Re: [Ql-Users] Quanta's Web Collapse, PDFs again (in QL Today)
Even with Mr Dunbar's incorrect address Google Chrome (under XP) got me thereafter one more click, as for the Quanta website, that is currently displaying correctly in Chrome, and displays correctly in Opera too but not in IE 8, IE9 will not run in XP hence I changed to Chrome. PS I have only looked at the home page Lee -: Back to the QL :- - Original Message - From: Dilwyn Jones To: ql-us...@q-v-d.com Sent: Saturday, April 02, 2011 5:41 PM Subject: Re: [Ql-Users] Quanta's Web Collapse, PDFs again (in QL Today) Right, are you wearing your flame-proof suit, Norman? Norman Dunbar wrote: I know exactly about this problem because my own web site at http://qdosmsg.dunbar-it.co.uk has the same problem with IE but not with anything else. (IE 9 does manage to display the pages properly I have to add.) But IE9 does not work on Windows XP machines. The affected web sites are using CSS and versions of IE that I have tested on my old web site failed miserably, up as far as IE 8 Beta, to render the page correctly according to the CSS rules. Well, I use IE8 and Firefox 3.6.16 and there are plenty of websites I visit from time to time which fail to display as intended on one browser or the other (mainly IE8 I hasten to add, though not always by any means). ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [Ql-Users] Quanta's Web Collapse, PDFs again (in QL Today)
Lee Privett wrote: Even with Mr Dunbar's incorrect address Google Chrome (under XP) got me thereafter one more click, as for the Quanta website, that is currently displaying correctly in Chrome, and displays correctly in Opera too but not in IE 8, IE9 will not run in XP hence I changed to Chrome. PS I have only looked at the home page Lee The point here being that websites using CSS can go well astray under some versions of IE as Norman explained. Next point of course is that (as Norman suggested) should we go the extra mile to make sure that the body of IE users get web pages that will display as intended on IE or just take the viewpoint that This website doesn't display correctly on Internet Exploder. Tough. Try another browser. Of course, it's the age-old question of how far do you take compatibility? Many old QL games won't run on QPC2 in high resolution or high colour modes for example, but will work if you start QPC2 in mode 4 512x256 (or possibly with QPC_QLSCREMU turned on) thus forcing screen memory and system variables to the same location as a QL, because Marcel went to great lengths to ensure some compatibility with older software not written to modern standards. How far can people be reasonably expected to go to make websites and software work on all systems past and present? Quanta's website will soon be moved to a new ISP who have specific knowledge and experience of the Typo3 CMS and the various plugins we would like to be able to use, such as the troublesome News one which has caused us so much difficulty since the middle of last year. I just hope (fingers and everything else crossed) that this closes the door on past problems and frees us to concentrate on the content as we want to do, and enable us to move forward with long term projects such as putting the Library online for members. I hope, I really really do. Dilwyn Jones ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [Ql-Users] Quanta's Web Collapse, PDFs again (in QL Today)
Hi Dilwyn, No! Should I be? I'm only ironing, nothing dangerous! ;-) Ironing, or smoothing out the bugs? Well, both! Ironing to smooth out the bugs in my shirts for next week. :-) Anyway, how can you be reading your email while ironing ??? Iron a shirt, read a mail, iron a shirt ... My office is where I do the ironing! But you are an IT pro...I only take weekely backups because not enough changes (normally) get done in one week on any of the small-time stuff I do. I may be an IT pro but I don't often backup my laptop, so last week I decided that just in case I had better write myself an rsync script to backup certain folders to my USB drive. While it all worked under testing, I noticed that my Documents folder was full of backups of my on-line library (ie, about 500 assorted manuals that I use for work) and all my documents were gone. I know *how* it happened - the rsync script was written to remove from the backup area anything no longer in the library area. I don't know *why* it happened as I had not written the script in my Documents folder and neither had I run it from there - so how it managed to backup the library and wipe my files from the wrong folder, I have no idea! You only stand up just before you throw another PC running Windows out the window! ;-) Yup! As the caption competition picture my son sent to me for the March issue of the magazine shows ;-) Your son seems to do a lot of that sort of thing! At long last! Seems that forcing M$ to allow Windows user to select other browsers might be having an influence. I'm not sure. I have a feeling that the Firefox browser got so many good write-ups, even in Windows magazines - that the vast majority of Web sites that used to say not using IE, tough! decided