Comments on: Try to Make a Comeback http://www.aelon.net/2004/12/try-to-make-a-comeback/ Random babblings from a few digitally inclined people Fri, 04 Jul 2008 17:41:05 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.0.2 by: Kelmon http://www.aelon.net/2004/12/try-to-make-a-comeback/#comment-359 Wed, 08 Dec 2004 12:04:50 +0000 http://www.aelon.net/2004/12/try-to-make-a-comeback/#comment-359 <blockquote cite="Cyrris">That’s the whole idea of standards - browsers displaying the same code in a reasonably similar way. IE is just the odd one out.</blockquote> I hate shooting my own argument/rant in the foot, but I think that Opera has/had a problem as well as I note code in a CSS file that I "borrowed" that has a section called the "Be Nice To Opera" rule, but needs to be implemented because IE5 can't implement the box model properly and the hack needed causes problems in Opera. Not strictly Opera's fault but given that it seems to be the only browser impacted I presume that something non-standard is at work there...

That’s the whole idea of standards - browsers displaying the same code in a reasonably similar way. IE is just the odd one out.

I hate shooting my own argument/rant in the foot, but I think that Opera has/had a problem as well as I note code in a CSS file that I “borrowed” that has a section called the “Be Nice To Opera” rule, but needs to be implemented because IE5 can’t implement the box model properly and the hack needed causes problems in Opera. Not strictly Opera’s fault but given that it seems to be the only browser impacted I presume that something non-standard is at work there…

]]> by: Kelmon http://www.aelon.net/2004/12/try-to-make-a-comeback/#comment-358 Wed, 08 Dec 2004 11:57:04 +0000 http://www.aelon.net/2004/12/try-to-make-a-comeback/#comment-358 Well, fair enough. I'll just part with the comment that the windows concept can be done better and OS X is living proof of this. Yeah, it's a shame that the two platforms are completely incompatible at a compiled-code level (at least without employing something like VirtualPC 7, which I ought to get at some point). Tiger looks as though it will open the gap more, particularly with Automator and Spotlight, but since they remain incompatible with x86 processors and Windows software, it is unlikely to make much more of a dent in the market. To be honest, the thing that is shifting Macs more than anything else is the iPod, purely because it has a much bigger exposure. At the end of the day there is little that can be done on Windows that cannot be done on OS X but much that cannot be done the other way around. I hope that Microsoft does a lot with Longhorn to bring Windows up to date but given that they have postponed major features like the WINFS file system, I doubt it is going to offer any compelling reason to upgrade, although I hope to be proved wrong since I will undoubtedly have to use it at some time. Oddly, we can perhaps have a reverse discussion about the iPod since it dominates a market that MS, along with everyone else, is trying to penetrate. And, to be fair, some of the same arguments can be levied at the iPod because it doesn't offer video at the moment and its damned expensive. However, having never actually used an MP3 (let alone modern versions), I can't really offer an opinion either way. Well, fair enough. I’ll just part with the comment that the windows concept can be done better and OS X is living proof of this. Yeah, it’s a shame that the two platforms are completely incompatible at a compiled-code level (at least without employing something like VirtualPC 7, which I ought to get at some point). Tiger looks as though it will open the gap more, particularly with Automator and Spotlight, but since they remain incompatible with x86 processors and Windows software, it is unlikely to make much more of a dent in the market. To be honest, the thing that is shifting Macs more than anything else is the iPod, purely because it has a much bigger exposure. At the end of the day there is little that can be done on Windows that cannot be done on OS X but much that cannot be done the other way around. I hope that Microsoft does a lot with Longhorn to bring Windows up to date but given that they have postponed major features like the WINFS file system, I doubt it is going to offer any compelling reason to upgrade, although I hope to be proved wrong since I will undoubtedly have to use it at some time.

Oddly, we can perhaps have a reverse discussion about the iPod since it dominates a market that MS, along with everyone else, is trying to penetrate. And, to be fair, some of the same arguments can be levied at the iPod because it doesn’t offer video at the moment and its damned expensive. However, having never actually used an MP3 (let alone modern versions), I can’t really offer an opinion either way.

