Re: SOT: Browser Stats (stirring the pot)
I dont want to restart this thread by any means but I wanted to reply to this one comment in the interest of those still using IE... On Mon, 06 Dec 2004 16:06:39 -0400, Jim Davis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Mon, 06 Dec 2004 11:35:06 -0400, Jim Davis > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > >> The question is whether or not FireFox in mass use would reduce > > spyware - > > > >> I'm not sure it would. It very well might - I just don't know. > > > > > > > >IE installs software without your consent - so yes it would reduce > > it > > > >(using logic and experience not stats). After I install firefox on > > > >systems and run spybot a month or two later there isn't any spyware. > > > > > > > > No it doesn't. > > > > I am afraid it does. Run spybot on your system every once in a while, > > bet you'll find some if you browse with IE - patch system or not > > Beleive me - I religiously run scanners and with a fully patched system have > yet to encouter any getting through. Do you have a URL that could > demonstrate this? http://news.com.com/IE+flaw+threat+hits+the+roof/2100-1002_3-5517457.html?tag=nl Exploit code for one of the vulnerabilities, a flaw in an HTML Help control, was published on the Internet on Dec. 21 in an advisory by GreyHats Security Group. "In order for us to rate a vulnerability as extremely critical, there has to be a working exploit out there and one that doesn't require user interaction," Kristensen said. "This is our highest rating and is the last warning for users to fix their systems." The exploit code can be used to attack computers running Windows XP even if Microsoft's Service Pack 2 patch has been installed, Secunia said. The company is advising people to disable IE's Active X support as a preventative measure, until Microsoft develops a patch for the problem. It also suggests using another browser product. -- ~The cfml plug-in for eclipse~ http://cfeclipse.tigris.org ~open source xslt IDE~ http://treebeard.sourceforge.net ~open source XML database~ http://ashpool.sourceforge.net ~| Discover CFTicket - The leading ColdFusion Help Desk and Trouble Ticket application http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=48 Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:189705 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:4 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
Re: DW on Linux - was (SOT: Browser Stats (stirring the pot))
nvu seems to add junk code like fp so i threw that in trash dreamweaver mx will run on wine but not dwmx 2004 again the thing i really like about dw is the split view also being able to make an extension very quickly for myself usually i will write the cfm code at top in code view then go to split to add the visual while im starting to do the whole cssp deal and tabless designs, that split screen becomes a HUGE asset especially when doing the positioning in css but i like robs energy so im gunna give it a try here next week when i "upgrade" my comp to linux only -- Original Message -- From: Thomas Chiverton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Thu, 9 Dec 2004 11:14:16 + >On Thursday 09 Dec 2004 03:51 am, dave wrote: >> i'll bring the beer! > >Dreamweaver will run under WINE on Linux, iirc. >'Nvu' aims to be a fairly comprehensive 'drop in' open source replacement with >many of the same featues. > >Of course, if you don't need that WYSIWYG stuff, Eclipse and the CFEclipse >plugin rock. > >-- >Tom Chiverton >Advanced ColdFusion Programmer >Tel: +44 (0)1749 834900 >email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >BlueFinger Limited >Underwood Business Park >Wookey Hole Road, WELLS. BA5 1AF >Tel: +44 (0)1749 834900 >Fax: +44 (0)1749 834XXX >web: www.bluefinger.com >Company Reg No: 4209395 Registered Office: 2 Temple Back East, Temple Quay, >BRISTOL. BS1 6EG >*** This E-mail contains confidential information for the addressee only. If >you are not the intended recipient, >please notify us immediately. You should not use, disclose, distribute or copy >this communication if received >in error. No binding contract will result from this e-mail until such time as >a written document is signed on >behalf of the company. BlueFinger Limited cannot accept responsibility for the >completeness or accuracy of >this message as it has been transmitted over public networks.*** > > ~| Special thanks to the CF Community Suite Gold Sponsor - CFHosting.net http://www.cfhosting.net Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:186916 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:4 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
Re: DW on Linux - was (SOT: Browser Stats (stirring the pot))
On Thursday 09 Dec 2004 03:51 am, dave wrote: > i'll bring the beer! Dreamweaver will run under WINE on Linux, iirc. 'Nvu' aims to be a fairly comprehensive 'drop in' open source replacement with many of the same featues. Of course, if you don't need that WYSIWYG stuff, Eclipse and the CFEclipse plugin rock. -- Tom Chiverton Advanced ColdFusion Programmer Tel: +44 (0)1749 834900 email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] BlueFinger Limited Underwood Business Park Wookey Hole Road, WELLS. BA5 1AF Tel: +44 (0)1749 834900 Fax: +44 (0)1749 834XXX web: www.bluefinger.com Company Reg No: 4209395 Registered Office: 2 Temple Back East, Temple Quay, BRISTOL. BS1 6EG *** This E-mail contains confidential information for the addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify us immediately. You should not use, disclose, distribute or copy this communication if received in error. No binding contract will result from this e-mail until such time as a written document is signed on behalf of the company. BlueFinger Limited cannot accept responsibility for the completeness or accuracy of this message as it has been transmitted over public networks.*** ~| Special thanks to the CF Community Suite Gold Sponsor - CFHosting.net http://www.cfhosting.net Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:186775 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:4 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.4 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
Re: SOT: Browser Stats (stirring the pot)
u might think but thats not it either its happened on very slow dial up in the country in ky to my mega fast line in colorado and u have to get online to update, which i cant anyway since ms's site wont let me in so service packs are useless and when i do reinstall i always install firewall & antivirus, spybots, spysweeper all first then i can install it on another comp that isnt even connected to the net and it still does it -- Original Message -- From: Lewis Sellers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Wed, 08 Dec 2004 23:34:53 -0500 >> If I weren't an atheist I would say that you've hit Karma pretty hard. >> >> Perhaps try spending some time not using ridiculous symbols when writing >> "MS" and not calling the OS "CrapXP" - perhaps the universe will smile upon >> you more often. >> >> It's worth a shot: because from what you describe you are, without a doubt, >> the unluckiest individual I've yet to see. >> >> Jim Davis > > >It sounds, honestly, like the machine is getting hit by a worm through >the internet connection. I've had the same experience with several of my >relatives computers when they'd ask me to come over and "fix" them. >Repeatedly. Installing and firewall and anti-virus software, as well as >the network version of the serice packs before you go on line usually >side steps this mess. > >-- >--Lewis Sellers (AKA min) >Intrafoundation Software >http://www.intrafoundation.com > > ~| Special thanks to the CF Community Suite Silver Sponsor - CFDynamics http://www.cfdynamics.com Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:186746 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:4 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.4 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
RE: SOT: Browser Stats (stirring the pot)
u know i tried that 4 a long time jim i never said anything bad, not even to fp users ;) but same thing & just tired of it but i will try and do better like i said im very passionate and when u get on my shit list, u really get on it lol i'll try and do better and hold my tongue after this weekend xp is off for good anyways, so i should be in better spirits :) but 4 the record, i salute MS <^>(*_*)<^> k im done ripping them sorry everyone, my hatred of them shouldnt be displayed here anyone wanna buy a used copy of xp pro? haha -- Original Message -- From: "Jim Davis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Wed, 8 Dec 2004 21:25:29 -0500 >> -Original Message- >> From: dave [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >> Sent: Wednesday, December 08, 2004 7:24 PM >> To: CF-Talk >> Subject: RE: SOT: Browser Stats (stirring the pot) >> >> so i know u all hate hearing me bitch about them but can u see why now? >> i get 20 minutes max between BSOD to work can u imagine how friggin >> frusterating that is? > >If I weren't an atheist I would say that you've hit Karma pretty hard. > >Perhaps try spending some time not using ridiculous symbols when writing >"MS" and not calling the OS "CrapXP" - perhaps the universe will smile upon >you more often. > >It's worth a shot: because from what you describe you are, without a doubt, >the unluckiest individual I've yet to see. > >Jim Davis > > > > ~| Special thanks to the CF Community Suite Silver Sponsor - New Atlanta http://www.newatlanta.com Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:186745 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:4 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.4 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
Re: SOT: Browser Stats (stirring the pot)
> If I weren't an atheist I would say that you've hit Karma pretty hard. > > Perhaps try spending some time not using ridiculous symbols when writing > "MS" and not calling the OS "CrapXP" - perhaps the universe will smile upon > you more often. > > It's worth a shot: because from what you describe you are, without a doubt, > the unluckiest individual I've yet to see. > > Jim Davis It sounds, honestly, like the machine is getting hit by a worm through the internet connection. I've had the same experience with several of my relatives computers when they'd ask me to come over and "fix" them. Repeatedly. Installing and firewall and anti-virus software, as well as the network version of the serice packs before you go on line usually side steps this mess. -- --Lewis Sellers (AKA min) Intrafoundation Software http://www.intrafoundation.com ~| Special thanks to the CF Community Suite Silver Sponsor - RUWebby http://www.ruwebby.com Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:186743 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:4 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
Re: DW on Linux - was (SOT: Browser Stats (stirring the pot))
i'll bring the beer! -- Original Message -- From: Jordan Michaels <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Wed, 08 Dec 2004 18:31:11 -0800 >-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- >Hash: SHA1 > >Jim Davis wrote: > >|>-Original Message- >|>From: dave [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >|>Sent: Wednesday, December 08, 2004 7:07 PM >|>To: CF-Talk >|>Subject: RE: SOT: Browser Stats (stirring the pot) >|> >|>right and i understand that >|>and actually u can run mx 2004 on linux up till the activation screen >|>comes up and that kills it >|>thats why say dw mx still works on linux because it doesnt have that >|>screen >|>and yeah i know they arent gunna build it just 4 me but it seems kinda >|>silly that the only thing keeping it from working isnt the program >itself, >|>its the activation screen. >|>i just think at the rate linux is starting to move forward that at some >|>point it will have to be dealt with. >|>just would be nice:) >|>would also be nice if m$ would be a decent company and stand by >their junk >|>they sell and i wouldnt have to worry about this in the 1st place >|>i would put it on my xmas list but i been a bad bad boy this yr! >| >| >|Well - we had a meeting in 1997 (or thereabouts - when CF 2.0 was >just being >|released) with J.J. Allaire and David Orfao. A friend asked "when >will you >|be coming out with a Linux version?" and he was literally laughed at. >| >|Three years later and we had CF for Linux. >| >|Allaire (and now Macromedia) are not against Linux - but they are for >making >|money. The instant they can make money by producing a Linux version, >they >|will. >| >|Jim Davis >| >| >If Macromedia had a linux version of DW out now, I would stand in line >for hours just to get my hands on a copy. > >I'm sure I am not the only one. > >- -- >Warm regards, >Jordan Michaels >Vivio Technologies >http://www.viviotech.net/ >[EMAIL PROTECTED] >-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- >Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux) >Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org > >iD8DBQFBt7juGa00RO4Gk88RAt2YAJwPTJFRS6xz4FgqK47QFmRH52MfwgCgweQv >ZE2p+Omgkhc+KGlcvQQbcEE= >=ilDw >-END PGP SIGNATURE- > > ~| Special thanks to the CF Community Suite Silver Sponsor - New Atlanta http://www.newatlanta.com Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:186740 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:4 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
RE: SOT: Browser Stats (stirring the pot)
i realize its not the norm i maybe passionate but i am not crazy ;) heres a screen capture when trying to update from their site http://www.jamwerx.com/nowin.jpg and yes i have a firewall (bitdefender) im telling u this does crazy things, i have all the auto updates turned off but it will still try, drives me friggin nuts and almost anytime i have updated it crashes ( i know quite a few ppl that happens to) but the thing is that there is a problem and its happened on multiple comps and even when this comp was new same thing but they just dont even want to hear about it. and its not like im running it on a crappy puter either, i just have no idea but im not gunna go shell out another $300 for another copy. and dont worry i dont take anything on here personal you & i can go around and around all day long but i still respect u highly :) -- Original Message -- From: Dave Watts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Wed, 8 Dec 2004 21:12:51 -0500 >> i dont think i have gone longer than 1 month between >> re-installs i have tried my disk on 3 diff comps, a high >> priced dell, an alienware and an ams custom and it happens on >> all 3 machines so i know its not hardware. >> bout 2 wks ago i had to put in another hd after the os tried >> to update itself (with it turned off) and completely froze >> up, so i had to get a new hd to put in so i could get >> everything off my old one that didnt get saved yet to my >> external one, yeah thats how bad it is, i have 3 hds now and >> a dvd burner and i still get caught grr >> >> and this has happened since i first bought xp pro and of >> course m$ tells me its probably a bad disk but they wont >> replace it, they try and pan it off on bestbuy to replace but >> they wont either. So basically im stuck with crap. I tried to >> sell it on ebay & m$ made ebay remove it because apparently >> even though i bought the software m$ still ownes the rights >> to it and im not allowed to sell it. at the samtime i had my >> copy of access and they removed that as well (even though i >> bought it on ebay) and now apparently they are so sick of me >> calling and bitching at them that i cant even access >> windowsupdate.microsoft.com anymore, so i cant get their damn >> fix for my comp having the BSOD every 10 friggin minutes with >> buffer overruns from my cable line. > >I'm sorry, but you sound like you're completely insane. I don't mean that as >a personal attack, but if I heard this from someone and that was all I knew >about them, I'd think they were nuts. > >If you can install the software from the CD, it's not a "bad disk". All the >CDs have the same files on them. I also find it unlikely that they've >blocked your access to the Windows Update site. Finally, you should have >some sort of firewall set up between your machine and the outside world to >prevent all those buffer overruns. > >I have machines running Windows NT, 2000, XP and 2003 and have never seen >any problems like that. I'm not saying that people don't have problems, just >that your situation isn't the norm. > >Dave Watts, CTO, Fig Leaf Software >http://www.figleaf.com/ >phone: 202-797-5496 >fax: 202-797-5444 > > > ~| Special thanks to the CF Community Suite Gold Sponsor - CFHosting.net http://www.cfhosting.net Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:186739 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:4 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.4 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
RE: DW on Linux - was (SOT: Browser Stats (stirring the pot))
> -Original Message- > From: Jordan Michaels [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, December 08, 2004 9:31 PM > To: CF-Talk > Subject: DW on Linux - was (SOT: Browser Stats (stirring the pot)) > | > If Macromedia had a linux version of DW out now, I would stand in line > for hours just to get my hands on a copy. > > I'm sure I am not the only one. If they did have a version for Linux you wouldn't have to stand in line to get it. ;^) Jim Davis ~| Special thanks to the CF Community Suite Gold Sponsor - CFHosting.net http://www.cfhosting.net Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:186734 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:4 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
RE: SOT: Browser Stats (stirring the pot)
> -Original Message- > From: dave [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, December 08, 2004 7:32 PM > To: CF-Talk > Subject: Re: SOT: Browser Stats (stirring the pot) > > ok they have now changed it to this > > The following are known issues with this app in the current version of > CrossOver. Getting a product to run on a third party emulation manager is a far cry from having it "almost there". For MM to even consider this it would take, quite literally, man-years of testing and QA to certify it for use on the new OS - and that's making the huge assumption that the code could work essentially as is. Add in new documentation, support infrastructure and everything else is just too costly. Kludging something to (almost) work using unsupported software, hacks and elbow grease is a far, distant, nearly invisible cry from releasing a supported product. Jim Davis ~| Special thanks to the CF Community Suite Silver Sponsor - CFDynamics http://www.cfdynamics.com Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:186733 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:4 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.4 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
DW on Linux - was (SOT: Browser Stats (stirring the pot))
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Jim Davis wrote: |>-Original Message- |>From: dave [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] |>Sent: Wednesday, December 08, 2004 7:07 PM |>To: CF-Talk |>Subject: RE: SOT: Browser Stats (stirring the pot) |> |>right and i understand that |>and actually u can run mx 2004 on linux up till the activation screen |>comes up and that kills it |>thats why say dw mx still works on linux because it doesnt have that |>screen |>and yeah i know they arent gunna build it just 4 me but it seems kinda |>silly that the only thing keeping it from working isnt the program itself, |>its the activation screen. |>i just think at the rate linux is starting to move forward that at some |>point it will have to be dealt with. |>just would be nice:) |>would also be nice if m$ would be a decent company and stand by their junk |>they sell and i wouldnt have to worry about this in the 1st place |>i would put it on my xmas list but i been a bad bad boy this yr! | | |Well - we had a meeting in 1997 (or thereabouts - when CF 2.0 was just being |released) with J.J. Allaire and David Orfao. A friend asked "when will you |be coming out with a Linux version?" and he was literally laughed at. | |Three years later and we had CF for Linux. | |Allaire (and now Macromedia) are not against Linux - but they are for making |money. The instant they can make money by producing a Linux version, they |will. | |Jim Davis | | If Macromedia had a linux version of DW out now, I would stand in line for hours just to get my hands on a copy. I'm sure I am not the only one. - -- Warm regards, Jordan Michaels Vivio Technologies http://www.viviotech.net/ [EMAIL PROTECTED] -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFBt7juGa00RO4Gk88RAt2YAJwPTJFRS6xz4FgqK47QFmRH52MfwgCgweQv ZE2p+Omgkhc+KGlcvQQbcEE= =ilDw -END PGP SIGNATURE- ~| Special thanks to the CF Community Suite Gold Sponsor - CFHosting.net http://www.cfhosting.net Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:186732 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:4 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.4 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
RE: SOT: Browser Stats (stirring the pot)
> -Original Message- > From: dave [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, December 08, 2004 7:24 PM > To: CF-Talk > Subject: RE: SOT: Browser Stats (stirring the pot) > > so i know u all hate hearing me bitch about them but can u see why now? > i get 20 minutes max between BSOD to work can u imagine how friggin > frusterating that is? If I weren't an atheist I would say that you've hit Karma pretty hard. Perhaps try spending some time not using ridiculous symbols when writing "MS" and not calling the OS "CrapXP" - perhaps the universe will smile upon you more often. It's worth a shot: because from what you describe you are, without a doubt, the unluckiest individual I've yet to see. Jim Davis ~| Special thanks to the CF Community Suite Silver Sponsor - RUWebby http://www.ruwebby.com Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:186731 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:4 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.4 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
RE: SOT: Browser Stats (stirring the pot)
> -Original Message- > From: dave [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, December 08, 2004 7:07 PM > To: CF-Talk > Subject: RE: SOT: Browser Stats (stirring the pot) > > right and i understand that > and actually u can run mx 2004 on linux up till the activation screen > comes up and that kills it > thats why say dw mx still works on linux because it doesnt have that > screen > and yeah i know they arent gunna build it just 4 me but it seems kinda > silly that the only thing keeping it from working isnt the program itself, > its the activation screen. > i just think at the rate linux is starting to move forward that at some > point it will have to be dealt with. > just would be nice:) > would also be nice if m$ would be a decent company and stand by their junk > they sell and i wouldnt have to worry about this in the 1st place > i would put it on my xmas list but i been a bad bad boy this yr! Well - we had a meeting in 1997 (or thereabouts - when CF 2.0 was just being released) with J.J. Allaire and David Orfao. A friend asked "when will you be coming out with a Linux version?" and he was literally laughed at. Three years later and we had CF for Linux. Allaire (and now Macromedia) are not against Linux - but they are for making money. The instant they can make money by producing a Linux version, they will. Jim Davis ~| Special thanks to the CF Community Suite Silver Sponsor - CFDynamics http://www.cfdynamics.com Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:186730 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:4 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.4 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
RE: SOT: Browser Stats (stirring the pot)
