Firefox Is Heading Towards Trouble
-
I don't agree with your last statement, FF is useful if for no other reason than providing a way to check something works how IE is *supposed* to handle it, but that aside: I do agree with the part about small annoyances. There are just too many unidentifiable differences in experience from both IE and other Windows applications that makes working in FF a continual struggle. I am a big fan of software complying to standard user experiences, and appreciate how damned near impossible it is to get it right all of the time, but with IE around as a credible and conforming alternative I have no desire to use FF for actual web use (only for development).
Ðavid Wulff The Royal Woofle Museum
Audioscrobbler :: flikrDie Freiheit spielt auf allen Geigen
What are these small annoyances? I haven't noticed them, and I've been using Firefox for a while (since it was called Firebird, anyway)... :~
[Cheshire] I can't afford those plastic things to cover the electric sockets so I just draw bunny faces on the electric outlets to scare the kids away from them... [RLtim] Newsflash! Kids aren't afraid of bunnies. [Cheshire] Oh they will be... -Bash.org
-
What are these small annoyances? I haven't noticed them, and I've been using Firefox for a while (since it was called Firebird, anyway)... :~
[Cheshire] I can't afford those plastic things to cover the electric sockets so I just draw bunny faces on the electric outlets to scare the kids away from them... [RLtim] Newsflash! Kids aren't afraid of bunnies. [Cheshire] Oh they will be... -Bash.org
I was very careful to say "unidentifiable annoyances" because I am not a UI expert and I cannot easily list them off. One big one that comes to mind and gets me virtually every time I use FF is the wheel scrolling. It just doesn't provide the same experience or UI as every other Windows application I use so it becomes a conscious effort to use it correctly. I too have used FF since well into it's FB days, including a period of exclusivity to try and adopt it - like exposure to measles. :) Serious useability professionals make serious amounts of money for a very good reason - they can identify these things and the end result for the product is one that people can use flawlessly without even reaslising it. Office has always been a great example of this - even with the various shortcomings in its history it still worked perfectly. Most of the time you are performing tasks in an application you are not actually doing something unique to that software - shortcuts, menus, controls, etc. When you get so used to them that they become automatic reactions then using something that does it differently is an effort. Software doesn't compete on features, it competes on usability. The problem is not just a software thing, it's the same for every product out there. For example, people who drive French cars 90% of the time usually find it a conscious effort to drive a foreign car not because they contain different features but because they are presented and work every so slightly differently to how they expect. When I spend 90% of my time in front of a computer using applications and an OS with totally consistent experiences then switching to and from another application that does things even slightly differently is a major productivity problem, stress builder, and more.
Ðavid Wulff The Royal Woofle Museum
Audioscrobbler :: flikrDie Freiheit spielt auf allen Geigen
-
What are these small annoyances? I haven't noticed them, and I've been using Firefox for a while (since it was called Firebird, anyway)... :~
[Cheshire] I can't afford those plastic things to cover the electric sockets so I just draw bunny faces on the electric outlets to scare the kids away from them... [RLtim] Newsflash! Kids aren't afraid of bunnies. [Cheshire] Oh they will be... -Bash.org
The biggest problem with FF is it's habit of always wanting an internet connection handy. That's fine if you have an 'always on' connection, but being on dialup as I am it does tend to get rather expensive. I like to bring up a page, and then disconnect my modem while I read it. I also have a habit of walking away, leaving the page up so I can come back to it later. FF would wait a while and then reconnect the modem, tying up my phone line and wasting limited connection minutes. Remembering to manually set FF to offline use is a possibility, but then I have to set it back to online when I want to do anything later. Small annoyance number one. When browsing the forums here on CP I would never know where I was going to end up when I click on a message to read it, The page would just randomly scroll to where it felt like, and then I would have to scroll the message back into view. Annoyance number two.
"You're obviously a superstar." - Christian Graus about me - 12 Feb '03 "Obviously ??? You're definitely a superstar!!!" mYkel - 21 Jun '04 Within you lies the power for good - Use it!
