers come with it in the first place? by the way ... as has netscape, i think the last time I installed the ie browser, it does most of the installing from the web, so it downloaded for me on cable 479 kb in 1 second. 6 MB would take me like 15 or 20 seconds (my cable is really fast by the way, it goes like twice as fast as mcafee speedometer checks).

If programmers need this, i don't. If Internet users need this, I don't ... and i'll never go back to it (i'm simply not going to be convinced! -- sounds kinda like the apple.com switch ads, except people didn't listen to them)

oo yea, bout the dave clark comment, we can just eliminate the fighting, especially the moderators here that should be against the fighting in the first place.

@fredmvauthorMar 12.2004 — #[i]Originally posted by steelersfan88 [/i]

[b]i use ie to debug my code and it works fine for me[/B][/QUOTE]Or so you think. IE actually assists you in only writing [b]incorrect[/b] code.[i]Originally posted by steelersfan88 [/i]

[b]I do all my code debugging with 2 easy programs ... notepad and ie[/B][/QUOTE]That's insufficent. Notepad may seem cool at first, but it's simply not meant for creating sites or programs. I fully agree that text editors are best, however, not Notepad. Hell, I could write a better text editor. I'd recommend using something meant for the job such as GNU Emacs, Kate, KWrite, or even Mozilla's very own Composer. The syntax highlighting, line numbers — among other things — truly do help.

And having IE as a testing tool is also an incredibly bad idea. Should you be debugging JavaScript, you'll have a rather hard time fixing it due to IE's already buggy implementation of JavaScript along with its poorly written JavaScript debugger (if you'd even call it that). Check out Mozilla's excellent JavaScript console — or, for larger scripts, you might check out Mozilla's very own JavaScript debugger: Venkman.[i]Originally posted by steelersfan88 [/i]

[b]If programmers need this, i don't.[/B][/QUOTE]How so? Do you actually enjoy buggy as well as poor implementations of core Web technologies?[i]Originally posted by steelersfan88 [/i]

[b]If Internet users need this, I don't[/B][/QUOTE]Why? I guess you enjoy pop-ups, slowly rendered pages, and unstable, insecure, buggy applications?[i]Originally posted by steelersfan88 [/i]

[b]i'm simply not going to be convinced![/B][/QUOTE]Whether you are or not, the question are really have to ask yourself is: [b]why[/b]? It's only hurting yourself (and others) to use IE.[i]Originally posted by steelersfan88 [/i]

[b]eliminate the fighting[/b][/QUOTE]What fighting? There is no fighting. This is merely a discussion; nothing more.

@ConorMar 12.2004 — #i dont use mozilla or IE. im happy with Safari. Its a good browser and it suits my need. is Mozilla avaialbe for OSX?

@JonaMar 12.2004 — #[i]Originally posted by RefreshF5 [/i]

[B]i dont use mozilla or IE. im happy with Safari. Its a good browser and it suits my need. is Mozilla avaialbe for OSX? [/B][/QUOTE]

[font=arial]Yes it is: [url=http://www.mozilla.org/]Mozilla.org[/url] has a download link on their main page. FireFox is also available for the Macintosh. I don't have a Mac, so I don't know how well Safari works, but I hear it is decent.[/font]

[b][J]ona[/b]

@fredmvauthorMar 12.2004 — #[i]Originally posted by RefreshF5 [/i]

[B]is Mozilla avaialbe for OSX? [/B][/QUOTE]For sure:[list]

[*] [url=http://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla.org/mozilla/releases/mozilla1.6/mozilla-mac-MachO-1.6.dmg.gz]Mozilla 1.6[/url]

[*] [url=http://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla.org/firefox/releases/0.8/firefox-0.8-mac.dmg.gz]Mozilla Firefox 0.8[/url]

[/list]

@ConorMar 12.2004 — #cool perhaps ill try mozilla. Safari is really good though.

@steelersfan88Mar 12.2004 — #i don't believe that IE leads me to incorrect code ... it just leads me to IE-only code, lets do the math:

87% (i.e.) * 85% (approx java enab) = approx 75%

so 3/4 people will see my site right, and guess what ... all of my sites are simply based on games that you download and play the executable programmed in higher level languages, so as long as the anchor link to download works ... thats all that matters! (to me anyway)

Notepad in 98 was awful, but xp and maybe 2000 do have the line and char number in the status bar when visible, so it has become a lot easier. PReviously, I used an HTML program that worked in compatibility with ie to test my scripts, but no longer.

Pop-ups aren't a big issue .. they are like commercials on TV ... the way the sites make money, otherwise, there would be no Internet. Its like Bill Cullen and Gene Rayburn always said, lets do some business with america (of course, cbs is national, the INet is global).

Slowly rendered pages, alos never a problem, at least with cable it seems. Cable lets my pages fast enough, they won't load any faster.

Maybe others to use IE, but definately not me ... i simply have looked at my options (i was somewhat impressed with the Opera browser when I tried it on my win98 pc in '99, not enough to keep tho) and i kno what suits me best.

And the fighting ... a tad too much into the discussion here, its more of a persuasion than a discussion, a very heavy persuasion.

@JonaMar 12.2004 — #[font=arial]Using Notepad isn't a bad thing -- I use it for my PHP and JavaScript programming, and my (X)HTML and CSS markup. I use it a lot, but it lacks a lot of the features that our freeware program, NoteTab Lite, happens to have. You might want to check into that program (it's free).[/font]

[b][J]ona[/b]

@fredmvauthorMar 12.2004 — #[i]Originally posted by steelersfan88 [/i]

[B]it just leads me to IE-only code[/B][/QUOTE]Hence proprietary hence incorrect.