> i dont think i have gone longer than 1 month between > re-installs i have tried my disk on 3 diff comps, a high > priced dell, an alienware and an ams custom and it happens on > all 3 machines so i know its not hardware. > bout 2 wks ago i had to put in another hd after the os tried > to update itself (with it turned off) and completely froze > up, so i had to get a new hd to put in so i could get > everything off my old one that didnt get saved yet to my > external one, yeah thats how bad it is, i have 3 hds now and > a dvd burner and i still get caught grr > > and this has happened since i first bought xp pro and of > course m$ tells me its probably a bad disk but they wont > replace it, they try and pan it off on bestbuy to replace but > they wont either. So basically im stuck with crap. I tried to > sell it on ebay & m$ made ebay remove it because apparently > even though i bought the software m$ still ownes the rights > to it and im not allowed to sell it. at the samtime i had my > copy of access and they removed that as well (even though i > bought it on ebay) and now apparently they are so sick of me > calling and bitching at them that i cant even access > windowsupdate.microsoft.com anymore, so i cant get their damn > fix for my comp having the BSOD every 10 friggin minutes with > buffer overruns from my cable line. I'm sorry, but you sound like you're completely insane. I don't mean that as a personal attack, but if I heard this from someone and that was all I knew about them, I'd think they were nuts. If you can install the software from the CD, it's not a "bad disk". All the CDs have the same files on them. I also find it unlikely that they've blocked your access to the Windows Update site. Finally, you should have some sort of firewall set up between your machine and the outside world to prevent all those buffer overruns. I have machines running Windows NT, 2000, XP and 2003 and have never seen any problems like that. I'm not saying that people don't have problems, just that your situation isn't the norm. Dave Watts, CTO, Fig Leaf Software http://www.figleaf.com/ phone: 202-797-5496 fax: 202-797-5444 ~| Special thanks to the CF Community Suite Silver Sponsor - CFDynamics http://www.cfdynamics.com Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:186729 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:4 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.4 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
RE: SOT: Browser Stats (stirring the pot)
Though not entirely related, I know a lady in education who was asked (by Macromedia) to review Contribute for use in the public school system. She couldn't get it installed on Windows XP because of a bug in the product activation code, and the license she was provided would not work with the Mac installer. Fortunately, for Macromedia's sake, she chose not to write a review. Ben Rogers http://www.c4.net v.508.240.0051 f.508.240.0057 > -Original Message- > From: Mike Chambers [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, December 08, 2004 7:20 PM > To: CF-Talk > Subject: Re: SOT: Browser Stats (stirring the pot) > > I don't know where you are getting your information from, but the > statement below is not correct. > > mike chambers > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > On Dec 8, 2004, at 4:06 PM, dave wrote: > > > and yeah i know they arent gunna build it just 4 me but it seems kinda > > silly that the only thing keeping it from working isnt the program > > itself, its the activation screen. > > > ~| Special thanks to the CF Community Suite Gold Sponsor - CFHosting.net http://www.cfhosting.net Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:186724 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:4 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
Re: SOT: Browser Stats (stirring the pot)
ok they have now changed it to this The following are known issues with this app in the current version of CrossOver. * Licensing Whenever loading Dreamweaver MX 2004, there are two files that need to be loaded into memory. Whether Dreamweaver is preactivated or not, it looks for the Macromedia Licensing.exe to run. Another file that is loaded is the ASP.NET Design Manager - which may or may not crash DWMX if it's not. On Windows 2000 and Windows XP, a licensing service is loaded. I'm not sure how that works on Windows '98. It is not the Product Activation that's the issue. I was able to make a complete replica of my Dreamweaver MX 2004 installation with the help of WinInstall. All registry settings were copied over as well. The serial number along with the activation verification number. That disables Product Activation from coming up. The first screen that comes up in DWMX before anything loads is the "Choose a Workspace" screen which allows one to select Coder or Designer. That screen loads before the Product Activation, which if anything, would be the issue. However, I disabled that as well by copying over my configuration directory and modifying my customization preferences in the registry. Even with the Product Activation disabled and the screen that comes up to choose a workspace, it still doesn't work. Which leads me to believe that the issue may be with a DLL (or several DLLs) that DWMX 2004 is loading on startup. In Dreamweaver MX, it pretty much uses the same files with the exception of the 'licensing' program - the Macromedia_Licensing_Installer.dll. * Does not work. Dreamweaver MX 2004 does not currently work. if interested heres the forum link http://www.codeweavers.com/site/compatibility/browse/name?app_id=207;forum=1 -- Original Message -- From: Mike Chambers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Wed, 8 Dec 2004 16:20:19 -0800 >I don't know where you are getting your information from, but the >statement below is not correct. > >mike chambers > >[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >On Dec 8, 2004, at 4:06 PM, dave wrote: > >> and yeah i know they arent gunna build it just 4 me but it seems kinda >> silly that the only thing keeping it from working isnt the program >> itself, its the activation screen. > > > ~| Special thanks to the CF Community Suite Gold Sponsor - CFHosting.net http://www.cfhosting.net Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:186722 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:4 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.4 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
Re: SOT: Browser Stats (stirring the pot)
from the crossover office site and about any site i googled on it, which im sure they got their info from the same site as well -- Original Message -- From: Mike Chambers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Wed, 8 Dec 2004 16:20:19 -0800 >I don't know where you are getting your information from, but the >statement below is not correct. > >mike chambers > >[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >On Dec 8, 2004, at 4:06 PM, dave wrote: > >> and yeah i know they arent gunna build it just 4 me but it seems kinda >> silly that the only thing keeping it from working isnt the program >> itself, its the activation screen. > > > ~| Special thanks to the CF Community Suite Gold Sponsor - CFHosting.net http://www.cfhosting.net Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:186720 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:4 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
RE: SOT: Browser Stats (stirring the pot)
i dont think i have gone longer than 1 month between re-installs i have tried my disk on 3 diff comps, a high priced dell, an alienware and an ams custom and it happens on all 3 machines so i know its not hardware. bout 2 wks ago i had to put in another hd after the os tried to update itself (with it turned off) and completely froze up, so i had to get a new hd to put in so i could get everything off my old one that didnt get saved yet to my external one, yeah thats how bad it is, i have 3 hds now and a dvd burner and i still get caught grr and this has happened since i first bought xp pro and of course m$ tells me its probably a bad disk but they wont replace it, they try and pan it off on bestbuy to replace but they wont either. So basically im stuck with crap. I tried to sell it on ebay & m$ made ebay remove it because apparently even though i bought the software m$ still ownes the rights to it and im not allowed to sell it. at the samtime i had my copy of access and they removed that as well (even though i bought it on ebay) and now apparently they are so sick of me calling and bitching at them that i cant even access windowsupdate.microsoft.com anymore, so i cant get their damn fix for my comp having the BSOD every 10 friggin minutes with buffer overruns from my cable line. so i know u all hate hearing me bitch about them but can u see why now? i get 20 minutes max between BSOD to work can u imagine how friggin frusterating that is? -- Original Message -- From: Dave Watts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Wed, 8 Dec 2004 19:08:57 -0500 >> been 2 weeks since my last reinstall of crapXP, so i think >> the next time im just not gunna put xp on it and i will try a >> few diff things. > >How often do you have to reinstall Windows? If you have to reinstall it that >frequently, I suspect you have some problem with hardware. I typically don't >have to reinstall Windows until I get a new machine or primary hard disk. > >Dave Watts, CTO, Fig Leaf Software >http://www.figleaf.com/ >phone: 202-797-5496 >fax: 202-797-5444 > > > ~| Special thanks to the CF Community Suite Silver Sponsor - New Atlanta http://www.newatlanta.com Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:186719 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:4 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
Re: SOT: Browser Stats (stirring the pot)
I don't know where you are getting your information from, but the statement below is not correct. mike chambers [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Dec 8, 2004, at 4:06 PM, dave wrote: > and yeah i know they arent gunna build it just 4 me but it seems kinda > silly that the only thing keeping it from working isnt the program > itself, its the activation screen. ~| Special thanks to the CF Community Suite Gold Sponsor - CFHosting.net http://www.cfhosting.net Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:186718 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:4 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
RE: SOT: Browser Stats (stirring the pot)
> well duh but thats cant change when its not available given > how much ppl are looking for it and trying to get it to run, > i would think it should be becoming an issue with MM. The fact is, not many people are looking for it. You are, but you are in a tiny minority. Here's a good article on this topic: http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/fog54.html > everyone used to say the samething about having it on a mac a > yr ago and about how there wasnt market share to support it > but it seems to have gone pretty well so far Macromedia desktop products have always run on the Mac. Dave Watts, CTO, Fig Leaf Software http://www.figleaf.com/ phone: 202-797-5496 fax: 202-797-5444 ~| Special thanks to the CF Community Suite Gold Sponsor - CFHosting.net http://www.cfhosting.net Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:186716 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:4 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.4 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
RE: SOT: Browser Stats (stirring the pot)
right and i understand that and actually u can run mx 2004 on linux up till the activation screen comes up and that kills it thats why say dw mx still works on linux because it doesnt have that screen and yeah i know they arent gunna build it just 4 me but it seems kinda silly that the only thing keeping it from working isnt the program itself, its the activation screen. i just think at the rate linux is starting to move forward that at some point it will have to be dealt with. just would be nice:) would also be nice if m$ would be a decent company and stand by their junk they sell and i wouldnt have to worry about this in the 1st place i would put it on my xmas list but i been a bad bad boy this yr! -- Original Message -- From: "Jim Davis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Wed, 8 Dec 2004 18:54:39 -0500 >> -Original Message- >> From: Adrocknaphobia [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >> Sent: Wednesday, December 08, 2004 8:46 AM >> To: CF-Talk >> Subject: Re: SOT: Browser Stats (stirring the pot) >> >> > i would sure like to hear from someone at MM though about why no linux >> versions of studio 2004 though >> >> Because Linux is not a viable market for PC software. >> Unfortunately it doesnt come down to which is technically better, it >> comes back to market share. > >And testing and support. Take CFMX for example - it runs just fine on MacOS >X, but MM doesn't support this. The testing and support costs are just too >high for the share of the market. > >To deliver Studio 2004 you've got several immensely complex applications >that would need to be fully regressed and tested on the new platform plus >unknown support costs to train and configure a support infrastructure for a >new environment. > >As testing costs are often the lion's share of a products budget adding a >new environment would be significantly expensive. Throw in the fact that >you're talking about an environment (Linux) which is, itself, >non-standardized (from an interface perspective) and much more variable than >OS X or Windows and those costs increase (I don't think it's ridiculous to >assume that Linux testing would cost more than either Mac OS or Windows >testing). > >Add on to that the fact that very few Linux desktop applications have been >successful and the fact that a significant percentage of Linux adherents >won't even consider purchased closed-source software and you've really got a >no-win situation for the vendor. > >Jim Davis > > > > ~| Special thanks to the CF Community Suite Gold Sponsor - CFHosting.net http://www.cfhosting.net Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:186715 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:4 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.4 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
RE: SOT: Browser Stats (stirring the pot)
Assuming Firefox implements standards 100%, we know that IE doesn't. As such, no matter how good your code is, there's going to be differences. It absolutely is not easier to develop for two than for one. That's just crazy talk. Jake Interesting enough I have been pulling my hair out for months trying to write a fairly complicated UI for an intranet application. Now we are an IE house, as many people have said is fairly common in the US, but we have a mix of 5.5 and 6.0. I have fought many battles where I would get it this UI to work on one IE and then something didn't work on the other and vice-a-versa. The moral of this story, is that I have started to make my code work first in Firefox, then check it against the two versions of IE. And woe and behold, I am not running into nearly the number of glitches I was before and generally they are fairly easy to fix. And not a "Hack" in site, albeit not an Active-X in site either. -- Ian Skinner Web Programmer BloodSource www.BloodSource.org Sacramento, CA "C code. C code run. Run code run. Please!" - Cynthia Dunning Confidentiality Notice: This message including any attachments is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender and delete any copies of this message. ~| Special thanks to the CF Community Suite Silver Sponsor - CFDynamics http://www.cfdynamics.com Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:186714 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:4 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
RE: SOT: Browser Stats (stirring the pot)
> been 2 weeks since my last reinstall of crapXP, so i think > the next time im just not gunna put xp on it and i will try a > few diff things. How often do you have to reinstall Windows? If you have to reinstall it that frequently, I suspect you have some problem with hardware. I typically don't have to reinstall Windows until I get a new machine or primary hard disk. Dave Watts, CTO, Fig Leaf Software http://www.figleaf.com/ phone: 202-797-5496 fax: 202-797-5444 ~| Special thanks to the CF Community Suite Silver Sponsor - CFDynamics http://www.cfdynamics.com Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:186712 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:4 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.4 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
RE: SOT: Browser Stats (stirring the pot)
> -Original Message- > From: dave [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, December 08, 2004 6:05 PM > To: CF-Talk > Subject: Re: SOT: Browser Stats (stirring the pot) > > well duh but thats cant change when its not available > given how much ppl are looking for it and trying to get it to run, i would > think it should be becoming an issue with MM. > everyone used to say the samething about having it on a mac a yr ago and > about how there wasnt market share to support it but it seems to have gone > pretty well so far Of course in that case most of the applications in the suite already ran on the Mac. Macromedia has generally produced Mac software in parity with PC software (or the other way around as several of the apps began their life on the Mac). They've also been doing both Mac and PC development for over a decade - they're very good at it now. Linux would entail an entirely new development process. Not cheap to consider when the possible payoff is so small. Jim Davis ~| Special thanks to the CF Community Suite Gold Sponsor - CFHosting.net http://www.cfhosting.net Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:186710 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:4 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
RE: SOT: Browser Stats (stirring the pot)
> -- Original Message -- > From: Adrocknaphobia <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Date: Tue, 7 Dec 2004 18:27:51 -0500 > > >Jochem, > > > >Thats been said since the conception of the w3c. I'm afraid that by > >the time they get enforcement (worldwide), HTML will already be dead. The W3C isn't some ivory tower organization "fighting corporate dominance". Microsoft (as well as IBM, Macromedia and dozens of others) is a major contributor to the W3C processes. They are also not specifically for or against open source software. There is a very specific reason that the W3C doesn't call its specifications "Standards" - rather they call them "Recommendations". Enforcement of standards simply isn't part of their charter in the least. Jim Davis ~| Special thanks to the CF Community Suite Gold Sponsor - CFHosting.net http://www.cfhosting.net Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:186709 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:4 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.4 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
RE: SOT: Browser Stats (stirring the pot)
> -Original Message- > From: Adrocknaphobia [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, December 08, 2004 8:46 AM > To: CF-Talk > Subject: Re: SOT: Browser Stats (stirring the pot) > > > i would sure like to hear from someone at MM though about why no linux > versions of studio 2004 though > > Because Linux is not a viable market for PC software. > Unfortunately it doesnt come down to which is technically better, it > comes back to market share. And testing and support. Take CFMX for example - it runs just fine on MacOS X, but MM doesn't support this. The testing and support costs are just too high for the share of the market. To deliver Studio 2004 you've got several immensely complex applications that would need to be fully regressed and tested on the new platform plus unknown support costs to train and configure a support infrastructure for a new environment. As testing costs are often the lion's share of a products budget adding a new environment would be significantly expensive. Throw in the fact that you're talking about an environment (Linux) which is, itself, non-standardized (from an interface perspective) and much more variable than OS X or Windows and those costs increase (I don't think it's ridiculous to assume that Linux testing would cost more than either Mac OS or Windows testing). Add on to that the fact that very few Linux desktop applications have been successful and the fact that a significant percentage of Linux adherents won't even consider purchased closed-source software and you've really got a no-win situation for the vendor. Jim Davis ~| Special thanks to the CF Community Suite Silver Sponsor - CFDynamics http://www.cfdynamics.com Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:186708 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:4 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.4 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
Re: SOT: Browser Stats (stirring the pot)
but i'll give it another shot been 2 weeks since my last reinstall of crapXP, so i think the next time im just not gunna put xp on it and i will try a few diff things. i dont really have time to be messing around but oh well maybe if i stop bickering at everyone on here i'd have more time ;) -- Original Message -- From: Rob <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Wed, 8 Dec 2004 15:26:25 -0800 >Ah yeah thats right, sorry bout that > > >On Wed, 8 Dec 2004 18:07:31 -0500, dave <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> yes rob but remember i really wasnt to jazzed about eclipse, it is an option >> though, i also found out that homesite will run on linux very well. >> i had a hard time writing cssp style with eclipse, thats where i really like >> having dw with the split view and css right there. >> >> >> >> -- Original Message -- >> From: Rob <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> Date: Wed, 8 Dec 2004 07:53:07 -0800 >> >> >There are other options to studio 2004 on linux. A great many in fact. >> >You might want to check out one of those fine products while you wait >> >for linux to gain enough market share for them to port >> > >> >On Wed, 8 Dec 2004 08:45:54 -0500, Adrocknaphobia >> ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> > i would sure like to hear from someone at MM though about why no linux >> >> > versions of studio 2004 though >> >> >> >> Because Linux is not a viable market for PC software. >> >> Unfortunately it doesnt come down to which is technically better, it >> >> comes back to market share. >> > >> >-- >> >~The cfml plug-in for eclipse~ >> >http://cfeclipse.tigris.org >> >~open source xslt IDE~ >> >http://treebeard.sourceforge.net >> >~open source XML database~ >> >http://ashpool.sourceforge.net >> > >> > >> >> > > ~| Special thanks to the CF Community Suite Gold Sponsor - CFHosting.net http://www.cfhosting.net Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:186705 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:4 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
Re: SOT: Browser Stats (stirring the pot)
Ah yeah thats right, sorry bout that On Wed, 8 Dec 2004 18:07:31 -0500, dave <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > yes rob but remember i really wasnt to jazzed about eclipse, it is an option > though, i also found out that homesite will run on linux very well. > i had a hard time writing cssp style with eclipse, thats where i really like > having dw with the split view and css right there. > > > > -- Original Message -- > From: Rob <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Date: Wed, 8 Dec 2004 07:53:07 -0800 > > >There are other options to studio 2004 on linux. A great many in fact. > >You might want to check out one of those fine products while you wait > >for linux to gain enough market share for them to port > > > >On Wed, 8 Dec 2004 08:45:54 -0500, Adrocknaphobia > ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> > i would sure like to hear from someone at MM though about why no linux > >> > versions of studio 2004 though > >> > >> Because Linux is not a viable market for PC software. > >> Unfortunately it doesnt come down to which is technically better, it > >> comes back to market share. > > > >-- > >~The cfml plug-in for eclipse~ > >http://cfeclipse.tigris.org > >~open source xslt IDE~ > >http://treebeard.sourceforge.net > >~open source XML database~ > >http://ashpool.sourceforge.net > > > > > > ~| Special thanks to the CF Community Suite Silver Sponsor - RUWebby http://www.ruwebby.com Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:186703 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:4 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