that that was no longer the way to go. People started seeing Not using a standards compliant browser? Tough messages instead and, as Firefox is fast, secure and free, people started using it, showed their friends and it spread. That article is not 100% clear on it, though, because the direct comparison was with IE7.0 specifically and mentions that the figure might be different if you base it on users using all versions of IE. Still that was 2009, so it must be even truer today. Thank goodness. Yes, and one thing the article didn't mention was the fact that a lot of browsers have a setting that allows them to pretend to be IE - and the figures for IE may include lots of numbers for browsers that are not IE! At the very best you'd have to admit that you are denying a big group the joys of accessing your website if it won't work on IE! Then you'd say (probably) thank goodness I *may* be denying some people, but no-one has complained so far. And, the content is there and visible even with IE, you just have to scroll down a little bit. Yes, that's the difficult part. Give an average emailer the choice of pretty colours, fonts, pictures etc under their control against simple plain text, you probably know which they'd choose. Probably not the same as you and I would. Yes, that's my point. M$ decide to adopt a new standard simply by dint of numbers. You buy a PC, you pay the Windows tax and, in most cases, you use the software provided in its default settings. Hence, suddenly, HTML becomes frequently used. And a jolly good rant it was too. I enjoyed it. Cheers! Drat, failed in my efforts to annoy Norman :o( :-) Cheers, Norman. -- Norman Dunbar Dunbar IT Consultants Ltd Registered address: Thorpe House 61 Richardshaw Lane Pudsey West Yorkshire United Kingdom LS28 7EL Company Number: 05132767 ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [Ql-Users] Quanta's Web Collapse, PDFs again (in QL Today)
Hi Lee, On 03/04/11 15:44, Lee Privett wrote: Even with Mr Dunbar's incorrect address Google Chrome (under XP) got me thereafter one more click, as for the Quanta website, that is currently displaying correctly in Chrome, and displays correctly in Opera too but not in IE 8, IE9 will not run in XP hence I changed to Chrome. That's strange, I used my XP in a VM system to run IE8 on my website and it was working fine for me yesterday! Still Chrome is good! Cheers, Norman. -- Norman Dunbar Dunbar IT Consultants Ltd Registered address: Thorpe House 61 Richardshaw Lane Pudsey West Yorkshire United Kingdom LS28 7EL Company Number: 05132767 ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [Ql-Users] Quanta's Web Collapse, PDFs again (in QL Today)
Hi Dilwyn, Next point of course is that (as Norman suggested) should we go the extra mile to make sure that the body of IE users get web pages that will display as intended on IE or just take the viewpoint that This website doesn't display correctly on Internet Exploder. Tough. Try another browser. Remember the days of IE5 when banks and some online shops refused point blank to allow you to shop unless you used IE? The boot is on the other foot now! ;-) What goes around, comes around - be nice to people on the way up because you will meet them again on the way down! Of course, it's the age-old question of how far do you take compatibility? Follow the example set by Microsoft then. I have to use Windows 2000 at work. I cannot install the latest version of Oracle on that platform because M$ have changed a DLL entry point named GetUserHomeDirectory (or something similar) to GetUserHomeDirectoryA and the compilers used now generate this latter version rather than the former. This breaks Windows 2000. 003, XP, 2008, Vista and Windows 7 work fine, just not 2000. So, Microsoft don't care much for backward compatibility. ... Marcel went to great lengths to ensure some compatibility with older software not written to modern standards. How far can people be reasonably expected to go to make websites and software work on all systems past and present? Marcel did indeed go to great lengths and I think I once read that Digital Precision went to great lengths *not* to get Turbo to fix bugs in the QL because some old programs that could be compiled used those bugs to work! I hope, I really really do. I hope it all works out for Quanta too. Cheers, Norman. -- Norman Dunbar Dunbar IT Consultants Ltd Registered address: Thorpe House 61 Richardshaw Lane Pudsey West Yorkshire United Kingdom LS28 7EL Company Number: 05132767 ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [Ql-Users] Quanta's Web Collapse, PDFs again (in QL Today)
Well if there is one constant in this universe it's inconsistency Lee -: Back to the QL :- - Original Message - From: Norman Dunbar To: ql-us...@q-v-d.com Sent: Sunday, April 03, 2011 5:22 PM Subject: Re: [Ql-Users] Quanta's Web Collapse, PDFs again (in QL Today) Hi Lee, On 03/04/11 15:44, Lee Privett wrote: Even with Mr Dunbar's incorrect address Google Chrome (under XP) got me thereafter one more click, as for the Quanta website, that is currently displaying correctly in Chrome, and displays correctly in Opera too but not in IE 8, IE9 will not run in XP hence I changed to Chrome. That's strange, I used my XP in a VM system to run IE8 on my website and it was working fine for me yesterday! Still Chrome is good! Cheers, Norman. -- Norman Dunbar Dunbar IT Consultants Ltd Registered address: Thorpe House 61 Richardshaw Lane Pudsey West Yorkshire United Kingdom LS28 7EL Company Number: 05132767 ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [Ql-Users] Quanta's Web Collapse, PDFs again (in QL Today)
