|
travestia
07-21-2008
01:23 AM ET (US)
|
thnks my friend travesti and jigolo
|
| |
Messages 17-15 deleted by topic administrator between 07-07-2008 02:22 AM and 07-21-2006 08:57 AM |
Rob McNair-Huff  03-29-2003
07:23 PM ET (US)
|
rob m, yeah, you are right about designing with IE in mind. Of course, to make it the most compatible is to avoid the IE and Netscape specific hacks. Do that and the page will work across the board, more or less...
|
|
rob m
03-29-2003
06:36 PM ET (US)
|
If you are designing a web site you still need to write for IE especially since over 80% of computer users are on it. So many mac users while at work visit mac sites on PCs and a lot of companies only have IE on their machines.
|
|
dxtr
03-28-2003
11:29 PM ET (US)
|
As far as banking goes Safari works fine with Wells Fargo all I have to do is tell it to be Netscape when I go to that site. I did my taxes with TurboTax online with Chimera/Camino, and trashed IE loooong ago. At present Safari is the main axe on LittleAL.
seeya
dxtr
|
Rob McNair-Huff 03-28-2003
12:53 PM ET (US)
|
Chris, you point out the main reason that I still have IE on my machine. In fact, I have to use IE under Classic at least twice a week in order to work with certain Java applets on Lycos.com, where I work. In short, there is no perfect browser for Mac OS X. Safari is too early in its development, even though it is a valiant effort so far. And when it comes right down to it, the most feature rich, mature, and still being actively developed browser for Mac OS X may be Mozilla. 99% of the Web pages I encounter can be used on Mozilla, including my bank's online banking site that won't work with anything other than IE or Mozilla.
|
|
Chris
03-28-2003
11:38 AM ET (US)
|
I don't know about you guys but I *have* to keep IE on my system whether I like it or not. There are still several sites that code for IE only so it is a necessary evil.
A recent example of this is TurboTax for the Web. Under Safari, toggle boxes appeared as text fields. Many javascript sites don't work well under Safari when they do under IE.
I wish I could remove it as well but I can't.
|
|
Bill
03-28-2003
11:33 AM ET (US)
|
IE? What's that? I now drive an el-CAMINO!
|
|
Michael
03-28-2003
10:49 AM ET (US)
|
...and about that long since I used that POS, too.
|
|
RB
03-28-2003
10:45 AM ET (US)
|
Why would anyone use IE as their default browser these days? As one who uses it as the default browser I should explain that IE's favorite navigation/management remains superior to all others in my view. The sidebar allows one to quickly and conveniently move around a number of web sites without loosing sight of the page presently being viewed as is the case in virtually all others at the present time...Safari and Camino specifically. The Safari implementation, which Camino is now copying, has far too many mouse clicks and movement to be either pleasant or efficient. The other items in the sidebar are useful as well.
Saving web pages into a file with IE results in an orderly single item which I can store in a folder for later retrieval. (I have used this system since NS 4.x and continue to do so even though IE has a "scrapbook" feature. Safari, Camino, and the others save pages as multiple files which are, to say the least, an unnecessary complication...actually they are just a mess.
I would certainly concur that IE should have keychain integration and that tabs would be very nice as would be a speed increase and some improvement in IEs stability (it does still crash too often for my liking). I have kept the others for use on pages which have problems in IE. Sometimes another browser will work and sometimes it is just a Mac versus code that works for Windows boxes despite problems with the code. Mozilla has been my "first alternate" for some time although I have been using Camino more and more (both have tabbed browsing now which I find especially useful in checking news sites). Safari is just a nuisance with its bookmark system and besides it has problems with a number of sites...including Apple's own.
Why would I use IE as my default browser? It does a better job on balance, even if people do dislike it because it is a M$ product.
|
Rob McNair-Huff 03-28-2003
10:02 AM ET (US)
|
Pete, I certainly didn't mean to offend with my comment. The truth for me, someone who has been using OS X since the days of the public beta in 2000, IE was the only browser running under Mac OS X for quite some time. We at least have to give Microsoft that much credit...
|
|
pete
03-28-2003
09:02 AM ET (US)
|
once the default browser that everyone running the OS was usingAs a Mac OS X user, you don't speak for me. I've always used Mozilla, launching IE only when I needed to test for compatibility. Edited 03-28-2003 09:02 AM
|
|
Thad Hoffman
03-28-2003
12:26 AM ET (US)
|
oh, FYI, all versions between 1.0.1 and 1.3 have the XMLSerializer() busted on OS X.
And 1.3 is OS X only... unfortunately. Mac classic builds are dead (at least until someone picks up maintaining the builds)
|
|
Thad Hoffman
03-28-2003
12:24 AM ET (US)
|
I'm 100% Mozilla, using 1.0.1 on my 1400c and 1.3 & 1.4a (aka nighlties) at work.
It's gotten faster and is STILL the only browser to support XMLHTTP and XMLDOM object creations on Mac (and linux). How can we create rich clients with web services and SOAP to make the Mac a richer plat if only 1 browser supports this? IE win supports this why can't MS port those ActiveXObjects over to the Mac version? Because they want to keep the Mac platform a toy/non-business looking plat. Even if I had a monopoly, I'd still want my software to be the best on any plat....
sorry to rant. Been eating at me for 2 years now...
|
New Topic
My Topics
Views:
2047
(Unique:
939
) / Subscribers:
0 | What's this?
