Which Browser do you use?

[harry456]

IE all the way!!!

[DeviantScripter]

Oh man, IE 6 definetely has my vote on this one.

Netscape is slower than dirt, and it’s incompatibility problems make me want to scream!

[TG Moses VI]

Lindows! :)

[DeviantScripter]

Haha! Lindows?!

That takes the best features of both operating systems, melds them together, and fails miserably in the entire process. :lol:

[ssolie]

I’m using AWeb on an Amiga 3000 running AmigaOS 3.9 so it seems I’m the only one who voted for “Other”. If you’re really curious, check out http://os.amiga.com/.

Keep your IE and Netscape… AWeb all the way!

Seriously though, stick to the W3C standards and everyone will be much happier in the long run. Customizing a web site for a particular browser misses the entire point of being on the web in the first place.

[djensen]

Yes, I’ve read the w3.org accessibility recommendations and I’ll probably follow many of them.

The problem is that some browsers don’t seem to layout tables properly and I just wanted an idea on which browsers to test.

[Xi]

Mic IE 4 me!

[GeZe]

I got netscape 7!

[DeviantScripter]

Can’t you just look at the sites’ logs?

[GeZe]

good point!

can u change for what u voted?

[Guest]

Mozilla is quite good, although its based on the NC-source. U have some nice features like “JavaScript: do not open unwanted windows” -> no more annoying pop-ups without the use of a third-party tool.

the only disadvantage is the lack of compatibility to a bunch of (mostly professional) websites due to a constant cash-flow from M$ :)

but if there are enough ppl using non-IE the webdesigners will be forced to make their sites good looking at more browsers coz every not viewable website is a possible loss of a customer…

[DeviantScripter]

I disagree. :P

The reason that so many websites are not viewable (or compatible) with “other” browsers is because web-designers get lazy. TOO MANY developers do not adhere to the W3 standards set forth for internet development. If more people would actually LEARN how to program, and get themselves out of a Frontpage environment, then we’d have a lot more compatibility across systems.

It’s got nothing to do with “accepting” money from Microsoft. :roll:

[GeZe]

frontpage sucks!

if your going to use a program use dreamweaver!

[Yanny]

change my Web to Mozilla. It friggin rocks.

[DeviantScripter]

@Yanny:

change my Web to Mozilla. It friggin rocks.

Doesn’t support CSS well enough. :(

[Yanny]

Just gota get the right mod )

[Guest]

@Deviant:Scripter:

I disagree. :P

The reason that so many websites are not viewable (or compatible) with “other” browsers is because web-designers get lazy. TOO MANY developers do not adhere to the W3 standards set forth for internet development. If more people would actually LEARN how to program, and get themselves out of a Frontpage environment, then we’d have a lot more compatibility across systems.

It’s got nothing to do with “accepting” money from Microsoft. :roll:

oh well, how would u explain the following:
if u go for www.ricoh.de, the german website of Ricoh (u probably know them :D), u get the following message (translated):

“Our sites are optimized for MS IE 4.x and Netscape 4.x. Netscape 6 is not supported yet.
We recommend (!!!) you the Internet Explorer 5.x from Microsoft ™”

reread the word “recommend” and see that theres no entry link to the site if youre using mozilla 1.1 (like me). There is however a link to the IE download page…
NOW all mozilla or Netscape 4.x+ user could try this link
www.ricoh.de/ricoh_ie.html.
I hear u all crying, it perfectly WORKS with Mozilla. Conclusion: Ricoh (and probably many other companies) are somewhat influenced by M$ to filter out non-IE-Browser. The statement above implicitly tells me, that ricoh is NEVER supporting Netscape 6 (and higher !!). The only possible other solution would be, that Ricoh is TOTALLY outdated, but I don’t think they are ‘allowed to’ from a commercial point of view.

Its your turn again…

[DeviantScripter]

@Anonymous:

@Deviant:Scripter:

I disagree. :P

The reason that so many websites are not viewable (or compatible) with “other” browsers is because web-designers get lazy. TOO MANY developers do not adhere to the W3 standards set forth for internet development. If more people would actually LEARN how to program, and get themselves out of a Frontpage environment, then we’d have a lot more compatibility across systems.

It’s got nothing to do with “accepting” money from Microsoft. :roll:

oh well, how would u explain the following:
if u go for www.ricoh.de, the german website of Ricoh (u probably know them :D), u get the following message (translated):

“Our sites are optimized for MS IE 4.x and Netscape 4.x. Netscape 6 is not supported yet.
We recommend (!!!) you the Internet Explorer 5.x from Microsoft ™”

reread the word “recommend” and see that theres no entry link to the site if youre using mozilla 1.1 (like me). There is however a link to the IE download page…
NOW all mozilla or Netscape 4.x+ user could try this link
www.ricoh.de/ricoh_ie.html.
I hear u all crying, it perfectly WORKS with Mozilla. Conclusion: Ricoh (and probably many other companies) are somewhat influenced by M$ to filter out non-IE-Browser. The statement above implicitly tells me, that ricoh is NEVER supporting Netscape 6 (and higher !!). The only possible other solution would be, that Ricoh is TOTALLY outdated, but I don’t think they are ‘allowed to’ from a commercial point of view.

Its your turn again…

Ok, where do I start? :P

First of all, I don’t think you understand optimized. The site works perfectly fine in Netscape. When they say “optimized,” it usually means that there’s something different that you get with IE, or maybe it’ll look better.

Secondly, do you seriously think that Microsoft would actually influence Ricoh to make their website ONLY for IE? Do you know how absurd that sounds? The reason that it’s OPTIMIZED for IE is becuase 93% of web users ( http://www.w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_stats.asp ) are using IE! Wouldn’t it be more realistic to assume that Ricoh is optimizing their site so the greatest number of users can have the best possible experience?

[BigBlocky]

I’d say the reason most sites dont’ work is they are too busy with flaming logos and 3-d spinning icons rather then the content. I used to love mosaic (anyone remember that one?), then of course the creators of mosaic formed netscape and I loved netscape. Then as microsoft slowly started to sabotage the competition I was forced to used internet explorer. Today my network runs 5.01, why? Not because I love microsoft…… I don’t. I use IE for the same reason I use Visual Studio for my development work. I use it because for now it’s a microsoft world and I have the least amount of conflicts. Of course none of my clients use anything but MS at the front line level either…

I think Unix/linux has a way better kernal. I also thought OS/2 was better, how’d that work for IBM? Metric is better then imperial but since the US doesn’'t use metric most of my tools aren’t metric either… C’est L’vie

This should be all about axis and allies and not about the dang tool we use to read posts. Keep the website simple, no flamming logos, no 5 channel sound required, no 5 meg shockwave files either… Da’ts my nickel.

BB

BB

[djensen]

I wasn’t planning on anything too fancy. But there are subtle differences between the browsers. For instance, look at this site using Netscape 4.x and you will see that the “wood” does not go all of the way across the top of the screen. This is an acceptable sacrifice because you are still able to get the content you need. It only looks slightly less attractive.