View Full Version : Browsers

<mark />
06-25-2004, 10:12 AM
I was just here: www.w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_stats.asp and it prompted the question. Just curious.

06-25-2004, 02:12 PM
Firefox forever! The only time I use IE is for Windows Updates (and some poorly designed sites that happen to fail in Firefox). There's only one major gripe I have with Firefox: its DHTML performance really lags behind IE's (even with optimised builds). Apart from that, there isn't much I don't like about it. Combined with Adblock and Tabbrowser Extensions, it's the perfect browser.

06-25-2004, 02:56 PM
Agreed. Firefox kicks butt when in a gui, but when I'm at a text based interface, it's links. Not lynx (http://lynx.browser.org/), links (http://artax.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~mikulas/links/).

06-26-2004, 03:32 PM
I'm primarily using Mozilla (except when I must use IE for a specific site, like timecards at work). I haven't switched to Firefox yet primarily because some key sites I visit still have problems with it.

07-07-2004, 04:07 PM

Unfortunately, Internet Explorer continues to dominate. FireFox is good, but...

07-10-2004, 11:10 PM
So I got a copy of firefox tonight and I noticed a bad bug. Instead of calculating the mouse position relative to the left edge of the browser window like you would expect they calculate the mouse relative to the right edge of the screen! So if you have a large screen say a 17" and you shrink the browser size horizontaly so that it only occupies a portion thereof the frigin mouse coordinates are off! What a stupid mistake!!! Can't test that with Firebird, because they don't allow you to change the size of the browser. Also the CSS positioning is a tad off, but not critical. So I don't share your high regard of Firefox. If I don't shrink the browser window or move the shrunk window as far left as I can the coordinate problem does not occur. I think I concur with that web-site that IE6 is the best.


07-11-2004, 11:04 AM
I think what you might be experiencing is the fact that IE is in fact the buggy browser - in terms of web standards - and Mozilla is only "obeying" web standards.

It is completely understandable: one develops so long on/for IE that its bugs are never seen as bugs (you learn to compensate for them) - and when another browser renders or behaves differently (whether it is correct or incorrect) it is seen as the buggy one... It's quite sad really. As a web developer I really wish the tables would turn and 90%+ people would use Mozilla instead of IE - it would make my life easier, and let me design better and more complex layouts without being bogged down by the need for IE5.x and 6.x hacks (as such I am discouraged to use anything that requires them - I totally hate using hacks).

NOTE: I am not specifically talking about the "bugs" you mentioned (it may very well be that you are right and Mozilla isn't), but in general, I don't think there is any browser out there that can exceed (or even match) the standards compliancy that Mozilla has attained.

07-11-2004, 05:50 PM
Okay, let me put it this way. What is the point of allowing the browser's horizontal dimensions to be shrunk and thus slid to possibly allow other windows to be exposed simutaneously if the browser is going to pretend like you didn't move it at all? Wouldn't it make much more sense if the browser calculated the mouse coordinates relative to the right edge of the browser window so that it always worked regardless of where it was placed? Of course. I also test my pages against many other brands like Opera, Netscape and Mozilla Firebird so don't give me that bit about developing on IE so long the bugs seem inconsequential. And I also verify my pages using the W3C utility and declare the pages as conforming to HTML 4.01 web standards. You can't implement IE hacks and get away with it. I agree that on the average Mozilla is more standards compliant. Forget the CSS positioning error. We're only talking about a few pixels here. It's the mouse coordinate issue that bothers me the most. You'd think that if a company was going to go head to head with the most popular brand they would be more careful not to allow lame brain mistakes like this one. How many people are going to download their newest version only to find out what I discovered and swear to never touch it again? I don't think expecting a company to be competant is asking too much. Talk about shooting yourself in the foot! And what's worse is that many other browsers like Netscape and even more obscure brands like k-meleon that probably don't have a prayer use Mozilla's rendering engine and will likely elicit this same buggy behavior! In Mozilla's haste they've set the industry back and I find that discouraging.


07-11-2004, 06:21 PM
so don't give me that bit about developing on IE

You misunderstood the tone of my post. I was in no way 'attacking' you: I was simply stating what my thoughts are on this topic (hence I used 'one develops...' and not 'you develop...'), considering the topic of discussion ("Browsers").

As for your specific mouse position problems, I've said this previously: I have no comment. I have not experimented with that part of JavaScript/DOM. Out of interest, though, what is the code/script you are using?

