Time for Chrome to go
-
gggustafson wrote:
Most will produce their web site using some Microsoft product. And when Chrome doesn't work? The reaction is simply that they do not have the time or the manpower to make the site cross-browser compatible.
It wasn't that long ago that I was hearing the same argument about FF. Chrome is, by the way, here to stay. I expect that within five years it will have surpassed FF in market share.
The 3-legged stool of understanding is held up by history, languages, and mathematics. Equipped with these three you can learn anything you want to learn. But if you lack any one of them you are just another ignorant peasant with dung on your boots. R. A. H.
-
You are in a minority - although a very vocal minority. Most web pages are developed using a Microsoft product. Thus, the target browser is IE. From Browser Statistics Internet Explorer 8: 33% Firefox 3: 23% Internet Explorer 6: 13% Internet Explorer 7: 9% Google Chrome: 7% Safari (all versions): 3% All that I'm saying is that the Chrome development team missed the mark. Not that Chrome is bad. Just that I experience significant difficulties with it.
I wouldn't recommend using statistics that are obviously a little old, especially since the point you are trying to show, Chrome's low market share, has a comment on it that says it is rapidly growing.
-
I'm sorry, Google. The time has come to tell you that you need to withdraw Chrome. Although I love your search engine, I have grown to dislike your browser. Why? First, as a developer, I am again facing the "browser wars." Something that works well in Firefox, IE, Opera, and Safari, requires an inordinate amount of time to get working in Chrome. And I've tried - tried very hard to make my HTML, CSS, and Javascript work across browsers. But usually I find myself Googling for Chrome solutions. Secondly, the Google Chrome development team is arrogant. I understand the frustration that the team may feel in trying to keep standards compliant, but to reject a large percentage of the development community requests for repair is arrogant and ill-conceived. Standards can be wrong! They are the creations of humans and are fraught with misinterpretations and possibly downright errors. I speak from personal experience as a former member of the X3J9 standards technical committee. Google, you have a looser on your hands. And I think that is true in both the marketplace (ranking just above Bing) as well as in the developer community. So I suggest that you fix it or throw it.
Are you kidding? Chrome is the only Google product I use. A very fast and sleek browser.
-
Google Wave had a context checker that worked well.
Every man can tell how many goats or sheep he possesses, but not how many friends.
ChrisElston wrote:
Google Wave had a ...
Important word there is 'had'. Does anyone actually use Google Wave?
-
You are in a minority - although a very vocal minority. Most web pages are developed using a Microsoft product. Thus, the target browser is IE. From Browser Statistics Internet Explorer 8: 33% Firefox 3: 23% Internet Explorer 6: 13% Internet Explorer 7: 9% Google Chrome: 7% Safari (all versions): 3% All that I'm saying is that the Chrome development team missed the mark. Not that Chrome is bad. Just that I experience significant difficulties with it.
gggustafson wrote:
Most web pages are developed using a Microsoft product.
Where did you get that from? Statistics, please.
Software rusts. Simon Stephenson, ca 1994.
-
I'm sorry, Google. The time has come to tell you that you need to withdraw Chrome. Although I love your search engine, I have grown to dislike your browser. Why? First, as a developer, I am again facing the "browser wars." Something that works well in Firefox, IE, Opera, and Safari, requires an inordinate amount of time to get working in Chrome. And I've tried - tried very hard to make my HTML, CSS, and Javascript work across browsers. But usually I find myself Googling for Chrome solutions. Secondly, the Google Chrome development team is arrogant. I understand the frustration that the team may feel in trying to keep standards compliant, but to reject a large percentage of the development community requests for repair is arrogant and ill-conceived. Standards can be wrong! They are the creations of humans and are fraught with misinterpretations and possibly downright errors. I speak from personal experience as a former member of the X3J9 standards technical committee. Google, you have a looser on your hands. And I think that is true in both the marketplace (ranking just above Bing) as well as in the developer community. So I suggest that you fix it or throw it.
gggustafson wrote:
looser
Damn. A terrific (fived) rant, but you had to go and spoil it.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
-
I'm sorry, Google. The time has come to tell you that you need to withdraw Chrome. Although I love your search engine, I have grown to dislike your browser. Why? First, as a developer, I am again facing the "browser wars." Something that works well in Firefox, IE, Opera, and Safari, requires an inordinate amount of time to get working in Chrome. And I've tried - tried very hard to make my HTML, CSS, and Javascript work across browsers. But usually I find myself Googling for Chrome solutions. Secondly, the Google Chrome development team is arrogant. I understand the frustration that the team may feel in trying to keep standards compliant, but to reject a large percentage of the development community requests for repair is arrogant and ill-conceived. Standards can be wrong! They are the creations of humans and are fraught with misinterpretations and possibly downright errors. I speak from personal experience as a former member of the X3J9 standards technical committee. Google, you have a looser on your hands. And I think that is true in both the marketplace (ranking just above Bing) as well as in the developer community. So I suggest that you fix it or throw it.
Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose. Thirty years ago, it was all about what terminal driver could render forms faster and with less comms traffic. Today, we've replaced all the terminals with PCs. But the same challenge still remains. Good luck with that. :cool: Oh and for those needing a translation, you'll find it here[^]. :)
Chris Meech I am Canadian. [heard in a local bar] In theory there is no difference between theory and practice. In practice there is. [Yogi Berra] posting about Crystal Reports here is like discussing gay marriage on a catholic church’s website.[Nishant Sivakumar]
-
gggustafson wrote:
My spellchecker let me down.
Actually, it didn't. "looser" is a real word, so the spell-checker was correctly doing it's job. What we need in browsers is a lexical parser that can determine what you're trying to say and indicate where you might want to use a different word. This would be a boon to people that don't know when to use 0) "there", "their", and "they're" 1) "too", "to", and "two" 2) "it's" and "its" 3) "see", "sea", and "si". 4) "site" and "sight" 5) "dough" and "doe" 6) "so" and "sew" BTW, why does "dough" sound like "doe", but "tough" doesn't sound like "toe"? It's no wonder English is so hard to learn...
".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
-----
You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
-----
"Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997John Simmons / outlaw programmer wrote:
What we need in browsers is a lexical parser
Not quite John, that's still two steps away from what you want.
- Lexical anaylisis aka tokenization
- grammar analysis: Does the sentence follow all the grammar rules.
- semantic analysis: What does this sentence mean, what is it's intent.
Some of the erroneous homophones often used which you mentioned in your list might already be detected during grammar analysis. 3) 4) & 5) from your list though can be anywhere a noun needs to stand and could thus only be detected by semantic analysis. This is, as I already mentioned in a previous post, somthing that we won't have very soon. It would require true artificial intelligence. There are experiments on semantic analysis, but they only work a constrained set of topics and not in a general way. Best Regards, --MRB
-
gggustafson wrote:
Most web pages are developed using a Microsoft product.
Where did you get that from? Statistics, please.
Software rusts. Simon Stephenson, ca 1994.
I guess I should have stated "Most US web pages...." In my experience developing US business and US Government sites since 2005, all sites were developed using Visual Studio and were targeted at IE (normally 7 or above). Of course, there may be exceptions, but in my experience, that's the fact.
-
You are in a minority - although a very vocal minority. Most web pages are developed using a Microsoft product. Thus, the target browser is IE. From Browser Statistics Internet Explorer 8: 33% Firefox 3: 23% Internet Explorer 6: 13% Internet Explorer 7: 9% Google Chrome: 7% Safari (all versions): 3% All that I'm saying is that the Chrome development team missed the mark. Not that Chrome is bad. Just that I experience significant difficulties with it.
gggustafson wrote:
Most web pages are developed using a Microsoft product. Thus, the target browser is IE.
I develop using Microsoft Visual Studio, but my target is still Chrome
If my jokes make me laugh, then I have already succeeded with 100% of my target audience
-
I'm sorry, Google. The time has come to tell you that you need to withdraw Chrome. Although I love your search engine, I have grown to dislike your browser. Why? First, as a developer, I am again facing the "browser wars." Something that works well in Firefox, IE, Opera, and Safari, requires an inordinate amount of time to get working in Chrome. And I've tried - tried very hard to make my HTML, CSS, and Javascript work across browsers. But usually I find myself Googling for Chrome solutions. Secondly, the Google Chrome development team is arrogant. I understand the frustration that the team may feel in trying to keep standards compliant, but to reject a large percentage of the development community requests for repair is arrogant and ill-conceived. Standards can be wrong! They are the creations of humans and are fraught with misinterpretations and possibly downright errors. I speak from personal experience as a former member of the X3J9 standards technical committee. Google, you have a looser on your hands. And I think that is true in both the marketplace (ranking just above Bing) as well as in the developer community. So I suggest that you fix it or throw it.
-
gggustafson wrote:
My spellchecker let me down.
Actually, it didn't. "looser" is a real word, so the spell-checker was correctly doing it's job. What we need in browsers is a lexical parser that can determine what you're trying to say and indicate where you might want to use a different word. This would be a boon to people that don't know when to use 0) "there", "their", and "they're" 1) "too", "to", and "two" 2) "it's" and "its" 3) "see", "sea", and "si". 4) "site" and "sight" 5) "dough" and "doe" 6) "so" and "sew" BTW, why does "dough" sound like "doe", but "tough" doesn't sound like "toe"? It's no wonder English is so hard to learn...
".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
-----
You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
-----
"Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997John Simmons / outlaw programmer wrote:
"dough" and "doe"
Don't forget "Doh!"
John Simmons / outlaw programmer wrote:
why does "dough" sound like "doe", but "tough" doesn't sound like "toe"?
