redxii
too big to fail
Premium,Mod
join:2001-02-26
Texas
Host:
/dev/null
Broadband Tweaks
Suddenlink
ISDN
Fiber Optic
| reply to Matt
Re: Why is IE8 the absolute worst at the acid3 browser test?
When MS "develops their own standards" it usually means they are trying to lock you or vendors into their software.. like they tried with their Java virtual machine. If they developed their own web standards, it's unlikely that they would open source it or allow others to reverse-engineer it without the threat of a patent or copyright infringement lawsuit. You would have to use IE, and IE is not available anymore to non-Windows OSes, and they only release new IE versions for Windows OSes that are in mainstream support, which right now is only Vista for home users; IE8 for XP was released just before XP left mainstream support in April. Not everyone wants to use IE, let alone Windows... |
|
ScottMo
Premium,MVM
join:2000-12-15
Stony Brook, NY | reply to james
Re: Why is IE8 the absolute worst at the acid3 browser test?
Did you read the part of my post where I said people were "assuming the person was honest and trying to do their best"?
Obviously not.
But again, I don't want to derail the topic. |
|
james
join:2001-02-26
antarctica
1 edit | reply to ScottMo
said by ScottMo  :Not to derail the thread, but if one scored a 20 on an IQ test that tells them they're a dumb as a brick Ok, so if I give you an IQ test in some language you don't speak, and you fail it means you're dumb as a brick? What if someone who is really smart said they don't care about the IQ test and just put random or funny answers? Are they no longer smart because of the holy test?
This specific test was designed to test one very specific thing, and idiots are claiming it's actually a "best browser in the world" test.
--
said by Metatron2008 :But people who download thousands of movies and games.... Yes, they are as bad as any murderer |
|
Matt
Take me down to the paradise city
Premium
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC
 ·North State Commun..
| reply to IT Guy
said by IT Guy :said by cmcasey79 :I wish Mozilla has the cahones cajones to do that and then open source their work. Fixed it for you. Thanks. |
|
IT Guy
Ow, My Balls
Premium
join:2004-07-29
Las Cruces, NM
clubs:
 ·Comcast
| reply to Matt
said by cmcasey79 :I wish Mozilla has the cahones cajones to do that and then open source their work. Fixed it for you.
--
My time is a piece of wax, falling on a termite, that's choking on a splinter. --Beck |
|
Grail Knight
Who Dares Wins
Premium
join:2003-05-31
·Verizon Online DSL
| reply to Mele20
quote:
IE8 has to be run in compatibility mode for ALL sites or it crashes constantly.
IE8 does not need to be run in compatibility mode on any of my computers nor has it crashed. Ten to one your Proxo and VM Ware as well as user error that is causing the problems.
Your issues are as usual your issues that I have yet to read others having. You would think if the issues you have were widespread more people would report them.
quote:
Opera 10 is outstanding
Sure it is once they fix rendering issues and the more then occasional freeze then crash issues. YMMV
quote:
I could go on and on about the myriad of problems with IE8 but I'll stop.
And the Earth sighs and thanks you for that.
--
"Facts not FUD!" |
|
UnnDunn
Premium
join:2005-12-21
Brooklyn, NY
·Optimum Online
| reply to Mele20
Re: Why is IE8 the absolute worst at the acid3 browser test?
