Mozilla - enough for me!
-
Robert Edward Caldecott wrote: 3. Some sites do not render very well. Using fonts larger than 100% makes the CP navigation bar on the left look crappy. JSYK, that is not Mozilla's fault, but the fault of the site coders. Mozilla follows standards quite well (not perfectly of course) and if it encounters a site optimised for IE then there will be problems. Robert Edward Caldecott wrote: The lack of Mozilla cookies has been a pain though! Mozilla Cookies? Do you mean cookies are not working at all on your Mozilla? If so then maybe you have the cookie filter turned onto "Out damned spot out" mode. Mozilla definitley supports cookies. Robert Edward Caldecott wrote: (can IE cookies be imported?). Never tried. regards, Paul Watson Bluegrass Cape Town, South Africa The greatest thing you'll ever learn is just to love, and to be loved in return - Moulin Rouge Alison Pentland wrote: I now have an image of you in front of the mirror in the morning, wearing your knickers, socks and shoes trying to decided if they match!
Paul Watson wrote: Mozilla follows standards quite well (not perfectly of course) and if it encounters a site optimised for IE then there will be problems. Paper standards. Comitee Standars. IE is "de facto" standard. Concussus surgo. When struck I rise.
-
I'd estimate that 90% of the problems mentioned above are because: 1. IE is faster, because it's built into the damn OS. You don't notice the startup time, BECAUSE IT'S ALREADY LOADED. 2. Mozilla has trouble rendering certain sites, because MOZILLA STICKS TO THE STANDARD. When a moron site coder builds toward IE (e.g. non-standard) of course Moz is gonna have problems on it.
Hold it, IE IS PART OF THE OS??? CONTACT THE DOJ!!!! Lol... When you run IE, it creates a new process just like any other program. It has to load the same DLLs just like any other program. It does everything just like any other program. Tim Smith "Programmers are always surrounded by complexity; we can not avoid it... If our basic tool, the language in which we design and code our programs, is also complicated, the language itself becomes part of the problem rather that part of the solution." Hoare - 1980 ACM Turing Award Lecture
-
Um, no. If you'll recall, Mozilla is the answer to the horridness that was netscape - and primarily intended for *nix boxen. It wasn't, as you imply, to get proper Java support on Win32 - Microsoft broke that. (I can't believe they did it accidentally, either - they're not dumb.) If you want proper Java support on Win32, go to http://java.sun.com/ and download the JRE. As for Chris spending a lot of time to provide good support for Mozilla: I'm inclined to question your intelligence. Making a site work under Mozilla does _not_ involve some non-standard-changes-every-minute extentions - it involves ONLY USING THE STANDARDS. I mean, try the damned HTML/CSS & XML validators. (http://validator.w3.org/ for starters.)
You forgot to mention the great right wing conspiracy. I am sure they are involved too!!!! Tim Smith "Programmers are always surrounded by complexity; we can not avoid it... If our basic tool, the language in which we design and code our programs, is also complicated, the language itself becomes part of the problem rather that part of the solution." Hoare - 1980 ACM Turing Award Lecture
-
I'd estimate that 90% of the problems mentioned above are because: 1. IE is faster, because it's built into the damn OS. You don't notice the startup time, BECAUSE IT'S ALREADY LOADED. 2. Mozilla has trouble rendering certain sites, because MOZILLA STICKS TO THE STANDARD. When a moron site coder builds toward IE (e.g. non-standard) of course Moz is gonna have problems on it.
negacao wrote: 1. IE is faster, because it's built into the damn OS. You don't notice the startup time, BECAUSE IT'S ALREADY LOADED Opera is faster than both IE and Mozilla. So how come the Opera guys were able to create a faster browser if they didn't have the advantage of embedding it into the OS? IE and Mozilla have a fair share of bloat and that's all. It has nothing to do with IE being built into the OS. negacao wrote: Mozilla has trouble rendering certain sites, because MOZILLA STICKS TO THE STANDARD. When a moron site coder builds toward IE (e.g. non-standard) of course Moz is gonna have problems on it. How is someone a moron for coding to a browser with what...95% of the market :confused: Finish this sentence: Cringer became the mighty BattleCat....
-
negacao wrote: 1. IE is faster, because it's built into the damn OS. You don't notice the startup time, BECAUSE IT'S ALREADY LOADED Opera is faster than both IE and Mozilla. So how come the Opera guys were able to create a faster browser if they didn't have the advantage of embedding it into the OS? IE and Mozilla have a fair share of bloat and that's all. It has nothing to do with IE being built into the OS. negacao wrote: Mozilla has trouble rendering certain sites, because MOZILLA STICKS TO THE STANDARD. When a moron site coder builds toward IE (e.g. non-standard) of course Moz is gonna have problems on it. How is someone a moron for coding to a browser with what...95% of the market :confused: Finish this sentence: Cringer became the mighty BattleCat....
