From the genius that brough you the UM and VADB: JSPaint!

Master_Kale · Post by **Master_Kale** » Tue Jul 10, 2007 3:32 pm

SnipaMasta wrote:...considering many of those are businesses with dedicated IT departments who are likely to know of Firefox...

I work at one of my University's tech support departments, and in a meeting last Friday I brought up the feasibility of installing Firefox during the large computer migration we're going through right now. It turns out that many people are for it, but there is a distinct lack of a Mozilla update server that could be used to push out Firefox updates. And before you say "well, users can just click 'update' when prompted", our department doesn't believe in the technical competency of all of its users, nor their ability to do something as simple as "click a button".

The bottom line is, it would be too difficult to manually update Firefox on 200+ computers, its just not a good use of our time. If you move that up to a corporate level, there's no way a company that large would authorize its IT staff to manually update thousands of computers. The reason IE remains on top of the browser market is because of how easy updates can be pushed out to clients from a single server.

I'm going to look into getting some kind of server operating, or at least what it would take, because I want to propagate Firefox out to as many people as possible...just imagine...an entire University of California dedicated to standards-compliant browsers

DaveW · Post by **DaveW** » Wed Jul 11, 2007 12:41 am

And as if by magic, you still didn't actually give a reason why using Firefox gives any benefit to regular users. Oh wait, except standards compliance. Which, whoops, was largely addressed in IE7 and is why sites like StopIE have since shut down.

As I have said before.

eternalightwithin · Post by **eternalightwithin** » Wed Jul 11, 2007 12:50 am

SnipaMasta wrote:And as if by magic, you still didn't actually give a reason why using Firefox gives any benefit to regular users. Oh wait, except standards compliance. Which, whoops, was largely addressed in IE7 and is why sites like StopIE have since shut down.

As I have said before.

Except IE7 does naughty stuff to WinXP (crashes) on every computer I've installed it on. Home, Work, Wifes computer.... (That was a big mistake.)

No thanks. I'm sticking with Firefox.

Master_Kale · Post by **Master_Kale** » Wed Jul 11, 2007 2:00 am

SnipaMasta wrote:And as if by magic, you still didn't actually give a reason why using Firefox gives any benefit to regular users. Oh wait, except standards compliance. Which, whoops, was largely addressed in IE7 and is why sites like StopIE have since shut down.

As I have said before.

Without throwing my own sarcasm into the mix...

Wait, let me pose a question to you first: how long have you been in the web-design field? I honestly don't know, and before I go and incite a riot by claiming you've not stepped foot in source code, I'll wait for a reply.

Now, while I wait, I will admit that IE7 addressed SOME of the CSS problems that required everything from validation-breaking !important to box-model hacks; the shame in that statement is that IE7 created a whole new set of problems related to how it parses CSS. I've been creating websites and following the flow of web technologies both as a freelancer and, now, a professional for the University of California, Riverside. For the past 5 years I've seen and experienced the worst of IE6; countless hours have been lost searching for the right tweak or glitch that I could exploit to make my website look (or sometimes even operate) as I intended.

Enter Firefox, in 2002/2003. For the first time since I set eyes on an <html> tag, I was able to code a webpage to look and work as I intended and OMFG IT ACTUALLY WORKS WITH NO EXTRA WORK ON MY PART!

Now before you go and say "well you must obviously have really shitty code", go ahead and check out my business site, http://www.knwd.us. Validate it with the W3C's validator, and you'll see that its not only Valid XHTML, its Valid XHTML 1.1. If you haven't been around web design ever, 1.1 is currently the strictest document type to validate against. Most sites use XHTML 1.0 Transitional because of its lenient validation requirements; hell, I stick with XHTML 1.0 Transitional when I create webesites. When I redesigned my business, though, I decided to go above and beyond to prove to anyone who might inquire that I was a worthy coder. Coding in XHTML 1.1 requires a strong foundation in 1.0 Transitional, if not Strict.