said by Mele20 :If Microsoft cared about all internet users, it would have proper accessibility for IE8. It doesn't though and I cannot use any IE version if I need to type in a text box like this one I am typing in now. IE zoom feature is worthless because it does not enlarge the font inside a text box. I can't read that tiny font. Yes, I could get a SLIGHT enlargement by making all other text on the page extremely gigantic. Then I can't read the thread above the reply box, etc. On any other browser that I use I can set a minimum font size and that font size is used in a reply box as well as for the rest of the text on the page. IE (all versions) does NOT meet Accessibility standards. Firefox and Opera browsers do. Opera is magnificent in this regard. It has fit to page feature which Fx desperately needs for Accessibility. IE8 has to be run in compatibility mode for ALL sites or it crashes constantly. I don't see how that is an improvement. IE8 on Vista has horrible GUI problems and Microsoft (after repeated calls and many hours of troubleshooting) told me to revert permanently to IE7 on Vista. I don't see how that makes IE such a great browsers. I had no way on IE8 on Vista to change anything in the Security tab or Advanced tab. On XP, the GUI on those tabs is all wrong but I discovered I could make changes by clicking or doubleclicking on the item but then I can't see what I changed it to. IE8's address bar is unreadable because I cannot bold it. Another reason why I cannot use IE8. I could go on and on about the myriad of problems with IE8 but I'll stop. It sounds like you are having atypical problems with Internet Explorer. IE is the only major browser that fully supports Speech Recognition in Vista and Windows 7 (as an example of accessibility support.) All other browsers use custom UI controls which are incompatible with Speech Recognition. I can't speak to the other problems you refer to. |
|
Mele20
Premium
join:2001-06-05
Hilo, HI
| reply to UnnDunn
said by UnnDunn :Unfortunately for "them", Microsoft actually conducts its own research into how real people use IE and what they want from it, and Microsoft builds IE based on that, not what a handful of Microsoft-haters think. In my view, IE8 is the best day-to-day browser there is. It is the only browser that is at once fast, mature, robust, stable, secure and compatible with nearly everything on the web today. It doesn't excel at any one thing, but it does everything well enough. Every other browser focuses on one or two things at the expense of everything else; Chrome and Safari are fast but immature, Firefox is highly customizable but gets slow and bloated, and Opera is just weird. If you want me to switch to another browser for day-to-day usage, show me one that hits all the marks. For a while, when IE was horrible, Firefox was that browser. Now IE8 is good enough that Firefox is no longer needed. If Microsoft cared about all internet users, it would have proper accessibility for IE8. It doesn't though and I cannot use any IE version if I need to type in a text box like this one I am typing in now. IE zoom feature is worthless because it does not enlarge the font inside a text box. I can't read that tiny font. Yes, I could get a SLIGHT enlargement by making all other text on the page extremely gigantic. Then I can't read the thread above the reply box, etc. On any other browser that I use I can set a minimum font size and that font size is used in a reply box as well as for the rest of the text on the page. IE (all versions) does NOT meet Accessibility standards. Firefox and Opera browsers do. Opera is magnificent in this regard. It has fit to page feature which Fx desperately needs for Accessibility.
IE8 has to be run in compatibility mode for ALL sites or it crashes constantly. I don't see how that is an improvement. IE8 on Vista has horrible GUI problems and Microsoft (after repeated calls and many hours of troubleshooting) told me to revert permanently to IE7 on Vista. I don't see how that makes IE such a great browsers. I had no way on IE8 on Vista to change anything in the Security tab or Advanced tab. On XP, the GUI on those tabs is all wrong but I discovered I could make changes by clicking or doubleclicking on the item but then I can't see what I changed it to.
IE8's address bar is unreadable because I cannot bold it. Another reason why I cannot use IE8. I could go on and on about the myriad of problems with IE8 but I'll stop.
Firefox is not a slow browser. Fx3 is very fast. 1.5 is a better browser but it is slower than 3 particularly when loading a bunch of tabs. Fx3 can load 95 tabs in less than 60 seconds and it does not use excessive memory even with 95 tabs open. Fx is far more accessibility conscious than IE8 although I read that 3.5 is not but I have not tried 3.5 yet so I can't say if that is correct or not. Users are saying the lack of "fit to page" on Fx is causing major problems in 3.5 for those needing larger fonts but I have not seen this for myself so there may be a way around Fx 3.5 creating gigantic horizontal scroll bars since it lacks the essential "fit to page" feature for those needing larger fonts and who use a Windows DPI of 120.
As for Opera, how could you say it is weird? That is currently the best browser available. Opera 10 is outstanding and with Opera Unite it is a major winner (once they get the bugs out of Opera Unite). Opera has improved tremendously in the last couple of years to where I now use it as much or more than I do Fx.