We must speak the STANDARDS MANTRA. LOL... What I find so funny is that Netscape never gave a rat's *** about standards until they thought they could use it as a talking point while trashing MS. If MS was 100% standards compliant and has 100% pure Java, they would just find something else to bitch about. I think I will stick with software that works and not what someone decided was best for their political or religious (GNU) leanings. Tim Smith "Programmers are always surrounded by complexity; we can not avoid it... If our basic tool, the language in which we design and code our programs, is also complicated, the language itself becomes part of the problem rather that part of the solution." Hoare - 1980 ACM Turing Award Lecture
-
Hold it, IE IS PART OF THE OS??? CONTACT THE DOJ!!!! Lol... When you run IE, it creates a new process just like any other program. It has to load the same DLLs just like any other program. It does everything just like any other program. Tim Smith "Programmers are always surrounded by complexity; we can not avoid it... If our basic tool, the language in which we design and code our programs, is also complicated, the language itself becomes part of the problem rather that part of the solution." Hoare - 1980 ACM Turing Award Lecture
Tim Smith wrote: It does everything just like any other program. Does any other program warp your mind, feed your brains to a blender, and attempt to brand your buttocks with a "Hail Mcirosoft" emblem? :) Jeremy Falcon Imputek "..." - Paul Watson 07-17
-
Um, no. If you'll recall, Mozilla is the answer to the horridness that was netscape - and primarily intended for *nix boxen. It wasn't, as you imply, to get proper Java support on Win32 - Microsoft broke that. (I can't believe they did it accidentally, either - they're not dumb.) If you want proper Java support on Win32, go to http://java.sun.com/ and download the JRE. As for Chris spending a lot of time to provide good support for Mozilla: I'm inclined to question your intelligence. Making a site work under Mozilla does _not_ involve some non-standard-changes-every-minute extentions - it involves ONLY USING THE STANDARDS. I mean, try the damned HTML/CSS & XML validators. (http://validator.w3.org/ for starters.)
negacao wrote: If you want proper Java support on Win32, go to http://java.sun.com/ and download the JRE. Sorry to be honest, when I'll be in this situation, I will retire myself from programming. Java - JAPOC (just another piece of crap ;) ) But, don't understand me wrong: MS indeed should provide more standards compliance in their products. At least, they are the standards, isn't like that??? :-D :-D
-
Tim Smith wrote: It does everything just like any other program. Does any other program warp your mind, feed your brains to a blender, and attempt to brand your buttocks with a "Hail Mcirosoft" emblem? :) Jeremy Falcon Imputek "..." - Paul Watson 07-17
Does any other program warp your mind, feed your brains to a blender, and attempt to brand your buttocks with a "Hail Mcirosoft" emblem? Just GNU. :) "We must program for the one. The one is us. The us is one. We must program for the one us. One million eyes must not fail to see one million bugs." And Linus is laughing his ass off on the way to the bank to cash another fat check. Tim Smith "Programmers are always surrounded by complexity; we can not avoid it... If our basic tool, the language in which we design and code our programs, is also complicated, the language itself becomes part of the problem rather that part of the solution." Hoare - 1980 ACM Turing Award Lecture
-
negacao wrote: If you want proper Java support on Win32, go to http://java.sun.com/ and download the JRE. Sorry to be honest, when I'll be in this situation, I will retire myself from programming. Java - JAPOC (just another piece of crap ;) ) But, don't understand me wrong: MS indeed should provide more standards compliance in their products. At least, they are the standards, isn't like that??? :-D :-D
We are 100% buzzword compliant. Tim Smith "Programmers are always surrounded by complexity; we can not avoid it... If our basic tool, the language in which we design and code our programs, is also complicated, the language itself becomes part of the problem rather that part of the solution." Hoare - 1980 ACM Turing Award Lecture
-
We are 100% buzzword compliant. Tim Smith "Programmers are always surrounded by complexity; we can not avoid it... If our basic tool, the language in which we design and code our programs, is also complicated, the language itself becomes part of the problem rather that part of the solution." Hoare - 1980 ACM Turing Award Lecture
Tim Smith wrote: We are 100% buzzword compliant. I'm sure about this, but I just don't want to make negacao feel completely not-understanded here. :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:
-
We are 100% buzzword compliant. Tim Smith "Programmers are always surrounded by complexity; we can not avoid it... If our basic tool, the language in which we design and code our programs, is also complicated, the language itself becomes part of the problem rather that part of the solution." Hoare - 1980 ACM Turing Award Lecture
Tim Smith wrote: We are 100% buzzword compliant. I feel more important just reading those buzzwords *puffs out chest and struts around kicking over all the C++ coders toys* :rolleyes: regards, Paul Watson Bluegrass Cape Town, South Africa The greatest thing you'll ever learn is just to love, and to be loved in return - Moulin Rouge Alison Pentland wrote: I now have an image of you in front of the mirror in the morning, wearing your knickers, socks and shoes trying to decided if they match! Tim Smith wrote: We are 100% buzzword compliant.
