Firefox vs IE
-
I've been coding a C# ASPX Page that includes JavaScript, and everything was going smoothly... My choice of Browser was Firefox, so that's where all my testing occured. I then gave a Beta Test to 2 other users, who complained of endless problems.... After MUCH testing, I found the problem... Firefox JavaScript Coding void(TextBox1.value=x); IE JavaScript Coding var tB1 = document.getElementById('TextBox1'); void(tB1.value=x); Both do the EXACT Same thing… IE needs the extra line... P.S Firefox allows both, so I’m using the IE Version...
-= Reelix =-
-
I've been coding a C# ASPX Page that includes JavaScript, and everything was going smoothly... My choice of Browser was Firefox, so that's where all my testing occured. I then gave a Beta Test to 2 other users, who complained of endless problems.... After MUCH testing, I found the problem... Firefox JavaScript Coding void(TextBox1.value=x); IE JavaScript Coding var tB1 = document.getElementById('TextBox1'); void(tB1.value=x); Both do the EXACT Same thing… IE needs the extra line... P.S Firefox allows both, so I’m using the IE Version...
-= Reelix =-
-
I've been coding a C# ASPX Page that includes JavaScript, and everything was going smoothly... My choice of Browser was Firefox, so that's where all my testing occured. I then gave a Beta Test to 2 other users, who complained of endless problems.... After MUCH testing, I found the problem... Firefox JavaScript Coding void(TextBox1.value=x); IE JavaScript Coding var tB1 = document.getElementById('TextBox1'); void(tB1.value=x); Both do the EXACT Same thing… IE needs the extra line... P.S Firefox allows both, so I’m using the IE Version...
-= Reelix =-
Reelix wrote:
My choice of Browser was Firefox, so that's where all my testing occured.
Not really meant to offend, but that right there is enough to make this qualify as a coding horror rather than subtle bug... I don't care which browser is "at fault"... I don't do web programming, but even I know that no two browsers work the same.
Faith is a fine invention For gentlemen who see; But microscopes are prudent In an emergency! -Emily Dickinson
-
I've been coding a C# ASPX Page that includes JavaScript, and everything was going smoothly... My choice of Browser was Firefox, so that's where all my testing occured. I then gave a Beta Test to 2 other users, who complained of endless problems.... After MUCH testing, I found the problem... Firefox JavaScript Coding void(TextBox1.value=x); IE JavaScript Coding var tB1 = document.getElementById('TextBox1'); void(tB1.value=x); Both do the EXACT Same thing… IE needs the extra line... P.S Firefox allows both, so I’m using the IE Version...
-= Reelix =-
-
document.getElementById('TextBox1'); is the recommended way to do it, getElementById is W3C standard recommendation. Oli
One step further, you could do this with one line if you do not need the variable elsewhere. document.getElementById('TextBox1').value = "XX";
-
I've been coding a C# ASPX Page that includes JavaScript, and everything was going smoothly... My choice of Browser was Firefox, so that's where all my testing occured. I then gave a Beta Test to 2 other users, who complained of endless problems.... After MUCH testing, I found the problem... Firefox JavaScript Coding void(TextBox1.value=x); IE JavaScript Coding var tB1 = document.getElementById('TextBox1'); void(tB1.value=x); Both do the EXACT Same thing… IE needs the extra line... P.S Firefox allows both, so I’m using the IE Version...
-= Reelix =-
What about Opera and Safari?
Broken Bokken You can't carry out a ninja-style assasination dressed as an astronaut. It's the luminous fabric; too visible. - Tripod http://www.brokenbokken.com
-
What about Opera and Safari?
Broken Bokken You can't carry out a ninja-style assasination dressed as an astronaut. It's the luminous fabric; too visible. - Tripod http://www.brokenbokken.com
Opera and Safari on Windows will work fine. Safari for Mac has some 'issues' but for the most part, as far as Javascript goes, IE is the one that doesn't belong. The other browsers seem to be fairly consistent in their Javascript implementations. Remember, Microsoft WANTS to have web sites out there which are broken in all browsers but IE - that is why a Sharepoint web site, and much of the stuff on microsoft.com and MSN can't be used with Firefox. This is also why Windows Update won't work - there is no reason why Windows Update couldn't work perfectly fine with ANY browser - Microsoft has deliberately made the choice to break it in anything other than IE.
"Quality Software since 1983!"
