Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Internet Explorer 5.2 is here!

Moz probs ?

Well, hit me, but two months ago I would have sworn I'd never use Mozilla. Now, it's my default browser.

Moz doesn't properly support Flash, Shockwave, Java
Click to expand...
?

Never had *any* prob with those. Java actually works much better than with IE (usually crashes of leaving e.g. Yahoo games).
Cookie management is better in Moo etc. etc.
Even Quartz looks better in Moz.
True, Moz has to speed up mouse events. Besides it just plainly works good (and better than IE) for me.
 
It's fascinating to read about different users experiences of browsers. There appears to be no consensus on what constitutes the best Mac browser, and I conclude from this that what suites you best depends entirely on your individual needs. For example, I use IE because I'm a Web developer, and so I want to optimise my code for the most popular browsers & platforms - and JScript support is important.

If you tend to visit sites not optimised for Microsoft browsers and you want a cocoa app (understandable), then OmniWeb or Chimera are the obvious choice.

If you're a free software fan (who for whatever reason is using OS X rather than Linux) then I guess Mozilla is the obvious choice.

It all comes down to different horses for different courses.
 
What the hell is with the flash plugin and Mozilla. I've never had problems with it. Besides as explained before, the developer, in this case Macromedia is responsible for making everything work.

Besides, Macromedia's TOP priority should be Mozilla, because that is the package that supports the Netscape browser, the god-father of all plugins.
 
Re: Moz probs ?

Originally posted by dekator
Well, hit me, but two months ago I would have sworn I'd never use Mozilla. Now, it's my default browser.

?

Never had *any* prob with those. Java actually works much better than with IE (usually crashes of leaving e.g. Yahoo games).
Cookie management is better in Moo etc. etc.
Even Quartz looks better in Moz.
True, Moz has to speed up mouse events. Besides it just plainly works good (and better than IE) for me.
Click to expand...

From my experience Javascript works faster with Mozilla. For what that 'does' work, it's great and really speedy compared to IE for OS 10.

This one site has an info on each gallery, that follows the cursor of the mouse. In IE it doesn't follow smoothly, only updating every second or so. With Mozilla, however it moves smoothly accross the screen and updates itself every time the mouse moves.
 
Ya know, Mac IE rarely crashes on me. Maybe I'm lucky. Maybe the sites that I go to don't push the button on some bugs in the code. All in all, I see no reason to switch to another browser. I still Mosaic and MacWeb on a floppy disc somewhere. I used Netscape until IE 4 came out, once it did, I started using it, as it was way better than N4. Then Netscape 5 came out and it got worse, while IE5 got better. The ONLY annoyance I have with IE right now is when I try to click on a toolbar link, it sometimes brings up the contextual menu, when I LEFT-click on it.

So, yeah, I am liking 5.2, I'll keep trying alternative browsers, but IE right now is my favorite.
 
Originally posted by peterjhill
Ya know, Mac IE rarely crashes on me. Maybe I'm lucky. Maybe the sites that I go to don't push the button on some bugs in the code. All in all, I see no reason to switch to another browser. I still Mosaic and MacWeb on a floppy disc somewhere. I used Netscape until IE 4 came out, once it did, I started using it, as it was way better than N4. Then Netscape 5 came out and it got worse, while IE5 got better. The ONLY annoyance I have with IE right now is when I try to click on a toolbar link, it sometimes brings up the contextual menu, when I LEFT-click on it.

So, yeah, I am liking 5.2, I'll keep trying alternative browsers, but IE right now is my favorite.
Click to expand...

Um... Netscape 5 was never relased officially. Only a Unix port was available to some testers. Your refering to Netscape 6 right?
 
i dont think any osx apps really crash often. so when people say that ie is unstable or crashes often i always assume they mean relative to other apps. i have never had mozilla 1.0 crash on me. the new releases of omniweb also have never crashed on me. chimera... well lets just say its in early development and leave it at that. but what i do notice is that ie will occasionally go down. certainly not often, but and unexpected quit in osx is so rare that it leaves an impression. osx is so stable and ie is the ONLY non-beta app i have had unexpectedly quit.

if you like ie, say stick with it. but most people who use ie IME are very unhappy with it, but are not willing to try other browsers because of all the misinformation about 'alternative' browsers.

mozilla has the biggest problem with this sort of thing because early versions were not complete. people got tastes of an unfinished mozilla from netscape 6, and early mozilla builds and it left a bad impression. the first builds of mozilla were slow, unstable, and had rendering issues.

but those days are long gone and anyone who has tried mozilla lately will tell you that mozilla has finally come of age. i have never found a site mozilla can not render (not saying the dont exist im just saying they are just as rare as the sites ie has problems with).

i suspect omniweb will have a similiar problem. the current omniweb has lots of rendering problems. but the omnigroup has recognized this and are completely rebuilding the rendering engine for version 5.0 taht should come out in 1st quarter 2003.
 