-
Good for you!! Anyway, where are Mozilla fans? ...and btw.: why did they do it?? To enter the market? X| oh, no, I understand now: they missed proper Java support from IE!! ROTFL!!! Only Chris will spen a lot of time to provide good support to Mozilla browser, but this is something else...
Don Miguel wrote: Only Chris will spen a lot of time to provide good support to Mozilla browser, but this is something else... Boy do you have the wrong end of the stick Don. It is about choice, about having an option which a lot of people will take, even if for the daft but tangible reason that the only other choice is Microsoft. And it is not about writing code to support Mozilla and then code to support IE. It is about writing standards compliant code and having it work in both Mozilla and IE (not too mention Opera, Knoqueror etc. etc. etc.) Mozilla is much more than just a browser to surf the web with. It's aim is to be an embedable standards compliant system for many devices, systems and applications. You can even read the Mozilla site where they stress that Mozilla is not meant to oust IE. Don Miguel wrote: Anyway, where are Mozilla fans? Right here big boy. Just do a search in Google for Mozilla... happens to be quite a bit of support for it. Oh and did I mention AOL is swapping to Mozilla *cough* sorry I mean Netscape? Yeah, 68million American (read: nice fat wallet) users start using Mozilla... No worth in "supporting" Mozilla at all. :rolleyes: Mozilla, for once, is not some stupid anti-Microsoft inspired attack from *nix users. This time the *nix fans got it right. regards, Paul Watson Bluegrass Cape Town, South Africa The greatest thing you'll ever learn is just to love, and to be loved in return - Moulin Rouge Alison Pentland wrote: I now have an image of you in front of the mirror in the morning, wearing your knickers, socks and shoes trying to decided if they match!
-
I'd estimate that 90% of the problems mentioned above are because: 1. IE is faster, because it's built into the damn OS. You don't notice the startup time, BECAUSE IT'S ALREADY LOADED. 2. Mozilla has trouble rendering certain sites, because MOZILLA STICKS TO THE STANDARD. When a moron site coder builds toward IE (e.g. non-standard) of course Moz is gonna have problems on it.
negacao wrote: You don't notice the startup time, BECAUSE IT'S ALREADY LOADED. In fact, I think that the browser itself load the OS...;P ;P
-
Don Miguel wrote: Only Chris will spen a lot of time to provide good support to Mozilla browser, but this is something else... Boy do you have the wrong end of the stick Don. It is about choice, about having an option which a lot of people will take, even if for the daft but tangible reason that the only other choice is Microsoft. And it is not about writing code to support Mozilla and then code to support IE. It is about writing standards compliant code and having it work in both Mozilla and IE (not too mention Opera, Knoqueror etc. etc. etc.) Mozilla is much more than just a browser to surf the web with. It's aim is to be an embedable standards compliant system for many devices, systems and applications. You can even read the Mozilla site where they stress that Mozilla is not meant to oust IE. Don Miguel wrote: Anyway, where are Mozilla fans? Right here big boy. Just do a search in Google for Mozilla... happens to be quite a bit of support for it. Oh and did I mention AOL is swapping to Mozilla *cough* sorry I mean Netscape? Yeah, 68million American (read: nice fat wallet) users start using Mozilla... No worth in "supporting" Mozilla at all. :rolleyes: Mozilla, for once, is not some stupid anti-Microsoft inspired attack from *nix users. This time the *nix fans got it right. regards, Paul Watson Bluegrass Cape Town, South Africa The greatest thing you'll ever learn is just to love, and to be loved in return - Moulin Rouge Alison Pentland wrote: I now have an image of you in front of the mirror in the morning, wearing your knickers, socks and shoes trying to decided if they match!