Safari and Chrome are horrible and should be totally avoided although Safari has one feature that is better than in any other browser. Safari has an outstanding font rendering engine designed for LCD monitors using Clear Type. Microsoft's Clear Type for LCD monitors is far inferior to Apple's version.
--
"The same ferocity that our founders devoted to protect the freedom and independence of the press is now appropriate for our defense of the freedom of the internet. The stakes are the same: the survival of our Republic". Al Gore, The Assault on Reason |
|
cypherstream
Looking forward to the future of things.
Premium,MVM
join:2004-12-02
Reading, PA
clubs:
1 edit | reply to Matt
Matt -
I think your absolutely right about XPI exploits. I think that they will become more commonplace as time goes on. ActiveX has just been "out there" for such a long time, malware writers have had a lot of opportunity to harvest it.
Yeah, the end user is the last line of defense. An uneducated end user will not be protected by a simple browser change. Heck, even in Chrome, all they have to do is download a bad executable. Perhaps an "Antivirus 2009" window pops up and looks like your computer has a virus. They get worried click the OK button in the ad, which downloads the executable. Heck, I've seen vista users click the fake OK or Scan my computer buttons in an ad that looks like a Windows XP window! |
|
Matt
Take me down to the paradise city
Premium
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC
·North State Commun..
|  reply to amungus
said by amungus :Cypherstream also has a great point - "It's just great that there's choices out there." Even if we disagree on a couple things, it's awesome that we agree on some others and can see each others points - DSLR just rocks! Have a safe and happy weekend everyone! A quick note about Chrome. Chrome itself is multi-core capable, but a single Javascript program (or Chrome tab) cannot use more than a single core. It's a common misconception about Chrome, but definitely a step in the right direction.
On everything else you said, I think they are excellent points and I completely agree. I think deep down, most people just want the best solution but like politics, you have the fringes who don't like anything Linux or anything Microsoft. |
|
amungus
Premium
join:2004-11-26
America
clubs:
| reply to Matt
Matt - "Microsoft made the desktop computer ubiquitous, affordable, and standards-based."
Good point there, about ubiquity of MS desktops for sure (may not've been entirely MS on their own, don't forget good ol' IBM  ...).
I too have been tinkering w/DOS since the same era, old Apple systems, etc. but didn't actually even try Linux much until about 1999-2000.
I don't necessarily think open source/gnu is the answer to everything, so on that note I actually agree that in many cases - there are great proprietary applications/solutions that work wonderfully. The restrictions like DRM and disregards for privacy are the biggest gripes I have on some of that stuff, that's all... Fortunately, the music industry has finally been forced to agree that MP3 files are actually OK to sell now.
Regarding Ogg, yeah, not widely used that much, but FLAC on the other hand, is VERY widely used and works great  Some major bands have even released live shows in FLAC format and I was able to buy the lossless files.
...Great example of fusing "proprietary" with "open source/gnu" - The artist making money from something free to use (and barely any "middleman" [RIAA] in their way).
As for how MS got market share, I don't care that they bundled - I just didn't like how insanely invasive IE was at the time (4.0 - 6.0), nor that it was joined at the hip to the OS.
I guess IE 7 or 8 is less tied, but I still don't fully trust that it's completely separate, even if it can be "uninstalled" because it and Windows explorer (at least in Vista/7) do still share some components... "Decoupled" was a great choice of wording by UnnDunn!
Netscape "losing" was irrelevant, as is evident by the rise of Firefox/Mozilla giving people a good choice.
Nice to see we both DO agree that at least Firefox is a good thing to have around!
Guess watching "Revolution OS" the other day got me thinking how open source/gnu (intentional reversal of how Stallman likes to put it ) is a neat idea and more code could be more open.
