New Internet Explorer

[Pangloss]

Looks like a font issue to me. It's actually displaying fine for me with Mozilla 1.7.

[Klaynos]

I'm using Fx 1.06 - ubuntu. On ubuntu and I see it with the text covered, how weird...

[Sayonara]

I don't understand why Microsoft would care if people use IE or not. They don't make any extra money when people use IE. They already made all of their money when everyone first bought Windows.

What Pangloss said. Sometimes profit-on-first-use is not the only way to exploit customers.

 

 

If the W3C understands how the Microsoft proprietary code works, why don't they add it to their standards?

Because it is a commercial product, and the notion of incorporating that into WWW standards cannot be reconciled with the fundamental principles of the web.

 

 

I'm not sure how standards-compliant the Homestead software is. If it isn't compliant, I would have to copy the entire HTML code of my web sites and edit all of it. That might cause problems with certain Homestead elements.

You could always abandon it.

 

 

I don't understand why you are having trouble with the text and fields. Yes, there are two layers. All of the text is in one text box. All of the forms are on top of the text box. However, the fields should be to the right of the text. It looks fine in IE6. Is there something wrong with the way Firefox displays web sites with more than one layer?

It's the z-indices causing the problem. They're not needed anyway; might as well remove them.

[herme3]

Are you kidding? Microsoft wouldn't be where it is today without embrace-and-extend. It goes right to the core of both the problem that people have with Microsoft' date=' and the very reason for their success.

 

Microsoft cares very much whether people use IE. Very much indeed.[/quote']

 

I don't understand. I already paid Microsoft when I bought Windows XP. Now, I won't pay any extra when I use IE. I also won't get any money back if I start using Firefox. So, why does Microsoft care which browser I use? How will Microsoft lose any money if I use Firefox to access this web site instead of IE?

 

No actually there is a problem with the way IE6 displays multiple layours and your site is tailored to fix this but by doing so has ignored the correct way of doing it. You see this is why we need standards so this doesn't happen.

 

What are you talking about? The HTML says how many pixels the form should be from the left margin. When I say the form should be 500 pixels from the left, IE will display the form 500 pixels from the left. How is that a problem? If the form is on top of the text, then Firefox must have counted the pixels incorrectly.

 

It's the z-indices causing the problem. They're not needed anyway; might as well remove them.

 

That should control the element layers, not where they are placed on the page.

[Dak]

I don't understand. I already paid Microsoft when I bought Windows XP. Now, I won't pay any extra when I use IE. I also won't get any money back if I start using Firefox. So, why does Microsoft care which browser I use? How will Microsoft lose any money if I use Firefox to access this web site instead of IE?

 

Microsoft are trying to reach a state whereby if someone thinks 'computer', they think microsoft/windows; as part of that idea, they want people who think of 'a program to wright documents' to think 'ms word'; someone who thinks of 'an email thingy' to think either 'microsoft Outlook' or 'microsoft hotmail'; someone who thinks 'thing to brows the internet' to think 'microsoft internet explorer'.

 

They want people to basically be of the oppinion that either the only quality programs are microsoft made, or the only programs full-stop are microsoft made.

 

Just look at how many people use ms office compared to how many use openoffice. Im sure that most people would chose the free open-office rather than pay for the relatively indistinguishable ms office if it werent for the fact that they just assume that ms is the best/only choice, or simply dont think atall; which is exactly what microsoft want people to do.

 

Thats why microsoft are interested in pushing IE; they want to get peoples first thought for anything computer-related to be ms, and having them use a microsoft web-browser is part of that buisness strategy.

[Sayonara]

I don't understand. I already paid Microsoft when I bought Windows XP. Now, I won't pay any extra when I use IE. I also won't get any money back if I start using Firefox. So, why does Microsoft care which browser I use? How will Microsoft lose any money if I use Firefox to access this web site instead of IE?

It's not necessarily about money they lose or gain directly through the IE user base.

