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

[Richard Maher]

Hi Arne,

"Arne Vajhøj" <arne at vajhoej.dk> wrote in message
news:4b53ca5d$0$273$14726298 at news.sunsite.dk...
> 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.

Ah yes, and doesn't DEC have a rich history of not only following but
leading the charge with standards such as DECnet/OSI? But my personal
favourite has to be their lovely FIMS compliant IFDL that tehy still stuff
down the throats of unsuspecting customers :-(
>
> It may not be good to use all features in the standard.

Yes, you're right again; no IPsec! "That's where we can save time, money,
and effort. The rest of the IT world just aren't as clever as us." :-(
>
> But I don't think anyone suggested that.
>
> Arne

Regards Richard Maher
>