The main point I want you to get out of this is that there are STANDARDS that have been created as to how websites are designed and DISPLAYED. These STANDARDS are called such because they are guidelines that have been agreed upon and drafted up as THE ONLY WAY websites should be coded. The internet would most likely not exist in its current form if browsers had to decipher between three or four different "styles" of HTML. By unifying the code that goes into a web page's structure, the World Wide Web Consortium has helped the Internet to prosper and grow in a way that would not be possible if large companies like Microsoft were allowed to create their own HTML.

IE7 is an inferior web browser BECAUSE OF ITS STANDARDS INCOMPATIBILITY. If hacks exist to make a browser "standards compliant", then the browser is not standards compliant. Firefox renders pages true to life, following most (if not all) of the W3C's CSS and HTML standards; Internet Explorer 7 will never be in the same league as Firefox until Microsoft realizes that it cannot create its own standards. Its just that simple.

And if you want more proof of Firefox's superior standards compliance, download an alpha of Firefox 3 and run the Acid Test in it. Game over, Internet Explorer 7.

Post by **Jonas** » Wed Jul 11, 2007 2:14 am

There's also Firefox' plugins.

Mmmmm FireFTP... let me count the ways I love you.

Jetsetlemming · Post by **Jetsetlemming** » Wed Jul 11, 2007 2:21 am

Jonas wrote:There's also Firefox' plugins.

Mmmmm FireFTP... let me count the ways I love you.

Adblock, Noscript, FasterFox, Flashgot, StumbleUpon, VideoDownloader.

DaveW · Post by **DaveW** » Wed Jul 11, 2007 7:13 am

Well the point still is that IE7 has greatly improved the standards compliance - no, it's not perfect yet (and technically Firefox is only closer to being perfect), but it's hardly 100% uncompliant. Here's a list of stuff they've changed. Many blogs from professionals from last year cited that from the beta version of IE7 they're going 'in the right direction'.

And at any rate, I said what the benefit for users of Firefox over IE7. CSS is design side - and I haven't had problems with any sites except your coding (which seems to ignore over 80% of the browser market, very professional there) and EER's texture database - something which he said was 'quite easy' to fix.

As for plugins, I'd be willing to bet the majority don't even use them.

EER · Post by **EER** » Wed Jul 11, 2007 7:20 am

SnipaMasta wrote:and EER's texture database - something which he said was 'quite easy' to fix.

Caused by shoddy code on my part btw, fixing it involved roughly halving the amount of javascript required to achieve virtually the same effect.

Anyway, from a web developers POV, I like Firefox better than IE. But from a users POV, I really don't give a damn. I want tabbed browsing. IE7 offers tabbed browsing, why should I care about standards if websites work in my browser?

Master_Kale · Post by **Master_Kale** » Wed Jul 11, 2007 7:23 am

SnipaMasta wrote:And at any rate, I said what the benefit for users of Firefox over IE7. CSS is design side - and I haven't had problems with any sites except your coding (which seems to ignore over 80% of the browser market, very professional there)...

Hey buddy, JSPaint wasn't designed to be a professional piece of work, it was something I did in my free time. I set out to make it work in Firefox, and never once tested it out in IE...if I was doing this professionally, damn right I'd make it work in IE.

And when you say "...any sites except your coding..." do you mean JSPaint, or other sites I've done? If you mean other sites, I'd like examples; don't bother, by the way, because I know you won't find any.

Jetsetlemming · Post by **Jetsetlemming** » Wed Jul 11, 2007 8:24 am

SnipaMasta wrote:Well the point still is that IE7 has greatly improved the standards compliance - no, it's not perfect yet (and technically Firefox is only closer to being perfect), but it's hardly 100% uncompliant. Here's a list of stuff they've changed. Many blogs from professionals from last year cited that from the beta version of IE7 they're going 'in the right direction'.

And at any rate, I said what the benefit for users of Firefox over IE7. CSS is design side - and I haven't had problems with any sites except your coding (which seems to ignore over 80% of the browser market, very professional there) and EER's texture database - something which he said was 'quite easy' to fix.

As for plugins, I'd be willing to bet the majority don't even use them.