Re: SOT: Browser Stats (stirring the pot)
well duh but thats cant change when its not available given how much ppl are looking for it and trying to get it to run, i would think it should be becoming an issue with MM. everyone used to say the samething about having it on a mac a yr ago and about how there wasnt market share to support it but it seems to have gone pretty well so far -- Original Message -- From: Adrocknaphobia <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Wed, 8 Dec 2004 08:45:54 -0500 >> i would sure like to hear from someone at MM though about why no linux >> versions of studio 2004 though > >Because Linux is not a viable market for PC software. >Unfortunately it doesnt come down to which is technically better, it >comes back to market share. > >-Adam > > >On Tue, 7 Dec 2004 22:13:04 -0500, dave <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> actually after your last post i called a buddy who i know had a couple of >> extra macs and hes gunna let me boroow one for a bit to see if i like it. >> if it works im not sure what i will do those extra 4 days a month i usually >> reserve for my usual windows re-install >> >> i know u all think im loco, and thats the reason why;) >> > >> >> i'd even give M$ another chance if they'd actually conduct ethical business >> but thats not gunna happen >> >> >> >> -- Original Message -- >> From: "Jim Davis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> Date: Tue, 7 Dec 2004 22:00:06 -0500 >> >> >Virtual PC will let you run Linux or Windows on your Mac (just as, by the >> >way, VM Ware will let you run Windows on a Linux Box without having to dual >> >boot). >> > >> >Personally I'm not a fan of the Mac... but it's nothing more than personal >> >preference. Both XP and OS X are very mature UIs (if only Linux could catch >> >up in that department). But obviously those that really like Macs REALLY >> >like Macs - you'll find no shortage of MS (oops... I forgot shift+4 again - >> >I hope you can still tell who I'm talking about) haters in that camp. >> > >> >Jim Davis >> > >> >> -Original Message- >> >> From: dave [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >> >> Sent: Tuesday, December 07, 2004 1:17 PM >> >> To: CF-Talk >> >> Subject: Re: SOT: Browser Stats (stirring the pot) >> >> >> >> as time marches on and im getting ready to get a new puter soon anyways, >> >> yes, i am thinking bout a mac. >> >> i love linux and i just know as soon as i buy a mac MM will throw out a >> >> linux version ;) >> >> however, last night i did come upon a thread that supposedly will let >> >> studio 2004 run on linux with the current version of wine but havent tried >> >> it yet. >> >> when i was in the medicine field we had mac's and i hated working on them >> >> but that was also quite some time ago >> > >> > >> > >> > >> >> > > ~| Special thanks to the CF Community Suite Silver Sponsor - RUWebby http://www.ruwebby.com Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:186697 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:4 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.4 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
Re: SOT: Browser Stats (stirring the pot)
ok we know i dont know shit but. i have been treating html as if it was dead already at least move on to xhtml, im amazed how many sites arent even close to validating in html not to mention xhtm -- Original Message -- From: Adrocknaphobia <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Tue, 7 Dec 2004 18:27:51 -0500 >Jochem, > >Thats been said since the conception of the w3c. I'm afraid that by >the time they get enforcement (worldwide), HTML will already be dead. > >-Adam > > >On Wed, 08 Dec 2004 00:14:17 +0100, Jochem van Dieten ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Adrocknaphobia wrote: >> > I hate to break it to you but with 90%+ market share... IE is the >> > standard... regardless of what the W3C has to say about it. >> >> The law has more power as a de facto standard. In the EU >> directive 2000/78/EC mandates accessibility for more then just >> government sites. >> In Germany the "Bundesgleichstellungsgesetz für Behinderte" >> mandates WCAG 1.0 Priority 1 and 2 for every new government site, >> and all existing sites have to be retrofitted within the next >> year. (Yes Macromedia, this means no Flash RIA's, because they >> use and embed does not conform to HTML which is a >> requirement under WCAG 1.0 Priority 2. It has finally happened, >> Flash RIA's are illegal.) >> My favourite example though is the UK. The DDA, Code of Practice >> III makes accessibility mandatory for commercial sites. Yes, >> accessibility all the way, an explicit example from the code of >> practise is the requirement to make a travel reservation site >> accessible for people with special user agents (screen reader etc.). >> >> Like it or not, W3C standards are comming your way. Use that >> knowledge now to win clients by explicitly stating conformance in >> tender bids, because soon everybody else will jump on the >> conformance bandwagon and you will need to find another >> competitive edge. >> >> Jochem >> >> > > ~| Special thanks to the CF Community Suite Silver Sponsor - New Atlanta http://www.newatlanta.com Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:186681 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:4 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.4 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
Re: SOT: Browser Stats (stirring the pot)
yes rob but remember i really wasnt to jazzed about eclipse, it is an option though, i also found out that homesite will run on linux very well. i had a hard time writing cssp style with eclipse, thats where i really like having dw with the split view and css right there. -- Original Message -- From: Rob <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Wed, 8 Dec 2004 07:53:07 -0800 >There are other options to studio 2004 on linux. A great many in fact. >You might want to check out one of those fine products while you wait >for linux to gain enough market share for them to port > >On Wed, 8 Dec 2004 08:45:54 -0500, Adrocknaphobia ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> > i would sure like to hear from someone at MM though about why no linux >> > versions of studio 2004 though >> >> Because Linux is not a viable market for PC software. >> Unfortunately it doesnt come down to which is technically better, it >> comes back to market share. > >-- >~The cfml plug-in for eclipse~ >http://cfeclipse.tigris.org >~open source xslt IDE~ >http://treebeard.sourceforge.net >~open source XML database~ >http://ashpool.sourceforge.net > > ~| Special thanks to the CF Community Suite Silver Sponsor - CFDynamics http://www.cfdynamics.com Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:186698 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:4 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.4 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
Re: SOT: Browser Stats (stirring the pot)
So what if it's open source? What, are you going to modify a Gecko browser to suit your needs? How many people on this list know C++, and know it well enough that they could even attempt to do this? ~| Special thanks to the CF Community Suite Silver Sponsor - New Atlanta http://www.newatlanta.com Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:186684 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:4 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
Re: SOT: Browser Stats (stirring the pot)
I think this is a fairly silly statement, personally. In theory it may be correct. In theory, writing good, standards-compliant code would be all that you need. Fact is, browsers don't implement those standards or at minimum, there are differences between their implementation. Assuming Firefox implements standards 100%, we know that IE doesn't. As such, no matter how good your code is, there's going to be differences. It absolutely is not easier to develop for two than for one. That's just crazy talk. Jake >When you are experienced at developing apps for all browsers, it becomes >harder to develop one for a single browser, than it is for all. ~| Special thanks to the CF Community Suite Silver Sponsor - RUWebby http://www.ruwebby.com Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:186683 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:4 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
Re: SOT: Browser Stats (stirring the pot)
> For one reason, people have an expectation that HTML applications work with > HTML clients. This expectation may be unreasonable given the current state > of affairs, but web sites are not packaged shrinkwrap that use > locally-executed binaries. The web was explicitly designed to be a > cross-platform environment, and to the extent that we build > platform-specific web applications we pervert this design. This issue is between public web sites / applications v. private web sites / applications. With the public web there is no way to gauge browser or systems needed to support. However when given that information, much as in the case of an intranet application, wouldn't it just be irresponsible to not take advantage? > I agree that there may be some cases where it makes sense to use an > IE-specific codebase, especially if that happens to be what you already > have. However, what will happen to those 30+ intranet applications when > you're mandated to move to, say, Windows XP SP2? Or, in the case of ActiveX, > if your security administrators decide that they simply can't support it for > security reasons? Wouldn't you rather have standards-compliant code that > will work with any browser? Haven't had any problems with any upgrades. However I mentioned before we build all of our application with a strict seperation of the presentation layer on top of a core framework. As it stands I could update all of our applications to support a w3c standard supporting browser with simple edits to about 2 files and a few custom tags. But why? When I know for a fact, written in typical government security language, that only IE5.5+ is allowed. As for the someday things will change, we're moving towards RIA's and the client/server model, and away from HTML based UIs. > I think the argument is less about supporting Firefox specifically than > about supporting standards generally. It doesn't matter that you can't use > Firefox on your internal network now, when you may need to migrate your > sites to standards for future conformance. Again, though, I agree that the > answer will vary depending on your situation, and in many cases it probably > makes sense to go with what you already have. No Dave this argument is the same argument made time and time again on this list. Open source, Linux, and the latest and greatest non-M$ technology is inherently better for all situations and anyone who isn't 1337 enough to agree must be morons. The last 30 messages of this thread have been nothing but an assault on Andrew for making applications his way. > I don't think this is as simple as you think it is. What is eBay or Amazon? > Aren't those applications? Don't the requirements have more to do with the > users than with what the site actually does in most cases? Why do we think > that successful web applications might not have large enough userbases to > warrant wider compatibility? Again, public v private. Even in Nathan's case (which is very common) where you know you have Mac and PCs of all different flavors, why wouldnt he use that knowledge to expand beyond what the w3c considers standard and define his own standard based on his closed user based? Isn't that doing a better job of serving your users? > And, as for this application selling for $200K, does this mean that more > copies couldn't have been sold if it was standards-compliant? Has any actual > market research been done to see why sales were lost? Andrew states that no > sales have ever been lost. I don't really doubt Andrew on this, but often > developers don't ask themselves these sorts of hard questions, and if no one > else asks, things just continue as they have been. Personally, I have worked > with clients who rejected applications for being IE-specific, even when I > didn't think it made business sense for them to do so - of course, they may > know their core business better than I do! I agree 100% with standards and I wish IE wasn't such a PoS. But the bottom line is 90%+ saturation. To me, that defines IE as the standard. I mean the w3c doesnt seem to work, they have been preaching standards for nearly a decade now to no avail. If they cannot convice M$ to change IE, they dont have a standard. They are just driving the browser war back to where we were 10 years ago. This grassroots fireFox campaign will soon fade just as Netscape. Soon we'll have a google browser to add into the mix and I can't see Google spending R&D just to bring out a fireFox clone. (However they are in the office next week and I plan to pry every little bit of info I can about it) So what can we do? When I know my user base, I'm going to take advantage of it. When I don't, my code is 100% XHTML, CSS1 and 508 compliant. You dont want to take advantage of a closed user base, then so be it, but when you stand on a soap box to proclaim your superiority and 1337N3$$, thats when I have problem. Who are you to smash Andrew for building successful money making applications? This whole ope
Re: SOT: Browser Stats (stirring the pot)
Kwang Suh wrote: > I'm curious. If I were to use XUL to create an app, would that be okay then? No, it's just as browser dependant but... the browser is open source. Still, I wouldn't. -nathan strutz > > >>Jim Davis wrote: >> >>>That depends on where your logic lies. >>> >>>In our HTA applications, for example, the presentation is completely >>>decoupled from the middle-ware, but is still IE specific (as only IE >>>supports HTA). >> >>Yes, a HTA application would have more than a couple problems running in >>Firefox. That's too bad, and one day, I assume, this app would have to >>be ported to a longer-term architecture. >> >>Personally, I hold the belief that using HTAs as a base for a business >>application is flawed from the start. Interesting concept though. I >>think HTA is perfect for, oh, say, the "IE7" project, that script that >>promises to make IE6 render with web standards. >> >>-nathan strutz > > > ~| Special thanks to the CF Community Suite Silver Sponsor - CFDynamics http://www.cfdynamics.com Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:186642 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:4 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.4 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
Re: SOT: Browser Stats (stirring the pot)
GUYS GIVE IT A REST!! Please move this extended, futile, out of control conversation to CF-Community or something so those of us who need some cf help can find it in the sea of messages... Cutter Adrocknaphobia wrote: >>i would sure like to hear from someone at MM though about why no linux >>versions of studio 2004 though > > > Because Linux is not a viable market for PC software. > Unfortunately it doesnt come down to which is technically better, it > comes back to market share. > > -Adam > > > On Tue, 7 Dec 2004 22:13:04 -0500, dave <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>actually after your last post i called a buddy who i know had a couple of >>extra macs and hes gunna let me boroow one for a bit to see if i like it. >>if it works im not sure what i will do those extra 4 days a month i usually >>reserve for my usual windows re-install >> >>i know u all think im loco, and thats the reason why;) >> > > >>i'd even give M$ another chance if they'd actually conduct ethical business >>but thats not gunna happen >> >> >> >>-- Original Message -- >>From: "Jim Davis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>Date: Tue, 7 Dec 2004 22:00:06 -0500 >> >> >>>Virtual PC will let you run Linux or Windows on your Mac (just as, by the >>>way, VM Ware will let you run Windows on a Linux Box without having to dual >>>boot). >>> >>>Personally I'm not a fan of the Mac... but it's nothing more than personal >>>preference. Both XP and OS X are very mature UIs (if only Linux could catch >>>up in that department). But obviously those that really like Macs REALLY >>>like Macs - you'll find no shortage of MS (oops... I forgot shift+4 again - >>>I hope you can still tell who I'm talking about) haters in that camp. >>> >>>Jim Davis >>> >>> >>>>-Original Message- >>>>From: dave [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >>>>Sent: Tuesday, December 07, 2004 1:17 PM >>>>To: CF-Talk >>>>Subject: Re: SOT: Browser Stats (stirring the pot) >>>> >>>>as time marches on and im getting ready to get a new puter soon anyways, >>>>yes, i am thinking bout a mac. >>>>i love linux and i just know as soon as i buy a mac MM will throw out a >>>>linux version ;) >>>>however, last night i did come upon a thread that supposedly will let >>>>studio 2004 run on linux with the current version of wine but havent tried >>>>it yet. >>>>when i was in the medicine field we had mac's and i hated working on them >>>>but that was also quite some time ago >>> >>> >>> >>> >> > > ~| Special thanks to the CF Community Suite Gold Sponsor - CFHosting.net http://www.cfhosting.net Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:186630 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:4 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
Re: SOT: Browser Stats (stirring the pot)
There are other options to studio 2004 on linux. A great many in fact. You might want to check out one of those fine products while you wait for linux to gain enough market share for them to port On Wed, 8 Dec 2004 08:45:54 -0500, Adrocknaphobia <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > i would sure like to hear from someone at MM though about why no linux > > versions of studio 2004 though > > Because Linux is not a viable market for PC software. > Unfortunately it doesnt come down to which is technically better, it > comes back to market share. -- ~The cfml plug-in for eclipse~ http://cfeclipse.tigris.org ~open source xslt IDE~ http://treebeard.sourceforge.net ~open source XML database~ http://ashpool.sourceforge.net ~| Special thanks to the CF Community Suite Gold Sponsor - CFHosting.net http://www.cfhosting.net Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:186638 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:4 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
Re: SOT: Browser Stats (stirring the pot)
> i would sure like to hear from someone at MM though about why no linux > versions of studio 2004 though Because Linux is not a viable market for PC software. Unfortunately it doesnt come down to which is technically better, it comes back to market share. -Adam On Tue, 7 Dec 2004 22:13:04 -0500, dave <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > actually after your last post i called a buddy who i know had a couple of > extra macs and hes gunna let me boroow one for a bit to see if i like it. > if it works im not sure what i will do those extra 4 days a month i usually > reserve for my usual windows re-install > > i know u all think im loco, and thats the reason why;) > > > i'd even give M$ another chance if they'd actually conduct ethical business > but thats not gunna happen > > > > -- Original Message -- > From: "Jim Davis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Date: Tue, 7 Dec 2004 22:00:06 -0500 > > >Virtual PC will let you run Linux or Windows on your Mac (just as, by the > >way, VM Ware will let you run Windows on a Linux Box without having to dual > >boot). > > > >Personally I'm not a fan of the Mac... but it's nothing more than personal > >preference. Both XP and OS X are very mature UIs (if only Linux could catch > >up in that department). But obviously those that really like Macs REALLY > >like Macs - you'll find no shortage of MS (oops... I forgot shift+4 again - > >I hope you can still tell who I'm talking about) haters in that camp. > > > >Jim Davis > > > >> -Original Message- > >> From: dave [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> Sent: Tuesday, December 07, 2004 1:17 PM > >> To: CF-Talk > >> Subject: Re: SOT: Browser Stats (stirring the pot) > >> > >> as time marches on and im getting ready to get a new puter soon anyways, > >> yes, i am thinking bout a mac. > >> i love linux and i just know as soon as i buy a mac MM will throw out a > >> linux version ;) > >> however, last night i did come upon a thread that supposedly will let > >> studio 2004 run on linux with the current version of wine but havent tried > >> it yet. > >> when i was in the medicine field we had mac's and i hated working on them > >> but that was also quite some time ago > > > > > > > > > > ~| Special thanks to the CF Community Suite Gold Sponsor - CFHosting.net http://www.cfhosting.net Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:186628 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:4 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
Re: SOT: Browser Stats (stirring the pot)
Jochem, Thats been said since the conception of the w3c. I'm afraid that by the time they get enforcement (worldwide), HTML will already be dead. -Adam On Wed, 08 Dec 2004 00:14:17 +0100, Jochem van Dieten <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Adrocknaphobia wrote: > > I hate to break it to you but with 90%+ market share... IE is the > > standard... regardless of what the W3C has to say about it. > > The law has more power as a de facto standard. In the EU > directive 2000/78/EC mandates accessibility for more then just > government sites. > In Germany the "Bundesgleichstellungsgesetz für Behinderte" > mandates WCAG 1.0 Priority 1 and 2 for every new government site, > and all existing sites have to be retrofitted within the next > year. (Yes Macromedia, this means no Flash RIA's, because they > use and embed does not conform to HTML which is a > requirement under WCAG 1.0 Priority 2. It has finally happened, > Flash RIA's are illegal.) > My favourite example though is the UK. The DDA, Code of Practice > III makes accessibility mandatory for commercial sites. Yes, > accessibility all the way, an explicit example from the code of > practise is the requirement to make a travel reservation site > accessible for people with special user agents (screen reader etc.). > > Like it or not, W3C standards are comming your way. Use that > knowledge now to win clients by explicitly stating conformance in > tender bids, because soon everybody else will jump on the > conformance bandwagon and you will need to find another > competitive edge. > > Jochem > > ~| Special thanks to the CF Community Suite Silver Sponsor - CFDynamics http://www.cfdynamics.com Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:186653 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:4 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
RE: SOT: Browser Stats (stirring the pot)