 

By crow-barring people into The Microsoft Way (by pushing a product with their operating system that works best with their own proprietary code, and ignoring the mutually agreed way everyone else does things) they ensure expanding markets for the product lines that support the development of content for that platform. Everything from asp.NET to Visual Basic owes its enormous market share to the overall strategy, which IE has played a significant role in.

 

 

What are you talking about? The HTML says how many pixels the form should be from the left margin. When I say the form should be 500 pixels from the left, IE will display the form 500 pixels from the left. How is that a problem? If the form is on top of the text, then Firefox must have counted the pixels incorrectly.

The question is "500 pixels from the left, relative to what?"

 

Firefox follows the standards and uses the box model correctly. Microsoft use their own box model (which does actually makes sense on its own), and therefore IE disagrees with all other clients. This is why you should develop to standards and then make a minor tweak for IE. It's as easy as inserting a strategically-placed > into your CSS.

Check out the articles on cross-platform web development at http://www.alistapart.com for more information.

 

 

That should control the element layers, not where they are placed on the page.

I know. That's the problem.

That page doesn't need layers - the problem is arising from styles that are imprecisely controlled and redundant.

[Sayonara]

Very well said Sayo...

 

For browser stats a better source is (hey look it's w3c again!):

 

http://www.w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_stats.asp

Forgot to mention this at the time...

 

Even these stats will give a false view, because Opera and Konqueror identify themselves as Internet Explorer by default.

[bloodhound]

this site has a "few" IE bugs with demos.

 

http://www.positioniseverything.net/explorer.html

[herme3]

Microsoft are trying to reach a state whereby if someone thinks 'computer'' date=' they think microsoft/windows; as part of that idea, they want people who think of 'a program to wright documents' to think 'ms word'; someone who thinks of 'an email thingy' to think either 'microsoft Outlook' or 'microsoft hotmail'; someone who thinks 'thing to brows the internet' to think 'microsoft internet explorer'.

 

They want people to basically be of the oppinion that either the only quality programs are microsoft made, or the only programs full-stop are microsoft made.

 

Just look at how many people use ms office compared to how many use openoffice. Im sure that most people would chose the free open-office rather than pay for the relatively indistinguishable ms office if it werent for the fact that they just assume that ms is the best/only choice, or simply dont think atall; which is exactly what microsoft want people to do.

 

Thats why microsoft are interested in pushing IE; they want to get peoples first thought for anything computer-related to be ms, and having them use a microsoft web-browser is part of that buisness strategy.[/quote']

 

Hmm... I never thought about that. That is a very good business strategy.

 

By the way, I tried OpenOffice before and I didn't like it. I thought that OpenOffice looked like a version of Microsoft Office that was very poorly made. The word processor program reminded me of Notepad! I really missed that little paperclip...

 

The question is "500 pixels from the left' date=' relative to what?"

 

Firefox follows the standards and uses the box model correctly. Microsoft use their own box model (which does actually makes sense on its own), and therefore IE disagrees with all other clients.[/quote']

 

How did the standards or IE get the idea of how far "500 pixels from the left" should be? If the first web browser came up with the idea, and the standards changed it, I think web browsers should stay with the original idea. If a web site designer built his web site to display on the first web browser, he shouldn't have to change it because the standards, or IE changed how a web site should be. I think the standards should use the rules of the first browser for situations like this.

 

I know. That's the problem.

That page doesn't need layers - the problem is arising from styles that are imprecisely controlled and redundant.

 

The z-indices are actually entered automatically by Homestead. Some of my pages do require layers. For example, if I have a background image behind only one text box, I wouldn't want the image on top of the text.

 

Homestead does not allow me to remove the z-indices. It must be a bug in Firefox if it moves the position of an object because of z-indices. A browser is not supposed to move an object because of z-indices. Only the x and y indices should move an object on a web site.

[1veedo]

Pangloss, how'd you get your tabs at the bottom? That's really cool.