Paul Watson wrote: Just do a search in Google for Mozilla... happens to be quite a bit of support for it After a very fast search: Mozilla: 5.170.000 hits Microsoft: 31.000.000 hits. np, thats conspiracy, I'm sure.... And I forgot 3.490 hits for "Mozzila" spelling.... Paul Watson wrote: It is about choice, about having an option which a lot of people will take, even if for the daft but tangible reason that the only other choice is Microsoft. Other choice than Microsoft??? :omg: Who need another choice?? :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:
-
Maybe you ought to try getting an actual _release_ of Mozilla - 1.0 is much faster on my boxen than any version of Konq. :)
I've always found the opposite to be true. I used a lot of different types of releases. I run Debian and update regularly. Currently I'm still running KDE2.2 and the least time I ran Mozilla it was slower than Konqueror. While running the two are extremely close but I feel that Konqueror is usually the winner ( with the huge exception of Javascript where Mozilla takes the cake ). During startup Konqueror is a much larger winner. Jared jparsons@jparsons.org www.prism.gatech.edu/~gte477n
-
After seing so many discutions here, on CP, about Mozilla nice features, I decided finally to give a try and install it on my computer. Everything fine, untill I start it. What a piece of crap! Nothing to really impress me. Usually I open lot of IE instancess to see many pages, and... it worked fine for me. It seems IE doesn't consume so many resources for a new instance... (and in fact this is true indeed). But when I started Mozilla, my IE become slow also. Hm... One thought, finally: about that "navigation tab"s - nice feature, but... let be serious: in few hours, a skilled COM developer could develop a explorer band for IE, which could emulate this tab navigation... and much more, if he want ;P So, after 5 minutes, I remove Mozilla :-D :-D and go back to my nice IE. I had also the feeling that I keep my computer cleaner, this way. ;). Serious, I use only MS products for my tasks, and, with proper settings and a little atention, everything work fine for me.
To quote your subject "Mozilla - enough for me!". Mozilla - enough for me, I don't need no stinkin' IE. Well to be honest I use both, but I tend to use M as my browser of choice, and just use IE for those stubborn non-standard sites.
Bruce Duncan, CP#9088, CPUA 0xA1EE, Sonork 100.10030
Mozilla, its enough for me, I don't need no stinkin' IE. -
Paul Watson wrote: Mozilla follows standards quite well (not perfectly of course) and if it encounters a site optimised for IE then there will be problems. Paper standards. Comitee Standars. IE is "de facto" standard. Concussus surgo. When struck I rise.
Daniel Turini wrote: Paper standards. Comitee Standars. IE is "de facto" standard. Yeah! Shame on Mozilla for not conforming to the Microsoft "screw the standards" approach.
-
I'd estimate that 90% of the problems mentioned above are because: 1. IE is faster, because it's built into the damn OS. You don't notice the startup time, BECAUSE IT'S ALREADY LOADED. 2. Mozilla has trouble rendering certain sites, because MOZILLA STICKS TO THE STANDARD. When a moron site coder builds toward IE (e.g. non-standard) of course Moz is gonna have problems on it.
negacao wrote: Mozilla has trouble rendering certain sites, because MOZILLA STICKS TO THE STANDARD. When a moron site coder builds toward IE (e.g. non-standard) of course Moz is gonna have problems on it. What is a web developer supposed to do when 95% of the web's users use IE? Code for Mozilla, Netscape, etc? Of course not! If they did, then THAT would be idiotic!
All of my opinions are correct, even when reality makes the mistake of disagreeing with me.
-
Tim Smith wrote: We are 100% buzzword compliant. I feel more important just reading those buzzwords *puffs out chest and struts around kicking over all the C++ coders toys* :rolleyes: regards, Paul Watson Bluegrass Cape Town, South Africa The greatest thing you'll ever learn is just to love, and to be loved in return - Moulin Rouge Alison Pentland wrote: I now have an image of you in front of the mirror in the morning, wearing your knickers, socks and shoes trying to decided if they match! Tim Smith wrote: We are 100% buzzword compliant.
Paul Watson wrote: feel more important just reading those buzzwords *puffs out chest and struts around kicking over all the C++ coders toys* Toys like in what you use when you not doing anything important? So VB that is! :laugh:
All of my opinions are correct, even when reality makes the mistake of disagreeing with me.
-
Daniel Turini wrote: Paper standards. Comitee Standars. IE is "de facto" standard. Yeah! Shame on Mozilla for not conforming to the Microsoft "screw the standards" approach.
What I'm stating here is a simple fact: the massive HTML made today is only tested with Internet Explorer. Coding a browser TODAY that cannot read this HTML and whining that "MS does not conform to the standards" is plain stupid, this will not get more people using your browser. Like the original post, people will start uninstalling Mozilla. Concussus surgo. When struck I rise.