Avant Browser - pros and cons
-
David Stone wrote:
Plus, it's still based on IE, which I despise
Do you have a specific reason for not using IE? Do you just dislike the MSHTML engine? Are you a slave to to standards*? Maybe you just dislike Closed Source Software? Do these questions seem familiar? * And before you start on too much about standards support, let's not forget that a lot of the advances in web browsing are because the standards were not adhered to, not in spite of it (tables and Netscape being an obvious example)
Graham Bradshaw wrote:
Do you have a specific reason for not using IE?
Yes. And I've mentioned them all before. For the sake of this discussion, I'll leave out web standards that are newer than IE 6 (as that would be unfair to IE...seeing how it hasn't had any opportunity to catch up in the 5 years since its last major release). Here are a few of the reasons I dislike IE:
-
ActiveX. It's the primary vehicle for spyware/adware/crapware. I love the fact that, in Firefox, I can look up lyrics on a lyrics website and not get 9 billion dialogs asking me to install every ActiveX control known to man.
-
I dislike the fact that IE 6 hasn't seen any major update for nearly 5 years. And you can't really call the XP SP2 stuff a major update.
-
I dislike the fact that IE botches a lot of things in the CSS 2 model...despite CSS 2 having been standardized for quite some time now. (1998...7 years ago.) My favorite pet peeve is the fact that form elements cover floating divs. Nice.
-
I dislike the fact that IE doesn't have tabbed browsing. Despite every other browser having had tabs for a very long time now. (Opera had 'em first. Props to them.)
So. There are just 4 things that I find irritating about IE. I have more...I just don't want to rant.
Graham Bradshaw wrote:
Do you just dislike the MSHTML engine?
Correct. See above.
Graham Bradshaw wrote:
Are you a slave to to standards*?
Nope. I don't mind it when people extend the standards (-moz-opacity, anybody? Mozilla has been actively extending CSS 3 for a while now.)...because that is where innovation comes from. I do like it when people implement the standard fully first. Especially something as crucial as CSS.
Graham Bradshaw wrote:
Maybe you just dislike Closed Source Software?
Um. No. I love Visual Studio. I love Office. I love .NET. I love Windows. I love VMWare Workstation. I love FeedDemon. I love all these really cool Closed Source applications. I am by no means an open source zealot. I just love Firefox too.
And
-
-
Graham Bradshaw wrote:
There's a number of UI inconsistencies (a particular bugbear of mine)
I haven't noticed them. Would you mind pointing them out?
Graham Bradshaw wrote:
It doesn't import cookies properly (it broke some "saved logon" sites)
Also something I haven't noticed. Works fine for me every time.
Graham Bradshaw wrote:
It doesn't hande CP's menus or quote selected text feature
The menu issue was weird. And the QST feature does look like a regression between 1.0.x and 1.5. However, Shog and I both sent Chris a workaround, so it should be fixed pretty soon here.
Graham Bradshaw wrote:
The clear implication here is that if Firefox does not render a site properly, it's the fault of the web site.
Actually, it usually is. Most websites that don't work in Firefox blindly code for things like document.all support (which the W3C does not specify in the HTML specs, but the IE devs "helpfully" added) or have non-standard Javascript that relies on DOM features that aren't guaranteed to be there. The DOM that IE exposes is different in enough ways than the DOM for Firefox that if you only code for IE, you've pretty much screwed over the Firefox users of your site. And the Reporter is there so that the Mozilla Foundation can work with companies whose websites don't work in Firefox and help the get the website "fixed" so it works in Firefox too. I don't think that's arrogance...any more so than web developers who blindly assume all their users will be IE users.
And that's not all. I just discovered this cool concept called "object oriented design". I can't wait to convert my subroutines to class methods! :-D -Ravi Bhavnani on finally installing XP SP2...in December 2005
David Stone wrote:
I haven't noticed them. Would you mind pointing them out?
- Tools | Options | Content -> Colors the browse is non-standard for Windows
- Some resizable diaglogs have the resize "cue" bottom right, some don't
- Some pages have accelerators for tabs, some don't
- Not all controls have accelerators
- Some dialogs have a Help button, some don't.
- Tools | Options. Pick advanced section, pick security tab. Click Revocation lists, hit help. Read the helpful help text.
I've had FF downloaded for no more than half an hour, and I've found all those already...
David Stone wrote:
Actually, it usually is.
That's not my point. I'm not in a position to comment on the reasons. But, it's like writing error messages for any application. You never, ever blame the user, whether it's their fault or not.
