twifkak Posted August 29, 2003 Share Posted August 29, 2003 Originally posted by DomStLeger (P.P.S I should get paid for this) Yeah, don't hold your breath. I dunno about Dom, but personally, I'm not nearly as pro-Mozilla as I am anti-IE/Outlook. So I have no problem with Opera users. (I tried it back in the ver 5 days and I didn't like the UI and JS support, though I know those have changed -- it's laziness, and the fact that Moz is free.) Incidentally, I went ahead and dled Moz Fb for work, because I was so sick and tired of IE (don't make me list them again ), and displays that page just fine. It also displays this page just fine. Also, for those curious, my work computer here is a 200-400MHz with 128MB, and it takes about 5 seconds to load, and 5 seconds to page in from virt. mem (when you've kept it running in the background, but haven't used it in a while). Mmm... shiitake. Also, the tab that I used to post this message still says "loading" (even as I edit it). This is one of those wacky forum cases like I mentioned in ragou's thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moosferatu Posted August 30, 2003 Share Posted August 30, 2003 Fine fine. I cave. I'll try it out. Should I try regular Mozilla or Firebird? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
remixor Posted August 30, 2003 Share Posted August 30, 2003 I'm using Firebird right now. Can anyone explain the difference between normal Mozilla and Firebird? I may be dumb but I couldn't find any sort of comparison on their site. All in all I'm liking Firebird, although to be completely honest pretty much the only big advantage I can ses it the tabs. I'm sure there's other stuff going on behind the scenes though. A couple problems, however: I've noticed that when downloaind files it defaults to opening them directly rather than asking to save or open (which IE does). This isn't a huge problem in most cases, since one can just right click and save target as, but there are times when you must do things like fill out a form and click the submit button to receive a file, or times when a download starts automatically. In both of those cases, you cannot right-click and save target as, and the file opens directly. This is quite annoying, and the Firebird configuration options seem pretty slim compared to how many IE has. I don't know if there are options somewhere else where I can fix this or what. The other problem is due to my idiocy: I'll build up about a dozen tabs, all of which I'm using. Then, I'll not need one anymore, so I'll instinctive go to the upper right of the screen and hit the close button...there go ALL the tabs. ARGH! I've done it several times now, and I suppose it's just something I'll have to remember not to do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moosferatu Posted August 30, 2003 Share Posted August 30, 2003 LOL! I just downloaded regular Mozilla, and I found a problem that I definitely don't have with IE. For some reason the textarea that I am currently typing this message into has the same width as the input box for the post subject. Very, weird and annoying. PS. I sill don't get the tabed thingy. All I see are a bunch of new windows. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moosferatu Posted August 30, 2003 Share Posted August 30, 2003 I just figured out the tab thing. Not bad... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
remixor Posted August 30, 2003 Share Posted August 30, 2003 Moos: I noticed that text box width thing too. It's pretty annoying, but not debilitating. Seems a rather random error though Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moosferatu Posted August 30, 2003 Share Posted August 30, 2003 Originally posted by remixor Moos: I noticed that text box width thing too. It's pretty annoying, but not debilitating. Seems a rather random error though I think I would rather use IE than have this dinky box. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moosferatu Posted August 30, 2003 Share Posted August 30, 2003 I have visited most of the sites that I normally go to and I have noticed a few more problems. I think that I will probably just stick to IE, since it (for me at least) has far less problems than Mozilla. Maybe I'll try it again when the next version comes out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marek Posted August 30, 2003 Share Posted August 30, 2003 Originally posted by ragou If you need more arguments you should read this thing: http://www.mozilla.org/products/firebird/why/ The only thing I can find that the normal Mozilla does not have is the "Annoyance Eliminator". I guess I won't go for Firebird just yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DomStLeger Posted August 30, 2003 Share Posted August 30, 2003 Thats a shame Moos, hope you do try again some day. I honestly have never had any problems with other web pages. Never noticed the text area thing though. As for the Annoyance Eliminator, I think it is present in Mozilla. Just open the preferences, expand the "Advanced" catagory and select "Scripts & Plugins" from the list. There you can turn off the ability for websites to "Change status bar text" along with the rest. And remixor, yeah