@steelersfan88Mar 12.2004 — #thank you Jona, while you said everything against me this far, at least you can say you do accept Notepad.

i will look into that program more deeply and get back to you.

Fred: no one has to this point yet argued with my code saying it is incorrect in this browser or wrong with that browser, or isn;t supported ... I base it on ie mostly because its efficient for me ... i don't expect a quote with that line and a remark because what is efficient for me is much different than that of most people (eqpecially at my age).

@steelersfan88Mar 12.2004 — #Notetab lite is good so far ... just to a while to find, yet only a 5 second download ... will get back on recommendations, etc.

@buntineMar 12.2004 — #
Notepad may seem cool at first, but it's simply not meant for creating sites or programs.
[/quote]

Agreed. Guys, notepad is one of the worst programs to use when writing software, especially high-level languages like C++.

Any program which doesnt have syntax high-lighting is bad for writing software.

Download xHTML-kit from www.chami.com Its excellent, and it has support for every web language plus many others.

Regards.

@fredmvauthorMar 12.2004 — #I'll explain why Notepad in unacceptable (even if this is getting off-topic a bit). While I of course agree that text editors are the only way to get the job done right, Notepad doesn't qualify as a true developer's text editor. Notepad is for editing text and editing text only — not developing Web content, applications, or standalone applications. Real text editors like GNU Emacs or KWrite/Kate (among others like HTML Kit for Windows) are [b]intended[/b] for this kind of thing. It's like using a butterknife as opposed to a swiss army knife. Who gives you more functionality and more power? Who lets you get the job done quicker, more efficently, and more correctly? The one that's created with [i]that[/i] purpose in mind — in this case, development purposes. Notepad was never intended for development purposes though some people like to use it for them for whatever reason.

@steelersfan88Mar 12.2004 — #understand what you are saying, but not going to listen. Notepad works fine for me, I don't want an editor that does it for me or adds things I don't want. They annoy me -- programs that prompt for a title of page, etc.

Notepad is designed to edit text, the reason I love it for editing, it doesn't ever get in the way when I'm coding. I did check out Notetab Lite and I don't see it over Notepad because of what I previously said ... I don't like the alerts, prompts, etc.

It could be worse, much worse, I could be using Word for editing, which many still do. That would be a bad choice, Notepad, still good.

@buntineMar 12.2004 — #
Notepad works fine for me, I don't want an editor that does it for me or adds things I don't want
[/quote]

These editors dont do [i]it[/i] for you. Notepad actually limits you. You really are using a butter knife...

But, each to his own.

@fredmvauthorMar 12.2004 — #[i]Originally posted by steelersfan88 [/i]

[B]Notepad works fine for me, I don't want an editor that does it for me or adds things I don't want. They annoy me -- programs that prompt for a title of page, etc.[/B][/QUOTE]Not all of them do. And the ones that do, these kind of features can easily be turned off. Moreover, you need to look past these kind of things (even though they can easily be toggled) and realize how much more functionality you're really getting.[i]Originally posted by steelersfan88 [/i]

[B]it doesn't ever get in the way when I'm coding.[/B][/QUOTE]Nor do other editors. Should they — as aforementioned — you can simply disable the features you don't want; enable the ones you do.

@steelersfan88Mar 12.2004 — #notepad doesn't require me to turn them off ... thats why i like it better. I have tried several before but they really don't do much for me.

The only non-Notepad editor i liked was PrettyPrint and that was for Visual BASIC, but you don't need an editor for that, it just made that code blocks (select case ... end select, do ... loop, for ... next, sub/function ... end sub/function, if,then ... end if) and colored thecode with no annoying alerts.

Its difficult to look past these things. Playwrights as well as authors can't say that since the end of the book is good, if you don't like it at first, you'll like it later, the reader will throw the book away. Just with the program, bad first impression = trash = junk = delete

buntine ... how does Notepad limit you? it works fine for me, and i've never been limited!

@fredmvauthorMar 12.2004 — #No further argument needed on this topic. A fact is a fact is a fact. Notepad isn't well suited for development hence why it shouldn't be used for it. There are other editors (or even IDEs) that are meant for the job and do it much better. Let's try to get back on the subject of why you shouldn't use IE because it is harmful and why Mozilla should be embraced.

@steelersfan88Mar 12.2004 — #good idea, but lets keep it to a discussion, not a text argument

and yes, my legacy continues: IE + Notepad = MyScripts,

YourPrograms = YourScriptsNotMine

@fredmvauthorMar 12.2004 — #[i]Originally posted by steelersfan88 [/i]

[B]IE + Notepad = …[/B][/QUOTE]A horrible combination. ?

@Robert_WellockMar 12.2004 — #I must admit M$ Explorer is really great because it cannot handle XML or XHTML correctly so is useless to me when writing code.

@JonaMar 12.2004 — #[i]Originally posted by Robert Wellock [/i]

[B]I must admit M$ Explorer is really great because it cannot handle XML or XHTML correctly so is useless to me when writing code. [/B][/QUOTE]

[font=arial]Yes, in [url=http://cmm.sonoracabinets.com/ks/index.php]my KidScript site layout[/url], which I did the other day, I use XHTML 1.0 strict--the "so strict it doesn't work" mode--but it won't work in IE, so I have to go back and use the text/html MIME type. Thanks for some of that PHP code, by the way, Robert. I got a lot of things figured out to keep things running clean in both browsers (even though I shouldn't have to). ? [/font]

[b][J]ona[/b]

@fredmvauthorMar 13.2004 — #My primary question to all IE users would be simply: [b]why[/b]? It's bad for you, bad for developers, and just doesn't make sense when there are incredible alternatives like Mozilla. IE needs to be stopped, that's really all I can say…