-
If you don't deal with HTML and web development often then IE is just fine. One thing you should appreciate about Firefox and the number one reason I use it whenever I can is that it has brought competition back to the browser market.
andy brummer wrote:
If you don't deal with HTML and web development often then IE is just fine.
Can you shed some more light on that. i do a lot of HTML, web development but normally stick to HTML tables and java scripts :) What is the difference ? , thanks "Not everything that counts can be counted..." -Albert Einstein
-
And besides all that, where would I be without my GreaseMonkey or my mouse gestures or my delicious extension or my Gmail Notifier or my Web Developer extension or my DOM inspector or Venkman...
Firefox is awesome. I can use a base install of Firefox all day long. But the extensions make it 100 billion times better.
And that's not all. I just discovered this cool concept called "object oriented design". I can't wait to convert my subroutines to class methods! :-D -Ravi Bhavnani on finally installing XP SP2...in December 2005
-
Judah Himango wrote:
a lot of sites don't render right or don't function right
I've been using FF for a very long time. Since before it was called Firefox. (Or even Firebird). And I have to say, there are a few pages that don't work right. However, most of the pages I visit work perfectly in Firefox, especially since 1.0 was released and web devs have stepped up to the plate to make their sites work in it.
And that's not all. I just discovered this cool concept called "object oriented design". I can't wait to convert my subroutines to class methods! :-D -Ravi Bhavnani on finally installing XP SP2...in December 2005
-- modified at 19:09 Monday 5th December, 2005
It's kind of ironic, but just as we're talking about Firefox rendering issues, Firefox renders your post oddly: clickity[^]. Nevermind, looks like CodeProject is at fault here, as the same thing shows up in IE. Is it because I used the blockquote tag instead of the normal quote? Well, the quote button doesn't work in my current FF version. ;P
Tech, life, family, faith: Give me a visit. I'm currently blogging about: Bought a House! Judah Himango
-
David Stone wrote:
I haven't noticed them. Would you mind pointing them out?
- Tools | Options | Content -> Colors the browse is non-standard for Windows
- Some resizable diaglogs have the resize "cue" bottom right, some don't
- Some pages have accelerators for tabs, some don't
- Not all controls have accelerators
- Some dialogs have a Help button, some don't.
- Tools | Options. Pick advanced section, pick security tab. Click Revocation lists, hit help. Read the helpful help text.
I've had FF downloaded for no more than half an hour, and I've found all those already...
David Stone wrote:
Actually, it usually is.
That's not my point. I'm not in a position to comment on the reasons. But, it's like writing error messages for any application. You never, ever blame the user, whether it's their fault or not.
Excellent points about the UI.
With repsect to your comments about writing error messages and the Reporter...I'm thinking this is a bit different. The Mozilla Foundation isn't really blaming the user...they're blaming the content providers for providing IE only content...which, IMO, is where the blame needs to go. I don't think the blame should go on Mozilla, Apple, Opera, the KHTML folks, or anybody else for not providing rendering engines that act exactly like IE's. Web Devs who ignorantly assume that their user base is only going to hit their site with IE are the ones to blame. And there are ways to minimize the amount of double-coding necessary to support all of those browsers.
And that's not all. I just discovered this cool concept called "object oriented design". I can't wait to convert my subroutines to class methods! :-D -Ravi Bhavnani on finally installing XP SP2...in December 2005
-
Quartz... wrote:
its Definitely not for FF users because its too sophisticated and a bit complicated also due to enhanced feature list
:laugh::laugh: That is rich. That's possibly the most hilarious thing I've heard in quite a while...
Quartz... wrote:
The Pro's
That list sounds exactly like everything Firefox does... :~
Do you have a specific reason for not using Firefox? Do you just dislike the Gecko engine? Are you not a big fan of standards? Maybe you just dislike Open Source Software?
And that's not all. I just discovered this cool concept called "object oriented design". I can't wait to convert my subroutines to class methods! :-D -Ravi Bhavnani on finally installing XP SP2...in December 2005
David Stone wrote:
Maybe you just dislike Open Source Software?
Can't sleep, communists will eat me... :~
Calvin's my hero. It used to be Shog but then I saw where he made a programming mistake and admitted it publicly. I didn't know Shog made mistakes so now he's 2nd on "The All Time Hero List" and Calvin is back at #1. - code-frog, Calling Cookie Experts...