Honoured as one of The Most Helpful Members of 2004
-
I was very careful to say "unidentifiable annoyances" because I am not a UI expert and I cannot easily list them off. One big one that comes to mind and gets me virtually every time I use FF is the wheel scrolling. It just doesn't provide the same experience or UI as every other Windows application I use so it becomes a conscious effort to use it correctly. I too have used FF since well into it's FB days, including a period of exclusivity to try and adopt it - like exposure to measles. :) Serious useability professionals make serious amounts of money for a very good reason - they can identify these things and the end result for the product is one that people can use flawlessly without even reaslising it. Office has always been a great example of this - even with the various shortcomings in its history it still worked perfectly. Most of the time you are performing tasks in an application you are not actually doing something unique to that software - shortcuts, menus, controls, etc. When you get so used to them that they become automatic reactions then using something that does it differently is an effort. Software doesn't compete on features, it competes on usability. The problem is not just a software thing, it's the same for every product out there. For example, people who drive French cars 90% of the time usually find it a conscious effort to drive a foreign car not because they contain different features but because they are presented and work every so slightly differently to how they expect. When I spend 90% of my time in front of a computer using applications and an OS with totally consistent experiences then switching to and from another application that does things even slightly differently is a major productivity problem, stress builder, and more.
Ðavid Wulff The Royal Woofle Museum
Audioscrobbler :: flikrDie Freiheit spielt auf allen Geigen
Tools->Options->Advanced->Use Smooth Scrolling will turn on smooth scrolling and provide you with the same experience you get in IE (it's turned off by default in Gecko. I'm not sure why. Although I'm positive a search through bugzilla might provide some insight). And I understand the rest of your post. I'll agree that UI guidelines are there for a reason and that maintaing consistency of usability throughout all applications on an OS is a very important goal. I think, though, that Firefox conforms really well to the Windows UI guidelines. At least, I don't feel uncomfortable using it. Whereas I can't say the same about IE. I get irritated every time I try to use the damn thing. Stuff just doesn't work the way I expect it to. I guess it's all a matter of preference though. You can keep your inferior browser... ;)
[Cheshire] I can't afford those plastic things to cover the electric sockets so I just draw bunny faces on the electric outlets to scare the kids away from them... [RLtim] Newsflash! Kids aren't afraid of bunnies. [Cheshire] Oh they will be... -Bash.org
-
Tools->Options->Advanced->Use Smooth Scrolling will turn on smooth scrolling and provide you with the same experience you get in IE (it's turned off by default in Gecko. I'm not sure why. Although I'm positive a search through bugzilla might provide some insight). And I understand the rest of your post. I'll agree that UI guidelines are there for a reason and that maintaing consistency of usability throughout all applications on an OS is a very important goal. I think, though, that Firefox conforms really well to the Windows UI guidelines. At least, I don't feel uncomfortable using it. Whereas I can't say the same about IE. I get irritated every time I try to use the damn thing. Stuff just doesn't work the way I expect it to. I guess it's all a matter of preference though. You can keep your inferior browser... ;)
[Cheshire] I can't afford those plastic things to cover the electric sockets so I just draw bunny faces on the electric outlets to scare the kids away from them... [RLtim] Newsflash! Kids aren't afraid of bunnies. [Cheshire] Oh they will be... -Bash.org
David Stone wrote: Tools->Options->Advanced->Use Smooth Scrolling will turn on smooth scrolling and provide you with the same experience you get in IE I already have that option activated. :) The experience is not the same though. A wheel click in FF always feels like you have to press it harder than in other applications - now obviously you don't so it must be the user experience it gives. Pressure sensitive mice buttons would be cool for gaming and graphics work though. David Stone wrote: UI guidelines I sort of half-disagree here: UI guidelines have nothing to do with anything because as you go on to say the success of a UI always comes down to preference. Consistency of usability does matter though. I didn't mean to suggest that FF got it's UI wrong and others have got it right, just that conformity is the important thing. There is a reason that IE and many other Microsoft applications have non-standard behaviour from an outsiders pov - it's so they work as the user will expect them to. It's only really clever people like us that ever complain. :)
Ðavid Wulff The Royal Woofle Museum
Audioscrobbler :: flikrDie Freiheit spielt auf allen Geigen
-
The biggest problem with FF is it's habit of always wanting an internet connection handy. That's fine if you have an 'always on' connection, but being on dialup as I am it does tend to get rather expensive. I like to bring up a page, and then disconnect my modem while I read it. I also have a habit of walking away, leaving the page up so I can come back to it later. FF would wait a while and then reconnect the modem, tying up my phone line and wasting limited connection minutes. Remembering to manually set FF to offline use is a possibility, but then I have to set it back to online when I want to do anything later. Small annoyance number one. When browsing the forums here on CP I would never know where I was going to end up when I click on a message to read it, The page would just randomly scroll to where it felt like, and then I would have to scroll the message back into view. Annoyance number two.