Originally posted by AmbitiousLemon

but those days are long gone and anyone who has tried mozilla lately will tell you that mozilla has finally come of age. i have never found a site mozilla can not render (not saying the dont exist im just saying they are just as rare as the sites ie has problems with).

i suspect omniweb will have a similiar problem. the current omniweb has lots of rendering problems. but the omnigroup has recognized this and are completely rebuilding the rendering engine for version 5.0 taht should come out in 1st quarter 2003.
Click to expand...

Yet another site that sucks with mozilla... sony.com Like other sites I've mentioned, the biggest issue is with pull-down menus. On this site they don't even show up. Which is better than them showing up in the wrong place or with incorrect imaging like the sites below.

I've added that to my short list so far. macmall.com, fontreserve.com

These aren't lame sites. These are professional sites designed to work cross platform. These are companies that are trying to make their sites work so they can sell you stuff. Yet, they don't work correctly in mozilla or omniweb.

Go for it mozilla/omni. Kick IE's a**. But hurry up with it already. Why don't these sites work? This is basically early dhtml and javascript. Standards that were set years ago.

Yes yes yes. Tabs and speed. Wow. I can tab through sites that don't look right very quickly. Still not impressed.
 
MS & Apple's SHaky Relationship

I read through most of these posts, but I didn't notice any mention of a rather sublime point:

All previous updates to IE were available through Apple's System Preference Software Update. This is the first one that was not not. This is the first time I actually had to go to MS's site to download an update to IE.

What does it mean? I don't know. BUt the IE-as-default-browser agreement is obviously coming to an end...

BTW, I've noticed speed improvements with IE, but my favorite UI is still OmniWeb. I find that I can surf *better* on OmniWeb even though it is not the fastest to render.

Ciao!
 
When developing Web sites, I always take care to establish a detailed technical specification at the beginning. When using things like JScript to create menus, it is possible to debug them to be cross-platform compatible, but there are greater costs associated with doing this, and there are some platforms that will not be able to support some functionality (the Mac has very limited scripting functionality in any of its browsers).

On many occasions, I have deliberately disabled dropdown menus for Mac users because my client could not justify the additional cost of debugging for platforms that represent a very small proportion of their customers. In these instances, where functionality is limited on certain platforms I always ensure that the experience of Mac users is as good as possible, and that the page displays correctly, but it does mean that some functionality is not available. In some instances this is a deliberate and legitimate design decision, and cannot be considered a bug.

I've used Macs for years, and OS X and reinvigorated my enthusiasm for the Mac. However until Microsoft brings IE up-to-date and delivers feature parity with the PC version, there will always be an need for a PC as well as a Mac on my desk - and sites I develop will continue that additional functionality for PC users that is not available for the Mac.
 
Originally posted by sjs
Not to put too fine a point on it, but except for a very few exceptions, I cannot imagine why anyone would be using IE:

a) its MS...nuff said
b) it crashes more than every other mac program combined
c) OmniWeb and Mozilla are good enough to wean you off IE for 99% of tasks.

Who cares if they fixed a few leaks. Its garbage and you shouldn't be using it!!!
Click to expand...
Here's some reasons, coming from a web applications developer (me):

a) Over 80% of users use IE - the browser war is long over, folks
b) It's adequately stable, far more so than Mozilla, Chimera, and OmniWeb
c) OmniWeb and Chimera lack satisfactory javascript and java support. They all render certain pages incorrectly. This is because web developers oftern favor IE in their sites / applications since it won the browser war. Yes, yes -- pox on them, but that's the way it is and that's the web I'm out there moving around on. You get the truest rendering of pages w/ IE. Do I wish this were not the case? Sure. That seems of little consequence though.

I run Chimera and OmniWeb for fun occasionally. Mainly for Quartz rendering (I do like tabbed navigation, I must say) -- but now that IE has it...

Am I the only one who takes this realistic, if not defeatist, approach?



blakespot
 
a) Over 80% of users use IE - the browser war is long over, folks
Click to expand...

Less than 10% of computer users run any flavour of Mac OS ... is that war over too?

littlejim
He's fallen in the water.
 
Originally posted by blakespot

Here's some reasons, coming from a web applications developer (me):

a) Over 80% of users use IE - the browser war is long over, folks
b) It's adequately stable, far more so than Mozilla, Chimera, and OmniWeb


blakespot
Click to expand...

Never seen any survey aut sim. that points to 80% ! That number seems to be a fantasy number. And, obviously, the browser war is far from over. In fact, it was just rekindled. Just because some real alternatives have (re-) emerged.
IE is not more stable than Mozilla, at least not for me. Indeed, IE is the most crashing app in OS X (again for me, that is).
 
You might think the browser was is over, but AOL does not. It is about to stirr Netscape back into the whole picture vs. IE. This time with Apple maybe, and we might see some viable solutions down the road...

Oh, and to my knowledge and trying for the past 10 minutes, I can't seem to find tabbed navigation in IE.
 
Installed X.1.5 yesterday and IE 5.2 just a few minutes ago...

Haven't noticed much with osX but text is now a bit fuzzier and boldfaces bolder under IE...

And IE is noticeably faster, too. :cool: ...

Will have to get back to y'all regarding crashworthiness at a later date. Used to freeze up from time to time back under X.1, but haven't had any problems since X.1.3.
 