See my personal web site for photos, info, and a really weird blog
Want to fly model aircraft? Read my beginner site to find out how! -
Opera and Safari on Windows will work fine. Safari for Mac has some 'issues' but for the most part, as far as Javascript goes, IE is the one that doesn't belong. The other browsers seem to be fairly consistent in their Javascript implementations. Remember, Microsoft WANTS to have web sites out there which are broken in all browsers but IE - that is why a Sharepoint web site, and much of the stuff on microsoft.com and MSN can't be used with Firefox. This is also why Windows Update won't work - there is no reason why Windows Update couldn't work perfectly fine with ANY browser - Microsoft has deliberately made the choice to break it in anything other than IE.
"Quality Software since 1983!"
See my personal web site for photos, info, and a really weird blog
Want to fly model aircraft? Read my beginner site to find out how!Jasmine2501 wrote:
Windows Update won't work - there is no reason why Windows Update couldn't work perfectly fine with ANY browser - Microsoft has deliberately made the choice to break it in anything other than IE.
I believe Windows Update uses an ActiveX control because it needs to access the system in a way that is impossible without such control (a level that's impossible using JavaScript). I don't think ActiveX controls are supported properly by FireFox. In short I think the statement, "there is no reason why Windows Update couldn't work perfectly fine with ANY browser", is overly simplistic.
Steve
-
Jasmine2501 wrote:
Windows Update won't work - there is no reason why Windows Update couldn't work perfectly fine with ANY browser - Microsoft has deliberately made the choice to break it in anything other than IE.
I believe Windows Update uses an ActiveX control because it needs to access the system in a way that is impossible without such control (a level that's impossible using JavaScript). I don't think ActiveX controls are supported properly by FireFox. In short I think the statement, "there is no reason why Windows Update couldn't work perfectly fine with ANY browser", is overly simplistic.
Steve
But actually, in a time where we spend half the time developing web services and cross-system technologies, why do we need an ActiveX control for anything? Anyhow, I don't think FF + Active X is the issue. Check systemrequirementlabs.com for example; they use an ActiveX component there too to determine your system capabilities and check if they meet requirements for certain gaming software. Works fine on Firefox. I even used it in Safari for Windows. So ActiveX support is not the issue, I'd say.
Kazz
"Users are there to click on things, not think. Let the archs do the damn thinking."
-
But actually, in a time where we spend half the time developing web services and cross-system technologies, why do we need an ActiveX control for anything? Anyhow, I don't think FF + Active X is the issue. Check systemrequirementlabs.com for example; they use an ActiveX component there too to determine your system capabilities and check if they meet requirements for certain gaming software. Works fine on Firefox. I even used it in Safari for Windows. So ActiveX support is not the issue, I'd say.
Kazz
"Users are there to click on things, not think. Let the archs do the damn thinking."
Ariel Kazeed wrote:
But actually, in a time where we spend half the time developing web services and cross-system technologies, why do we need an ActiveX control for anything?
Because, in the case of Windows Update, the installers need a level of access that can't be achieved with JavaScript.
Steve
-
Ariel Kazeed wrote:
But actually, in a time where we spend half the time developing web services and cross-system technologies, why do we need an ActiveX control for anything?
Because, in the case of Windows Update, the installers need a level of access that can't be achieved with JavaScript.
Steve
Stephen Hewitt wrote:
Because, in the case of Windows Update, the installers need a level of access that can't be achieved with JavaScript.
Which means Windows Update is outdated for, as far as I know, neither MacOSX or any linux distribution needs a browser add-on for updating.
Kazz
"Users are there to click on things, not think. Let the archs do the damn thinking."
-
Stephen Hewitt wrote:
Because, in the case of Windows Update, the installers need a level of access that can't be achieved with JavaScript.
Which means Windows Update is outdated for, as far as I know, neither MacOSX or any linux distribution needs a browser add-on for updating.
Kazz
"Users are there to click on things, not think. Let the archs do the damn thinking."
Ariel Kazeed wrote:
Which means Windows Update is outdated for, as far as I know, neither MacOSX or any linux distribution needs a browser add-on for updating.
How do you figure that? On Windows Update (http://windowsupdate.microsoft.com/[^]) the browser can access the system and display which updates you need. Read that last part again: the browser, not another system component or a downloaded application, but the browser. The browser doesn't just display a list of updates, it examines your system and only shows what you need. Things such as OS version, installed software and installed devices all may effect this filtering. The ActiveX control is only there to integrate that functionality into the browser. If you schedule an update no ActiveX is needed, for example. You don't seem to have a grasp of the issues involved.
Steve