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!

Originally posted by AmbitiousLemon
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.
Click to expand...
Not to offend, but I trust web stats from 5 of my sites over polls posted here asking which browsers are used.

If the people I work for don't want me to take the time to entirely recode all of my DHTML to get it working on Netscape, I don't. If you're telling me that following the project manager's wishes on coding a product (sure, I voice concerns along the way) is sloppy, then that shows me what you know about the world of professional development.


blakespot
 
feel for ya

Blakespot. You have to design your sites to work on IE period. No denying it. My point, back on the first page of this thread, is that the rest of us shouldn't be enabling Microsoft by using their products.

MS can defeat every other browser by designing IE to require you to write to it alone. Since they don't follow the code standards themselves, if you design web sites correctly to (theoretically) work properly on any browser, then it doesn't work properly on IE!

As a consumer, that makes me mad. My response is I use other browsers as a matter of principle.

PS: IE DOES crash more than OW or Mozilla and that alone is enough to make me stay away from it.
 
The war is not over...!

The browser war is not over! Although MS wants you to believe otherwise. Didn't anyone her e of the story of David killing Goliath. The American Rebels against the British Empire...?

A war is not over until there is no opposition standing. Even then, others may be inspired by the struggle of those in the past to rekindle the fight.

Even a monopoly (if there is such a thing) can be beaten. It's just a more difficult fight.
 
Re: feel for ya

Originally posted by sjs
Blakespot. You have to design your sites to work on IE period. No denying it. My point, back on the first page of this thread, is that the rest of us shouldn't be enabling Microsoft by using their products.
Click to expand...

I certainly voice an opinion much the same as that when the issue is discussed in project meetings, but is that the ultimatim I should lay down to my project managers? Do you have any notion of business practice??

MS can defeat every other browser by designing IE to require you to write to it alone. Since they don't follow the code standards themselves, if you design web sites correctly to (theoretically) work properly on any browser, then it doesn't work properly on IE!

As a consumer, that makes me mad. My response is I use other browsers as a matter of principle.

PS: IE DOES crash more than OW or Mozilla and that alone is enough to make me stay away from it.
Click to expand...
The W3C chose IE's DHTML model to be the "standard" over the one implemented by Netscape 4. Netscape 6 tried to adhere to this now-set standard...but still fails to a large degree. IE's DHTML model _is_ the standard, officially. Whether or not this should have been the case is debatable, but what is not debatable is the fact that it was chosen as the standard.


blakespot
 
Re: The war is not over...!

Originally posted by pbrice68
The browser war is not over! Although MS wants you to believe otherwise. Didn't anyone her e of the story of David killing Goliath. The American Rebels against the British Empire...?

A war is not over until there is no opposition standing. Even then, others may be inspired by the struggle of those in the past to rekindle the fight.

Even a monopoly (if there is such a thing) can be beaten. It's just a more difficult fight.
Click to expand...
Your zeal is admirable.


blakespot
 
i'm not seeing it

Guys and gals,
I'm not seeing any noticeable speed increase with ie 5.2. I'm now absolutely addicted to omniweb, however after installing 5.2 i was more than willing to give ie another try before disregarding it again. however, there was no noteable speed-up and i am well and truly over the now defunct os9 interface of ie 5. I like everyone else would like to see microsoft taken down a notch or two, but in reality all I want to use is the best possible browser for macintosh. If this was ie I would use ie, if it were mozilla i would use moz. However, presently omni does everything i NEED it to do, and whatsmore does things i don't need it to do--but LIKE it doing. No more pop-up ads for me.
To see a good example of ie's deficiency with speed try http://www.afl.com.au on ie and omni. Omni is much faster.
I can't wait to see what the ms macbu do with ie 6 and omni do with ow 5, because i can be easily persuaded to use another browser. I just want the best surfing experience possible on os x.
Cheers,
Tim
 
No blame

Originally posted by blakespot

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
Click to expand...

I wouldn't blame you. But if these people think that of 100.000 visitors 20.000 (+) just don't matter, then... wow ! Strange company! :eek:
 
IE is a very standards compliant browser, both on Mac & PC. In many areas I think you'll find that Netscape is less compliant.

From my experience, Netscape is less reliable in rendering than IE.

With such an overwhelming number of users on the IE bandwagon it *is* the standard anyway.

