[Info-vax] IE8 got me too :-( Sorry Jeff.

[Bill Gunshannon]

In article <00A97896.C166AAF9 at sendspamhere.org>,
	VAXman-  @SendSpamHere.ORG writes:
> In article <7r8j3oF3qnU2 at mid.individual.net>, billg999 at cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) writes:
>>In article <00A97820.3EB74593 at sendspamhere.org>,
>>	VAXman-  @SendSpamHere.ORG writes:
>>> In article <4b4e7946$0$279$14726298 at news.sunsite.dk>, =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Arne_Vajh=F8j?= <arne at vajhoej.dk> writes:
>>>>On 13-01-2010 08:50, AEF wrote:
>>>>> I actually tried IE8 at work, hoping it would be better than IE6. But
>>>>> it was blurrier on the monitor. I checked it on others' machines and
>>>>> the blurriness varied, and all the monitors were ViewSonics. (I did
>>>>> only check 2 or 3 others, but mine was blurrier than IE6 and that's
>>>>> all that really mattered to me.) So I went back to IE6. And I did
>>>>> check if you could do that before I tried IE8. It turns out that all
>>>>> you have to do is uninstall it, except that a certain OS patch would
>>>>> get in the way if you have it and you'd have to uninstall that first,
>>>>> then reinstall after expunging IE8 from your machine.
>>>>>
>>>>> I do have Firefox installed at work and I use that for some sites, but
>>>>> others work better on IE6. Hate the spastic Find function in IE6, but
>>>>> at least you can use it to highlight a link, or get near it with an
>>>>> easier target and then tab to the link, and without the mouse just
>>>>> press Return and it works! Safari can't do that, but Safari is better
>>>>> with multiple choice items in forms and for printing. Safari puts all
>>>>> the print params on a single page! I've never understood why all the
>>>>> important things like page size, orientation, number of copies,
>>>>> certain things on the Page Setup dialog box and such aren't all in one
>>>>> place. WHY THE HELL DON'T THEY PUT THEM ALL IN ONE PLACE LIKE SAFARI
>>>>> DOES? Arghhhh.
>>>>
>>>>IE6 is pretty bad in AJAX context due to its deviation
>>>>from the standards. IE8 is a lot better. It actually passed
>>>>ACID2.
>>> 
>>> Let me know when it can pass ACID3.  AFAIK, only Safari does so.  Firefox is
>>> close.  It gets to 93/100.
>>
>>Why should anyone care?  It is good business to make sure your web
>>pages work with as many browsers as possible and not just with some
>>obscure standard. It is customers being able to see your web page
>>that makes sales, not some claim that you wrote your page to comply
>>with ACID3.
>>
>>Too many people in this profession have lost site of the core value.
>>The computer needs to adapt to the user, not the user to the computer.
> 
> In that case, all web pages should be HTML 2.0 *ONLY*.  Forego the 
> Javascript, DOM, and other extensions.

If that is what it takes to sell products, then yes.  Save the fancy
crap for your personal web page.

bill
 

-- 
Bill Gunshannon          |  de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n.  Three wolves
billg999 at cs.scranton.edu |  and a sheep voting on what's for dinner.
University of Scranton   |
Scranton, Pennsylvania   |         #include <std.disclaimer.h>