> Some Macromedia people insist that that does not work with > all Flash remoting and FlashComm features. That is why I > explicitly said Flash RIA's and not just Flash. I passed this to our Flash guys, and they said they hadn't seen any problems with omitting the EMBED tag with RIAs. I don't know about Flash Comm specifically, though, since we don't use that as much. Dave Watts, CTO, Fig Leaf Software http://www.figleaf.com/ phone: 202-797-5496 fax: 202-797-5444 ~| Special thanks to the CF Community Suite Silver Sponsor - CFDynamics http://www.cfdynamics.com Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:186636 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:4 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.4 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
RE: SOT: Browser Stats (stirring the pot)
> When you are experienced at developing apps for all browsers, it becomes > harder to develop one for a single browser, than it is for all. Most moderately complex apps have a great many screens. Some of these screens can only be invoked by forcing error situations or validation messages. Since we're talking dynamic apps built at runtime, we have to account for page layout issues (i.e. did you hard set the width of the select list and now the right hand portion of the data is truncated? Does the drop down expand past the hard set width at least providing a method for the user to see the full string?) My point is that each browser you choose to support adds a lot more overhead to the entire development process. This translates into a longer timeline and bigger project cost. Depending on the size and scope of the project, it could affect the price dramatically. That said, sometimes, companies require that apps developed for them support multiple browsers. However, there's always a limit. It's always something like: Internet Explorer 5.5 on Windows 2000 Service Pack 1, Internet Explorer 5.1 on Windows 98 Service Release 2, Internet Explorer 4 on Mac OS 9. And because these are the project requirements, you target for and test on these platforms. > There are a few exceptions, mostly dealing with activeX (though FF has a > plugin for that), html text areas (though fckeditor 2 will be released > soon), and VBScripting (does anyone actually use that?). These are very > minor. Have you ever tried walking into a corporate environment and telling them that you're application will work, but you're going to need to install a couple of plug-ins from some no name companies -- or worse open source projects without official support channels? The same goes for ActiveX controls in my experience. Quite simply, most companies developing intranet apps for large corporations target Internet Explorer because the vast majority of computers already have Internet Explorer installed. This way, you can roll your application out without having to install anything on 20,000 desks. > If you can't develop the app talked about in this thread to be > cross-browser compatable, it's my theory that you're just inexperienced > at cross-browser development. Obviously, I can't speak for the app that's being discussed. However, every project has requirements. Though support for multiple platforms and browsers is sometimes one of them, I've never seen "cross browser" listed as a requirement for any intranet site. It's an open ended term that is impossible to define in a practical sense. Insulting someone because he's more concerned about meeting tangible requirements than adhering to some pure aesthetic does not further your argument. Ben Rogers http://www.c4.net v.508.240.0051 f.508.240.0057 ~| Special thanks to the CF Community Suite Gold Sponsor - CFHosting.net http://www.cfhosting.net Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:186635 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:4 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
RE: SOT: Browser Stats (stirring the pot)
ok heres a good example whatever dipshit did the apps for farmers insurance group made all their stuff ie specific now farmers lets the agents access those pages remotely but u have to have ie but farmers also wont support any problems if u have installed sp2 and sent out letters saying dont install it or uninstall it so now everyone is completely screwed because of someones inability to see the future. and of course they dont wanna pay to fix it either but i sure bet whomever did that account wont be doing it again. they also have talked about going to linux but im sure u can figure that one out. -- Original Message -- From: "Andrew Scott" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Wed, 8 Dec 2004 09:19:52 +1100 >Nathan, > >If it was web based for the average joe blow to look at I agree, but in >this case it is not. And intranet systems are always designed with one >browser in mind and one only, and this is usually IE because these >companies have agreements with M$. > >Did you stop to think about that? > > >-Original Message- >From: Nathan Strutz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >Sent: Wednesday, 8 December 2004 5:06 AM >To: CF-Talk >Subject: Re: SOT: Browser Stats (stirring the pot) > >I agree with pretty much everything Umer has said in this thread. > >Honestly, at the risk of hurting feelings and being called names and >whatnot, the reason a web app that does the things we've talked about in > >this thread should not be cross-browser compatable is either a lack of >skills on the developer's part, lack of time/money on the manager's >part, or retarded requirements writers. > >When you are experienced at developing apps for all browsers, it becomes > >harder to develop one for a single browser, than it is for all. > >There are a few exceptions, mostly dealing with activeX (though FF has a > >plugin for that), html text areas (though fckeditor 2 will be released >soon), and VBScripting (does anyone actually use that?). These are very >minor. > >If you can't develop the app talked about in this thread to be >cross-browser compatable, it's my theory that you're just inexperienced >at cross-browser development. > >-nathan strutz > > > > > ~| Special thanks to the CF Community Suite Silver Sponsor - CFDynamics http://www.cfdynamics.com Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:186614 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:4 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.4 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
RE: SOT: Browser Stats (stirring the pot)
I recommend giving TinyMCE a go. It works in FF, IE, NS and Moz (but not Opera) and taking away the hot pink etc is very easy indeed. It's in active development and the author listens to requests. -Original Message- From: S. Isaac Dealey [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, 8 December 2004 3:59 To: CF-Talk Subject: Re: SOT: Browser Stats (stirring the pot) Yep, unfortunately these things still rely (afaik) on code which is not part of the standard for DOM -- they do something that the browser was never intended to do and as a result are still somewhat fidgety pretty much across the board. What I personally find odd about them is that they're almost invariably way more complicated than I'm sure is necessary. But by and large I'm waiting for them to mature a bit -- I had a client request for one recently and spent several hours just trying to figure out where to _begin_ modifying FCK Editor and couldn't do it. Had better luck with HTMLEdit but still not good enough for the client to use. Never did get around to TinyMCE. Although had I my druthers I would just tell them all that letting them format their text is a bad idea and they should let professionals _not_ apply colors like hot-pink text on an orange background with 20pt, bold, italic, underlined and blinking text. As seems to be their invariable pattern. ~| Special thanks to the CF Community Suite Silver Sponsor - CFDynamics http://www.cfdynamics.com Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:186611 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:4 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
Re: SOT: Browser Stats (stirring the pot)
> S. Isaac Dealey wrote: >> >> What's the problem with textareas again? And why will >> fckeditor 2 >> help? Or did you mean wysiwyg editors? >> > The HTML text area, yes, the wysiwyg editor -- it's > usually a simple bit > of JS in IE only. FCK2 is cross-browser compatable, but a > little > unstable for production use on my commercial sites. I > submitted a few > bugs and hope for the best for the next release, be it RC2 > or 2.0 final. > -nathan strutz Yep, unfortunately these things still rely (afaik) on code which is not part of the standard for DOM -- they do something that the browser was never intended to do and as a result are still somewhat fidgety pretty much across the board. What I personally find odd about them is that they're almost invariably way more complicated than I'm sure is necessary. But by and large I'm waiting for them to mature a bit -- I had a client request for one recently and spent several hours just trying to figure out where to _begin_ modifying FCK Editor and couldn't do it. Had better luck with HTMLEdit but still not good enough for the client to use. Never did get around to TinyMCE. Although had I my druthers I would just tell them all that letting them format their text is a bad idea and they should let professionals _not_ apply colors like hot-pink text on an orange background with 20pt, bold, italic, underlined and blinking text. As seems to be their invariable pattern. s. isaac dealey 954.927.5117 new epoch : isn't it time for a change? add features without fixtures with the onTap open source framework http://www.sys-con.com/story/?storyid=44477&DE=1 http://www.sys-con.com/story/?storyid=45569&DE=1 http://www.fusiontap.com ~| Special thanks to the CF Community Suite Gold Sponsor - CFHosting.net http://www.cfhosting.net Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:186609 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:4 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.4 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
RE: SOT: Browser Stats (stirring the pot)
One ok thing with IE being the de facto standard is that it has been
very static evolution-wise, not like the development up to IE 5.5 which
added more and more new features. Now it just needs to be brought up to
current standards!
/Hugo
--
Hugo Ahlenius
-
Hugo Ahlenius E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Project OfficerPhone:+46 8 230460
UNEP GRID-Arendal Fax: +46 8 230441
Stockholm Office Mobile: +46 733 467111
WWW: http://www.grida.no
-
|-Original Message-
|From: Adrocknaphobia [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
|Sent: Tuesday, December 07, 2004 15:43
|To: CF-Talk
|Subject: Re: SOT: Browser Stats (stirring the pot)
|
|I hate to break it to you but with 90%+ market share... IE is
|the standard... regardless of what the W3C has to say about
|it. I don't agree with it, i wish IE was complaint, but the
|reality is that they define the standard.
|
|-Adam
|
|
|On Mon, 06 Dec 2004 21:21:28 -0500, Umer Farooq
|<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
|> Okay...
|>
|> For the first one... I'm assuming that... you got a var in
|js that is
|> holding the new window... if its in the function that calls
|> openwindow... try declaring it outside... since I don't
|have ur code...
|> can't really comment on the exact cause..
|>
|> For #2... In the CSS spec there is no attribute.. "hand"
|for cursor..
|> try using "pointer".. I think that was the only problem there.. if
|> wrong plz correct me
|>
|> http://www.w3schools.com/css/pr_class_cursor.asp
|>
|> for #3 don't have the screen shot so can't comment.
|>
|> From the looks of it.. most of these are issues were IE has
|gone away
|> from the standards.. or you have coded just for one
|browser.. which in
|> my opinion defeats the purpose of having a web app.. anyhow if you
|> were to compare browsers on standard compliance.. FireFox will win..
|> and with any application.. the closely you follow standards.. the
|> better off you are in the long run.. As eventually ev1 comes
|back to the standards.
|>
|> --
|> Regards,
|>
|>
|>
|> Andrew Scott wrote:
|> >
|> > Hmmm,
|> >
|> > Lets talk about opening another window and trying to close
|the main
|> > window first, this under IE will give focus to our new
|window under
|> > Firefox it keeps the old window focused even if you try to
|focus the
|> > other window with the browser, which means that even the
|Javascript
|> > is not even compatible! Bug #1.
|> >
|> > Bug #2, in the following bit of code this will not work
|under Firefox.
|> > > onmouseover="this.style.cursor = 'hand';"
|> >
|onclick="window.location.replace('nuMenu.cfm?MenuGroupCode=ARMASTER'
|> > );">
|> >
|> > Bug #3, As you can see by the attached images that it will not
|> > display IFrames correctly either.
|> >
|> > Internet Explorer was used
|> >
|> >
|> > FireFox used to browse
|> >
|> >
|>
|> >
|>
|> --
|> Umer Farooq
|> Octadyne Systems
|> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
|> +1 (519) 772-5424 voice
|> +1 (519) 635-2795 mobile
|> +1 (208) 275-3824 fax
|>
|> LOOKING FOR A USED CAR IN IOWA VISIT: http://www.IowaMotors.com
|>
|>
|
|
~|
Special thanks to the CF Community Suite Gold Sponsor - CFHosting.net
http://www.cfhosting.net
Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:186605
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/4
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:4
Unsubscribe:
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.4
Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
Re: SOT: Browser Stats (stirring the pot)
parts of that are true but i think they should be looking at it. From what i have read the only thing thats really keeping mx 2004 from running well on linux is the activation screen and im sure that can be addressed. i know what ur saying about ppl using linux and not wanting to pay but there are those like me who dont mind paying to get away from the evil empire. i BOUGHT linux as in suse, i know what ur saying but there are others as well just like when we had this debate about releasing it for mac users (remember that?) if u look at crossover office the # of ppl wanting it supported is pretty large and the linux userbase will only get larger. if worse comes to worse i can run dw mx i guess or just learn to use eclipse but dammit i just won a full version of studio pro -- Original Message -- From: Kay Smoljak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Wed, 8 Dec 2004 12:58:59 +0800 >> i would sure like to hear from someone at MM though about why no linux >> versions of studio 2004 though > >That's not difficult to work out - no ROI. It would cost far more to >develop than I imagine they'd ever make off it - there's just not THAT >many people using Linux as a desktop machine. I'd much rather they >spent the time and development dollars fixing bugs and adding features >on the existing platforms. > >Plus, most people I know who run Linux as a desktop machine are rather >adverse to paying for software... (warning: personal anecdote only) > >-- >Kay Smoljak >http://kay.smoljak.com/ > > ~| Special thanks to the CF Community Suite Gold Sponsor - CFHosting.net http://www.cfhosting.net Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:186604 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:4 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
Re: SOT: Browser Stats (stirring the pot)
> i would sure like to hear from someone at MM though about why no linux > versions of studio 2004 though That's not difficult to work out - no ROI. It would cost far more to develop than I imagine they'd ever make off it - there's just not THAT many people using Linux as a desktop machine. I'd much rather they spent the time and development dollars fixing bugs and adding features on the existing platforms. Plus, most people I know who run Linux as a desktop machine are rather adverse to paying for software... (warning: personal anecdote only) -- Kay Smoljak http://kay.smoljak.com/ ~| Special thanks to the CF Community Suite Silver Sponsor - CFDynamics http://www.cfdynamics.com Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:186603 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:4 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.4 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
RE: SOT: Browser Stats (stirring the pot)
> -Original Message- > From: Rob [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Tuesday, December 07, 2004 5:28 PM > To: CF-Talk > Subject: Re: SOT: Browser Stats (stirring the pot) > > > And intranet systems are always designed with one > > browser in mind and one only, > > Always? are you sure about that? On our intranet some people use Macs > some windows (and now a few linux boxes on the sys admin team) - and > our intranet works on all browsers (though the new version which is > not out yet is, stupidly in my opnion, windows IE only) That really depends on your company. We, for example, are not allowed to install a Mac on our network (although we're still asked to debug Mac end-user issues). Desktops are somewhat loosely controlled, but the company standard is clearly stated as IE 6. If you've something else then you can't get support or complain. I'm not saying I agree with this... but with something like 60,000 desktops I can see the logic. I doubt this is unusual for Fortune 50 companies in general. Jim Davis ~| Special thanks to the CF Community Suite Silver Sponsor - RUWebby http://www.ruwebby.com Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:186600 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:4 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
RE: SOT: Browser Stats (stirring the pot)
actually after your last post i called a buddy who i know had a couple of extra macs and hes gunna let me boroow one for a bit to see if i like it. if it works im not sure what i will do those extra 4 days a month i usually reserve for my usual windows re-install i know u all think im loco, and thats the reason why;) i would sure like to hear from someone at MM though about why no linux versions of studio 2004 though i'd even give M$ another chance if they'd actually conduct ethical business but thats not gunna happen -- Original Message -- From: "Jim Davis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Tue, 7 Dec 2004 22:00:06 -0500 >Virtual PC will let you run Linux or Windows on your Mac (just as, by the >way, VM Ware will let you run Windows on a Linux Box without having to dual >boot). > >Personally I'm not a fan of the Mac... but it's nothing more than personal >preference. Both XP and OS X are very mature UIs (if only Linux could catch >up in that department). But obviously those that really like Macs REALLY >like Macs - you'll find no shortage of MS (oops... I forgot shift+4 again - >I hope you can still tell who I'm talking about) haters in that camp. > >Jim Davis > >> -Original Message- >> From: dave [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >> Sent: Tuesday, December 07, 2004 1:17 PM >> To: CF-Talk >> Subject: Re: SOT: Browser Stats (stirring the pot) >> >> as time marches on and im getting ready to get a new puter soon anyways, >> yes, i am thinking bout a mac. >> i love linux and i just know as soon as i buy a mac MM will throw out a >> linux version ;) >> however, last night i did come upon a thread that supposedly will let >> studio 2004 run on linux with the current version of wine but havent tried >> it yet. >> when i was in the medicine field we had mac's and i hated working on them >> but that was also quite some time ago > > > > ~| Special thanks to the CF Community Suite Silver Sponsor - New Atlanta http://www.newatlanta.com Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:186599 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:4 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.4 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
RE: SOT: Browser Stats (stirring the pot)
> -Original Message- > From: Nathan Strutz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Tuesday, December 07, 2004 1:31 PM > To: CF-Talk > Subject: Re: SOT: Browser Stats (stirring the pot) > > Jim Davis wrote: > > That depends on where your logic lies. > > > > In our HTA applications, for example, the presentation is completely > > decoupled from the middle-ware, but is still IE specific (as only IE > > supports HTA). > > Yes, a HTA application would have more than a couple problems running in > Firefox. That's too bad, and one day, I assume, this app would have to > be ported to a longer-term architecture. > > Personally, I hold the belief that using HTAs as a base for a business > application is flawed from the start. Interesting concept though. I > think HTA is perfect for, oh, say, the "IE7" project, that script that > promises to make IE6 render with web standards. For what it's worth, aside from the use of COM object within the HTA almost all the actual web code in (at least my) HTAs runs fairly well in FireFox. Object-oriented JavaScript is almost completely ignored by the community at large, but is insanely useful in abstracting interfaces and segmenting browser-specific code. HTA's allow us to make highly maintainable interfaces in very short periods of time. If I had my druthers we'd actually be using Flash for this, but the company doesn't want to commit to it. For example, the project I'm building now is a tool allowing a small group (around 5 people) to view and modify mainframe-based (DB2) data for the purposes of data purification and cleanup. The original version of the program was in PowerBuilder, but built very badly. The HTA version works client-side with a WebSphere middleware engine which talks to DB2. The HTA is distributed online (offering instant updates) but has full client-application privileges (registry access, file system access, etc). The HTA application makes extensive use of JavaScript objects for abstraction and portability. It makes structured POSTs to Beans in WebSphere which returns only XML data. In this way the Middleware is completely decoupled from the interface (and interface logic). Because of time constraints we're requiring IE 6 (we need to save money on end-to-end testing and the user base is exceedingly small), but so far the app is working in 5 and 5.5 as well. There are definite issues, but so far it's amazing how much better our applications can be using the technology. Jim Davis ~| Special thanks to the CF Community Suite Silver Sponsor - CFDynamics http://www.cfdynamics.com Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:186598 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:4 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.4 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
RE: SOT: Browser Stats (stirring the pot)
Virtual PC will let you run Linux or Windows on your Mac (just as, by the way, VM Ware will let you run Windows on a Linux Box without having to dual boot). Personally I'm not a fan of the Mac... but it's nothing more than personal preference. Both XP and OS X are very mature UIs (if only Linux could catch up in that department). But obviously those that really like Macs REALLY like Macs - you'll find no shortage of MS (oops... I forgot shift+4 again - I hope you can still tell who I'm talking about) haters in that camp. Jim Davis > -Original Message- > From: dave [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Tuesday, December 07, 2004 1:17 PM > To: CF-Talk > Subject: Re: SOT: Browser Stats (stirring the pot) > > as time marches on and im getting ready to get a new puter soon anyways, > yes, i am thinking bout a mac. > i love linux and i just know as soon as i buy a mac MM will throw out a > linux version ;) > however, last night i did come upon a thread that supposedly will let > studio 2004 run on linux with the current version of wine but havent tried > it yet. > when i was in the medicine field we had mac's and i hated working on them > but that was also quite some time ago ~| Special thanks to the CF Community Suite Silver Sponsor - RUWebby http://www.ruwebby.com Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:186597 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:4 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.4 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
RE: SOT: Browser Stats (stirring the pot)
