Sorry your browser is not supported!

You are using an outdated browser that does not support modern web technologies, in order to use this site please update to a new browser.

Browsers supported include Chrome, FireFox, Safari, Opera, Internet Explorer 10+ or Microsoft Edge.

Geek Culture / one question

Author
Message
Dreamora
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 20th Sep 2002
Location: Switzerland
Posted: 1st Sep 2003 20:26
Rich I have a little question:

You made such an effort to make a new cool page and everything, so why didn't you make and effort to make the ground values (like width values without the px behind etc) conform so non-IE users can enjoy surfing the page too?

I'm annoyed by the menu on the left with it's width problem (gets a width of about 1100px sometimes!!) and that only because you didn't make it use px value (width=200 instead of width="200px" for example)

I hope you change this soon since it isn't a great effort but would change a lot to IE haters like me and others in here. *its like the code snippet function in the forum which doesn't work too*
Richard Davey
Retired Moderator
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 30th Apr 2002
Location: On the Jupiter Probe
Posted: 1st Sep 2003 20:56
It has nothing at all to do with setting a fixed width. If you looked at the page source you'd see that the left menu has a fixed width size of 160 pixels which is set in the TD tag, as well as pushed out with a single pixel (160px wide) image as well as set in the CSS. All three possible methods of setting the width are in use.

This renders correctly in IE, Opera7.1 and Mozilla 1.4. However I have seen it do what you describe via screen shots people send and it's got nothing to do with the html structure of the page, it's the javascript dhtml menu that the browser fails to render correctly. You can set as many widths as you like, if the menu fails to get parsed properly it'll always blow the column out. This effects certain subsets of Mozilla only and is a pain in the arse, but then NS always was.

Cheers,

Rich

"Gentlemen, we have short-circuited the Universe!"
Dreamora
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 20th Sep 2002
Location: Switzerland
Posted: 1st Sep 2003 22:39 Edited at: 1st Sep 2003 22:50
oh ok

didn't say anything

*but where to get mozilla 1.4 ... have the most actual phoenix ...*

PS: just to say, the pain is IE not Mozilla or NS because IE doesn't care about ANY CONFORMITY, this piece of s*** loads everything, it can be as buggy as it wants!

if you want to see where your bugs are, take the amaya browser from the w3c page ... this follows exactly the way w3c set the html/ xhtml standards, not like IE that follows no standard and just parse without thinking.
empty
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 26th Aug 2002
Location: 3 boats down from the candy
Posted: 1st Sep 2003 22:53
Quote: "This effects certain subsets of Mozilla only and is a pain in the arse, but then NS always was."

A matter of taste I would say.


Quote: "*but where to get mozilla 1.4 ... have the most actual phoenix ...*"

http://www.mozilla.org/releases/

I awoke in a fever. The bedclothes were all soaked in sweat.
She said "You've been having a nightmare and it's not over yet"
Ian T
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 12th Sep 2002
Location: Around
Posted: 1st Sep 2003 23:01
I have to agree about Netscape, it's a 'bit' of a pain. Opera 7.1 is excellent though, and the new site works flawlessly with it. Switch! Switch!

--Mouse: Famous (Avatarless) Fighting Furball
Read It: http://www.angryflower.com/itsits.gif
Learn It: http://www.angryflower.com/bobsqu.gif
empty
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 26th Aug 2002
Location: 3 boats down from the candy
Posted: 1st Sep 2003 23:04 Edited at: 1st Sep 2003 23:05
Quote: "Opera 7.1 is excellent though, and the new site works flawlessly with it. Switch! Switch!"

Opera is nice but doesn't work very well on my system (flickering images).
However Opera can be a pain as well. eg. Some dynamic manipualtions on layers work flawlessly in IE and Mozilla but don't work in Opera at all.

I awoke in a fever. The bedclothes were all soaked in sweat.
She said "You've been having a nightmare and it's not over yet"
Ian T
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 12th Sep 2002
Location: Around
Posted: 1st Sep 2003 23:07
Yes, Opera has a few problems... for one thing, it's VERY jerky and slow when loading pages. Luckily it is faster than IE, but it's still a problem.

Another is that it's more of a memory hog than IE.

Finally, it often screws up downloads larger than 25mb, so I use IE download system for that.

Other then that, it's the best...

--Mouse: Famous (Avatarless) Fighting Furball
Read It: http://www.angryflower.com/itsits.gif
Learn It: http://www.angryflower.com/bobsqu.gif
Dreamora
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 20th Sep 2002
Location: Switzerland
Posted: 2nd Sep 2003 02:02
using browser for downloads is noobish
get DAP, Godzilla or another download manager - accelerator and forget about using browsers for downloading.
Shadow Robert
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 22nd Sep 2002
Location: Hertfordshire, England
Posted: 2nd Sep 2003 07:36
personally i use IE and nothing else... i have Netscape 7.1 and Gecko on this machine, but both are a pain in the ass, neither have 100% Java/CGI/PHP/Flash compatibility - oftenly thing will just not be displayed becuase of this (and this is even with the Java 1.4.2 SDK Support, Plugin & Java Console and Installed in all) what script works on one site doesn't nescisarily work on another.

as for not using it without a download manager, my OC connection usually downloads things in under a minute so it isn't needed ... but that aside IE 5.5 & 6.x have built-in resumable downloads with compatible sites & ftp accounts.
It also has download Queing depending on your connection (provided you bother to set it up)

not to mention download managers are the bane of every connection, they run at godaweful rates ... even on a 56k i could be done with particular downloads faster than an ISDN user on Go!Zilla or DAP.
Add to this they also have a tendancy to LOOSE download, i remember this vividly when i used to use them to get Mircosoft SDKs back when i had a pathetic 36k.

add to this they override alot of things and also open up alot of ports which are a pain in the ass to authenticate and check using Norton/ZoneAlarm/BlackIce if you happen to use them on a secure connection.

Explorer7 will be out soon, which is a pretty awesome new incarnation ... IE might seems like its very independant in what it supports but look at what i actually supports, its the only browser i know which is capable of finishing broken code without ruining the pages download and it also is the only browser i know which happens to support everything under the sun ... and then a few things.

plus the built-in debugger helps alot at times

Richard Davey
Retired Moderator
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 30th Apr 2002
Location: On the Jupiter Probe
Posted: 2nd Sep 2003 13:31
re: the menu code, I will go back to the authors and see if there is a newer version that stops the "exploding menu" from happening. We paid quite a bit for the code, so I would hope so.

Cheers,

Rich

"Gentlemen, we have short-circuited the Universe!"
empty
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 26th Aug 2002
Location: 3 boats down from the candy
Posted: 2nd Sep 2003 13:45
Quote: "i have Netscape 7.1 and Gecko on this machine, but both are a pain in the ass, neither have 100% Java/CGI/PHP/Flash compatibility"

CGI and PHP are server sided, Java and Flash are third party plug-ins. So how can they be incompatible. Download the latest Java from Sun and the latest Flash from Macromedia. And Gecko isn't a browser, it's a layout engine (used by Mozilla/Firebird and Netscape).

I awoke in a fever. The bedclothes were all soaked in sweat.
She said "You've been having a nightmare and it's not over yet"

Login to post a reply

Server time is: 2024-11-23 19:43:13
Your offset time is: 2024-11-23 19:43:13