Firefox comes with a few plugins standard (Talkback, DOM Inspector), and the it automatically loads a starter page from Mozilla's website with sort of a "newbie guide", explaining plugins, tabs, and whatnot. A few of the most popular plugins get entirely seperate word-of-mouth advertising and offer an installation interface from their websites which doesn't at all require technical knowledge of plugins (Adblock, Fasterfox, and Stumpleupon, for three). Your average Firefox user is also entirely more computer competent than your average IE user (As a good number of those IE users use it simply because they have no idea there's alternative browsers), so I'd be willing to bet your bet is wrong.
Firefox also still has a leg up in security over IE.
Also, a feature I especially like, it doesn't make an audible click every time it DOES something, like IE does. That gets on my goddamn nerves.

Ajare · Post by **Ajare** » Wed Jul 11, 2007 9:35 am

Mr_Cyberpunk wrote:
btw I'm the biggest Sonic fan ever.. so yeah I can do this without having to look at a picture (this is what happens when u do fan games when you are 10 years old lol )

Then you'll just looove this. I know your type.

DaveW · Post by **DaveW** » Wed Jul 11, 2007 1:33 pm

And when you say "...any sites except your coding..." do you mean JSPaint, or other sites I've done? If you mean other sites, I'd like examples; don't bother, by the way, because I know you won't find any.

I meant JSPaint, as in your program is the only thing I've had problems with running IE. Everything else works fine.

The only exception is, ironically, my site. But I have no idea what I'm doing - as for some reason IE and Firefox are both displaying the image with different colours. Which are both wrong, by the way.

The point is, I have been using Firefox for about 1-2 years now, and only recently have I installed Vista and figured I might as well use IE7. So I basically have the most unbiased view on the "user-side" element - and as a regular user there is very little difference between the two. Oh, except Firefox used to constantly crash on forums. Go firefox!

Jetset - just because they're there, it doesn't mean they're used. And even if they are "more competent", it doesn't at all mean that they use plugins. I know how to use computers well, and I didn't. Obviously I'm not everyone, but it demonstrates how that theory doesn't work.

Now, I don't know your stance in the Mac Vs PC debate, but I've noticed that a lot of people are willing to side with Firefox saying "it's more secure than IE" etc. , and then ignore the fact that in the same respect, Macs are more secure than PC's. In both cases it can be put down to the fact that IE is used by more people, hence more people are trying to find flaws in it. Just like PC's are more popular, so more people find flaws in it. A good firewall and virus checker is all you need, anyway. And everyone should have that regardless of what browser you use.

fox · Post by **fox** » Wed Jul 11, 2007 2:19 pm

Microsoft IS slow when it comes to fixing of critical holes. The addon NoScript is an excellent example of an security enhancement because it allows you to decide which sites are allowed to run scripts in a convienet way for the user. Yes you can do that in IE, too but it's ineffective because noone will want to go through several dialogs for each change.
I bareley know anyone who doesn't use Firefox without addons and I've never had crashes on forums since 1.5 .

However, get lucky with IE. If you like it better, why not? It's obvious that Firefox-missionaries won't be successfull in your case so where's the point in this discussion?

Jetsetlemming · Post by **Jetsetlemming** » Wed Jul 11, 2007 2:21 pm

The cost of dropping windows for Mac is much greater than dropping IE for Firefox. XD I can run IE IN Firefox btw, in a tab.

IETab plugin.

Phasmatis · Post by **Phasmatis** » Wed Jul 11, 2007 2:32 pm

The Mac vs PC argument isn't the same imo, they are two different platforms, it's a far far bigger switch.

From a gamer point of view, Macs just don't cut it, if the same amount of games were made for Mac as well as PC I would switch in a second, I hate Windows with a passion. It's the same with Linux. If the programmes I use were available on Linux I would most likely switch.

Sorry to go so off topic, I've wanted to say that for a while lol

IE seems unstable for me, the very few times I use it (when a website isn't updated to use other browsers for instant, like my bank

) it can freeze, although only for a couple of seconds it's still annoying.

Each to his own though, if Sniper want's to use IE I think that's fine, this is really a rant about Macs not realising there's a big gaming market.