- Joined
- 5 Dec 2001
- Messages
- 6,498
You just started a war my friend.
I would like to see a test to see which browser wins.
But i also want to see which browser is able to load sites the fastest, that are totally w3c compliant, and that IE renders useless.
Case and point: http://tutorials.x-istence.com/qMail_vpopmail_daemontools_authpatch.xhtml
Open this in Mozilla and you will be presented with a nice page, showing you how to setup qMail and the stuff, but open this in IE, and it will ask you to download it. What is that all about? The server is still sending it a normal XHTML document, with the normal header, but it WANTS TO DOWNLOAD IT.
Now second, performance, this seems to be your issue about FireBird, and Mozilla.org. You dont think it can stand up against IE, or you are to SCARED to even believe it would fail to step up to the plate, and blatently load sites that re w3c compliant, and look crap in IE.
Second, i know Mozilla does this as well, but why does MS add extensions to CSS but those are not recognized by w3c, but they still try to push them on everyone on the web.
Case and point, the "filter" CSS tag. Its not valid CSS, and is not shown by FireBird or Opera, but still IE shows them. Mozilla has extensions like these, but properly marks em that way. Like
moz-opacity and moz-*. And most users dont even know about these.
Third, if you put to many tables inside another table, making a pyramid kinda ting, IE will get slower and slower and slower and slower everytime it has to add another table. While FireBird/Mozilla displays em within seconds, without any problems.
Also, why the random bugs in IE, there is even one where if you have an <input> field without a name="hello" it will crash.
Put this in a page and watch:
<form>
<input ie>
</form>
( Note: code could be wrong, i am gonna check up on this )
it will crash IE, and if you have a HTML background type thingie, your desktop will now only say it crashed =).
I currently cant think of a site that is w3c compliant but doesnt look proper in IE but i have seen quit a few things happen.
Like my friends site http://squeakyweasel.net/ had made his page w3c compliant after Speedy_B proded him a few times, and it looked like he wanted in Mozilla and opera, but in IE it was all screwed, and things were out of place. So he went out of his way, redid some of his allready w3c compliant code, which again was compliant, but now it did look fine in IE as well, and looked the same in FireBird and Opera.
Popup blocking? IE doesnt even have any, i hate popups, so Firebird and mozilla block em for me, no need to install something from a 3rd party, and it works out the box.
Cookie control, okay so in IE you have 2 settings. Allow or disable, but you cant do site per site allowance, or only allow cookies for the current site only so that any cookies from 3rd party sites are blocked. Or you can get warned when a cookie is set and per site basis select if you want to allow it, or not allow the cookie.
Image control, you can control what servers are allowed to load images and what server are not. Great for that annoying flashing GIF banner add, right click, dont show images from this site, and gone it is. Just hit reload. Youd need to find another app for IE to be able to do that.
Search is integrated, google, netscape, ixquick, hotbot, pretty much anything is included. Have yet to see more than MSN and some other services in IE, and those search engines dont offer what i want.
Mulitmedia integration and plugins. IE and FireBird have their fair share of plugins and multimedia apps that work with em. But the edge that Firebird has over IE is that its easier to produce plugins for since ITS opensource. Ive seen plugins for IE only, but why IE? Only because its the most used, why cant you make it for some other company? See thats another problem, IE seems to get a lot more used since EVERYTHING is made towards it. This can be bad, but to me thats good, one less site to visit on my daily surfing.
Javascript, in FireBird you can control what it can do or cant. You can select if its allowed to open windows or change the URL bar text and make a ticker. In IE its either on or off, and those annoying debug messages dont help the end user anyways, who wants to see them if they are just visiting the site in the first place?
Then there is java, its all great, but the last IE i used it still contained the old Java from MS, the one that is now banned. So using the origional one is needed, but still for some reason if the normal java is not present and the MS java is, it will still use that instead of telling the users that its not allowed, or uninstalling it totally.
Active X, i have yet to see something good come off of Active X, all it lets sites do is install spyware on demand as someone else stated. Its not a good language, and can be used to do malicious things. No active X in FireBird, and also a lot less viruses going around for it arnt there?
Third, bugs and major security issues, well last time i checked IE had a million and one patches in the last 50 minutes since it had another vuln that allowed any site to takeover a person's PC. I have yet to see any other browser allow someone that they dont even know and they are visiting a page off to allow them to take over my PC. Kinda weird aint it?
Now that is my review of IE versus FireBird/Mozilla.