"You're obviously a superstar." - Christian Graus about me - 12 Feb '03 "Obviously ??? You're definitely a superstar!!!" mYkel - 21 Jun '04 Within you lies the power for good - Use it!
Honoured as one of The Most Helpful Members of 2004
- This should help with your dialup problem. 2) The scrolling offset isn't random. It's offset by the amount of space that the last post took up. So if you're reading a freaking huge post and then click on a different post, the page won't focus on the new post, it'll keep you where you are. But since the large post has collapsed, the forum has moved back up the page. This is an issue with the forum code rather than Firefox. Nowhere in the SwitchMessage javascript function does the code call the focus() method on the tr for the message header. IE does this nicely for you, sure. But it's non-standard. It's another case of IE doing its own thing.
[Cheshire] I can't afford those plastic things to cover the electric sockets so I just draw bunny faces on the electric outlets to scare the kids away from them... [RLtim] Newsflash! Kids aren't afraid of bunnies. [Cheshire] Oh they will be... -Bash.org
-
David Stone wrote: Tools->Options->Advanced->Use Smooth Scrolling will turn on smooth scrolling and provide you with the same experience you get in IE I already have that option activated. :) The experience is not the same though. A wheel click in FF always feels like you have to press it harder than in other applications - now obviously you don't so it must be the user experience it gives. Pressure sensitive mice buttons would be cool for gaming and graphics work though. David Stone wrote: UI guidelines I sort of half-disagree here: UI guidelines have nothing to do with anything because as you go on to say the success of a UI always comes down to preference. Consistency of usability does matter though. I didn't mean to suggest that FF got it's UI wrong and others have got it right, just that conformity is the important thing. There is a reason that IE and many other Microsoft applications have non-standard behaviour from an outsiders pov - it's so they work as the user will expect them to. It's only really clever people like us that ever complain. :)
Ðavid Wulff The Royal Woofle Museum
Audioscrobbler :: flikrDie Freiheit spielt auf allen Geigen
A wheel click in FF always feels like you have to press it harder :wtf: Ooooookay. Y'know David, you're not exactly the most normal person on the face of the planet. Maybe you shouldn't be the one to talk about conformity. ;P Pressure sensitive mice buttons would be cool for gaming and graphics work though. That's why the Xbox controllers are pressure sensitive. Provides for a great experience. If I want to creep forward in Halo 2, I just press the stick up very slightly. Or if I want to squeeze of one round in my fully-auto SMG, I just squeeze slightly. Very cool. And I wish I had the same experience while playing CounterStrike.
[Cheshire] I can't afford those plastic things to cover the electric sockets so I just draw bunny faces on the electric outlets to scare the kids away from them... [RLtim] Newsflash! Kids aren't afraid of bunnies. [Cheshire] Oh they will be... -Bash.org
-
A wheel click in FF always feels like you have to press it harder :wtf: Ooooookay. Y'know David, you're not exactly the most normal person on the face of the planet. Maybe you shouldn't be the one to talk about conformity. ;P Pressure sensitive mice buttons would be cool for gaming and graphics work though. That's why the Xbox controllers are pressure sensitive. Provides for a great experience. If I want to creep forward in Halo 2, I just press the stick up very slightly. Or if I want to squeeze of one round in my fully-auto SMG, I just squeeze slightly. Very cool. And I wish I had the same experience while playing CounterStrike.