I'll agree that the open source crowd hasn't "broken more ground" on the desktop level, but they deserve some credit for some things - Firefox, FLAC, Nvu, The Gimp, Audacity, MP3 formatted audio are all decent cros.s-platform programs/codecs. Groundbreaking, maybe not as software in general, but the fact that they have no restrictions that impede the freedom to use and to tinker is
I'll sum up my thoughts with this:
It's fine to charge for product/support that rocks.
It's also fine to tinker.
Open Source software will probably begin to "lead on the desktop" sooner than we think, at least in some areas.
IE is trying to support more standardized rendering - this is a good thing, even if it retains is backward compatibility with non-standard things.
...Chrome is neat because it does what you mentioned - a lot of new innovations with Java; multi-threading/core support, the engine is available for others to use/tinker with/update if they wish
Cypherstream also has a great point - "It's just great that there's choices out there."
Even if we disagree on a couple things, it's awesome that we agree on some others and can see each others points - DSLR just rocks!
Have a safe and happy weekend everyone! |
|
Matt
Take me down to the paradise city
Premium
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC
·North State Commun..
| reply to cypherstream
said by cypherstream :I have to say that every home users computer I've worked with on the side had tons of malware, and only one browser... IE. Clean the puppy up, install Firefox, make it the default browser, teach the user how to use it, and no more repeat visits. However, clean the malware, send it back as is, and 9 times out of 10, there's more malware on there within a month. What happens when malware writers start writing XPI exploits? Firefox does nothing more than prompt you to "allow" the installation and while it's not tied to the OS, if you can get a user to click and install a malicious XPI, you have lost the battle. Fundamentally, XPI operates exactly as ActiveX, so why does everyone rail against ActiveX's default behavior but not Firefox's XPI installer? XMarks is a good example, you're prompted once to install the XPI and then prompted by the xmarks.com website to "click here" to continue the installation. ActiveX applets now have more default prompts. Where's the outrage?
So while ActiveX was a security disaster, Firefox is only once removed. The weakness is still (and always will be) the user. |
|
cypherstream
Looking forward to the future of things.
Premium,MVM
join:2004-12-02
Reading, PA
clubs:
| reply to amungus
I have to say that every home users computer I've worked with on the side had tons of malware, and only one browser... IE.
Clean the puppy up, install Firefox, make it the default browser, teach the user how to use it, and no more repeat visits.
However, clean the malware, send it back as is, and 9 times out of 10, there's more malware on there within a month.
Could it be vulnerabilities within IE causing malware to download and attach itself? Is it IE's ActiveX implementation? Is it because IE is so tied to the O/S?
If you like IE7 or IE8, fine, it's your choice. You have to use it when designing websites just to ensure compatability. I for use Chrome for speed, and if it's non-cached back button behavior gets tiering, I goto Firefox (specifically 3.5 now).
It's just great that there's choices out there. No one is forced into IE. No one is forced into Safari. No one is forced into Firefox, etc... Let's take advantage of that choice and use what browser were comfortable with for our own personal reasons. |
|
Link Logger
Premium,MVM
join:2001-03-29
Calgary, AB
·Shaw
| reply to geekamongus
said by geekamongus :said by urbanriot :When did WaSP become the consortium that dictated web standards? What about W3C? WaSP is all about pushing the W3C's standards, which the Acid3 test is based on. They aren't making up their own. Is everything in Acid3 a standard, if you read »en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acid3 it might not be 'standards'.
quote:
Controversially, it includes several elements from the CSS2 recommendation that were later removed in CSS2.1 but reintroduced in W3C CSS3 working drafts that have not made it to candidate recommendations yet.
With things like web standards evolving as they are I don't put much faith into on the edge or over the edge standards.
Blake
--
Vendor: Author of Link Logger which is a traffic analysis and firewall logging tool |
|
geekamongus
Real Slump Quality
Premium,MVM
join:2004-07-27
Asheville, NC
| reply to urbanriot
said by urbanriot :When did WaSP become the consortium that dictated web standards? What about W3C? WaSP is all about pushing the W3C's standards, which the Acid3 test is based on. They aren't making up their own.
--
geekamongus tech blog | moi |
|