thats was tongue-in-cheek dave, with all your brains i'd figure u'd know that u dont have to be so damn serious all the time so maybe i am dating linux? better than bill and then at least u couldnt accuse me of kissin his azz for the money and yes i'll advocate linux, firefox, ect, with the hope that someday ppl will pull their heads outta their lazy asses and requests some changes to be made. -- Original Message -- From: Dave Watts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Tue, 7 Dec 2004 21:17:50 -0500 >> are you dating bill? > >Why would anyone take you seriously, with that kind of response? Are you >dating Linus? If not, why advocate Linux all the time? > >Dave Watts, CTO, Fig Leaf Software >http://www.figleaf.com/ >phone: 202-797-5496 >fax: 202-797-5444 > > > ~| Special thanks to the CF Community Suite Silver Sponsor - RUWebby http://www.ruwebby.com Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:186595 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:4 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.4 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
RE: SOT: Browser Stats (stirring the pot)
> are you dating bill? Why would anyone take you seriously, with that kind of response? Are you dating Linus? If not, why advocate Linux all the time? Dave Watts, CTO, Fig Leaf Software http://www.figleaf.com/ phone: 202-797-5496 fax: 202-797-5444 ~| Special thanks to the CF Community Suite Gold Sponsor - CFHosting.net http://www.cfhosting.net Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:186594 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:4 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.4 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
RE: SOT: Browser Stats (stirring the pot)
> Why is everyone so concerned over Andrew's philosophy? How > can you sit here and make these BS arguments, when you dont > apply this reason to any other type of applications? Why does > every html based application have to render in every browser? > Why is it ok to write a program that only runs on linux, or > OSX when you could obviously just write everything in Java > for all platforms? Why do you not care that games are > published for gamecube and not Xbox? What is this double > standard? For one reason, people have an expectation that HTML applications work with HTML clients. This expectation may be unreasonable given the current state of affairs, but web sites are not packaged shrinkwrap that use locally-executed binaries. The web was explicitly designed to be a cross-platform environment, and to the extent that we build platform-specific web applications we pervert this design. > I can agree with you if you are talking about a public > website, but come on Andrew writes web applications built > for IE because its adds value to his applications. We have > 30+ intranet applications I support written only for IE 5.5+ > within the Dept of State. I agree that there may be some cases where it makes sense to use an IE-specific codebase, especially if that happens to be what you already have. However, what will happen to those 30+ intranet applications when you're mandated to move to, say, Windows XP SP2? Or, in the case of ActiveX, if your security administrators decide that they simply can't support it for security reasons? Wouldn't you rather have standards-compliant code that will work with any browser? > Now according to Nathan I must be some kinda of moron, but why > would I spend any extra development time while hindering features > just to support the latest open-source browser that is prohibited > on my network? Thats not to say that the public website I'm about > to launch isnt a CSS1 masterpiece (beacuse CSS2 will not exist until > IE decides it can) because it is. I think the argument is less about supporting Firefox specifically than about supporting standards generally. It doesn't matter that you can't use Firefox on your internal network now, when you may need to migrate your sites to standards for future conformance. Again, though, I agree that the answer will vary depending on your situation, and in many cases it probably makes sense to go with what you already have. > Web sites have vastly different requirements from web applications. > This is not a tough concept to grasp. Andrew writes an app > that sells for 200k, even though its built for IE only, so > what does that say about your entire argument. Your envy > isn't completely masked by your tech-arrogance. I don't think this is as simple as you think it is. What is eBay or Amazon? Aren't those applications? Don't the requirements have more to do with the users than with what the site actually does in most cases? Why do we think that successful web applications might not have large enough userbases to warrant wider compatibility? And, as for this application selling for $200K, does this mean that more copies couldn't have been sold if it was standards-compliant? Has any actual market research been done to see why sales were lost? Andrew states that no sales have ever been lost. I don't really doubt Andrew on this, but often developers don't ask themselves these sorts of hard questions, and if no one else asks, things just continue as they have been. Personally, I have worked with clients who rejected applications for being IE-specific, even when I didn't think it made business sense for them to do so - of course, they may know their core business better than I do! Dave Watts, CTO, Fig Leaf Software http://www.figleaf.com/ phone: 202-797-5496 fax: 202-797-5444 ~| Special thanks to the CF Community Suite Silver Sponsor - RUWebby http://www.ruwebby.com Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:186588 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:4 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
Re: SOT: Browser Stats (stirring the pot)
are you dating bill? -- Original Message -- From: Adrocknaphobia <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Tue, 7 Dec 2004 18:23:47 -0500 >Again... this is the stupidest thread I've ever had the pleasure on >deleting nearly 90 times. Will you people just grow up? > >Why is everyone so concerned over Andrew's philosophy? How can you sit >here and make these BS arguments, when you dont apply this reason to >any other type of applications? Why does every html based application >have to render in every browser? Why is it ok to write a program that >only runs on linux, or OSX when you could obviously just write >everything in Java for all platforms? Why do you not care that games >are published for gamecube and not Xbox? What is this double standard? > >I can agree with you if you are talking about a public website, but >come on Andrew writes web applications built for IE because its >adds value to his applications. We have 30+ intranet applications I >support written only for IE 5.5+ within the Dept of State. Now >according to Nathan I must be some kinda of moron, but why would I >spend any extra development time while hindering features just to >support the latest open-source browser that is prohibited on my >network? Thats not to say that the public website I'm about to launch >isnt a CSS1 masterpiece (beacuse CSS2 will not exist until IE decides >it can) because it is. > >Web sites have vastly different requirements from web applications. >This is not a tough concept to grasp. Andrew writes an app that sells >for 200k, even though its built for IE only, so what does that say >about your entire argument. Your envy isn't completely masked by your >tech-arrogance. > >The fact is that the general public could care less about the 'browser >war' or Firefox. If its installed and they can access google and ebay >its a good browser in thier mind. This utter drivel will make no >impact on that what so ever. So lets stop making the same points over >and over again, and get Mike to drop this thread which is so obviously >so far of topic the letters cf haven't even been used in a sentence. > >-Adam > > > >On Tue, 7 Dec 2004 14:28:14 -0800, Rob <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> > And intranet systems are always designed with one >> > browser in mind and one only, >> >> Always? are you sure about that? On our intranet some people use Macs >> some windows (and now a few linux boxes on the sys admin team) - and >> our intranet works on all browsers (though the new version which is >> not out yet is, stupidly in my opnion, windows IE only) >> >> >> >> -- >> ~The cfml plug-in for eclipse~ >> http://cfeclipse.tigris.org >> ~open source xslt IDE~ >> http://treebeard.sourceforge.net >> ~open source XML database~ >> http://ashpool.sourceforge.net >> >> > > ~| Special thanks to the CF Community Suite Silver Sponsor - CFDynamics http://www.cfdynamics.com Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:186587 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:4 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.4 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
Re: SOT: Browser Stats (stirring the pot)
i would think that might only be the case if ur trying to use flashvars which im sure you could work in -- Original Message -- From: Jochem van Dieten <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Wed, 08 Dec 2004 00:58:14 +0100 >Dave Watts wrote: >> >> You can easily work around this: >> >> http://www.macromedia.com/devnet/mx/dreamweaver/articles/flash_satay.html > >Some Macromedia people insist that that does not work with all >Flash remoting and FlashComm features. That is why I explicitly >said Flash RIA's and not just Flash. > >Jochem > > ~| Special thanks to the CF Community Suite Gold Sponsor - CFHosting.net http://www.cfhosting.net Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:186585 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:4 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
Re: SOT: Browser Stats (stirring the pot)
really shouldnt be using anyways try this, xhtml compliant as well, not to mention less code -- Original Message -- From: Jochem van Dieten <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Wed, 08 Dec 2004 00:14:17 +0100 >Adrocknaphobia wrote: >> I hate to break it to you but with 90%+ market share... IE is the >> standard... regardless of what the W3C has to say about it. > >The law has more power as a de facto standard. In the EU >directive 2000/78/EC mandates accessibility for more then just >government sites. >In Germany the "Bundesgleichstellungsgesetz für Behinderte" >mandates WCAG 1.0 Priority 1 and 2 for every new government site, >and all existing sites have to be retrofitted within the next >year. (Yes Macromedia, this means no Flash RIA's, because they >use and embed does not conform to HTML which is a >requirement under WCAG 1.0 Priority 2. It has finally happened, >Flash RIA's are illegal.) >My favourite example though is the UK. The DDA, Code of Practice >III makes accessibility mandatory for commercial sites. Yes, >accessibility all the way, an explicit example from the code of >practise is the requirement to make a travel reservation site >accessible for people with special user agents (screen reader etc.). > > >Like it or not, W3C standards are comming your way. Use that >knowledge now to win clients by explicitly stating conformance in >tender bids, because soon everybody else will jump on the >conformance bandwagon and you will need to find another >competitive edge. > >Jochem > > ~| Special thanks to the CF Community Suite Silver Sponsor - New Atlanta http://www.newatlanta.com Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:186584 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:4 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
Re: SOT: Browser Stats (stirring the pot)
Dave Watts wrote: > > You can easily work around this: > > http://www.macromedia.com/devnet/mx/dreamweaver/articles/flash_satay.html Some Macromedia people insist that that does not work with all Flash remoting and FlashComm features. That is why I explicitly said Flash RIA's and not just Flash. Jochem ~| Special thanks to the CF Community Suite Gold Sponsor - CFHosting.net http://www.cfhosting.net Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:186583 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:4 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.4 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
Re: SOT: Browser Stats (stirring the pot)
sure, did u find the actual link though? i just figured you'd seen us talk about it on here to know :) -- Original Message -- From: Nathan Strutz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Tue, 07 Dec 2004 14:00:38 -0700 >Why not? ... > >Because I hadn't seen it :) > >Thanks for the link Dave. > >-nathan strutz > > > >dave wrote: >> why not try tinymce? >> i know everyone is waiting for fck but you have also been waiting quite a >> long time now, i think shorthorn will be out before then ;) >> >> -- Original Message -- >> From: Nathan Strutz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> Date: Tue, 07 Dec 2004 13:40:24 -0700 >> >> >>>S. Isaac Dealey wrote: >>> What's the problem with textareas again? And why will fckeditor 2 help? Or did you mean wysiwyg editors? >>> >>>The HTML text area, yes, the wysiwyg editor -- it's usually a simple bit >>>of JS in IE only. FCK2 is cross-browser compatable, but a little >>>unstable for production use on my commercial sites. I submitted a few >>>bugs and hope for the best for the next release, be it RC2 or 2.0 final. >>> >>>-nathan strutz >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> > > ~| Special thanks to the CF Community Suite Silver Sponsor - New Atlanta http://www.newatlanta.com Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:186582 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:4 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.4 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
RE: SOT: Browser Stats (stirring the pot)
> I'm curious. If I were to use XUL to create an app, would > that be okay then? How would that be any different from using HTAs, with regard to compatibility? Dave Watts, CTO, Fig Leaf Software http://www.figleaf.com/ phone: 202-797-5496 fax: 202-797-5444 ~| Special thanks to the CF Community Suite Silver Sponsor - New Atlanta http://www.newatlanta.com Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:186581 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:4 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.4 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
RE: SOT: Browser Stats (stirring the pot)
> (Yes Macromedia, this means no Flash RIA's, because they use > and embed does not conform to HTML which is a requirement > under WCAG 1.0 Priority 2. It has finally happened, Flash RIA's > are illegal.) You can easily work around this: http://www.macromedia.com/devnet/mx/dreamweaver/articles/flash_satay.html Dave Watts, CTO, Fig Leaf Software http://www.figleaf.com/ phone: 202-797-5496 fax: 202-797-5444 ~| Special thanks to the CF Community Suite Silver Sponsor - CFDynamics http://www.cfdynamics.com Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:186580 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:4 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
Re: SOT: Browser Stats (stirring the pot)
I'm curious. If I were to use XUL to create an app, would that be okay then? >Jim Davis wrote: >> That depends on where your logic lies. >> >> In our HTA applications, for example, the presentation is completely >> decoupled from the middle-ware, but is still IE specific (as only IE >> supports HTA). > >Yes, a HTA application would have more than a couple problems running in >Firefox. That's too bad, and one day, I assume, this app would have to >be ported to a longer-term architecture. > >Personally, I hold the belief that using HTAs as a base for a business >application is flawed from the start. Interesting concept though. I >think HTA is perfect for, oh, say, the "IE7" project, that script that >promises to make IE6 render with web standards. > >-nathan strutz ~| Special thanks to the CF Community Suite Silver Sponsor - CFDynamics http://www.cfdynamics.com Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:186579 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:4 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.4 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
Re: SOT: Browser Stats (stirring the pot)
Again... this is the stupidest thread I've ever had the pleasure on deleting nearly 90 times. Will you people just grow up? Why is everyone so concerned over Andrew's philosophy? How can you sit here and make these BS arguments, when you dont apply this reason to any other type of applications? Why does every html based application have to render in every browser? Why is it ok to write a program that only runs on linux, or OSX when you could obviously just write everything in Java for all platforms? Why do you not care that games are published for gamecube and not Xbox? What is this double standard? I can agree with you if you are talking about a public website, but come on Andrew writes web applications built for IE because its adds value to his applications. We have 30+ intranet applications I support written only for IE 5.5+ within the Dept of State. Now according to Nathan I must be some kinda of moron, but why would I spend any extra development time while hindering features just to support the latest open-source browser that is prohibited on my network? Thats not to say that the public website I'm about to launch isnt a CSS1 masterpiece (beacuse CSS2 will not exist until IE decides it can) because it is. Web sites have vastly different requirements from web applications. This is not a tough concept to grasp. Andrew writes an app that sells for 200k, even though its built for IE only, so what does that say about your entire argument. Your envy isn't completely masked by your tech-arrogance. The fact is that the general public could care less about the 'browser war' or Firefox. If its installed and they can access google and ebay its a good browser in thier mind. This utter drivel will make no impact on that what so ever. So lets stop making the same points over and over again, and get Mike to drop this thread which is so obviously so far of topic the letters cf haven't even been used in a sentence. -Adam On Tue, 7 Dec 2004 14:28:14 -0800, Rob <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > And intranet systems are always designed with one > > browser in mind and one only, > > Always? are you sure about that? On our intranet some people use Macs > some windows (and now a few linux boxes on the sys admin team) - and > our intranet works on all browsers (though the new version which is > not out yet is, stupidly in my opnion, windows IE only) > > > > -- > ~The cfml plug-in for eclipse~ > http://cfeclipse.tigris.org > ~open source xslt IDE~ > http://treebeard.sourceforge.net > ~open source XML database~ > http://ashpool.sourceforge.net > > ~| Special thanks to the CF Community Suite Gold Sponsor - CFHosting.net http://www.cfhosting.net Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:186576 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:4 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.4 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
Re: SOT: Browser Stats (stirring the pot)
Andrew Scott wrote: > Nathan, > > If it was web based for the average joe blow to look at I agree, but in > this case it is not. And intranet systems are always designed with one > browser in mind and one only, and this is usually IE because these > companies have agreements with M$. > > Did you stop to think about that? > IE on Windows you mean? What about the design team that needs to hit up the intranet from time to time, they've only got Macs. IE5 on mac isn't like any browser on Windows. Anyway, I won't pick apart everything you said. The fact is, your app is IE only, and probably no one knows what it would take to make it compatable with other browsers. You've stated that it's not worth switching because it's a big money-maker and you haven't had any problems with companies requiring other browsers. One day, this will change. Everyone won't stay on IE6 forever , and also your program will have to evolve in some way to keep its cool (No web app is a long-term solution). If it doesn't stay cool, your clients will dump it for something better. You may not be making it Firefox compatable in the near future, but someday, someone will have to adapt your software for a different browser. The art dept will have to get on it eventually, or you'll make some linux-loving fanatic sysadmin all pissy about not being able to use it on Konquerer. Develop it with everyone in mind from the start and you avoid these problems. -nathan strutz ~| Special thanks to the CF Community Suite Gold Sponsor - CFHosting.net http://www.cfhosting.net Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:186575 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:4 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.4 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
Re: SOT: Browser Stats (stirring the pot)
Adrocknaphobia wrote: > I hate to break it to you but with 90%+ market share... IE is the > standard... regardless of what the W3C has to say about it. The law has more power as a de facto standard. In the EU directive 2000/78/EC mandates accessibility for more then just government sites. In Germany the "Bundesgleichstellungsgesetz für Behinderte" mandates WCAG 1.0 Priority 1 and 2 for every new government site, and all existing sites have to be retrofitted within the next year. (Yes Macromedia, this means no Flash RIA's, because they use and embed does not conform to HTML which is a requirement under WCAG 1.0 Priority 2. It has finally happened, Flash RIA's are illegal.) My favourite example though is the UK. The DDA, Code of Practice III makes accessibility mandatory for commercial sites. Yes, accessibility all the way, an explicit example from the code of practise is the requirement to make a travel reservation site accessible for people with special user agents (screen reader etc.). Like it or not, W3C standards are comming your way. Use that knowledge now to win clients by explicitly stating conformance in tender bids, because soon everybody else will jump on the conformance bandwagon and you will need to find another competitive edge. Jochem ~| Special thanks to the CF Community Suite Gold Sponsor - CFHosting.net http://www.cfhosting.net Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:186574 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:4 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.4 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
RE: SOT: Browser Stats (stirring the pot)
> If it was web based for the average joe blow to look at I > agree, but in this case it is not. And intranet systems are > always designed with one browser in mind and one only, and > this is usually IE because these companies have agreements > with M$. > > Did you stop to think about that? While I agree that there are valid reasons to design using IE-specific functionality, I've never heard of companies having agreements with Microsoft to use IE. IE is, after all, free. I would disagree with your statement that intranet systems are always designed with only one browser in mind, too, since I've worked on plenty that require compatibility with more than one browser. Dave Watts, CTO, Fig Leaf Software http://www.figleaf.com/ phone: 202-797-5496 fax: 202-797-5444 ~| Special thanks to the CF Community Suite Gold Sponsor - CFHosting.net http://www.cfhosting.net Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:186571 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:4 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.4 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
Re: SOT: Browser Stats (stirring the pot)