[Cheshire] I can't afford those plastic things to cover the electric sockets so I just draw bunny faces on the electric outlets to scare the kids away from them... [RLtim] Newsflash! Kids aren't afraid of bunnies. [Cheshire] Oh they will be... -Bash.org
David Stone wrote: That's why the Xbox controllers are pressure sensitive And the reason why my dad will never, ever, be able to win against me in an an XBox FPS. :rolleyes: David Stone wrote: Ooooookay. Y'know David, you're not exactly the most normal person on the face of the planet. Maybe you shouldn't be the one to talk about conformity. You're talking to yourself again... ;)
Ðavid Wulff The Royal Woofle Museum
Audioscrobbler :: flikrDie Freiheit spielt auf allen Geigen
-
I was very careful to say "unidentifiable annoyances" because I am not a UI expert and I cannot easily list them off. One big one that comes to mind and gets me virtually every time I use FF is the wheel scrolling. It just doesn't provide the same experience or UI as every other Windows application I use so it becomes a conscious effort to use it correctly. I too have used FF since well into it's FB days, including a period of exclusivity to try and adopt it - like exposure to measles. :) Serious useability professionals make serious amounts of money for a very good reason - they can identify these things and the end result for the product is one that people can use flawlessly without even reaslising it. Office has always been a great example of this - even with the various shortcomings in its history it still worked perfectly. Most of the time you are performing tasks in an application you are not actually doing something unique to that software - shortcuts, menus, controls, etc. When you get so used to them that they become automatic reactions then using something that does it differently is an effort. Software doesn't compete on features, it competes on usability. The problem is not just a software thing, it's the same for every product out there. For example, people who drive French cars 90% of the time usually find it a conscious effort to drive a foreign car not because they contain different features but because they are presented and work every so slightly differently to how they expect. When I spend 90% of my time in front of a computer using applications and an OS with totally consistent experiences then switching to and from another application that does things even slightly differently is a major productivity problem, stress builder, and more.
Ðavid Wulff The Royal Woofle Museum
Audioscrobbler :: flikrDie Freiheit spielt auf allen Geigen
David Wulff wrote: One big one that comes to mind and gets me virtually every time I use FF is the wheel scrolling Me too. In IE I do this quite often: Hold wheel button down Move mouse up/down to scroll the page Release wheel button to stop scrolling This is the behavior provided by the IntelliPoint drivers, and therefore is "correct" by default. This gesture did not work in FF (don't remember what version I looked at) because FF decides that holding the wheel button down should do nothing. :^) --Mike-- LINKS~! Ericahist updated! | 1ClickPicGrabber | CP SearchBar v2.0.2 | C++ Forum FAQ Strange things are afoot at the U+004B U+20DD
-
David Wulff wrote: One big one that comes to mind and gets me virtually every time I use FF is the wheel scrolling Me too. In IE I do this quite often: Hold wheel button down Move mouse up/down to scroll the page Release wheel button to stop scrolling This is the behavior provided by the IntelliPoint drivers, and therefore is "correct" by default. This gesture did not work in FF (don't remember what version I looked at) because FF decides that holding the wheel button down should do nothing. :^) --Mike-- LINKS~! Ericahist updated! | 1ClickPicGrabber | CP SearchBar v2.0.2 | C++ Forum FAQ Strange things are afoot at the U+004B U+20DD
Works for me. It's an option though, so maybe it is/was off by default. That said, it has problems - occasionally, it gets "stuck". In fairness, this isn't unique to FF... a depressing number of Windows programs have faulty UIs for wheel scrolling. One of the most infuriating things about the "skinning" craze of not too long ago was a host of programs that broke scores of behavioral conventions along with their intended appearance changes. :sigh:
Shog9
I'm not the Jack of Diamonds... I'm not the six of spades. I don't know what you thought; I'm not your astronaut...
