71–80 of 81 posts
I love this. If everyone did this, then Microsoft would lose the power to do whatever it wanted. Standards compliance would not be optional for them anymore. I hope this is a trend that continues.
I love this. If everyone did this, then Microsoft would lose the power to do whatever it wanted. Standards compliance would not be optional for them anymore. I hope this is a trend that continues.
67.44% use IE http://marketshare.hitslink.com/browser-market-share.aspx?qp...
Maybe only 3.7% of his users are IE users because they get a whole lot of attitude when they visit his site? Or because a lot of IE users either don't have the choice (corporate) or the desire or the skill (grandma) to upgrade their web browsers. Perhaps CEOs of major corporations visit his site every day curious about whether they might deploy his service across their whole company (ok, fantasy), and then leave because he says he doesn't want to support them. Perhaps his business could be 20 times bigger if he wasn't so obsessed with this issue. Perhaps that isn't the case now but it might be down the track.
There are lots of great frameworks out there that nearly completely remove the cross platform issues in coding for browsers these days for all but the most unusual requirements. This is not the issue it once was.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes. I developed the most complex UI site I've ever seen, Twiddla, on IE first followed by Firefox. I never understood all the IE hate, to be honest. Until Chrome came out, I used IE7 as my daily browser. It's just better than Firefox in my opinion.
Voted up for developing Twiddla for IE. I share your sentiment.. I develop against IE first then test it against the "good" browsers... which rarely screw it up. IE sucks for script debugging.. I mean EPIC suck. You're not even told what line of what file is screwed up (IE seems to concatenate everything into 1 file when giving the error report), but I've learned to rely on myself not to make common scripting mistake…
http://developer.apple.com/internet/safari/faq.html#anchor14 (among other google results)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
But IE6 isn't 70% of your userbase. Maybe 70% of your userbase is IE but only maybe 20-25% of that is IE6 so spending 30% more time/resources on IE6 is what I would call a major fail. But hey, that's just me. And have you ever tried to develop complex ui sites on IE? I'm sorry...it just sucks and there is no good way around that. And I'm someone who knows IE6/7 quirks pretty good. Their script debuggers are utter cra…
Yes. I developed the most complex UI site I've ever seen, Twiddla, on IE first followed by Firefox. I never understood all the IE hate, to be honest. Until Chrome came out, I used IE7 as my daily browser. It's just better than Firefox in my opinion.
http://dustincurtis.com/screenshots/Team_WhiteBoarding_with_...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Voted up for developing Twiddla for IE. I share your sentiment.. I develop against IE first then test it against the "good" browsers... which rarely screw it up. IE sucks for script debugging.. I mean EPIC suck. You're not even told what line of what file is screwed up (IE seems to concatenate everything into 1 file when giving the error report), but I've learned to rely on myself not to make common scripting mistake…
Um, Safari has a full Javascript debugger built in: http://developer.apple.com/internet/safari/faq.html#anchor14 (among other google results)
But, then again, there apparently were several Google results.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I read: author wanted to make his website pretty, but IE was making it hard, especially since he was developing on a Mac which made it harder to test, so author dropped support for IE. Author then explains less than 10% of his users use IE, anyway, so it doesn't really matter. Sparks browser war. While I admit, IE really blows, and I hate developing for it, it's really not that bad. It's manageable if you test on it…
I think Marco's point was that he's created this site as a fun side project. Supporting IE isn't fun. The vast majority of the site's users aren't IE users so he wont get a lot of flack from its users. I agree that developing for IE isn't the worst thing ever, but it's certainly not fun. I have to side with Marco on this, if I were to build a site just for fun, I'd probably never look at it in IE.
If it's so important to "business types" to support IE here's an idea: make them pay a fee so it covers the extra development costs (this is not outrageous in general; there are open source projects that cost money for the Windows version).
This is not a government site or an Amazon that has to please everybody. I bet none of the people complaining have ever suffered trying to code around the IE compatibility problems.
I love this. If everyone did this, then Microsoft would lose the power to do whatever it wanted. Standards compliance would not be optional for them anymore. I hope this is a trend that continues.
67.44% use IE http://marketshare.hitslink.com/browser-market-share.aspx?qp...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
And it's not just bugs, but lack of features. For example, I have requirements for simple 2D graphics with client-side interactivity. If we only had to support Firefox/Safari/Opera/Chrome, we could use SVG, but for users with IE (which has neither SVG or Canvas), that means Flash. Doing simple graphics with Flash is well over 10x more work than just splatting some XML inline into your page (which I've also done for p…
You're mistaken. IE has had SVG support since IE5, long before Safari and Firefox introduced Canvas. And the nice kids at Google have built a little library that lets you emulate most Canvas functionality via SVG: http://sourceforge.net/projects/iecanvas
I think you're mistaken. I tried IE6 and IE7 just now, and they don't do SVG (though it nicely offers to save the file).
I think you're thinking of something called "VML". IE does have that, but it's not the same as SVG, not as full-featured as SVG, and nobody else supports it. Maybe that would solve some of my problems, but I'd never even heard of it before -- though I'm sure checking it out now!
I think the URL you meant to post was " rel="nofollow">http://code.google.com/p/explorercanvas/>. I looked at the source, and it uses VML, not SVG.