the differences aren't made very clear on the website. Mozilla is a suite with a Web Browser, Mail program, Chat program, Website Composer and Address Book built in to one program. Thunderbird is purely a Web Browser like IE; though you can download extensions to add extra functions like the chat program etc. Thunderbird therefore loads-up faster initially, though they both open websites at the same speed. I'm not sure, but I get the impression that the next version of Mozilla (Mozilla 1.5) will be based on Thunderbird with all the other features pre-installed as extensions. This is just a guess though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ragou Posted August 30, 2003 Share Posted August 30, 2003 The plan is for mozilla to use Firebird (browser) and Thunderbird (Mail) in the future in the mozilla suite. It will not be for mozilla 1.5 though. Look at this place for info about the 1.5 beta: http://www.mozilla.org/releases/mozilla1.5b/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moosferatu Posted August 30, 2003 Share Posted August 30, 2003 Dom and Ragou, do you have the same problem with the textarea? Dom, some other sites that have problems are The Church of Tim, AOL (you have to go to the inbox), and there was even a little mistake on one of the screenshot indexes over at Gamespot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twifkak Posted August 30, 2003 Share Posted August 30, 2003 Well, I'd take the puritanical route and say that the problems with all those webpages is that they're not standard compliant (which is true), but I'm sure that doesn't matter to you. Like Dom said, Moz is an app suite, while Firebird is just the browser. Also, Firebird tries to look a little bit like IE, and I believe it handles tabbed windows a little differently than Moz. Moz 1.5 is going to be normal, with 1.6 or 1.7 becoming a Fb/Tb/Sb bundle. Any one who thinks Moz's configuration options are too few is completely insane (type about:config in your URL bar, except without the evil space vB keeps adding). And if that's not enough, download an extension! I do get the textarea problem, but to me, I can live with that for all the improvements that I get. (BTW, could you guys fix it so the textarea is normal size for us?) I also get a couple of minor problems at The Church. (The black line up top, and the fact that it doesn't support IE's proprietary image fading thingy.) Whatever. Page works fine. (Better, actually, 'cause I don't get annoying pop-ups, and eaten words and screenshots open in a new tab instead of a new window.) I don't have AOL, but I do see problems with the occasional evil web page that refuses to allow anything but IE 6.0, but it's not like I can't run both at the same time. So I do. Another little Moz bonus: you can use the scroll wheel while selecting text. Very useful. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moosferatu Posted August 30, 2003 Share Posted August 30, 2003 I can use the scrollwheel while selecting text in IE too. I'm not saying that I didn't like what I saw, but since the majority of the webpages out there are designed with IE in mind I figure that it is better to stick with IE despite some of its flaws. If everything ran the same on Moz as they do on IE I would probably switch over, but until then I will probably stick with IE. On the other hand, if everyone thinks the same as me there will probably never be a big switch off of IE... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DomStLeger Posted August 31, 2003 Share Posted August 31, 2003 Ok well I looked at the Church of Tim; thats a simple problem in the page source. While it looks fine in IE you can't guarentee it will look the same in other browsers (not just Mozilla btw). I'm not trying to defend Mozilla (er... Ok I am ) but IE adheres less strictly to HTML standards than other browsers. So people make sites and check to see if they look ok in IE and then they potentially don't look ok in stricter browsers and on other platforms (i.e. linux, MacOS, your TV etc). Checking your site looks ok in Mozilla or Opera or another stricter browser actually ensures its more compatible and so displays as the webmaster intended to the massive number of people who don't or can't use IE... (Yes lol I did try to twist that problem round into mozillas favour ) Anyway as for other sites I honestly have never had to use IE instead of Mozilla. Yes you occasionally get glitches on some sites but frankly that is the fault of the webmaster and IE, not Mozilla . I'll gladly put up with a black line on Church of Tim or Gamespot if it means no more pop ups and tabbed browsing. (p.s. in my last post I wrote Thunderbird when i meant Firebird, sorry about that. Firebird is the browser, Thunderbird is the mail client. I'd edit mypost but I keep getting bouts of Lucasforum slowdown.