I simply do not believe that most Mac users do not use IE - every guy who buys a new iMac has the IE icon already in the dock, and I doubt the average user is going to question that or look for an alternative to something that works adequately. This is exactly the reason why Netscape lost market share to IE on the PC platform as well. I recognise that this situation is likely to change in the future as Apple reviews the situation, and I would not be at all suprised to see a Netscape icon in the dock in the near future.

I'm entirely with Blakespot on all his points - it's just a factor of the real world we live in. Anyone I work with would tell you that I'm a nutcase because I'm so obsessed with Apple, but I routinely use Windows and Linux in my business because it's not always possible, appropriate or practical to do everything the Apple way. Equally, just because you may prefer one browser over another does not mean everyone else is wrong in their choices.

Finally - an observation: it's the support of developers like Microsoft and the existence of products like IE for Mac which differentiates OS X from Linux, and it's key to the future and survival of OS X. Microsoft is unlikely to ever develop for Linux because Linux users don't like to buy software ;) This leaves OS X as being in the enviable position of the only credible Unix desktop OS - a nice niche to be in.

Long may MS on OS X continue!
 
Blakespot, I think you missed my point. I have an excellent notion of business practices, that is why I support you in the fact that you have to design your sites to work on IE. That's what I stated.

But consumers who only USE browsers DO have a choice and that choice is to support the up and comers like OW and Moz while they are developing. Its not a big sacrifice...for 95% of the sites I view they work perfectly well. I bought a seat form OW so they can afford to come out with the next version (5) which should solve most remaining issues.
 
MOZILLA 1.1 ALPHA >= IE 5.2

Mozilla 1.1 Alpha rendering of text FAR exceeds that of IE 5.2. Mozilla effects all the text, not just some of it like IE. Its not a fast as IE yet, but i'm sure that will come with time. Mozilla is on an agressive timetable too.

go to www.mozilla.org and try it out yourself!
 
Re: feel for ya

Originally posted by sjs

MS can defeat every other browser by designing IE to require you to write to it alone. Since they don't follow the code standards themselves, if you design web sites correctly to (theoretically) work properly on any browser, then it doesn't work properly on IE!

As a consumer, that makes me mad. My response is I use other browsers as a matter of principle.
Click to expand...

As a designer that doesn't hand code I get just the opposite impression.

In either GoLive or Dreamweaver, you can set the alignment of text, cells, tables etc. I'm guessing that both programs are forced to adhere to accepted standards of html, javascript, and html. A little cutting edge elements, but not much because they'd have consumers all day long calling them up and complaining that their site looks wrong in this and that.

With that in mind, my sites WORK right in my target browsers that I set in the apps. But they don't always LOOK right. DW and GL wysiwyg matches IE almost always. I usually end up having to muck with the code or add some bizarre tag to get netscape/mozilla to comply. Usually the issue is tables. They don't seem to follow the alignment rules unless I do it precisely the way they demand. On the other hand, IE displays it correctly whatever way I do it. It's much more lenient.

So on a coding perspective I don't know which is adhering to what standards, all I can tell you is which is easier to design for and which represents pages better and more accurately. Shouldn't that be the judge of the better browser? An analogy: Which is the better printer... A) the printer that prints what you see in your word processor exactly as you see it... or B) the one that, well, doesn't
 
Hi bretm,

Both Dreamweaver & GoLive can from time-to-time produce malformed code, like unbalanced tags. The chances are, if you produce your code entirely in a WYSISYG environment, their is a fair amount of malformed code in your work.

In my experience, IE is substantially more advanced in "interpreting" malformed code vs Netscape/Mozilla, which is more pedantic. For example in the tables you describe, if one tag is in the wrong place (which easily happens if you do a lot of cutting and pasting in WYSIWYG mode) Netscape will stop rendering the table altogether, whereas IE will soldier on and make the best job it can under the circumstances.

I think the difference your describing relates to IE's superior HTML interpretting rather than its adherence to standards.

It's worth getting your hands dirty with the code - once you get used to it, you'll find it's easy to fix the majority of these issues yourself.
 
Originally posted by sjs
Blakespot, I think you missed my point. I have an excellent notion of business practices, that is why I support you in the fact that you have to design your sites to work on IE. That's what I stated.

But consumers who only USE browsers DO have a choice and that choice is to support the up and comers like OW and Moz while they are developing. Its not a big sacrifice...for 95% of the sites I view they work perfectly well. I bought a seat form OW so they can afford to come out with the next version (5) which should solve most remaining issues.
Click to expand...
Yes, I misread your first sentence in the message I responded to. Apologies.


blakespot
 
Apple needs it's own browser... omniweb?