I have to respectfully disagree with your view. This is a relatively TINY "bug", that to 99% of users (read: users NOT developers such as yourself) would be irrelevant (they wouldn't even know - how many sites use mouse position scripts in a way that is critical to the functionality of the site?) I also disagree on your view on your evaluation of Mozilla as a whole because of this experience of yours - in all honesty, I think you are being totally unfair. ESPECIALLY not when you judge their competency on the fact that one piece of code fails in the browser. IE has far many, more disturbing bugs - but you are not calling it a piece of crap are you? ;) Also, one (not YOU specifically) should look at the fact that there are so many derivative browsers based on the same rendering engine as praise to it - you don't see any derivative browsers for IE, do you? Of course not - everything for that browser is an addon, the engine remains the same. As for "Mozilla's haste" as you put it, I would respond and say that if you think Mozilla is rushed, you should take a look at IE! I've been using Mozilla Firefox for a very long time (since it was Phoenix 0.1, in fact) and it is still only on version 0.9. IE would probably have gone through 2 service packs (if not major versions) and 20 security patches in the same period, none of which would have fixed any rendering bugs - oh but wait, IE isn't being developed anymore! :D

Now I am not saying Mozilla is perfect, I am just saying that IE is less perfect. And, no, I'm not on Mozilla's payroll or anything (not that they have one, I think)... I just love my Mozilla Firefox (as you love your IE6) - and this is perfectly acceptable.

Also, though not really an issue, the IE hacks I was talking about don't actually break (W3C) validation on pages.

In fact, I'd love to see what the "CSS positioning error" you've encountered too. Perhaps it is something in your code and not the browser? I'm sure you are aware that IE has the "broken box model" problem...

In closing, I just want to re-iterate that I'm not attacking you personally. I am just trying to engage in (what I see so far as) intellectual debate. I have absolutely nothing against you, or your preference for browsers (I used to love IE myself).

07-11-2004, 07:13 PM
Firefox 0.9.2!
With "Tabbrowser Preferences 0.6.5" extension.

I still use IE for Windows Update and badly coded sites.

07-11-2004, 07:20 PM
Relax FZ. No, I'm not saying that IE is superior. And I am certaintly not saying Windows and all its incarnations are not crap! Windows is the worst platform to develop on. I use Linux for that. I hope you're right about most users never learning what I did although I recall visiting a web-site where they gave an indication that larger screen sizes were becoming more common. I used my web-site http://www.sanjuanpersonals.com to evaluate Mozilla. Agreed web-sites that make use of the DOM are few and far between. Opera is a derivative of IE. On the DOM level they are similiar. Perhaps I am at fault regarding the CSS positioning error. Even the browsers that attest to following the web standards don't display things exactly the same and you have to make slight changes to work around inconsistencies. It can be quite maddening. Whatever IE hacks you were referring to I don't use anyways. Perhaps you could elaborate. No, I don't love IE. But yes I do have a larger screen and don't care to have the browser window occupy the whole thing if there is something underneath I care to see. The browser breaking is unacceptable.


07-11-2004, 07:52 PM
I am totally relaxed, SJP.

I've never tried Linux (happy with Windows so far).

The IE hacks I was referring to:

I'm sorry but I am still a little unclear about what the problem is - I'm lost between the talk about mouse coordinates and screen sizes? Do you have a demo/page I can have a look at to see what it is you are having trouble with (couldn't see anything at first glimpse on your site)? I agree that larger screen sizes are becoming more common (as well as a higher default resolution), but I fail to see where that fits in here - if you could post the code you used that caused the problem, I want to check it out. I too have a large screen, and like you say, like to tile windows once in a while.

As for Opera being a derivative, I did not know that (yes, I don't know everything ;)) - are you saying that its rendering engine is the exact same that IE uses (i.e. is Microsoft developed)? I find that hard to believe! They may be similar but I think Opera (from a developer's viewpoint) is better.

As for your positioning errors, I can understand miniscule differences between browsers, it will always happen. I think the best way is to not try and achieve pixel precision... Use of relative values is best (%, em, etc.) And yes, it definitely is maddening at times.

In any case, I'd still love to check out any of the code that has been causing headaches for you... I'm pretty good at troubleshooting.

07-11-2004, 08:53 PM
Using my web-site shrink the window so that it only occupies a standard page width (i.e. 800 pixels instead of 1200 or so) and then move it away from the left side. Click on the utilities or category menu items at the top and volia the little boxes appear way to the right. The upper left hand corner should be where you positioned the mouse and clicked.

Opera is close, but since MS doesn't share their code I guess derivative is probably not the right word. How about mimick? It's subtle. And like I said it's on the DOM level. Also some of the non standard features like an onload event for IFRAMEs is supported.

I don't use any hacks.


07-11-2004, 09:10 PM
The javascript code is located in the home.js file. IE and Opera use the event object and Mozilla, Netscape, and all the other gecko based browsers use the addEventListener method and pass an event object that contains the coordinates to a routine that is invoked everytime the mouse moves.