> And intranet systems are always designed with one > browser in mind and one only, Always? are you sure about that? On our intranet some people use Macs some windows (and now a few linux boxes on the sys admin team) - and our intranet works on all browsers (though the new version which is not out yet is, stupidly in my opnion, windows IE only) -- ~The cfml plug-in for eclipse~ http://cfeclipse.tigris.org ~open source xslt IDE~ http://treebeard.sourceforge.net ~open source XML database~ http://ashpool.sourceforge.net ~| Special thanks to the CF Community Suite Silver Sponsor - RUWebby http://www.ruwebby.com Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:186570 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:4 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
RE: SOT: Browser Stats (stirring the pot)
Nathan, If it was web based for the average joe blow to look at I agree, but in this case it is not. And intranet systems are always designed with one browser in mind and one only, and this is usually IE because these companies have agreements with M$. Did you stop to think about that? -Original Message- From: Nathan Strutz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, 8 December 2004 5:06 AM To: CF-Talk Subject: Re: SOT: Browser Stats (stirring the pot) I agree with pretty much everything Umer has said in this thread. Honestly, at the risk of hurting feelings and being called names and whatnot, the reason a web app that does the things we've talked about in this thread should not be cross-browser compatable is either a lack of skills on the developer's part, lack of time/money on the manager's part, or retarded requirements writers. When you are experienced at developing apps for all browsers, it becomes harder to develop one for a single browser, than it is for all. There are a few exceptions, mostly dealing with activeX (though FF has a plugin for that), html text areas (though fckeditor 2 will be released soon), and VBScripting (does anyone actually use that?). These are very minor. If you can't develop the app talked about in this thread to be cross-browser compatable, it's my theory that you're just inexperienced at cross-browser development. -nathan strutz ~| Special thanks to the CF Community Suite Gold Sponsor - CFHosting.net http://www.cfhosting.net Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:186567 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:4 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.4 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
Re: SOT: Browser Stats (stirring the pot)
Why not? ... Because I hadn't seen it :) Thanks for the link Dave. -nathan strutz dave wrote: > why not try tinymce? > i know everyone is waiting for fck but you have also been waiting quite a > long time now, i think shorthorn will be out before then ;) > > -- Original Message -- > From: Nathan Strutz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Date: Tue, 07 Dec 2004 13:40:24 -0700 > > >>S. Isaac Dealey wrote: >> >>>What's the problem with textareas again? And why will fckeditor 2 >>>help? Or did you mean wysiwyg editors? >>> >> >>The HTML text area, yes, the wysiwyg editor -- it's usually a simple bit >>of JS in IE only. FCK2 is cross-browser compatable, but a little >>unstable for production use on my commercial sites. I submitted a few >>bugs and hope for the best for the next release, be it RC2 or 2.0 final. >> >>-nathan strutz >> >> >> > > > ~| Special thanks to the CF Community Suite Gold Sponsor - CFHosting.net http://www.cfhosting.net Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:186547 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:4 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.4 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
Re: SOT: Browser Stats (stirring the pot)
why not try tinymce? i know everyone is waiting for fck but you have also been waiting quite a long time now, i think shorthorn will be out before then ;) -- Original Message -- From: Nathan Strutz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Tue, 07 Dec 2004 13:40:24 -0700 >S. Isaac Dealey wrote: >> >> What's the problem with textareas again? And why will fckeditor 2 >> help? Or did you mean wysiwyg editors? >> > >The HTML text area, yes, the wysiwyg editor -- it's usually a simple bit >of JS in IE only. FCK2 is cross-browser compatable, but a little >unstable for production use on my commercial sites. I submitted a few >bugs and hope for the best for the next release, be it RC2 or 2.0 final. > >-nathan strutz > > > ~| Special thanks to the CF Community Suite Silver Sponsor - CFDynamics http://www.cfdynamics.com Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:186545 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:4 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
Re: SOT: Browser Stats (stirring the pot)
S. Isaac Dealey wrote: > > What's the problem with textareas again? And why will fckeditor 2 > help? Or did you mean wysiwyg editors? > The HTML text area, yes, the wysiwyg editor -- it's usually a simple bit of JS in IE only. FCK2 is cross-browser compatable, but a little unstable for production use on my commercial sites. I submitted a few bugs and hope for the best for the next release, be it RC2 or 2.0 final. -nathan strutz ~| Special thanks to the CF Community Suite Gold Sponsor - CFHosting.net http://www.cfhosting.net Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:186544 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:4 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.4 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
Re: SOT: Browser Stats (stirring the pot)
> or retarded requirements writers. Or rather -- un-retarded requirements writers who're allowed to specify anything they can imagine as a requirement... "We'd like controls in our web application which allow us to insert and play our DVD on any personal DVD player in the continental US. It should display a map of the US where we can drill down to an individual house and then an individual room and select the DVD player to activate." A problem of requirements writers having no concept of what is genuinely possible and what is not, who simply think that computers or the web are a strange form of black-magic which can do anything a person can conceive. Their imagination has to be retarded to within the constraints of what is currently feasible. > When you are experienced at developing apps for all > browsers, it becomes harder to develop one for a > single browser, than it is for all. This has for the most part been my experience in recent years. I still run into an occasional issue with something like IE 6 not understanding the css style display: table-row; when I wanted to toggle the display of table row elements. IE accepts "block" to return the table row to its normal display state whereas other browsers then treat the row as a block element and make all its children in-line thus destroying the table. I did find a reasonably simple workaround for this tho that's viable for all browsers afaik. There were some other issues with the tabsets in the onTap framework and IE not allowing the innerHTML property of tables or table rows to be written (even though the standard insists that they both be read/write), but I was able to find a better DOM compliant alternative for that as well. Oh... and IE treats the onUnload event differently as well... All other browsers execute the event _before_ closing the window -- IE executes the event _after_ the window is closed. So to get the same behavior with IE again you have to specify the IE specific onBeforeUnload event handler. Though given that other browsers will simply ignore the extraneous event handler, I'd just write a function and use both event handlers to call it in the body tag. > There are a few exceptions, mostly dealing with activeX > (though FF has a plugin for that), html text areas (though > fckeditor 2 will be released soon), and VBScripting (does > anyone actually use that?). These are very minor. What's the problem with textareas again? And why will fckeditor 2 help? Or did you mean wysiwyg editors? s. isaac dealey 954.927.5117 new epoch : isn't it time for a change? add features without fixtures with the onTap open source framework http://www.sys-con.com/story/?storyid=44477&DE=1 http://www.sys-con.com/story/?storyid=45569&DE=1 http://www.fusiontap.com ~| Special thanks to the CF Community Suite Silver Sponsor - RUWebby http://www.ruwebby.com Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:186525 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:4 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
Re: SOT: Browser Stats (stirring the pot)
Jim Davis wrote: > That depends on where your logic lies. > > In our HTA applications, for example, the presentation is completely > decoupled from the middle-ware, but is still IE specific (as only IE > supports HTA). Yes, a HTA application would have more than a couple problems running in Firefox. That's too bad, and one day, I assume, this app would have to be ported to a longer-term architecture. Personally, I hold the belief that using HTAs as a base for a business application is flawed from the start. Interesting concept though. I think HTA is perfect for, oh, say, the "IE7" project, that script that promises to make IE6 render with web standards. -nathan strutz ~| Special thanks to the CF Community Suite Silver Sponsor - New Atlanta http://www.newatlanta.com Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:186509 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:4 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.4 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
Re: SOT: Browser Stats (stirring the pot)
as time marches on and im getting ready to get a new puter soon anyways, yes, i am thinking bout a mac. i love linux and i just know as soon as i buy a mac MM will throw out a linux version ;) however, last night i did come upon a thread that supposedly will let studio 2004 run on linux with the current version of wine but havent tried it yet. when i was in the medicine field we had mac's and i hated working on them but that was also quite some time ago -- Original Message -- From: Jim Davis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Tue, 07 Dec 2004 13:07:37 -0400 >> i do >> i run a dual boot system with xp & suse 9.2 pro >> as soon as MM gets off their butts and makes studio mx 2004 run on >> linux, xp is gone! cant wait to get fully rid of it >> but i need at least flash & dw and they wont run on linux yet COME ON >> MM > >Seems to me like a Mac would be the way to go for you. No MS (oops... I >didn't hit shift+4 on that one...) but still full support for all your MM >tools. Also OSX is a Unix OS. > >Pretty much a no-brainer I would think. > >Jim Davis > > ~| Special thanks to the CF Community Suite Gold Sponsor - CFHosting.net http://www.cfhosting.net Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:186505 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:4 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
Re: SOT: Browser Stats (stirring the pot)
I agree with pretty much everything Umer has said in this thread. Honestly, at the risk of hurting feelings and being called names and whatnot, the reason a web app that does the things we've talked about in this thread should not be cross-browser compatable is either a lack of skills on the developer's part, lack of time/money on the manager's part, or retarded requirements writers. When you are experienced at developing apps for all browsers, it becomes harder to develop one for a single browser, than it is for all. There are a few exceptions, mostly dealing with activeX (though FF has a plugin for that), html text areas (though fckeditor 2 will be released soon), and VBScripting (does anyone actually use that?). These are very minor. If you can't develop the app talked about in this thread to be cross-browser compatable, it's my theory that you're just inexperienced at cross-browser development. -nathan strutz Umer Farooq wrote: >>Bug #1: >> >>If I create a simple page to open a window, and close the parent Firefox >>behaves very bad, that's all I need to say Not browser specific >>code!! >> > > > Not able to produce the problem.. likly something wrong with the > JavaScript event listner. again.. not sure as to how you are closing > the window.. programmatically or trying to figure out if user closed the > window.. > > > >>Bug#2: >> >>The problem is with the URL in the style attribute, the image does not >>appear at all. > > > The width of the background image.. in ur code is set to 1PX.. > > >>Bug #3: >>We have and Iframe that contains 2 more Iframes, and will not display in >>Firefox, this is also not IE specific code!! > > > Again.. not able to reproduce the problem.. I created.. three level deep > iframes.. > > >>And as far as IE specific code goes, we are using a lot of it to deliver >>content management and Business Logic that we can not deliver in >>Firefox, Opera or even Netscape. > > > With no alternative to IE for a long time.. I understand this.. and if > you have Windows specific code.. nothing much can be done about it.. as > 90% of the users are still on IE/Win.. and if you can add the > functionality to place your app higher up then the others.. might as > well do it.. but with FireFox going at the pace it is.. I wouldn't wana > be left without support for it.. > > >>If you would like me to send you the images for you to look at then I am >>more than happy to send an HTML email for you to see the problems at >>hand. > > > Sure.. email address below.. > > >>But the point is that if our application can't run in anything else than >>a browser then we are creating more usability for MS products, that's >>the point I was trying to make. > > > > Yes.. for a long time to come IE will still rule the web.. But as > developers we can stop the push to MS products by adding cross > compatibility.. and with FireFox, it just makes the whole thing lot > easier.. to implement.. sell to higher up.. etc.. etc.. For me I'm just > glad I don't have to do compatibility test with NN4.7 and NN6.0.. :-) > > Regards, ~| Special thanks to the CF Community Suite Gold Sponsor - CFHosting.net http://www.cfhosting.net Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:186501 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:4 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
Re: SOT: Browser Stats (stirring the pot)
> i do > i run a dual boot system with xp & suse 9.2 pro > as soon as MM gets off their butts and makes studio mx 2004 run on > linux, xp is gone! cant wait to get fully rid of it > but i need at least flash & dw and they wont run on linux yet COME ON > MM Seems to me like a Mac would be the way to go for you. No MS (oops... I didn't hit shift+4 on that one...) but still full support for all your MM tools. Also OSX is a Unix OS. Pretty much a no-brainer I would think. Jim Davis ~| Special thanks to the CF Community Suite Gold Sponsor - CFHosting.net http://www.cfhosting.net Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:186500 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:4 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
RE: SOT: Browser Stats (stirring the pot)
Haha! Touche! -Original Message- From: Adrocknaphobia [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, December 07, 2004 7:52 AM To: CF-Talk Subject: Re: SOT: Browser Stats (stirring the pot) Andrew, I agree with you. If you are developing an _application_ not a public website, I then I think you should have the liberty to design it to any browser you want. If developing an application for IE only makes your app easier to use then more power to you. All these people act like applications are always developed for every platform. But they aren't and never have. Why do you think they put sys requirements on every piece of software sold in america. Umer, I suggest you leave the small fish alone and start writing to Apple to complain about how they are breaking the PC standard in writing software that only works on OSX! -Adam On Tue, 7 Dec 2004 15:29:15 +1100, Andrew Scott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Bug #1: > > If I create a simple page to open a window, and close the parent Firefox > behaves very bad, that's all I need to say Not browser specific > code!! > > Bug#2: > > The problem is with the URL in the style attribute, the image does not > appear at all. > > Bug #3: > We have and Iframe that contains 2 more Iframes, and will not display in > Firefox, this is also not IE specific code!! > > And as far as IE specific code goes, we are using a lot of it to deliver > content management and Business Logic that we can not deliver in > Firefox, Opera or even Netscape. > > If you would like me to send you the images for you to look at then I am > more than happy to send an HTML email for you to see the problems at > hand. > > But the point is that if our application can't run in anything else than > a browser then we are creating more usability for MS products, that's > the point I was trying to make. > > > > > -Original Message----- > From: Umer Farooq [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Tuesday, 7 December 2004 2:49 PM > To: CF-Talk > Subject: Re: SOT: Browser Stats (stirring the pot) > > Andrew Scott wrote: > > First of all there is no Var variable so I don't know what you're > > talking about, secondly the problem with the CSS is the actual url > style > > and nothing else. > > First off.. the initial comment was regarding this.. "BUG #1" > > >>Lets talk about opening another window and trying to close the main > >>window first, this under IE will give focus to our new window under > >>Firefox it keeps the old window focused even if you try to focus the > >>other window with the browser, which means that even the Javascript > is > >>not even compatible! Bug #1. > >> > > Now.. like I said.. I don't know how you are openning windows.. or > closing.. > > > Did you actually try the code, or just make the assumption? > > Yes.. I did try the code.. hence the reference.. to cursor='hand'.. > prop.. being only IE thing.. also.. what CSS url style issue are you > referring to.. > > > Thridly IFrame is a w3c standard, and even that doesn't work. I have > > also looked at many other things that we use in IE that are needed for > > our application that we can tie down to one application across the > > entire organisation, what that means is we have an application that is > > fully configurable easy to create and less work for us with our > > framework and we can create anything within minutes. > > Again.. I'm not aware of any IFrame parts.. that are in w3c standard and > > not supported by FireFox.. if you know of any.. plz enlighten me to > them.. as I would like to know.. I think.. this from one of your > previous posts sums it all up.. > > > delivering our application to the end user, we use specific > > IE only functionality and it works. > > Regards, > -- > Umer Farooq > Octadyne Systems > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > +1 (519) 772-5424 voice > +1 (519) 635-2795 mobile > +1 (208) 275-3824 fax > > LOOKING FOR A USED CAR IN IOWA VISIT: http://www.IowaMotors.com > > ~| Special thanks to the CF Community Suite Silver Sponsor - New Atlanta http://www.newatlanta.com Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:186449 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:4 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
Re: SOT: Browser Stats (stirring the pot)
Andrew, I agree with you. If you are developing an _application_ not a public website, I then I think you should have the liberty to design it to any browser you want. If developing an application for IE only makes your app easier to use then more power to you. All these people act like applications are always developed for every platform. But they aren't and never have. Why do you think they put sys requirements on every piece of software sold in america. Umer, I suggest you leave the small fish alone and start writing to Apple to complain about how they are breaking the PC standard in writing software that only works on OSX! -Adam On Tue, 7 Dec 2004 15:29:15 +1100, Andrew Scott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Bug #1: > > If I create a simple page to open a window, and close the parent Firefox > behaves very bad, that's all I need to say Not browser specific > code!! > > Bug#2: > > The problem is with the URL in the style attribute, the image does not > appear at all. > > Bug #3: > We have and Iframe that contains 2 more Iframes, and will not display in > Firefox, this is also not IE specific code!! > > And as far as IE specific code goes, we are using a lot of it to deliver > content management and Business Logic that we can not deliver in > Firefox, Opera or even Netscape. > > If you would like me to send you the images for you to look at then I am > more than happy to send an HTML email for you to see the problems at > hand. > > But the point is that if our application can't run in anything else than > a browser then we are creating more usability for MS products, that's > the point I was trying to make. > > > > > -Original Message----- > From: Umer Farooq [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Tuesday, 7 December 2004 2:49 PM > To: CF-Talk > Subject: Re: SOT: Browser Stats (stirring the pot) > > Andrew Scott wrote: > > First of all there is no Var variable so I don't know what you're > > talking about, secondly the problem with the CSS is the actual url > style > > and nothing else. > > First off.. the initial comment was regarding this.. "BUG #1" > > >>Lets talk about opening another window and trying to close the main > >>window first, this under IE will give focus to our new window under > >>Firefox it keeps the old window focused even if you try to focus the > >>other window with the browser, which means that even the Javascript > is > >>not even compatible! Bug #1. > >> > > Now.. like I said.. I don't know how you are openning windows.. or > closing.. > > > Did you actually try the code, or just make the assumption? > > Yes.. I did try the code.. hence the reference.. to cursor='hand'.. > prop.. being only IE thing.. also.. what CSS url style issue are you > referring to.. > > > Thridly IFrame is a w3c standard, and even that doesn't work. I have > > also looked at many other things that we use in IE that are needed for > > our application that we can tie down to one application across the > > entire organisation, what that means is we have an application that is > > fully configurable easy to create and less work for us with our > > framework and we can create anything within minutes. > > Again.. I'm not aware of any IFrame parts.. that are in w3c standard and > > not supported by FireFox.. if you know of any.. plz enlighten me to > them.. as I would like to know.. I think.. this from one of your > previous posts sums it all up.. > > > delivering our application to the end user, we use specific > > IE only functionality and it works. > > Regards, > -- > Umer Farooq > Octadyne Systems > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > +1 (519) 772-5424 voice > +1 (519) 635-2795 mobile > +1 (208) 275-3824 fax > > LOOKING FOR A USED CAR IN IOWA VISIT: http://www.IowaMotors.com > > ~| Special thanks to the CF Community Suite Gold Sponsor - CFHosting.net http://www.cfhosting.net Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:186448 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:4 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
Re: SOT: Browser Stats (stirring the pot)
I hate to break it to you but with 90%+ market share... IE is the
standard... regardless of what the W3C has to say about it. I don't
agree with it, i wish IE was complaint, but the reality is that they
define the standard.
-Adam
On Mon, 06 Dec 2004 21:21:28 -0500, Umer Farooq <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Okay...
>
> For the first one... I'm assuming that... you got a var in js that is
> holding the new window... if its in the function that calls
> openwindow... try declaring it outside... since I don't have ur code...
> can't really comment on the exact cause..
>
> For #2... In the CSS spec there is no attribute.. "hand" for cursor..
> try using "pointer".. I think that was the only problem there.. if wrong
> plz correct me
>
> http://www.w3schools.com/css/pr_class_cursor.asp
>
> for #3 don't have the screen shot so can't comment.