In light of Apple taking some minor shots at windows, and not including IE in their recent software update I think it's clear that Apple must design or purchase a browser.

What do people do with their computers 99% of the time? Send email and surf the web. Apple couldn't go without email for OSX so they implemented their own program. How would they have marketed OSX without email? Sure since it's release osx emails programs have come out, but they needed one right there in the dock. email has become such an integral part of the computing experience. As a computer manufacturer I don't think apple wanted to rely on other companies for updates, beta tests, etc. That would have led to a poor user experience and compatibility issues. There still isn't an outlook or entourage express for OSX and there may never be one. Apple has always been about compatibility. They make the hardware, the os, and much of the integral software.

For the software they didn't make microsoft has always filled a large part of the void. On paying ventures (office mostly) MS probably always will. MS wants to make and sell software to everyone they can. Mac or Windows. But on the IE issue they are giving away software to Apple users. If you look at it from a possible MS point of view... switching people to windows will make more money for MS. Giving mac users a great browser is not helping that, and it's not making them any money. Why hurry with it? Why make it as good as the IE 6 version? There isn't a huge compelling reason for them to do so. And without any other fully-operational non-beta browser out there they can take that attitude.

So that leaves apple with a problem. If apple can't advertise that browsing the web is fluid, quick and compliant on the mac, all their os, unix, itunes, iphoto, etc. means nothing. Apple harps on windows and how poor the user's experience on it is, yet at the same time they RELY on windows to update their IE browser for mac. That's a precarious position to be in. What if Bill just get's pissed and decides to not update IE for a year while his new IE 7 does all sorts of miraculous stuff? Where would that leave apple's "everything is easier" claims? My feeling is that Apple would like to have a relationship with microsoft as a premier software vendor but Apple doesn't want to RELY on microsoft. Their email and appleworks programs are examples. The digital hub contines this theory. Apple wants to sell hardware by marketing it's platforms user experience. Microsoft just wants to sell software for the most part. Apple is trying to wean themselves off of Microsoft without burning any bridges too quickly. Thier latest ad campaign shows that they are getting more their legs back. With their own browser they could afford to burn some bridges.

So maybe I'm exaggerating. But it would be in Apple's best interests to purchase/develop a cutting edge, completely OSX native, browser and integrate it into the system like IE is on windows.

So what browser out there fits the bill? Omniweb. It's the only one that completely looks and feels like Apple's email program. From drawers (which I dont' like in the email program) to the customizeable bar to the prefs pane. They have followed Apple's specs to the letter. Except for the fact that omniweb still doesn't support much of what's out there on the web. A little cash from Apple could solve that. A little more cash could make it apple's own.

Call me crazy.
 
Originally posted by Foocha
Hi bretm,

Both Dreamweaver & GoLive can from time-to-time produce malformed code, like unbalanced tags. The chances are, if you produce your code entirely in a WYSISYG environment, their is a fair amount of malformed code in your work.

In my experience, IE is substantially more advanced in "interpreting" malformed code vs Netscape/Mozilla, which is more pedantic. For example in the tables you describe, if one tag is in the wrong place (which easily happens if you do a lot of cutting and pasting in WYSIWYG mode) Netscape will stop rendering the table altogether, whereas IE will soldier on and make the best job it can under the circumstances.

I think the difference your describing relates to IE's superior HTML interpretting rather than its adherence to standards.

It's worth getting your hands dirty with the code - once you get used to it, you'll find it's easy to fix the majority of these issues yourself.
Click to expand...

I agree almost completely. But of course that brings me back to the question what makes the better broswer? Sounds like from your description IE easily wins. It can display correctly formed code AND does an incredible of piecing together my malaligned code. :)

I do get my hands dirty with cleaning up code and tags but that's about it. I alter some script and an item or two in cgi scripts but i wouldn't know how to code at all from scratch.

IMHO DW does a great job at cleaning up code with it's clean up html command. I can't seem to find a simple way to do it in GoLive. Both programs have their benefits and have developed quite differently. GoLive seems to make messier code.
 
Pref Problem

Has anybody else had problems with IE 5.2 preferences being reset? It seems everytime I log into my machine, my IE preferences are reset, homepage set back to msn.com. etc...

Also, ever sinceI installed the OS X update, the font for the toolbar links got squished together. An I and F next together looks like a bolded F on the right.

I'm not sure if this is just something screwy with my X or if other's may have had the same problem.

I've tried deleting IE 5.2 and it's pref files and reinstalling but it continues.
 
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