On 2 Apr 2011, at 17:08, Norman Dunbar wrote: I know exactly about this problem because my own web site at http://qdosmsg.dunbar-it.co.uk has the same problem with IE but not with anything else. (IE 9 does manage to display the pages properly I have to add.) This site appears not to exist! George ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [Ql-Users] Quanta's Web Collapse, PDFs again (in QL Today)
I know exactly about this problem because my own web site at http://qdosmsg.dunbar-it.co.uk has the same problem with IE but not with anything else. (IE 9 does manage to display the pages properly I have to add.) This site appears not to exist! This is why I said that I'm not in a position to criticise people for making typos! The proper URL should be http://qdosmsq.dunbar-it.co.uk and not as above. Sigh! Cheers, Norman. PS. I note you are busy again George . updating pages all over the place! -- Norman Dunbar Dunbar IT Consultants Ltd Registered address: Thorpe House 61 Richardshaw Lane Pudsey West Yorkshire United Kingdom LS28 7EL Company Number: 05132767 ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [Ql-Users] Quanta's Web Collapse, PDFs again (in QL Today)
Right, are you wearing your flame-proof suit, Norman? Norman Dunbar wrote: I know exactly about this problem because my own web site at http://qdosmsg.dunbar-it.co.uk has the same problem with IE but not with anything else. (IE 9 does manage to display the pages properly I have to add.) But IE9 does not work on Windows XP machines. The affected web sites are using CSS and versions of IE that I have tested on my old web site failed miserably, up as far as IE 8 Beta, to render the page correctly according to the CSS rules. Well, I use IE8 and Firefox 3.6.16 and there are plenty of websites I visit from time to time which fail to display as intended on one browser or the other (mainly IE8 I hasten to add, though not always by any means). I have just spent an hour or two trying to figure out why a page on a site I maintain for a local craft association failed to display properly on Firefox - a table got its columns a bit scrambled. I am not sure what the problem was - I redid the page in a slightly different way and the problem eventually went away, but I didn't keep a copy to examine why. Using comment markers in table cells MAY have been the problem, but I am not sure. My own web page doesn't display correctly using IE 6 and neither does the Quanta web page. I am surprised anything displays correctly in IE6! Quanta home page has consistently failed to display as intended on IE8 too (Dan and Keith are fed up of me complaining about it - it won't get fixed before the move to the new hosts which should happen real soon I hope). It isn't just the Quanta home page that fails when using IE8 for me - I have great difficulties with the Typo3 CMS when trying to edit the pages via IE8. It is much easier (and seems to be faster, though that is probably subjective) when using Firefox. Gone are the days, thankfully, when you used to see web sites with signs on them saying best views in Internet Explorer, now you see Using IE? Shame. Why not get a proper browser that follows standards and you will enjoy this site all the more. (Or words to that effect!) While I would be the last person on this planet to stand up for Micro$oft, the plain home truth is that the majority of Windows users still use Internet Explorer of one version or another, despite its faults. To say that to your website visitors is laziness in many ways, as you are failing to ensure your website works for the majority. However, using modern web page editing software often produces code which is very hard or impossible to study and recode by hand, so this tends to become unavoidable sometimes. Of course, I suspect if you add up all the users of Firefox, Chrome, Safari and any other alternative browsers you may well find that the sum total of the others adds up to more than the number of IEs. If all the other browsers all display the pages correctly, your statement then starts to be valid. Rant over. Dilwyn Jones ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [Ql-Users] Quanta's Web Collapse, PDFs again (in QL Today)
On 2 Apr 2011, at 17:23, Norman Dunbar wrote: PS. I note you are busy again George . updating pages all over the place! At long last I've found out how (not to) set up a queue device. In the course of this I have found a most intriguing error in SMSQ/E which shows that no-one has ever used the vector written specially for queues. More of this later perhaps! George ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [Ql-Users] Quanta's Web Collapse, PDFs again (in QL Today)