 

I think it's a Linux thing, or maybe a 64bit firefox thing. I am running Fedora (good guess w/ RH) but if it's the same on Ubuntu...if Klaynos is running 64 bit, or it could be something else.

The z-indices are actually entered automatically by Homestead. Some of my pages do require layers. For example, if I have a background image behind only one text box, I wouldn't want the image on top of the text.

There are other, more efficient ways of doing that. Even as somebody who does next to no web design, I know this. Same goes with your form boxes. Easier for one, and a smaller document for two.

[Pangloss]

Tabs?

[Dak]

Hmm... I never thought about that. That is a very good business strategy.

 

Its an effective buisness strategy, and one that isn't unique to microsoft or the computer industry.

 

I dont hold their use of that strategy against them, but the way in which they are persuing that strategy, ie by non-compliance with standards, is a tad off dont'cher think?

[calbiterol]

Pangloss, how'd you get your tabs at the bottom? That's really cool.

 

'Twasn't Pangloss, it was me. No worries.

 

Tools -> Options -> Tabbed Browsing -> (scroll down) User Interface -> Place tabbar on bottom of window (requires restart).

[herme3]

Its an effective buisness strategy' date=' and one that isn't unique to microsoft or the computer industry.

 

I dont hold their use of that strategy against them, but [i']the way in which they are persuing that strategy[/i], ie by non-compliance with standards, is a tad off dont'cher think?

 

Yes, it really isn't fair to web site developers. I will still use IE6, and I plan to download IE7. However, if I was Bill Gates, there would be some changes at Microsoft. Nothing is wrong with being a monopoly if they have the best product, but they shouldn't push other companies around.

[ChewyPoop]

Yes, it really isn't fair to web site developers. I will still use IE6, and I plan to download IE7. However, if I was Bill Gates, there would be some changes at Microsoft. Nothing is wrong with being a monopoly if they have the best product, but they shouldn't push other companies around.

 

MICROSOFT AIN'T PUSING ANYONE AROUND! THEY ARE #1 BECAUSE FIREFOX STINKS!

[calbiterol]

Nothing is wrong with being a monopoly if they have the best product

 

I have to disagree with this. Having a monopoly dissolves all competition, meaning that there is no longer any push for a better product. This means that either there are no improvements made, or the improvements are very slow in the coming. If you ask me, m$ is the case in point for this.

[herme3]

I have to disagree with this. Having a monopoly dissolves all competition, meaning that there is no longer any push for a better product. This means that either there are no improvements made, or the improvements are very slow in the coming. If you ask me, m$ is the case in point for this.

 

I didn't mean that. What I meant was that it is ok if you are the only company that makes a product because you are the only company that makes a good product. If a competitor releases a better product, the first company should be fair. Instead of pushing around their competitors, they should release a better product.

[calbiterol]

MICROSOFT AIN'T PUSING ANYONE AROUND! THEY ARE #1 BECAUSE FIREFOX STINKS!

 

You gotta be kidding me.

 

Seriously, don't waste our time with your ridiculously degenerate defecation of an answer. In other words, cut the crap, you boil-brained whore-master. Come back when you have something intelligent to say. Your odiferously nonsensical babbling will get you nowhere.

 

I didn't mean that. What I meant was that it is ok if you are the only company that makes a product because you are the only company that makes a good product. If a competitor releases a better product, the first company should be fair. Instead of pushing around their competitors, they should release a better product.

Ahah. Much more reasonable. I still think that this would make it harder for potentially great products to compete, though.

[herme3]

MICROSOFT AIN'T PUSING ANYONE AROUND! THEY ARE #1 BECAUSE FIREFOX STINKS!

 

You sound like I did when I first started posting in this thread. I guess all these Firefox fans have changed my opinion a little...

 

The problem isn't with Firefox. The problem is that Microsoft ignores standards that were established by the creators of the web. Microsoft once agreed to use these standards, but then they decided not to. Now IE doesn't work with these standards, so web site developers are writing web sites only for IE. This is how Microsoft keeps pushing around their competitors, so many web sites don't work with Firefox.