X-Istence
Content posted here is (c) copyright 2003 X-Istence.com
I would like to see a test to see which browser wins.
But i also want to see which browser is able to load sites the fastest, that are totally w3c compliant, and that IE renders useless.
Case and point: http://tutorials.x-istence.com/qMail_vpopmail_daemontools_authpatch.xhtml
Open this in Mozilla and you will be presented with a nice page, showing you how to setup qMail and the stuff, but open this in IE, and it will ask you to download it. What is that all about? The server is still sending it a normal XHTML document, with the normal header, but it WANTS TO DOWNLOAD IT.
Now second, performance, this seems to be your issue about FireBird, and Mozilla.org. You dont think it can stand up against IE, or you are to SCARED to even believe it would fail to step up to the plate, and blatently load sites that re w3c compliant, and look crap in IE.
Second, i know Mozilla does this as well, but why does MS add extensions to CSS but those are not recognized by w3c, but they still try to push them on everyone on the web.
Case and point, the "filter" CSS tag. Its not valid CSS, and is not shown by FireBird or Opera, but still IE shows them. Mozilla has extensions like these, but properly marks em that way. Like
moz-opacity and moz-*. And most users dont even know about these.
Third, if you put to many tables inside another table, making a pyramid kinda ting, IE will get slower and slower and slower and slower everytime it has to add another table. While FireBird/Mozilla displays em within seconds, without any problems.
Also, why the random bugs in IE, there is even one where if you have an <input> field without a name="hello" it will crash.
Put this in a page and watch:
<form>
<input ie>
</form>
( Note: code could be wrong, i am gonna check up on this )
it will crash IE, and if you have a HTML background type thingie, your desktop will now only say it crashed =).
I currently cant think of a site that is w3c compliant but doesnt look proper in IE but i have seen quit a few things happen.
Like my friends site http://squeakyweasel.net/ had made his page w3c compliant after Speedy_B proded him a few times, and it looked like he wanted in Mozilla and opera, but in IE it was all screwed, and things were out of place. So he went out of his way, redid some of his allready w3c compliant code, which again was compliant, but now it did look fine in IE as well, and looked the same in FireBird and Opera.
Popup blocking? IE doesnt even have any, i hate popups, so Firebird and mozilla block em for me, no need to install something from a 3rd party, and it works out the box.
Cookie control, okay so in IE you have 2 settings. Allow or disable, but you cant do site per site allowance, or only allow cookies for the current site only so that any cookies from 3rd party sites are blocked. Or you can get warned when a cookie is set and per site basis select if you want to allow it, or not allow the cookie.
Image control, you can control what servers are allowed to load images and what server are not. Great for that annoying flashing GIF banner add, right click, dont show images from this site, and gone it is. Just hit reload. Youd need to find another app for IE to be able to do that.
Search is integrated, google, netscape, ixquick, hotbot, pretty much anything is included. Have yet to see more than MSN and some other services in IE, and those search engines dont offer what i want.
Mulitmedia integration and plugins. IE and FireBird have their fair share of plugins and multimedia apps that work with em. But the edge that Firebird has over IE is that its easier to produce plugins for since ITS opensource. Ive seen plugins for IE only, but why IE? Only because its the most used, why cant you make it for some other company? See thats another problem, IE seems to get a lot more used since EVERYTHING is made towards it. This can be bad, but to me thats good, one less site to visit on my daily surfing.
Javascript, in FireBird you can control what it can do or cant. You can select if its allowed to open windows or change the URL bar text and make a ticker. In IE its either on or off, and those annoying debug messages dont help the end user anyways, who wants to see them if they are just visiting the site in the first place?
Then there is java, its all great, but the last IE i used it still contained the old Java from MS, the one that is now banned. So using the origional one is needed, but still for some reason if the normal java is not present and the MS java is, it will still use that instead of telling the users that its not allowed, or uninstalling it totally.
Active X, i have yet to see something good come off of Active X, all it lets sites do is install spyware on demand as someone else stated. Its not a good language, and can be used to do malicious things. No active X in FireBird, and also a lot less viruses going around for it arnt there?
Third, bugs and major security issues, well last time i checked IE had a million and one patches in the last 50 minutes since it had another vuln that allowed any site to takeover a person's PC. I have yet to see any other browser allow someone that they dont even know and they are visiting a page off to allow them to take over my PC. Kinda weird aint it?
Now that is my review of IE versus FireBird/Mozilla.
X-Istence
Content posted here is (c) copyright 2003 X-Istence.com