Corrections: On 02/04/11 18:11, Norman Dunbar wrote: While I would be the last person on this planet to stand up for Micro$oft, You only stand up just before you throw another PC running Windows out the window! ;-) You only stand up for Microsoft was what I meant to say! As of two months ago, the most used browser in all of Europe was Firefox 3. See http://www.techradar.com/news/internet/firefox-3-0-is-europe-s-most-popular-browser-588938 Sigh. As of March 31st 2009. Where I got two months ago I have no idea. Cheers, Norman. -- Norman Dunbar Dunbar IT Consultants Ltd Registered address: Thorpe House 61 Richardshaw Lane Pudsey West Yorkshire United Kingdom LS28 7EL Company Number: 05132767 ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [Ql-Users] Quanta's Web Collapse, PDFs again (in QL Today)
Norman Dunbar wrote: Hi Dilwyn, Right, are you wearing your flame-proof suit, Norman? No! Should I be? I'm only ironing, nothing dangerous! ;-) Ironing, or smoothing out the bugs? Anyway, how can you be reading your email while ironing ??? I have just spent an hour or two trying to figure out why a page on a site I maintain for a local craft association failed to display properly on Firefox - a table got its columns a bit scrambled. I am not sure what the problem was - I redid the page in a slightly different way and the problem eventually went away, but I didn't keep a copy to examine why. Using comment markers in table cells MAY have been the problem, but I am not sure. It's a shame you didn't keep a copy. Actually, I'm surprised you didn't. Making changes to a live web site is dangerous. My stuff is backed up daily and the Wiki software keeps n old versions - just in case. But you are an IT pro...I only take weekely backups because not enough changes (normally) get done in one week on any of the small-time stuff I do. Still, it used to be IE 5.5 and when we (the government) upgraded to IE 6.0, we have to get the vendors to build in different bugs to make the system work with IE 6. Go figure! He he, that I can believe ;-) It isn't just the Quanta home page that fails when using IE8 for me - I have great difficulties with the Typo3 CMS when trying to edit the pages via IE8. It is much easier (and seems to be faster, though that is probably subjective) when using Firefox. I suspect the problem is because the CMS uses an on screen editor to generate content. That is working inside a web page itself and probably using CSS. Hence, IE (whatever version) with its CSS problems, can't work with the editor properly. Just a hunch - I obviously don't know. Could well be the case. While I would be the last person on this planet to stand up for Micro$oft, You only stand up just before you throw another PC running Windows out the window! ;-) Yup! As the caption competition picture my son sent to me for the March issue of the magazine shows ;-) the plain home truth is that the majority of Windows users still use Internet Explorer of one version or another, despite its faults. As of two months ago, the most used browser in all of Europe was Firefox 3. See http://www.techradar.com/news/internet/firefox-3-0-is-europe-s-most-popular-browser-588938 - so unfortunately it seems as if all those Windows users are catching on to quality products and no longer being spoon feed mush by Microsoft. At long last! Seems that forcing M$ to allow Windows user to select other browsers might be having an influence. That article is not 100% clear on it, though, because the direct comparison was with IE7.0 specifically and mentions that the figure might be different if you base it on users using all versions of IE. Still that was 2009, so it must be even truer today. Thank goodness. To say that to your website visitors is laziness in many ways, as you are failing to ensure your website works for the majority. No, my website actually works for the majority. My site is based on a product that produces Web Standard HTML and CSS. It's not my fault that the people too lazy to get a proper browser (oops!) decide to stick with a broken one. One that has butchered web standards and now, the cows have come home to roost. (Cows? Roosting? Who's got the chickens then?) At the very best you'd have to admit that you are denying a big group the joys of accessing your website if it won't work on IE! Then you'd say (probably) thank goodness You do know, for example, that the web standard for email is plain text. So why then do Microsoft set their email clients up with default that send emails in bloody HTML. It takes masses more bandwidth and gives what extra? A bold text here or a colour there? It's content that is important - and that's why we have CSS, it separates the content from the styling. Yes, that's the difficult part. Give an average emailer the choice of pretty colours, fonts, pictures etc under their control against simple plain text, you probably know which they'd choose. Probably not the same as you and I would. Rant over. And a jolly good rant it was too. I enjoyed it. Cheers! Drat, failed in my efforts to annoy Norman :o( Dilwyn Jones ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