>
> From the looks of it.. most of these are issues were IE has gone away
> from the standards.. or you have coded just for one browser.. which in
> my opinion defeats the purpose of having a web app.. anyhow if you were
> to compare browsers on standard compliance.. FireFox will win.. and with
> any application.. the closely you follow standards.. the better off you
> are in the long run.. As eventually ev1 comes back to the standards.
>
> --
> Regards,
>
>
>
> Andrew Scott wrote:
> >
> > Hmmm,
> >
> > Lets talk about opening another window and trying to close the main
> > window first, this under IE will give focus to our new window under
> > Firefox it keeps the old window focused even if you try to focus the
> > other window with the browser, which means that even the Javascript is
> > not even compatible! Bug #1.
> >
> > Bug #2, in the following bit of code this will not work under Firefox.
> > > onmouseover="this.style.cursor = 'hand';"
> > onclick="window.location.replace('nuMenu.cfm?MenuGroupCode=ARMASTER');">
> >
> > Bug #3, As you can see by the attached images that it will not display
> > IFrames correctly either.
> >
> > Internet Explorer was used
> >
> >
> > FireFox used to browse
> >
> >
>
> >
>
> --
> Umer Farooq
> Octadyne Systems
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> +1 (519) 772-5424 voice
> +1 (519) 635-2795 mobile
> +1 (208) 275-3824 fax
>
> LOOKING FOR A USED CAR IN IOWA VISIT: http://www.IowaMotors.com
>
>
~|
Special thanks to the CF Community Suite Gold Sponsor - CFHosting.net
http://www.cfhosting.net
Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:186446
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/4
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:4
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
Re: SOT: Browser Stats (stirring the pot)
> Bug #1: > > If I create a simple page to open a window, and close the parent Firefox > behaves very bad, that's all I need to say Not browser specific > code!! > Not able to produce the problem.. likly something wrong with the JavaScript event listner. again.. not sure as to how you are closing the window.. programmatically or trying to figure out if user closed the window.. > Bug#2: > > The problem is with the URL in the style attribute, the image does not > appear at all. The width of the background image.. in ur code is set to 1PX.. > Bug #3: > We have and Iframe that contains 2 more Iframes, and will not display in > Firefox, this is also not IE specific code!! Again.. not able to reproduce the problem.. I created.. three level deep iframes.. > And as far as IE specific code goes, we are using a lot of it to deliver > content management and Business Logic that we can not deliver in > Firefox, Opera or even Netscape. With no alternative to IE for a long time.. I understand this.. and if you have Windows specific code.. nothing much can be done about it.. as 90% of the users are still on IE/Win.. and if you can add the functionality to place your app higher up then the others.. might as well do it.. but with FireFox going at the pace it is.. I wouldn't wana be left without support for it.. > If you would like me to send you the images for you to look at then I am > more than happy to send an HTML email for you to see the problems at > hand. Sure.. email address below.. > But the point is that if our application can't run in anything else than > a browser then we are creating more usability for MS products, that's > the point I was trying to make. Yes.. for a long time to come IE will still rule the web.. But as developers we can stop the push to MS products by adding cross compatibility.. and with FireFox, it just makes the whole thing lot easier.. to implement.. sell to higher up.. etc.. etc.. For me I'm just glad I don't have to do compatibility test with NN4.7 and NN6.0.. :-) Regards, -- Umer Farooq Octadyne Systems [EMAIL PROTECTED] +1 (519) 772-5424 voice +1 (519) 635-2795 mobile +1 (208) 275-3824 fax LOOKING FOR A USED CAR IN IOWA VISIT: http://www.IowaMotors.com ~| Special thanks to the CF Community Suite Silver Sponsor - New Atlanta http://www.newatlanta.com Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:186415 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:4 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
RE: SOT: Browser Stats (stirring the pot)
Bug #1: If I create a simple page to open a window, and close the parent Firefox behaves very bad, that's all I need to say Not browser specific code!! Bug#2: The problem is with the URL in the style attribute, the image does not appear at all. Bug #3: We have and Iframe that contains 2 more Iframes, and will not display in Firefox, this is also not IE specific code!! And as far as IE specific code goes, we are using a lot of it to deliver content management and Business Logic that we can not deliver in Firefox, Opera or even Netscape. If you would like me to send you the images for you to look at then I am more than happy to send an HTML email for you to see the problems at hand. But the point is that if our application can't run in anything else than a browser then we are creating more usability for MS products, that's the point I was trying to make. -Original Message- From: Umer Farooq [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, 7 December 2004 2:49 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: Re: SOT: Browser Stats (stirring the pot) Andrew Scott wrote: > First of all there is no Var variable so I don't know what you're > talking about, secondly the problem with the CSS is the actual url style > and nothing else. First off.. the initial comment was regarding this.. "BUG #1" >>Lets talk about opening another window and trying to close the main >>window first, this under IE will give focus to our new window under >>Firefox it keeps the old window focused even if you try to focus the >>other window with the browser, which means that even the Javascript is >>not even compatible! Bug #1. >> Now.. like I said.. I don't know how you are openning windows.. or closing.. > Did you actually try the code, or just make the assumption? Yes.. I did try the code.. hence the reference.. to cursor='hand'.. prop.. being only IE thing.. also.. what CSS url style issue are you referring to.. > Thridly IFrame is a w3c standard, and even that doesn't work. I have > also looked at many other things that we use in IE that are needed for > our application that we can tie down to one application across the > entire organisation, what that means is we have an application that is > fully configurable easy to create and less work for us with our > framework and we can create anything within minutes. Again.. I'm not aware of any IFrame parts.. that are in w3c standard and not supported by FireFox.. if you know of any.. plz enlighten me to them.. as I would like to know.. I think.. this from one of your previous posts sums it all up.. > delivering our application to the end user, we use specific > IE only functionality and it works. Regards, -- Umer Farooq Octadyne Systems [EMAIL PROTECTED] +1 (519) 772-5424 voice +1 (519) 635-2795 mobile +1 (208) 275-3824 fax LOOKING FOR A USED CAR IN IOWA VISIT: http://www.IowaMotors.com ~| Special thanks to the CF Community Suite Gold Sponsor - CFHosting.net http://www.cfhosting.net Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:186412 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:4 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.4 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
Re: SOT: Browser Stats (stirring the pot)
Andrew Scott wrote: > First of all there is no Var variable so I don't know what you're > talking about, secondly the problem with the CSS is the actual url style > and nothing else. First off.. the initial comment was regarding this.. "BUG #1" >>Lets talk about opening another window and trying to close the main >>window first, this under IE will give focus to our new window under >>Firefox it keeps the old window focused even if you try to focus the >>other window with the browser, which means that even the Javascript is >>not even compatible! Bug #1. >> Now.. like I said.. I don't know how you are openning windows.. or closing.. > Did you actually try the code, or just make the assumption? Yes.. I did try the code.. hence the reference.. to cursor='hand'.. prop.. being only IE thing.. also.. what CSS url style issue are you referring to.. > Thridly IFrame is a w3c standard, and even that doesn't work. I have > also looked at many other things that we use in IE that are needed for > our application that we can tie down to one application across the > entire organisation, what that means is we have an application that is > fully configurable easy to create and less work for us with our > framework and we can create anything within minutes. Again.. I'm not aware of any IFrame parts.. that are in w3c standard and not supported by FireFox.. if you know of any.. plz enlighten me to them.. as I would like to know.. I think.. this from one of your previous posts sums it all up.. > delivering our application to the end user, we use specific > IE only functionality and it works. Regards, -- Umer Farooq Octadyne Systems [EMAIL PROTECTED] +1 (519) 772-5424 voice +1 (519) 635-2795 mobile +1 (208) 275-3824 fax LOOKING FOR A USED CAR IN IOWA VISIT: http://www.IowaMotors.com ~| Special thanks to the CF Community Suite Silver Sponsor - CFDynamics http://www.cfdynamics.com Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:186411 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:4 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.4 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
RE: SOT: Browser Stats (stirring the pot)
First of all there is no Var variable so I don't know what you're
talking about, secondly the problem with the CSS is the actual url style
and nothing else.
Did you actually try the code, or just make the assumption?
Thridly IFrame is a w3c standard, and even that doesn't work. I have
also looked at many other things that we use in IE that are needed for
our application that we can tie down to one application across the
entire organisation, what that means is we have an application that is
fully configurable easy to create and less work for us with our
framework and we can create anything within minutes.
We can not do what we are achieving on any other browser, and would mean
that the functionality that we do end up delivering to our clients is
minimal.
I'll say it again, Firefox doesn't support everything and work the way
you would think it will work, Netscape had the same problem, Mozilla has
had the same problems in the past, and their new creation firefox has
the same problems again.
I know everyone would love to ditch IE, I would too. But I can't it has
been around far too long, has some very nice additions that we do
leverage off to make an intranet application that kicks butt, and makes
us more money than we could ever hope to make if we did it in any other
browser.
My point is simple, Firefox might be good for general browsing, but its
not up to the task to deliver what we want and what we need.
-Original Message-
From: Umer Farooq [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, 7 December 2004 1:21 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: Re: SOT: Browser Stats (stirring the pot)
Okay...
For the first one... I'm assuming that... you got a var in js that is
holding the new window... if its in the function that calls
openwindow... try declaring it outside... since I don't have ur code...
can't really comment on the exact cause..
For #2... In the CSS spec there is no attribute.. "hand" for cursor..
try using "pointer".. I think that was the only problem there.. if wrong
plz correct me
http://www.w3schools.com/css/pr_class_cursor.asp
for #3 don't have the screen shot so can't comment.
From the looks of it.. most of these are issues were IE has gone away
from the standards.. or you have coded just for one browser.. which in
my opinion defeats the purpose of having a web app.. anyhow if you were
to compare browsers on standard compliance.. FireFox will win.. and with
any application.. the closely you follow standards.. the better off you
are in the long run.. As eventually ev1 comes back to the standards.
--
Regards,
Andrew Scott wrote:
>
> Hmmm,
>
> Lets talk about opening another window and trying to close the main
> window first, this under IE will give focus to our new window under
> Firefox it keeps the old window focused even if you try to focus the
> other window with the browser, which means that even the Javascript is
> not even compatible! Bug #1.
>
> Bug #2, in the following bit of code this will not work under Firefox.
> onmouseover="this.style.cursor = 'hand';"
>
onclick="window.location.replace('nuMenu.cfm?MenuGroupCode=ARMASTER');">
>
> Bug #3, As you can see by the attached images that it will not display
> IFrames correctly either.
>
> Internet Explorer was used
>
>
> FireFox used to browse
>
>
>
--
Umer Farooq
Octadyne Systems
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
+1 (519) 772-5424 voice
+1 (519) 635-2795 mobile
+1 (208) 275-3824 fax
LOOKING FOR A USED CAR IN IOWA VISIT: http://www.IowaMotors.com
~|
Special thanks to the CF Community Suite Gold Sponsor - CFHosting.net
http://www.cfhosting.net
Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:186410
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/4
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:4
Unsubscribe:
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.4
Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
Re: SOT: Browser Stats (stirring the pot)
Okay...
For the first one... I'm assuming that... you got a var in js that is
holding the new window... if its in the function that calls
openwindow... try declaring it outside... since I don't have ur code...
can't really comment on the exact cause..
For #2... In the CSS spec there is no attribute.. "hand" for cursor..
try using "pointer".. I think that was the only problem there.. if wrong
plz correct me
http://www.w3schools.com/css/pr_class_cursor.asp
for #3 don't have the screen shot so can't comment.
From the looks of it.. most of these are issues were IE has gone away
from the standards.. or you have coded just for one browser.. which in
my opinion defeats the purpose of having a web app.. anyhow if you were
to compare browsers on standard compliance.. FireFox will win.. and with
any application.. the closely you follow standards.. the better off you
are in the long run.. As eventually ev1 comes back to the standards.
--
Regards,
Andrew Scott wrote:
>
> Hmmm,
>
> Lets talk about opening another window and trying to close the main
> window first, this under IE will give focus to our new window under
> Firefox it keeps the old window focused even if you try to focus the
> other window with the browser, which means that even the Javascript is
> not even compatible! Bug #1.
>
> Bug #2, in the following bit of code this will not work under Firefox.
> onmouseover="this.style.cursor = 'hand';"
> onclick="window.location.replace('nuMenu.cfm?MenuGroupCode=ARMASTER');">
>
> Bug #3, As you can see by the attached images that it will not display
> IFrames correctly either.
>
> Internet Explorer was used
>
>
> FireFox used to browse
>
>
>
--
Umer Farooq
Octadyne Systems
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
+1 (519) 772-5424 voice
+1 (519) 635-2795 mobile
+1 (208) 275-3824 fax
LOOKING FOR A USED CAR IN IOWA VISIT: http://www.IowaMotors.com
~|
Special thanks to the CF Community Suite Silver Sponsor - RUWebby
http://www.ruwebby.com
Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:186409
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/4
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:4
Unsubscribe:
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.4
Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
RE: SOT: Browser Stats (stirring the pot)
i do i run a dual boot system with xp & suse 9.2 pro as soon as MM gets off their butts and makes studio mx 2004 run on linux, xp is gone! cant wait to get fully rid of it but i need at least flash & dw and they wont run on linux yet COME ON MM like m$ told me that i probably got a bad copy so maybe im tainted but i also tried the xp home that came with comp with same results even after m$ told me i probably had a bad copy they laughed when i asked them to stand behind it and replace it & i bought it at bestbuy and they wont take back opened software, so im hosed either way that wasnt even the beginning of my hatred towards them. and now as i get into the who w3c thing i see just had bad they really are im not saying firefox is the be-all end-all as i like other browsers too, i currently have opera (which has come a long ways), mozilla, netscape, konqueror(sp?). the only time i even open ie is to do the final ie bug checks before finished and truthfully, i wouldnt sit her and rag on them as much if they'd at least try and follow the web standards which would surely help us all out. But thats to much to ask of them -- Original Message -- From: "Jim Davis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Mon, 6 Dec 2004 20:02:57 -0500 >> -Original Message- >> From: dave [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >> Sent: Monday, December 06, 2004 7:23 PM >> To: CF-Talk >> Subject: Re: SOT: Browser Stats (stirring the pot) >> >> [quote]I applaud the efforts MS has been taking to ensure that people are >> patched. It's actually very easy to keep your system patched if you >> follow their recommendations (patches are automatically downloaded and >> reminders automatically occur until you install them). [/quote] >> >> but i sure know a lot of ppl (including myself) that run just about any m$ >> update and everything crashes > >I've had very little problems with updates in my life. I wonder why, if >after "just about any" update you end up with an unstable system you're >still using Windows at all? > >I've personally been quite pleased with my experiences overall (isolated >events notwithstanding). But if I had the trouble you describe I would have >gone to Mac or Linux long ago. > >Jim Davis > > > > > ~| Special thanks to the CF Community Suite Gold Sponsor - CFHosting.net http://www.cfhosting.net Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:186407 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:4 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
RE: SOT: Browser Stats (stirring the pot)
Hmmm, Lets talk about opening another window and trying to close the main window first, this under IE will give focus to our new window under Firefox it keeps the old window focused even if you try to focus the other window with the browser, which means that even the Javascript is not even compatible! Bug #1. Bug #2, in the following bit of code this will not work under Firefox. Bug #3, As you can see by the attached images that it will not display IFrames correctly either. Internet Explorer was used FireFox used to browse -Original Message- From: Umer Farooq [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, 7 December 2004 11:17 AM To: CF-Talk Subject: Re: SOT: Browser Stats (stirring the pot) Im now very curious to know what "certian" Iframe and javascript you are doing that.. can't be done in FireFox.. a hint plz.. i'm dying to know.. Andrew Scott wrote: > I ran our intranet system we designed for a client, and it did not work > under firefox 1.0... I would love to show you but we use iframes heavily > with certain javascript and IE features to create a complex intranet > application. Firefox can't even provide the first step to our login > approach. > > -- Umer Farooq Octadyne Systems [EMAIL PROTECTED] +1 (519) 772-5424 voice +1 (519) 635-2795 mobile +1 (208) 275-3824 fax LOOKING FOR A USED CAR IN IOWA VISIT: http://www.IowaMotors.com ~| Special thanks to the CF Community Suite Silver Sponsor - CFDynamics http://www.cfdynamics.com Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:186405 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:4 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.4 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
RE: SOT: Browser Stats (stirring the pot)
> -Original Message- > From: Umer Farooq [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Monday, December 06, 2004 7:37 PM > To: CF-Talk > Subject: Re: SOT: Browser Stats (stirring the pot) > > Ahh.. yes.. tab browsing.. do you find ur self hitting.. Ctrl+T in IE.. > :-) I do it all the time.. No but I find myself middle clicking whether I'm in Avant Browser or IE. ;^) Jim Davis ~| Special thanks to the CF Community Suite Silver Sponsor - CFDynamics http://www.cfdynamics.com Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:186404 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:4 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
RE: SOT: Browser Stats (stirring the pot)
> -Original Message- > From: dave [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Monday, December 06, 2004 7:23 PM > To: CF-Talk > Subject: Re: SOT: Browser Stats (stirring the pot) > > [quote]I applaud the efforts MS has been taking to ensure that people are > patched. It's actually very easy to keep your system patched if you > follow their recommendations (patches are automatically downloaded and > reminders automatically occur until you install them). [/quote] > > but i sure know a lot of ppl (including myself) that run just about any m$ > update and everything crashes I've had very little problems with updates in my life. I wonder why, if after "just about any" update you end up with an unstable system you're still using Windows at all? I've personally been quite pleased with my experiences overall (isolated events notwithstanding). But if I had the trouble you describe I would have gone to Mac or Linux long ago. Jim Davis ~| Special thanks to the CF Community Suite Silver Sponsor - New Atlanta http://www.newatlanta.com Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:186403 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:4 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.4 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
RE: SOT: Browser Stats (stirring the pot)
> -Original Message- > From: Adrocknaphobia [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Monday, December 06, 2004 6:55 PM > To: CF-Talk > Subject: Re: SOT: Browser Stats (stirring the pot) > > All these problems seem like the original application could use some > good old MVC to seperate the presentation layer. Then 'upgrading' to > or for other browsers / flash / VB should be a snap. That depends on where your logic lies. In our HTA applications, for example, the presentation is completely decoupled from the middle-ware, but is still IE specific (as only IE supports HTA). Of course this isn't really a "browser" issue as HTA doesn't implement the browser interface or security model. You could, of course, move to a different client-technology, but only one that gave you the same capabilities - and no other browser does. We could go to, say, power-builder or Visual Basic but not to FireFox. (Although even there there are just a few, fairly small things, that FireFox can't do - and they all relate to the security model.) Jim Davis ~| Special thanks to the CF Community Suite Gold Sponsor - CFHosting.net http://www.cfhosting.net Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:186402 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:4 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.4 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
Re: SOT: Browser Stats (stirring the pot)
Ahh.. yes.. tab browsing.. do you find ur self hitting.. Ctrl+T in IE.. :-) I do it all the time.. Duncan I Loxton wrote: > Real Estate site in Australia: > > 92% IE in November of 18 million visits. Down from 93.19% in October > of 17 million visits. > > We administer this site and all of IT have moved over to Firefox - I > do all my browsing in it, because its got a warm fuzzy feeling and it > works. It uses proper standards, has tabbed browsing (love it) and the > developer toolbar helps a load for looking for faults etc. > > ~| Special thanks to the CF Community Suite Gold Sponsor - CFHosting.net http://www.cfhosting.net Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:186399 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:4 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.4 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