Gallegher has a great bit on this. My favorite is when he pronounces "daughter" like "laughter" - it comes out "dafter" :laugh: [edit]Ooops, typo correction[/edit]
QRZ? de WAØTTN
modified on Wednesday, June 22, 2011 9:40 AM
-
gggustafson wrote:
Most web pages are developed using a Microsoft product. Thus, the target browser is IE.
I develop using Microsoft Visual Studio, but my target is still Chrome
If my jokes make me laugh, then I have already succeeded with 100% of my target audience
As I stated earlier, in my experience I have never developed a US commercial or US Government site targeted at any browser other than IE. What's perhaps worse is that managers might care about browser compatibility but are willing to lose readers rather than spend the dollars to insure everyone can read the contents of their sites. (I must defend the managers - they have little to say when a development-illiterate senior manager says that the "site looks good enough" in IE, because that's the browser he uses.) In reading the Google Chrome bug reports, I see managers stating that they will steer their customers away from Chrome because web sites that worked in other browsers do not work in Chrome. That's an indictment!
-
:thumbsup: IE is the better option. I like it. Sometimes even firefox does not position correctly. ;P
I only read newbie introductory dummy books.
5fingers wrote:
IE is the better option. I like it
Ah. Chrome it is then.
Real men don't use instructions. They are only the manufacturers opinion on how to put the thing together. Manfred R. Bihy: "Looks as if OP is learning resistant."
-
-
Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose. Thirty years ago, it was all about what terminal driver could render forms faster and with less comms traffic. Today, we've replaced all the terminals with PCs. But the same challenge still remains. Good luck with that. :cool: Oh and for those needing a translation, you'll find it here[^]. :)
Chris Meech I am Canadian. [heard in a local bar] In theory there is no difference between theory and practice. In practice there is. [Yogi Berra] posting about Crystal Reports here is like discussing gay marriage on a catholic church’s website.[Nishant Sivakumar]
Me thinks them younguns will need a translation for "terminal driver" :-D
Panic, Chaos, Destruction. My work here is done. Drink. Get drunk. Fall over - P O'H OK, I will win to day or my name isn't Ethel Crudacre! - DD Ethel Crudacre I cannot live by bread alone. Bacon and ketchup are needed as well. - Trollslayer Have a bit more patience with newbies. Of course some of them act dumb - they're often *students*, for heaven's sake - Terry Pratchett
-
Are you kidding? Chrome is the only Google product I use. A very fast and sleek browser.
I thought this may have been a joke too. First thing I do on a new computer / guest OS is install Chrome.
-
gggustafson wrote:
My spellchecker let me down.
Actually, it didn't. "looser" is a real word, so the spell-checker was correctly doing it's job. What we need in browsers is a lexical parser that can determine what you're trying to say and indicate where you might want to use a different word. This would be a boon to people that don't know when to use 0) "there", "their", and "they're" 1) "too", "to", and "two" 2) "it's" and "its" 3) "see", "sea", and "si". 4) "site" and "sight" 5) "dough" and "doe" 6) "so" and "sew" BTW, why does "dough" sound like "doe", but "tough" doesn't sound like "toe"? It's no wonder English is so hard to learn...
".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
-----
You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
-----
"Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997I am aware of when to use all of the above but the simple truth is that I type instinctively to what I hear (in my head) therefore I will often make these "sounds like" mistakes. Of course, the question is should I care? And the answer really is no. This is no professional forum where I need to make sure my spelling is correct to keep up appearances - I know there are a lot of grammar sensitive people around here, but I am sure anyone would agree; the most important part of these "communications" (posts) is that they are understood, rather than that they are spelling correctly. Point being, if you can point out when someone has made a grammar mistake, then you must have understood the post (and is therefore not an important mistake) BTW, this is just my opinion and is in no way meant as a rant at you or anybody else
If my jokes make me laugh, then I have already succeeded with 100% of my target audience
-
:thumbsup: IE is the better option. I like it. Sometimes even firefox does not position correctly. ;P
I only read newbie introductory dummy books.
-
I am aware of when to use all of the above but the simple truth is that I type instinctively to what I hear (in my head) therefore I will often make these "sounds like" mistakes. Of course, the question is should I care? And the answer really is no. This is no professional forum where I need to make sure my spelling is correct to keep up appearances - I know there are a lot of grammar sensitive people around here, but I am sure anyone would agree; the most important part of these "communications" (posts) is that they are understood, rather than that they are spelling correctly. Point being, if you can point out when someone has made a grammar mistake, then you must have understood the post (and is therefore not an important mistake) BTW, this is just my opinion and is in no way meant as a rant at you or anybody else
If my jokes make me laugh, then I have already succeeded with 100% of my target audience
musefan wrote:
Of course, the question is should I care? And the answer really is no.
Pete