Originally posted by littlejim


Less than 10% of computer users run any flavour of Mac OS ... is that war over too?
Click to expand...
No, but it's not a parallel issue. It can be argued that a computer using Mac OS (X in particular) is more "powerful" than one running other OS's. It cannot be argued that Netscape, Mozilla, Chimera, or OmniWeb render pages more accurately or in a better way than IE. (Especially now that we have Quartz rendering under IE.)

I'm a web app developer by trade and all of my co-workers agree with me on this. I don't think a compelling argument can be made against this point.


blakespot
 
Originally posted by dekator


Never seen any survey aut sim. that points to 80% ! That number seems to be a fantasy number. And, obviously, the browser war is far from over. In fact, it was just rekindled. Just because some real alternatives have (re-) emerged.
IE is not more stable than Mozilla, at least not for me. Indeed, IE is the most crashing app in OS X (again for me, that is).
Click to expand...
I hear 80% bounced around in the trade journals from time to time, and I run a number of personal sites (the most popular with ~25,000 pageviews/day) and a site professionally as my day job (with about ~100,000 pageviews/day) and all the metrics from these sites indicate 80% or just above for IE.

80% is the reality.


blakespot
 
Originally posted by blakespot
…
I'm a web app developer by trade and all of my co-workers agree with me on this. I don't think a compelling argument can be made against this point.
…
Click to expand...

So how do you design your web apps? Do you check performance and compatibility on several browsers, or do you just throw your hands up and not try to give every browser an equal opportunity to render your pages correctly?

I'm torn on this issue. As a web developer I would love to not have to consider multiple browsers; it would make my job so much easier. But as a Mac advocate, and someone who believes that your content should be made available to anyone on any system using any browser, I refuse to design just for IE.

So where do we as developers make our stand? Do we push for a "one browser web"? Do we try to stick to standards, such as the W3C's, that may or may not be properly implemented by a user's browser?
 
blake i think the thing you forget is that most mac users dont use IE. so if you are building or managing a mac oriented site you need to keep other browsers in mind. take a look at the polls around here. i think everytime lately ie has taken less than 50%. also you have to remember that many alternative browsers identify themselves as ie. so if you are looking at your website's stats they are skewed. you need to ask the people and see what they are using. any serious web developer that does not test for other browsers is just plain sloppy, period. and saying 80% use ie is simply an excuse for poor work, especially considering that there might be a 5% chunk of that 80 that are using browsers that simply identify themselves as ie. although the browser wars are over, i would have to say that things are heating up again. mozilla is a contender. and aol is pushing moz as far as they can. maybe this will end all the sloppy programming out there.
 
Originally posted by blakespot

I hear 80% bounced around in the trade journals from time to time, and I run a number of personal sites (the most popular with ~25,000 pageviews/day) and a site professionally as my day job (with about ~100,000 pageviews/day) and all the metrics from these sites indicate 80% or just above for IE.

80% is the reality.


blakespot
Click to expand...

Well, firstly, I think I didn't make that clear enough: I was talking about Macintosh users here. 2) As AmbitiousLemon has pointed out, weblogs hardly give an accurate picture. It even happens that browser identification is plain wrong (not because the browser pretends to be something else).
And even if these numbers were correct. One out of five is quite a lot and I think should not be made light of...
 
hey... jus wodering.. im not chure if its my machine or not, but 5.2 doesnt work with jaguar properly -- when you highlight text it totally messes up... any comments?
 
Originally posted by firewire2001
hey... jus wodering.. im not chure if its my machine or not, but 5.2 doesnt work with jaguar properly -- when you highlight text it totally messes up... any comments?
Click to expand...

I'm seeing some weird stuff too, now that I've updated jag w/IE5.2...

Lots of text disapperaing on rollovers...ewww. But I'm not that surprised or upset about it.
 
alrighty... the Quartz smoothing is nice. Most pages can take advantage of it. It does make things easier to read. It is a little quicker.

:mad: however, ive been surfing pages that 5.1 dealt with just fine - and i've been crashing a whole lot. i mean WAY more than i ever did with any NS. To me, mozilla is sweet. ya its not all there yet, but its a 1.0 developed by caring, living people ;)

5.2 looks nice when its not crashing. i kinda wish i hadn't updated.i'm sure apple didn't include this in a software updater because they probably didn't want to back the install (seal of approval). could be wrong, but i'm glad i didn't see it in my software update panel.
 
Originally posted by Rower_CPU


So how do you design your web apps? Do you check performance and compatibility on several browsers, or do you just throw your hands up and not try to give every browser an equal opportunity to render your pages correctly?

I'm torn on this issue. As a web developer I would love to not have to consider multiple browsers; it would make my job so much easier. But as a Mac advocate, and someone who believes that your content should be made available to anyone on any system using any browser, I refuse to design just for IE.

So where do we as developers make our stand? Do we push for a "one browser web"? Do we try to stick to standards, such as the W3C's, that may or may not be properly implemented by a user's browser?
Click to expand...
I describe the time and effort that will be taken to do this or that on the web, supporting both browsers. In certain cases, the people I work for opt to support only IE. It is not my decision, but they pay me, and so I do it.


blakespot
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back