Re: SOT: Browser Stats (stirring the pot)
amen brother amen :) -- Original Message -- From: Duncan I Loxton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Tue, 7 Dec 2004 11:21:19 +1100 >Real Estate site in Australia: > >92% IE in November of 18 million visits. Down from 93.19% in October >of 17 million visits. > >We administer this site and all of IT have moved over to Firefox - I >do all my browsing in it, because its got a warm fuzzy feeling and it >works. It uses proper standards, has tabbed browsing (love it) and the >developer toolbar helps a load for looking for faults etc. > > ~| Special thanks to the CF Community Suite Gold Sponsor - CFHosting.net http://www.cfhosting.net Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:186398 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:4 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.4 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
RE: SOT: Browser Stats (stirring the pot)
so whats ie got that the others dont that make it so magically special? (besides bugs & holes?) do u think its just an accident that M$ doesnt make their browser follow the guidelines by w3c? I think not, just follow the monopoly highway and u'll have your answer. so while everyone says this and that what i have noticed is that we have all these problems with cross browsers because m$ is too "good" to have to follow the guidelines which only help us all. and they arent gunna change a damn friggin thing until we make them. -- Original Message -- From: "Andrew Scott" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Tue, 7 Dec 2004 10:24:13 +1100 >First of all, > >As I LMAO at you, being a developer for HTML applications, Intranets, >Extranets and websites for over 10 years. I can say that every browser >on the market today is NOT capable of delivering our application to the >end user, we use specific IE only functionality and it works. We will >not remove any of this to run it under Firefox because our application >is what is making us over $200K per application, because we can do what >others can not. > >This forces people to use IE on these intranets, but if the client wants >the application to run then it has to be IE or nothing. > >Now before you Laugh again, think about what you're saying. I am not >saying that IE is the best thing since sliced bread, I am not saying >that I like IE over anything else, I am saying that IE is the only >browser that will run our application at the moment. > > > >-Original Message- >From: dave [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >Sent: Monday, 6 December 2004 8:22 PM >To: CF-Talk >Subject: RE: SOT: Browser Stats (stirring the pot) > >are u serious??? LMFAO!!! > >"we" don't use it as a standard, you may but surely don't include me >wait till u start to make compliant wrbsites then say that. > >its more like ppl use ie because they don't know any better or they >don't know they have "better" choices. > >its funny u say this because i read an article where steve balmer said >like a week ago that m$ wont add "enhancements" because their customers >dont want them. WHich more than likely isnt the case, its more like they >dont know that they can have a better browser experience without ie. I >remember that i used to think that i would never use say, tabbed >browsing. until i tried it, now i cant live without it. > > >-- Original Message -- >From: "Andrew Scott" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Date: Mon, 6 Dec 2004 16:37:26 +1100 > >>Not to mention that we use IE as a standard for our intranet systems we >>design, why because NO other browser is capable of delivering the >>content enhancements we need in the browser, and that is what will make >>IE remain strong... >> >>Regards, >>Andrew Scott >> >> >>-Original Message- >>From: mayo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >>Sent: Monday, 6 December 2004 3:19 PM >>To: CF-Talk >>Subject: RE: SOT: Browser Stats (stirring the pot) >> >>I maintain / have access to the logs of about 15 sites. The commercial >>and >>financial ones all have MSIE above 92% and holding. The purely >financial >>ones are 95%+. >> >>The one pure art site (photography) has MSIE at 65%, and an awful lot >of >>unknowns. Mac O/S is about 25%. >> >>IE will remains strong until tech departments replace IE with Opera or >>Firefox. The sad thing is I inadvertently help IE remain strong. I use >>IE a >>lot because I need to know how IE renders my client's sites. I love >>using >>Opera but I need to know how they view the web. The end result is my >>usage >>helps pad IE's numbers. >> >>Gilbert Midonnet >>GLM Designs >> >> >> >> >>-Original Message- >>From: Sean Corfield [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >>Sent: Sunday, December 05, 2004 9:55 PM >>To: CF-Talk >>Subject: Re: SOT: Browser Stats (stirring the pot) >> >> >>Apache puts out a lot of security patches. Those don't get as much >>press as IIS. I might be hard to say whether Apache or IIS gets more >>patches. My gut feel is that Apache makes patches available faster >>than Microsoft does for IIS but, again, no hard evidence on my part... >> >>On Sun, 5 Dec 2004 18:05:47 -0800, Rob <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> That whole "its used more so there is more exploits for it" argument >>> is one of those ones
Re: SOT: Browser Stats (stirring the pot)
[quote]I applaud the efforts MS has been taking to ensure that people are patched. It's actually very easy to keep your system patched if you follow their recommendations (patches are automatically downloaded and reminders automatically occur until you install them). [/quote] but i sure know a lot of ppl (including myself) that run just about any m$ update and everything crashes -- Original Message -- From: Jim Davis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Mon, 06 Dec 2004 16:06:39 -0400 >> On Mon, 06 Dec 2004 11:35:06 -0400, Jim Davis >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> > >> The question is whether or not FireFox in mass use would reduce >> spyware - >> > >> I'm not sure it would. It very well might - I just don't know. >> > > >> > >IE installs software without your consent - so yes it would reduce >> it >> > >(using logic and experience not stats). After I install firefox on >> > >systems and run spybot a month or two later there isn't any spyware. >> >> > >> > No it doesn't. >> >> I am afraid it does. Run spybot on your system every once in a while, >> bet you'll find some if you browse with IE - patch system or not > >Beleive me - I religiously run scanners and with a fully patched system have >yet to encouter any getting through. Do you have a URL that could demonstrate >this? > >> > Or will we continue to compare the initial release of IE with the >> current release of FireFox? Anonymous installation of software was a >> bug. A bug that's been addressed. Any software that took advantage >> of that bug is legitimatly "viral" and can and should be caught by any >> off-the-shelf virus checking software. >> >> So what you are saying is, those people who "can't install software" >> are supposed to keep their system patched? IE will be a problem for a >> long long time, because if you find a flaw in it you often get to 0wn >> the whole box. > >I applaud the efforts MS has been taking to ensure that people are patched. >It's actually very easy to keep your system patched if you follow their >recommendations (patches are automatically downloaded and reminders >automatically occur until you install them). > >> > I think we're all in agreement that the first step to good security >> is to patch your systems as recommended by your vendor. (Even the >> gentlemen in Jochem's reference link admits that none of the software >> installed could have been installed with a fully patched system. >> Although I can't see what good point can be made by testing on five >> year old, unpatched software.) >> > >> > I think we can also all be agreement is that the second step in good >> security is to run up-to-date virus checkers and firewalls. >> > >> >> Thirdly run software that is well written, under active development, >> and had something added to it this century. > >This isn't really helpful. It's the hyperbole and fanaticism that get my >hackles up more than anything else. IE IS in desperate need of an update - >however it is under "active development" as we do see quick service to address >security issues. > >> > Also, there will be spyware on many people's ForeFox machines >> because, just as always, they can easily be tricked into installing it. >> Can you (or, humbly, I) be tricked? Probably not - but that's not who >> we're talking about - "the masses" definately can be and are. >> > >> >> I have yet to find a piece of spy ware on my girlfriends or her >> bosses >> computer after we moved them to firefox. I just don't think you are >> talking form experience here. > >A lot of it depends on how you use the machine and where you browse. My >father, for example, used to spend a lot of time on file sharing programs >looking for vintage music: LOTS of spyware, but essentially no IE activity. > >Many sites link directly to EXEs, other link to downloads that have to be run >manually, but also install spyware. > >I also maintain that as soon as FireFox gains the market share it deserves the >installation procedures for spyware will be modified to adapt. > >> > FireFox is a great browser, but it's not a panacea for bad human >> behavior. >> >> True that > >I guess one aspect of this that bothers me is that I rarely here any chants >against the actual spyware vendors. It's all "MS sucks! They're why we have >spyware!" > >I think it's the spyware vendors, the ones tricking my dad and mom and wife >and mother-in-law that need to be strung up by the short and curlies. ;^) > >Jim Davis > > ~| Special thanks to the CF Community Suite Gold Sponsor - CFHosting.net http://www.cfhosting.net Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:186395 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:4 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=8
Re: SOT: Browser Stats (stirring the pot)
Real Estate site in Australia: 92% IE in November of 18 million visits. Down from 93.19% in October of 17 million visits. We administer this site and all of IT have moved over to Firefox - I do all my browsing in it, because its got a warm fuzzy feeling and it works. It uses proper standards, has tabbed browsing (love it) and the developer toolbar helps a load for looking for faults etc. ~| Special thanks to the CF Community Suite Gold Sponsor - CFHosting.net http://www.cfhosting.net Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:186394 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:4 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.4 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
Re: SOT: Browser Stats (stirring the pot)
Im now very curious to know what "certian" Iframe and javascript you are doing that.. can't be done in FireFox.. a hint plz.. i'm dying to know.. Andrew Scott wrote: > I ran our intranet system we designed for a client, and it did not work > under firefox 1.0... I would love to show you but we use iframes heavily > with certain javascript and IE features to create a complex intranet > application. Firefox can't even provide the first step to our login > approach. > > -- Umer Farooq Octadyne Systems [EMAIL PROTECTED] +1 (519) 772-5424 voice +1 (519) 635-2795 mobile +1 (208) 275-3824 fax LOOKING FOR A USED CAR IN IOWA VISIT: http://www.IowaMotors.com ~| Special thanks to the CF Community Suite Silver Sponsor - CFDynamics http://www.cfdynamics.com Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:186393 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:4 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.4 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
RE: SOT: Browser Stats (stirring the pot)
Our application is designed on a framework that has evolved over 2 years, the framework has nothing to do whether it is compliant or not and is designed to work and be able to create an application that is easy to put together (that's the idea behind a framework). The application we create has to meat the requirements of the company we create it for, if that means local accessibility laws then the answer is yes, but as we don't need to as the application we deliver is based of the clients old software application that is 25 years old we do what the client wants, and needs. Having said that we use Iframes within Iframes, and divs and as I said earlier we try our application on other browsers on every new release and to date we have not had one non IE browser run our intranet sites. And at 200k a pop we are not going to remove critical functionality and functionality that is critical to our success to cripple our future, to be savvy because of the new flavour browser that might be not be around in 2 years time. Firefox is what generation browser now, and have they learnt anything yet? -Original Message- From: Paul Vernon [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, 7 December 2004 10:55 AM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: SOT: Browser Stats (stirring the pot) > We will not remove any of this to run it under Firefox because our > application is what is making us over $200K per application, because > we can do what others can not. I just have a couple of questions? Does your app need comply with any local accessibility laws? That is to say, do your clients need to provide an equal opportinities workplace where disabled people are not discriminated against and can use any of the applications that their able bodied colleagues use with impunity? If so, does your application comply with the relevant accessibility guidelines? If not, aren't you worried about that or is it a case of you'll worry about it when the time comes? If it doesn't need to comply then great, stick with what you are doing! At $200k a pop, I think I would But then looking to the future, maybe looking more deeply into what Firefox (or any other browser for that matter) supports so that you can produce an application with the same funciotnality that is currently in place might not be such a bad idea... I'd certainly wager that you may not be able to do the job in the same way if you went browser independent but human ingenuity would find a way to implement it anyway! This is the way of things... And BTW, I am a Firefox and IE user, and having used the Internet in one form or another since the early nineties, I regard myself as an old time experienced Internet user... For the first time ever, last week I got duped into running some spyware in Firefox... Let me tell you spyware installs just as easily in Firefox as it does in IE Nasty little thing... I manged to undo the damage it did but it took 2 hours using Adaware, Spybot, Panda AV, Trend HouseCall, Norton, Mcafee, Bitdefender and half an hour in regedit to find and remove all the last little bits of the thing... God help the uninitiated Paul ~| Special thanks to the CF Community Suite Silver Sponsor - RUWebby http://www.ruwebby.com Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:186391 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:4 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
RE: SOT: Browser Stats (stirring the pot)
Dave, No we have never lost a sale, because the companies we deal with know that they are getting a good deal and know that the application is delivered to their requirements which no other developer is able to do with out creating a client/server application that is not browser based, which costs more than what we deliver. -Original Message- From: Dave Watts [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, 7 December 2004 10:39 AM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: SOT: Browser Stats (stirring the pot) > As I LMAO at you, being a developer for HTML applications, > Intranets, Extranets and websites for over 10 years. I can > say that every browser on the market today is NOT capable of > delivering our application to the end user, we use specific > IE only functionality and it works. We will not remove any of > this to run it under Firefox because our application is what > is making us over $200K per application, because we can do > what others can not. > > This forces people to use IE on these intranets, but if the > client wants the application to run then it has to be IE or nothing. > > Now before you Laugh again, think about what you're saying. I > am not saying that IE is the best thing since sliced bread, I > am not saying that I like IE over anything else, I am saying > that IE is the only browser that will run our application at > the moment. Do you think it's possible you've ever lost a sale because of this requirement? If so, would the money lost from that sale have covered the cost of changing your application to work with other browsers? If the answer to both of these is no, then you're ok. If the answer to both is yes, then you're leaving money on the table. Assuming you can correctly answer both of these questions, they're all you need to ask. Dave Watts, CTO, Fig Leaf Software http://www.figleaf.com/ phone: 202-797-5496 fax: 202-797-5444 ~| Special thanks to the CF Community Suite Silver Sponsor - New Atlanta http://www.newatlanta.com Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:186389 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:4 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
RE: SOT: Browser Stats (stirring the pot)
> We will not remove any of this to run it under Firefox because our > application is what is making us over $200K per application, because > we can do what others can not. I just have a couple of questions? Does your app need comply with any local accessibility laws? That is to say, do your clients need to provide an equal opportinities workplace where disabled people are not discriminated against and can use any of the applications that their able bodied colleagues use with impunity? If so, does your application comply with the relevant accessibility guidelines? If not, aren't you worried about that or is it a case of you'll worry about it when the time comes? If it doesn't need to comply then great, stick with what you are doing! At $200k a pop, I think I would But then looking to the future, maybe looking more deeply into what Firefox (or any other browser for that matter) supports so that you can produce an application with the same funciotnality that is currently in place might not be such a bad idea... I'd certainly wager that you may not be able to do the job in the same way if you went browser independent but human ingenuity would find a way to implement it anyway! This is the way of things... And BTW, I am a Firefox and IE user, and having used the Internet in one form or another since the early nineties, I regard myself as an old time experienced Internet user... For the first time ever, last week I got duped into running some spyware in Firefox... Let me tell you spyware installs just as easily in Firefox as it does in IE Nasty little thing... I manged to undo the damage it did but it took 2 hours using Adaware, Spybot, Panda AV, Trend HouseCall, Norton, Mcafee, Bitdefender and half an hour in regedit to find and remove all the last little bits of the thing... God help the uninitiated Paul ~| Special thanks to the CF Community Suite Gold Sponsor - CFHosting.net http://www.cfhosting.net Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:186387 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:4 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
Re: SOT: Browser Stats (stirring the pot)
All these problems seem like the original application could use some good old MVC to seperate the presentation layer. Then 'upgrading' to or for other browsers / flash / VB should be a snap. -Adam On Mon, 6 Dec 2004 15:47:25 -0800, Ken Ketsdever <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > We have several of these type of applcations in house and what a pain in the > ass. > > Application A uses I.E. 5 - 5.5 it breaks on anything else and there is no > plan on updating anytime soon. > > Application B uses IE 5 - 5.5 but will be moving to I.E. 6 with the next > release (early next year) It will no longer run on IE 5 - 5.5. > > So as of early next year we are hosed. We have to resolve the issue in house > or change applications because someone is refusing to make their application > work with other other versions of IE let alone more compliant browser. We > are now looking at alternative applications that are not as browser specific. > In other words we are taking our money off the table. > > > > > As I LMAO at you, being a developer for HTML applications, > > Intranets, Extranets and websites for over 10 years. I can > > say that every browser on the market today is NOT capable of > > delivering our application to the end user, we use specific > > IE only functionality and it works. We will not remove any of > > this to run it under Firefox because our application is what > > is making us over $200K per application, because we can do > > what others can not. > > > > This forces people to use IE on these intranets, but if the > > client wants the application to run then it has to be IE or nothing. > > > > Now before you Laugh again, think about what you're saying. I > > am not saying that IE is the best thing since sliced bread, I > > am not saying that I like IE over anything else, I am saying > > that IE is the only browser that will run our application at > > the moment. > > Confidentiality Notice: This message including any > attachments is for the sole use of the intended > recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged > information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or > distribution is prohibited. If you are not the > intended recipient, please contact the sender and > delete any copies of this message. > > ~| Special thanks to the CF Community Suite Silver Sponsor - RUWebby http://www.ruwebby.com Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:186386 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:4 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
RE: SOT: Browser Stats (stirring the pot)
We have several of these type of applcations in house and what a pain in the ass. Application A uses I.E. 5 - 5.5 it breaks on anything else and there is no plan on updating anytime soon. Application B uses IE 5 - 5.5 but will be moving to I.E. 6 with the next release (early next year) It will no longer run on IE 5 - 5.5. So as of early next year we are hosed. We have to resolve the issue in house or change applications because someone is refusing to make their application work with other other versions of IE let alone more compliant browser. We are now looking at alternative applications that are not as browser specific. In other words we are taking our money off the table. > As I LMAO at you, being a developer for HTML applications, > Intranets, Extranets and websites for over 10 years. I can > say that every browser on the market today is NOT capable of > delivering our application to the end user, we use specific > IE only functionality and it works. We will not remove any of > this to run it under Firefox because our application is what > is making us over $200K per application, because we can do > what others can not. > > This forces people to use IE on these intranets, but if the > client wants the application to run then it has to be IE or nothing. > > Now before you Laugh again, think about what you're saying. I > am not saying that IE is the best thing since sliced bread, I > am not saying that I like IE over anything else, I am saying > that IE is the only browser that will run our application at > the moment. Confidentiality Notice: This message including any attachments is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender and delete any copies of this message. ~| Special thanks to the CF Community Suite Silver Sponsor - CFDynamics http://www.cfdynamics.com Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:186384 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:4 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.4 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
