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

[Arne Vajhøj]

On 14-01-2010 08:07, Bill Gunshannon wrote:
> In article<4b4e8718$0$282$14726298 at news.sunsite.dk>,
> 	Arne Vajhøj<arne at vajhoej.dk>  writes:
>> On 13-01-2010 21:31, VAXman- @SendSpamHere.ORG wrote:
>>> 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.
>>
>> Opera 10 also passed.
>>
>> IE8 will most likely never pass ACID3. It will be IE9.
>
> And if you are writting web pages that use features of ACID3 that IE
> doesn't do and you competitor is not who is going to pay the price?
> The target should be your desired audience and not some obscure ivory
> tower standard.

It is very good to follow the standards.

It may not be good to use all features in the standard.

But I don't think anyone suggested that.

Arne