-
It's kind of ironic, but just as we're talking about Firefox rendering issues, Firefox renders your post oddly: clickity[^]. Nevermind, looks like CodeProject is at fault here, as the same thing shows up in IE. Is it because I used the blockquote tag instead of the normal quote? Well, the quote button doesn't work in my current FF version. ;P
Tech, life, family, faith: Give me a visit. I'm currently blogging about: Bought a House! Judah Himango
Naw, FF and CP are both innocent - David just can't get his HTML right... ;P
Calvin's my hero. It used to be Shog but then I saw where he made a programming mistake and admitted it publicly. I didn't know Shog made mistakes so now he's 2nd on "The All Time Hero List" and Calvin is back at #1. - code-frog, Calling Cookie Experts...
-
It's kind of ironic, but just as we're talking about Firefox rendering issues, Firefox renders your post oddly: clickity[^]. Nevermind, looks like CodeProject is at fault here, as the same thing shows up in IE. Is it because I used the blockquote tag instead of the normal quote? Well, the quote button doesn't work in my current FF version. ;P
Tech, life, family, faith: Give me a visit. I'm currently blogging about: Bought a House! Judah Himango
No...that's my fault. I'm goofing off with CPhog and I've been screwing up quotes for the past few days. ;P
And that's not all. I just discovered this cool concept called "object oriented design". I can't wait to convert my subroutines to class methods! :-D -Ravi Bhavnani on finally installing XP SP2...in December 2005
-
Naw, FF and CP are both innocent - David just can't get his HTML right... ;P
Calvin's my hero. It used to be Shog but then I saw where he made a programming mistake and admitted it publicly. I didn't know Shog made mistakes so now he's 2nd on "The All Time Hero List" and Calvin is back at #1. - code-frog, Calling Cookie Experts...
Shhh...go away. Midas is making life a little more miserable than it should be. I had the damn quote problem fixed...and then I went and borked it again.
And that's not all. I just discovered this cool concept called "object oriented design". I can't wait to convert my subroutines to class methods! :-D -Ravi Bhavnani on finally installing XP SP2...in December 2005
-
andy brummer wrote:
If you don't deal with HTML and web development often then IE is just fine.
Can you shed some more light on that. i do a lot of HTML, web development but normally stick to HTML tables and java scripts :) What is the difference ? , thanks "Not everything that counts can be counted..." -Albert Einstein
The issue is that you probably haven't ventured beyond tables and simple Javascript. Once you start using things like CSS 2 (or wishing you could implement something cool from CSS 3) or heavily using the DOM, you'll find that you hate IE.
And that's not all. I just discovered this cool concept called "object oriented design". I can't wait to convert my subroutines to class methods! :-D -Ravi Bhavnani on finally installing XP SP2...in December 2005
-
No...that's my fault. I'm goofing off with CPhog and I've been screwing up quotes for the past few days. ;P
And that's not all. I just discovered this cool concept called "object oriented design". I can't wait to convert my subroutines to class methods! :-D -Ravi Bhavnani on finally installing XP SP2...in December 2005
Ah, good that explains it then. On a somewhat related note, is the "quote selected text" button working for you? I'm running FF 1.5, and when I hit that button, I get a CP message box saying, "You did not select any text to quote.", even though I in fact have text selected.
Tech, life, family, faith: Give me a visit. I'm currently blogging about: Bought a House! Judah Himango
-
Ah, good that explains it then. On a somewhat related note, is the "quote selected text" button working for you? I'm running FF 1.5, and when I hit that button, I get a CP message box saying, "You did not select any text to quote.", even though I in fact have text selected.
Tech, life, family, faith: Give me a visit. I'm currently blogging about: Bought a House! Judah Himango
I don't use the reply page for posting. But yes, the QST button is broken. It looks like there was a regression between 1.0.x and 1.5 in which the selected text was cleared when you clicked a form element. There's a workaround that Shog and I have both sent to Chris...but he's been on vacation for a bit...so it might be a bit before he fixes it.
In the interim...you could always try out Greasemonkey and CPhog. :)
And that's not all. I just discovered this cool concept called "object oriented design". I can't wait to convert my subroutines to class methods! :-D -Ravi Bhavnani on finally installing XP SP2...in December 2005
-
I figured FF would come out with a script for that sooner or later. FF uses a hell of a lot more memory than that. I've caught FF using 2 gigs+ on multiple occassions. I open FF when I need to and close it when I'm done. - Rex
Some assembly required. Code-frog System Architects, Inc.
code-frog wrote:
I've caught FF using 2 gigs+ on multiple occassions
Wow. I've never seen that happen.