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Royal Fool Posted August 31, 2003 Share Posted August 31, 2003 Again, I will play devil's advocate and recommend Opera. It doesn't have image fading problems (Church of Tim, for example), the box size problem is fixed simply by ordering the browser to use MSIE 6.0 identification (As opposed to various Mozilla or Opera identifications) and, to my knowledge, I have minimal problems with GameSpot as well. Plus you can play around with the toolbars (I have my address bar at the bottom now). The only downsides I know off are that Opera doesn't support dynamic content yet (Mozilla and IE do; check out the news comments at Shacknews if you want to see dynamic content for yourselves) Yeah, Mozilla isn't bad, but I just like Opera more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ragou Posted August 31, 2003 Share Posted August 31, 2003 I actually use opera in linux (mostly), I have galeon, mozilla, firebird and w3m (text-browser) installed too. On windows I use firebird, because it is simple and effective and I don't browse that much on windows. My review site (click link in my signature) looks better in opera/mozilla than in IE (IE is lousy at handling css correct). Another point why everyone *should* switch to a standards-compliant browser is that as a web designer it is a pain in the ass to make it look good in IE while trying to stay standards compliant. I have no will to go around and make my html/css-code look ugly just because IE is crap! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ragou Posted August 31, 2003 Share Posted August 31, 2003 Yes, another thing is that IE can't handle png:s correctly. Try this site in mozilla and then in IE and see the difference: http://www.pp.htv.fi/hsivone1/css-test/bitmapstyle.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Firefoot Posted August 31, 2003 Share Posted August 31, 2003 Originally posted by ragou Yes, another thing is that IE can't handle png:s correctly. Try this site in mozilla and then in IE and see the difference: http://www.pp.htv.fi/hsivone1/css-test/bitmapstyle.html What should I see and what not... I currently still have only IE installed and see a red square shortly and then a white/gray bar with shadow... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ragou Posted August 31, 2003 Share Posted August 31, 2003 This is donw with alpha-channels in the png. The original png is just a white button. This colour is changed using CSS. Normal it is a red button. When you hover over it, it should be blue and when you click on it dark blue. (look in the source code to see). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twifkak Posted August 31, 2003 Share Posted August 31, 2003 1)Sonuvabitch. Yes, changing the user agent string in Moz fixes the textarea thing. I'm using the Preferences Toolbar extension to do that, but I'm sure there are other ways. (Well, for one, there's good ol' about:config, if you know what you're doing.) Why someone would go out of their way to make a page look worse on specific browsers is beyond me (not). 2)Yeah, there are lots of cool dynamic things. My favorite is just the simple "Lock Menu" thing on this page. Smoooth. 3)Yeah, it's a cool little rounded rectangle with a smooth bevel and a drop shadow. Very OSX-like. 4)The fading of David's family jewels works, but the cross-fading of the screenshots doesn't. Note that there are plenty of standards-compliant ways of doing this, and some of them may even work in IE. It's merely a case of getting bad information from the first place he looked, probably. 'Tis a pity that I'm too lazy (or busy) to work on it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scabb Posted August 31, 2003 Share Posted August 31, 2003 I've tried most of the browsers mentioned, and a few more, and I've adopted Avant as the chief of browsetown. It's basically a tabbed version of Internet Explorer, with other handy things like pop-up stoppers etc. Bear in mind, these opinions are that of an accustomed Internet Explorer on a rather slow computer: Firebird is just too slow to load up, and still too slow from then on. I don't like it. Opera is good, but it has a few incredibly irritating features. And it's definitely the little things that are the most irritating. Not to mention the fact that it crashes when I load up around 20 pages. The argument that "Mozilla is more W3 Complaint" isn't really that important. Everybody still uses IE and webmasters know this, so most sites are gonna work in IE anyway. Anyway, check out Avant if you're not satisfied with your current browser. It's nice, and doesn't have many irritating features. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moosferatu Posted August 31, 2003 Share Posted August 31, 2003 I have heard that Moz convertes all finite measurements (like pixels) into percents and then back to pixels. I have seen some very odd results of this. Very odd indeed... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twifkak Posted September 1, 2003 Share Posted September 1, 2003 Originally posted by scabb I've tried most of the browsers mentioned, and a few more, and I've adopted Avant as the chief of browsetown. It's basically a tabbed version of Internet Explorer, with other handy things like pop-up stoppers etc. Now, I'm not going to dissuade anyone from this (I've already done that enough!), but just going to mention that, deep down, it's still IE, and still has all of those evil security holes. Just FYI. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.