-
There is some interesting reading here. Stuff like this is why I have trouble putting my trust in most open source projects. Mike Connor, a core Firefox developer, writes in his blog, "In nearly three years, we haven't built up a community of hackers around Firefox, for a myriad of reasons, and now I think we're in trouble. Of the six people who can actually review in Firefox, four are AWOL, and one doesn't do a lot of reviews. And I'm on the verge of just walking away indefinitely, since it feels like I'm the only person who cares enough to make it an issue." If Firefox's reviewing developers, the key people of any open-source project, have burned out on the project, Firefox is in a lot of trouble. Forget about trying to get new and better versions out. They're not going to be able to keep up on security fixes and bugs. For example, it used to be that if you ran Firefox you never saw annoying pop-up ad windows. That was then. This is now. See: http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1759,1774091,00.asp[^] Neville Franks, Author of ED for Windows www.getsoft.com and Surfulater www.surfulater.com "Save what you Surf"
Poves my theory that all successfull OpenSource projects are vitally dependent on a very small number of main contributors.
Pandoras Gift #44: Hope. The one that keeps you on suffering.
aber.. "Wie gesagt, der Scheiss is' Therapie"
boost your code || Fold With Us! || sighist | doxygen -
David Stone wrote: Tools->Options->Advanced->Use Smooth Scrolling will turn on smooth scrolling and provide you with the same experience you get in IE I already have that option activated. :) The experience is not the same though. A wheel click in FF always feels like you have to press it harder than in other applications - now obviously you don't so it must be the user experience it gives. Pressure sensitive mice buttons would be cool for gaming and graphics work though. David Stone wrote: UI guidelines I sort of half-disagree here: UI guidelines have nothing to do with anything because as you go on to say the success of a UI always comes down to preference. Consistency of usability does matter though. I didn't mean to suggest that FF got it's UI wrong and others have got it right, just that conformity is the important thing. There is a reason that IE and many other Microsoft applications have non-standard behaviour from an outsiders pov - it's so they work as the user will expect them to. It's only really clever people like us that ever complain. :)
Ðavid Wulff The Royal Woofle Museum
Audioscrobbler :: flikrDie Freiheit spielt auf allen Geigen
David Wulff wrote: A wheel click in FF always feels like you have to press it harder than in other applications The wheel button generally does double-duty in Firefox, opening up links in a separate window if clicked, while doing the standard drag-scroll thing otherwise. This can be frustrating, if (like me) you tend to keep the cursor off to one side of the window (a location favored by web designers for tower ads). It's a small thing to get used to, with nearly the whole window still available to click in... but it can be a subtle annoyance (not as annoying as not being open links in a new tab though, at least for me). Far more annoying in my book is the fact that Firefox's drag scroll doesn't capture mouse input - so if the mouse is dragged outside the window and released, Firefox will still be scrolling next time your cursor enters.
Shog9
I'm not the Jack of Diamonds... I'm not the six of spades. I don't know what you thought; I'm not your astronaut...
-
There is some interesting reading here. Stuff like this is why I have trouble putting my trust in most open source projects. Mike Connor, a core Firefox developer, writes in his blog, "In nearly three years, we haven't built up a community of hackers around Firefox, for a myriad of reasons, and now I think we're in trouble. Of the six people who can actually review in Firefox, four are AWOL, and one doesn't do a lot of reviews. And I'm on the verge of just walking away indefinitely, since it feels like I'm the only person who cares enough to make it an issue." If Firefox's reviewing developers, the key people of any open-source project, have burned out on the project, Firefox is in a lot of trouble. Forget about trying to get new and better versions out. They're not going to be able to keep up on security fixes and bugs. For example, it used to be that if you ran Firefox you never saw annoying pop-up ad windows. That was then. This is now. See: http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1759,1774091,00.asp[^] Neville Franks, Author of ED for Windows www.getsoft.com and Surfulater www.surfulater.com "Save what you Surf"