And that's not all. I just discovered this cool concept called "object oriented design". I can't wait to convert my subroutines to class methods! :-D -Ravi Bhavnani on finally installing XP SP2...in December 2005
-
Naw, FF and CP are both innocent - David just can't get his HTML right... ;P
Calvin's my hero. It used to be Shog but then I saw where he made a programming mistake and admitted it publicly. I didn't know Shog made mistakes so now he's 2nd on "The All Time Hero List" and Calvin is back at #1. - code-frog, Calling Cookie Experts...
Thanks. Hey, does CPhog work with FF 1.5? I'm not seeing the Quick Reply and all that I used to see, although I do see the monkey down in the corner of the status bar. *edit* Nevermind, just had to restart a couple times. It's working now. Awesome little tool by the way. :cool:
Tech, life, family, faith: Give me a visit. I'm currently blogging about: Bought a House! Judah Himango
-
Thanks. Hey, does CPhog work with FF 1.5? I'm not seeing the Quick Reply and all that I used to see, although I do see the monkey down in the corner of the status bar. *edit* Nevermind, just had to restart a couple times. It's working now. Awesome little tool by the way. :cool:
Tech, life, family, faith: Give me a visit. I'm currently blogging about: Bought a House! Judah Himango
And that's not all. I just discovered this cool concept called "object oriented design". I can't wait to convert my subroutines to class methods! :-D -Ravi Bhavnani on finally installing XP SP2...in December 2005
-
andy brummer wrote:
If you don't deal with HTML and web development often then IE is just fine.
Can you shed some more light on that. i do a lot of HTML, web development but normally stick to HTML tables and java scripts :) What is the difference ? , thanks "Not everything that counts can be counted..." -Albert Einstein
Quartz... wrote:
What is the difference ?
Top of my list:
- Leak-free closures
- Combo boxes that can be styled and aren't perpetually at the top of the z-order
- Use XPath on HTML documents
- Web Developer toolbar and DOM Inspector
- Support for handy CSS selectors and pseudo elements
- Better PNG support
position: fixed;- E4X
----- I just want you to be happy, That's my only little wish...
-
Excellent points about the UI.
With repsect to your comments about writing error messages and the Reporter...I'm thinking this is a bit different. The Mozilla Foundation isn't really blaming the user...they're blaming the content providers for providing IE only content...which, IMO, is where the blame needs to go. I don't think the blame should go on Mozilla, Apple, Opera, the KHTML folks, or anybody else for not providing rendering engines that act exactly like IE's. Web Devs who ignorantly assume that their user base is only going to hit their site with IE are the ones to blame. And there are ways to minimize the amount of double-coding necessary to support all of those browsers.
And that's not all. I just discovered this cool concept called "object oriented design". I can't wait to convert my subroutines to class methods! :-D -Ravi Bhavnani on finally installing XP SP2...in December 2005
I hear what you say, but I think my point still stands. In writing an error message (e.g. for a desktop app, and yes, this case is slightly different), you (as the application) take the blame yourself. So, not:
You have specified an incorrect location to save the file.but:WhizzyApp was unable to save the file. The folder does not exist.and I don't see Firefox going that far. They aren't taking responsibility for the problem. In the example above, it's not the application's fault that the user has given a bad location for the file, but the program takes responsibility anyway. It's subtle wording like that that makes all the difference about how applications are percieved, especically by non-technical users. -
And that's not all. I just discovered this cool concept called "object oriented design". I can't wait to convert my subroutines to class methods! :-D -Ravi Bhavnani on finally installing XP SP2...in December 2005
Yes, and oddly enough, for some reason I'm now seeing the quick reply. I swear, it was not there the last time I ran FF. Maybe I just had to restart it a couple times. X| Thanks.
Tech, life, family, faith: Give me a visit. I'm currently blogging about: Bought a House! Judah Himango
-
I don't use the reply page for posting. But yes, the QST button is broken. It looks like there was a regression between 1.0.x and 1.5 in which the selected text was cleared when you clicked a form element. There's a workaround that Shog and I have both sent to Chris...but he's been on vacation for a bit...so it might be a bit before he fixes it.
In the interim...you could always try out Greasemonkey and CPhog. :)
And that's not all. I just discovered this cool concept called "object oriented design". I can't wait to convert my subroutines to class methods! :-D -Ravi Bhavnani on finally installing XP SP2...in December 2005
David Stone wrote:
you could always try out Greasemonkey and CPhog.
Yeah, I had been using it until 1.5, then it seemed to stop working (even after GM 0.6.4). I think I might've had an old version of CPhog though, just upgraded and after a few restarts it does seem to work. I didn't realize Quote Selected Text is different under CPhog. That's great, it does appear to work (as I just quoted you above) :cool: Now, how do I add my sig to Quick Reply?