 

Wow... I can't believe I just said that!

[calbiterol]

Now THAT was poetic justice, Herme3.

 

I think Sayo will be proud.

[ydoaPs]

I really missed that little paperclip...

i hate that damn paperclip. i wish there was a program that would let me torture it until it gives me useful information(which it doesn't have) and stops being an annoying pest.

 

i don't like word. i think it may be very poorly written or has problems with xp. every xp computer that i have used word on runs word incredibly slow and word crashes a lot. i have yet to have any problems with openoffice and it is much much faster.

 

<Darth_Blade> Wow.

<Darth_Blade> Word crashes whenever I try to quote the constitution article about human rights. Conspiracy theories anyone? %)

<aetherspoon> heh

<Darth_Blade> But it's really really weird.

<aetherspoon> try openoffice. It only crashes when you quote Microsoft License Agreements.

[ydoaPs]

'Twasn't Pangloss' date=' it was me. No worries.

 

Tools -> Options -> Tabbed Browsing -> (scroll down) User Interface -> Place tabbar on bottom of window (requires restart).[/quote']

know how to do it in Ubuntu? no options under tools. under edit, you can change tabbed browsing stuff, but no tabbar on bottom of window.

[calbiterol]

Dunno. I have to rebuild my computer, and I'm going to partition the hard drive, with one partition linux and the other windows. Anything and everything online will be done on linux (except online gaming) - I've had too many problems with viruses, spyware, adware, etc on windows, even with antivirus. I'm going to try a live install (boot off CD) of ubuntu after I get it up and running again, and if I like it better than the SUSE I'm going to originally install, then I can play around and let you know. Look for something about the user interface.

[Klaynos]

You sound like I did when I first started posting in this thread. I guess all these Firefox fans have changed my opinion a little...

 

The problem isn't with Firefox. The problem is that Microsoft ignores standards that were established by the creators of the web. Microsoft once agreed to use these standards' date=' but then they decided not to. Now IE doesn't work with these standards, so web site developers are writing web sites only for IE. This is how Microsoft keeps pushing around their competitors, so many web sites don't work with Firefox.

 

Wow... I can't believe I just said that! [/quote']

 

 

It's good to see you say that

 

btw for openoffice, it's looks do seriousely let it down, but openoffice.org 2 is about to be released and it's supposed to be alot prettier, and also run alot better on windows, and if all you want is a word processor it's lots cheaper than buying ms office http://www.openoffice.org/product2/ imo it's formulae stuff is FAR suppirior to the stuff that comes with office too There's a thread around on computer help where it's discussed a bit

 

||edit btw I'm using 32bit firefox and ubuntu :s

[herme3]

i hate that damn paperclip. i wish there was a program that would let me torture it until it gives me useful information(which it doesn't have) and stops being an annoying pest.

 

He may not be the smartest paperclip in the world, but he certainly is fun to watch. Just right-click on him, and click "Animate". OpenOffice just seems so lonely without him. The paperclip has helped me a few times, and he's a lot cooler than a help menu.

 

If you don't like the paperclip, you could always choose a different Office assistant. There is a bouncy ball, a robot, the Office logo, a cat, a dog, and even Albert Einstein!

 

i don't like word. i think it may be very poorly written or has problems with xp. every xp computer that i have used word on runs word incredibly slow and word crashes a lot. i have yet to have any problems with openoffice and it is much much faster.

 

I really like the Word that came with Office XP. It loads on my computer in about 3 seconds. The old version of Word used to be slow and crash a lot. Maybe they made some improvements.

 

There are some features in Word that I couldn't find in OpenOffice. For example, Word has tons of clipart that you can add to a letter. They also have lots of templates so you could make a nice business letter if you need one.

 

There is also the recovery feature. If the electricity goes out, Word will probably be able to restore your document the next time you turn on your computer.