Mike, Just for your information Iceweasel IS firefox, just with another name (build from the firefox source by the debian team). Because of those stupid American patent laws you can't use a name of software without a logo and because the logo is copyrighted, debian doesn't wants it in their O.S.
fyi: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iceweasel I understand that you have to prioritize how your site works with O.S.' es and browsers, but if you decide to use a plugin like flash you should go for it completely or don't. It's out of the question that users can't navigate your site, just because of some fancy flash. But that's my 2 cents. Rogier. On 25/10/2007, Michael Kear <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I think its wonderful how, every time I post something to this list, people > will rush to tell me how we ought to be spending our scarce development > dollars. > > Christian Montoya, why do you assume that we're so dumb we don't know > anything about our customers? We have quite a large number of Firefox > customers, but if they're using Firefox, the site works fine. I know > because I've tested it in Firefox. I develop with Firefox. My client's > testing regime includes Firefox. There were several people on this list > who tested it in Firefox and didn't report any problems. The issue was > raised by Roger who said there was a small problem with "Firefox (IceWeasel) > for debian" whatever that is, not Firefox. You accuse us of making "poor > assumptions" when that's indeed what you did in your patronising way. > > > It might be true in big shops that there are unlimited development dollars > sufficient to allocate teams of people to iron out every last little issue, > but in small shops like mine (and they don't come smaller than my > business!!) there isn't unlimited time available. > > Here's a lesson in business for some of you. There is a limited supply of > time and dollars, and most jobs have a deadline. If you're running a > development shop for profit, there often comes a time when you have to > accept there will be issues with your output, and as lon gas it doesn't > impact unduly on your customers sometimes you have to just let the issues > remain in order to run the business. > > I can't afford to be spending time tracking down every last problem. And my > client wont pay me to either. We make some compromise decisions along the > way. We will not even be testing our site in the browsers mentioned by > Roger: Firefox (IceWeasel) for debian, or Epiphany (whatever the hell they > are). I've never heard of those browsers and I surely doubt many of my > client's customers have either. The site works how we want it to in the > major environments, and in the others it's still usable, if a little quirky. > > > That's where it's gonna stop while we move on to more important issues like > rebuilding the shopping cart that is showing signs of stress with the > volumes we're getting, and redesigning the database which no longer copes > with the range of products we have to accommodate. > > Those of you who think the minimum standard is perfection, good for you. > Well done, I salute you. I wish I had your set of deadlines and funding to > be able to do the same. Our standard is slightly lower at 'as good as we > can get it within the time and money allowed.' > > Cheers > Mike Kear > Windsor, NSW, Australia > 0422 985 585 > Adobe Certified Advanced ColdFusion Developer > AFP Webworks Pty Ltd > http://afpwebworks.com > Full Scale ColdFusion hosting from A$15/month > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > Behalf Of Christian Montoya > Sent: Wednesday, 24 October 2007 6:12 AM > To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org > Subject: Re: [WSG] How to make DHML cover flash > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > > Behalf Of Michael Kear > > Sent: Monday, October 22, 2007 6:14 PM > > To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org > > Subject: RE: [WSG] How to make DHML cover flash > > > Since we are likely to have perhaps 1 or 2 users only using any of those > > browsers, and by far the vast majority of our users are using WindowsXP > with > > IE6 or IE7 (remember this is not a IT related site - our customers are > > tshirt retailers and advertising agencies) I've decided the cost/benefit > of > > fixing that isn't worth it. > > I work with a 6 non-techie "business types" who are all involved in > advertising/licensing related functions and they all use Firefox by > choice. Have you ever asked your users what they actually use? Do you > have any stats on browsers (Google analytics will tell you this)? If > not, you are just making a poor assumption. > > -- > -- > Christian Montoya > christianmontoya.net > > > > > ******************************************************************* > List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm > Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm > Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > ******************************************************************* > > ******************************************************************* List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *******************************************************************