07-12-2004, 09:42 AM
Okay, found the error in my code regarding the X/Y coordinate issue so this post is meant to exhonerate Mozilla of any wrong doing :oops: I didn't really know what the right variable names were. There is so little documentation available, but I see Mozilla (web-site) has made inroads on this point by providing support and suggestions of where to look 8) So I'd change my vote from IE to Mozilla if I could. Thanks FZ :)


07-12-2004, 11:10 AM
Glad you figured it out. See, Mozilla isn't that bad is it?! :D

07-12-2004, 09:19 PM
I hate the say this (because I love Firefox, Mozilla, etc.), but there are CSS bugs in the Mozilla rendering engine. Don't believe me? Check Bugzilla (http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/). Search for CSS. When I did, I got a list of 785.

Either way, I still think Mozilla, isn't all that bad. I'm sure if we could look at the Internet Explorer bug list, you'd find just as many.

While you're over at bugzilla, check out bug# 95849 (http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=95849) for a laugh.

07-12-2004, 09:32 PM
you'd find just as many

Probably 10x more ;) Plus, if you looked at the severity of the bugs (in terms of what was affected), I think Mozilla would have many, many less bugs on the "critical" front (as a reference point, I'd call IE's broken box model critical).

Tom Howard
07-13-2004, 12:37 AM
I'm surprised there aren't any Opera zealots posting. It has held it's own against free browsers and is rich with features. It is only 3.4 MB download for the non-java version.

07-13-2004, 05:31 AM
Opera is cool, but I am more of a freeware kind of guy ;)

<mark />
07-13-2004, 01:55 PM
Heh, that's what college taught me: free is cool.
Free and useful is VERY cool.

09-01-2004, 02:19 AM
Hi :)

My favourite webbrowser is Konqueror (http://www.konqueror.org/) which comes with the KDE (http://www.kde.org/) desktop environment for GNU/Linux and other *nix-like operating systems.

When I need to use another operating system and/or some websites that don't render correctly with Konqueror, I also use Mozilla and Firefox.

09-06-2004, 05:05 AM
So I discovered a nasty bug in Firefox. It concerns using a check-box in a form. According to the write-up a NAME/VALUE pair is only passed to the script if the box is checked. Internet Explorer works. However, Firefox doesn't. It passes the combo regardless. I've been using Firefox more often and I do like it inspite, but the off-line capability offered by IE to access your web pages is very useful. Sure IE's box model or whatever may be whacky, but what difference does it make if they dominate the market? Sadly we don't have creative freedom. I'm not saying give in. I'm saying that is something you don't use unless you're prepared for all sorts of inconsistencies between browsers. Battling the DOM and CSS for 5 different browsers including Konqueror nearly drove me insane :cry:


09-06-2004, 08:07 AM
I have been playing with the lastest version of Firefox and like it. The only drawback is it does not have all my cookies for the forums and such I visit so I still tend to revert to IE. It imported my bookmarks but couldn't find a way to import the cookies. Guess I could do a manual copy. I am trying to use if for browseing new sites to have the extra security and fall back to IE for the sites I always visit.

I still code pages quite a bit based on IE features simply because it seems to be what most users out there have. I still have one site that uses a menu that won't work for FireFox so have a notice and linke to a sitemap page for those who cant access the regular menu. I should have never used the menu code but now the owner of the site is in love with it and I have to some how change thier mind. :) Sometimes I just give in to demand.

09-06-2004, 09:05 AM
So I discovered a nasty bug in Firefox.

Please report it, and post the bug number here for reference . . . http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/

09-06-2004, 06:10 PM
Ok. Been reported. The bug code is 258218.


09-06-2004, 07:14 PM
Thanks. Now we can track it . . .


12-22-2008, 09:33 AM
I am happy with chrome. Simple and effective.

04-04-2009, 01:50 AM
Well, even though I chose Firefox, I actually use another mozilla branch (it's actually the main branch, firefox is a sub-branch) called Minefield that's SSE2 optimized (better performance mainly). Otherwise, it's identical to firefox. :) I do development work and have about 40-50 extensions at any one time. Generally have 2 or 3 windows with upto 40 or so tabs. Took me a little while to get it to stop crashing! LOL

As a developer, I also use (or are forced to use) IE (7 & 8 are OK, and there are some decent dev plugins now. 5 or 6 are a royal pain! but people still use them, so I have to), Opera, Chrome, Safari. I also have a few others just for a quick test as necessary, such as text-based (Lynx of course) and specialist browsers for blind people.

Being a web developer is so much fun these days! I love standards... there are SO many of them! *sigh*