Neville Franks wrote: Stuff like this is why I have trouble putting my trust in most open source projects. Why? The key people who start a major development effort for a closed source application don't get burned out? The brain trust doesn't leave? Programmers fastituously document their code so other can pick up where they left off? Senior programmers don't move on to greener pastures when a product is released, rather than hanging around doing maintenance work? If I sound a bit irate, it's because I am. Saying you have trouble putting your trust in OS is a lot of BS, in my book, if the only reasons you can cite are things that happen in commercial development just as much. Been there, done that, in numerous closed source commercial endeavors. Seen it happen many times too. Granted, you did say "most" OS projects. ;P Marc MyXaml Advanced Unit Testing YAPO
-
There is some interesting reading here. Stuff like this is why I have trouble putting my trust in most open source projects. Mike Connor, a core Firefox developer, writes in his blog, "In nearly three years, we haven't built up a community of hackers around Firefox, for a myriad of reasons, and now I think we're in trouble. Of the six people who can actually review in Firefox, four are AWOL, and one doesn't do a lot of reviews. And I'm on the verge of just walking away indefinitely, since it feels like I'm the only person who cares enough to make it an issue." If Firefox's reviewing developers, the key people of any open-source project, have burned out on the project, Firefox is in a lot of trouble. Forget about trying to get new and better versions out. They're not going to be able to keep up on security fixes and bugs. For example, it used to be that if you ran Firefox you never saw annoying pop-up ad windows. That was then. This is now. See: http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1759,1774091,00.asp[^] Neville Franks, Author of ED for Windows www.getsoft.com and Surfulater www.surfulater.com "Save what you Surf"
Biggest problem I have with firefox is it's HORRIBLE copy/paste ability.
Found on Bash.org [erno] hm. I've lost a machine.. literally _lost_. it responds to ping, it works completely, I just can't figure out where in my apartment it is.
-
- This should help with your dialup problem. 2) The scrolling offset isn't random. It's offset by the amount of space that the last post took up. So if you're reading a freaking huge post and then click on a different post, the page won't focus on the new post, it'll keep you where you are. But since the large post has collapsed, the forum has moved back up the page. This is an issue with the forum code rather than Firefox. Nowhere in the SwitchMessage javascript function does the code call the focus() method on the tr for the message header. IE does this nicely for you, sure. But it's non-standard. It's another case of IE doing its own thing.
[Cheshire] I can't afford those plastic things to cover the electric sockets so I just draw bunny faces on the electric outlets to scare the kids away from them... [RLtim] Newsflash! Kids aren't afraid of bunnies. [Cheshire] Oh they will be... -Bash.org
David Stone wrote: IE does this nicely for you, sure. But it's non-standard With respect, that is a pointless argument, it's just bull and always has been. IE *is* the standard. Take a look at any website hit log (normal website that is, not a slashdottie one) and the standard is clear, overwhelmingly IE. The bodies at large can come up with whatever standards they want, but it's completely meaningless when there is already a de-facto standard. Most of what people decry about IE being "non-standard" are things that are simply better than the standard. This is a hollow argument at best in favor of a clearly inferior browser. So what if it follows the standards? If the "standards" result in unreadable text then the "standards" are crap!
-
Neville Franks wrote: Stuff like this is why I have trouble putting my trust in most open source projects. Why? The key people who start a major development effort for a closed source application don't get burned out? The brain trust doesn't leave? Programmers fastituously document their code so other can pick up where they left off? Senior programmers don't move on to greener pastures when a product is released, rather than hanging around doing maintenance work? If I sound a bit irate, it's because I am. Saying you have trouble putting your trust in OS is a lot of BS, in my book, if the only reasons you can cite are things that happen in commercial development just as much. Been there, done that, in numerous closed source commercial endeavors. Seen it happen many times too. Granted, you did say "most" OS projects. ;P Marc MyXaml Advanced Unit Testing YAPO
Marc Clifton wrote: Why? The key people who start a major development effort for a closed source application don't get burned out? The brain trust doesn't leave? Of course they do, and a commercial enterprise anticipates this, deals with it and moves on seamlessly. Honestly what in the world do you think *can't* be done better with a real company, real budgets and real revenue to invest than with exactly nothing? There's just no winning that argument under any circumstances. Sure some commercial organizations are run badly, but the great majority are not and they are able to deal with this kind of thing. Fighting for open source is exactly as helpful to the career programmer as fighting for outsourcing.