]]> by: Cyrris http://www.aelon.net/2004/12/try-to-make-a-comeback/#comment-357 Wed, 08 Dec 2004 11:18:43 +0000 http://www.aelon.net/2004/12/try-to-make-a-comeback/#comment-357 <blockquote> That said, I do agree that people should follow the standards at least enough so that a website works in both IE and firefox (I personally feel no need to support even more like Opera, Netscape and Konqueror).</blockquote> Well, the great thing about W3C's standards means that if you get a site working in Firefox, it will also most likely work fine in Opera, Safari, Netscape, and Konquerer. That's the whole idea of standards - browsers displaying the same code in a reasonably similar way. IE is just the odd one out.

That said, I do agree that people should follow the standards at least enough so that a website works in both IE and firefox (I personally feel no need to support even more like Opera, Netscape and Konqueror).

Well, the great thing about W3C’s standards means that if you get a site working in Firefox, it will also most likely work fine in Opera, Safari, Netscape, and Konquerer. That’s the whole idea of standards - browsers displaying the same code in a reasonably similar way. IE is just the odd one out.

]]> by: JohnDoe http://www.aelon.net/2004/12/try-to-make-a-comeback/#comment-356 Wed, 08 Dec 2004 10:45:29 +0000 http://www.aelon.net/2004/12/try-to-make-a-comeback/#comment-356 <blockquote cite="Kelmon"> defy anyone not to have sworn at the OS for having done something really dumb.</blockquote> True, but I have yelled at my linux box a whole lot more. I do like windows, at least over the other OSes I've used. It doesnt have those fancy (and in my view utterly pointless and ugly) skins (ok it has the windows xp theme which sux but I always set it to classic). And it runs all my programs like a dream, and it doesnt crash anymore like windows 9x did. Period. Thats all I'm looking for. I honestly dont give a flying fuck wether or not they're good for the OS market, as long as they're good for ME.

defy anyone not to have sworn at the OS for having done something really dumb.

True, but I have yelled at my linux box a whole lot more.

I do like windows, at least over the other OSes I’ve used. It doesnt have those fancy (and in my view utterly pointless and ugly) skins (ok it has the windows xp theme which sux but I always set it to classic). And it runs all my programs like a dream, and it doesnt crash anymore like windows 9x did. Period. Thats all I’m looking for. I honestly dont give a flying fuck wether or not they’re good for the OS market, as long as they’re good for ME.

]]> by: JohnDoe http://www.aelon.net/2004/12/try-to-make-a-comeback/#comment-355 Wed, 08 Dec 2004 10:40:18 +0000 http://www.aelon.net/2004/12/try-to-make-a-comeback/#comment-355 <blockquote cite="Cyrris"> But now, IE’s non-standards compiance means that good designers who do wish to cater for 100% of net users have to add countless design hacks to make sure it works in IE as well as the standard compliant browsers. So overall, we’ve seen a rise in production time, and lots of unnecessary code in websites meaning they take longer to load. </blockquote> I disagree. Remember my W3C compliant website which DID work in IE and DIDNT work in firefox? You had to get all funky to make it work in firefox too. Generally FF has better standard compliancy, but not always. Besides, perhaps they should make their renderer as robust as IE's, so those 'broken' websites work too. That said, I do agree that people should follow the standards at least enough so that a website works in both IE and firefox (I personally feel no need to support even more like Opera, Netscape and Konqueror).

But now, IE’s non-standards compiance means that good designers who do wish to cater for 100% of net users have to add countless design hacks to make sure it works in IE as well as the standard compliant browsers. So overall, we’ve seen a rise in production time, and lots of unnecessary code in websites meaning they take longer to load.

I disagree. Remember my W3C compliant website which DID work in IE and DIDNT work in firefox? You had to get all funky to make it work in firefox too. Generally FF has better standard compliancy, but not always. Besides, perhaps they should make their renderer as robust as IE’s, so those ‘broken’ websites work too.

That said, I do agree that people should follow the standards at least enough so that a website works in both IE and firefox (I personally feel no need to support even more like Opera, Netscape and Konqueror).

]]>