-
Marc Clifton wrote: Why? The key people who start a major development effort for a closed source application don't get burned out? The brain trust doesn't leave? Of course they do, and a commercial enterprise anticipates this, deals with it and moves on seamlessly. Honestly what in the world do you think *can't* be done better with a real company, real budgets and real revenue to invest than with exactly nothing? There's just no winning that argument under any circumstances. Sure some commercial organizations are run badly, but the great majority are not and they are able to deal with this kind of thing. Fighting for open source is exactly as helpful to the career programmer as fighting for outsourcing.
John Cardinal wrote: Of course they do, and a commercial enterprise anticipates this, deals with it and moves on seamlessly. ROTF! In the companies I've worked for, developing commercial products, this has never been the case. "deals" and "moves on seamlessly"??? HAHAHAHA! John Cardinal wrote: with a real company, real budgets and real revenue and real beauracracy, real red tape, real idiots in management... Ah well. I think I'm overtired and punchy tonight. So, I'll be signing off. Have a good evening! Marc MyXaml Advanced Unit Testing YAPO
-
John Cardinal wrote: Of course they do, and a commercial enterprise anticipates this, deals with it and moves on seamlessly. ROTF! In the companies I've worked for, developing commercial products, this has never been the case. "deals" and "moves on seamlessly"??? HAHAHAHA! John Cardinal wrote: with a real company, real budgets and real revenue and real beauracracy, real red tape, real idiots in management... Ah well. I think I'm overtired and punchy tonight. So, I'll be signing off. Have a good evening! Marc MyXaml Advanced Unit Testing YAPO
-
- This should help with your dialup problem. 2) The scrolling offset isn't random. It's offset by the amount of space that the last post took up. So if you're reading a freaking huge post and then click on a different post, the page won't focus on the new post, it'll keep you where you are. But since the large post has collapsed, the forum has moved back up the page. This is an issue with the forum code rather than Firefox. Nowhere in the SwitchMessage javascript function does the code call the focus() method on the tr for the message header. IE does this nicely for you, sure. But it's non-standard. It's another case of IE doing its own thing.
[Cheshire] I can't afford those plastic things to cover the electric sockets so I just draw bunny faces on the electric outlets to scare the kids away from them... [RLtim] Newsflash! Kids aren't afraid of bunnies. [Cheshire] Oh they will be... -Bash.org
David Stone wrote: This should help with your dialup problem. Been there, done that, no difference. I will be sticking with a browser that works.
"You're obviously a superstar." - Christian Graus about me - 12 Feb '03 "Obviously ??? You're definitely a superstar!!!" mYkel - 21 Jun '04 Within you lies the power for good - Use it!
Honoured as one of The Most Helpful Members of 2004
-
David Stone wrote: IE does this nicely for you, sure. But it's non-standard With respect, that is a pointless argument, it's just bull and always has been. IE *is* the standard. Take a look at any website hit log (normal website that is, not a slashdottie one) and the standard is clear, overwhelmingly IE. The bodies at large can come up with whatever standards they want, but it's completely meaningless when there is already a de-facto standard. Most of what people decry about IE being "non-standard" are things that are simply better than the standard. This is a hollow argument at best in favor of a clearly inferior browser. So what if it follows the standards? If the "standards" result in unreadable text then the "standards" are crap!
John Cardinal wrote: IE *is* the standard. Take a look at any website hit log (normal website that is, not a slashdottie one) and the standard is clear, overwhelmingly IE. My (.NET) blog stats:
62% MSIE 6.0
23% Firefox 1.0.1
9% Firefox 1.0
3% Netscape 7.1
2% Mozilla 5.0
1% Opera 8.0My audience is far from slashdotties: they are almost only Microsoft Windows .NET developers. And I believe the only reason IE 6.0 lost only 38% of .NET developer browsers is because it came installed in the OS. John Cardinal wrote: Most of what people decry about IE being "non-standard" are things that are simply better than the standard. Transparent PNG support anyone? I see dead pixels Yes, even I am blogging now!
