Time to Dump Internet Explorer

By Per Hansson ยท 70 replies
Jun 18, 2004
  1. acidosmosis

    acidosmosis TechSpot Chancellor Posts: 1,350

    Uh. 800x600 has nothing to do with this discussion. Websites are designed for 800x600 because the majority of users resolution is 800x600.

    You are NOT a good web designer at all if you don't understand that you design for resolutions that the MAJORITY uses and design your page so that the MAJORITY of users can view it correctly.

    Who cares what the "correct" way to do html is. A functional page is MORE money for the company. If a page doesnt work correctly the viewer will NOT come back most likely. To ignore this is stupidity and the sign of a bad web designer.

    Edit: And you must take into account of the fact that MOST, probably 98% of shoppers online are using IE. There is no way around this fact. Those who know enough about technicalities to use another browser aren't as much of a concern as the general public is.

    It's one thing to know how to do "correct" html, but it's other to blatanly ignore the fact that some correct html might not work in the most used browser (IE).

    It really annoys me when people come in here and talk about how web designers should design a page to live up to html standards. People that do that don't know what they are talking about when it comes down to it and are bad designers and I sure wouldnt hire anyone to create a webpage with that attitude. A webpage had better work well for the majority of it's viewers or you would be out of a job if I was the one hiring you.

    Frontpage, is in fact crap. No matter HOW you look at it. Take a look at frontpage html with Notepad and you will immediately know why if you are a good designer.

    Your all ignoring the facts because you are blind. Just because you decide that FireFox or Opera are "better" doesn't mean everyone else uses it or wants to. Pages SHOULD and NEED to be designed for the majority. If your too blind to see this than well, that is your problem, your downfall and you would be the one losing money, having the customer pissed at you, and this would be the reason you do not move up in the world as a web page designer.
  2. Nic

    Nic TechSpot Paladin Posts: 1,549

    acid: Don't you think you are being a little hard on stelex?

    If you look at any code generation tool's output, be it dreamweaver, frontpage, or whatever, the output isn't designed to be easily readable, and isn't formatted as such.

    Further, it is important that standards are kept to, otherwise how can you ensure that everyone can view the same page, unless it is coded to an agread standard? The programmer's job is also made significantly easier if he doesn't have to code to take into account all the variable permutations of non-standard coding practice that exists. He should however, make such additions as necessary to ensure that the large majority of users can still view the website, even if it means using non-standard coding practice.

    People are free to choose and use any browser they wish, but that does not excuse writing non-standard code.

    Look at the mess with DVD+R/DVD-R, VHS/Betamax, BlueRay-DVD/HD-DVD. It isn't in anyones interest to have multiple versions of any technology, not by any means. I'm sure even you (acid) will realise this (I hope). Proprietary techniques in any field is fast becoming unacceptable to users, and it will benefit all of us at the end of the day.

    As regards screen resolution, browsers, such as Opera have a zoom control so you can scale wider pages to fit the display resolution you are running. Also, with more and more PC's shipping with LCD monitors, it would appear that 1024x768 will soon (if it isn't already) be the most common desktop resolution.
  3. acidosmosis

    acidosmosis TechSpot Chancellor Posts: 1,350

    Well as long as you make the viewing pleasant enough for the user and at the same time write the code to spec as much as possible then that is no big deal. I'll agree 100% with that. If you can do that, then your doing a great job.
  4. Rick

    Rick TechSpot Staff Posts: 4,572   +65

    All HTML should be made to specification.

    But... a good web developer will also ensure their website works on non-compliant browsers too.

    It may not seem right to have to put a lot of extra work into a site because of company's inability to adhere to W3C standards, but it is necessary until all browsers are uniformly compliant.

    You have to admit though - Web developing has gotten MUCH more standardized than it was a few years ago. The differences between how Netscape and IE rendered pages was amazing sometimes.. But you don't see much of a difference anymore.

    Non-standards compliant browsers are no excuse for a website that doesn't work among all major browsers. If you use it as an excuse, you either don't know enough to make it work on all browsers or you are just a lazy web designer. :)

    And IE users don't account for 98% of the users out there, fortunately. Nor is 800x600 the most popular resolution any longer. Here are some hard statistics for you.

  5. Rick

    Rick TechSpot Staff Posts: 4,572   +65

    And remember to take these statistics lightly... Many browsers may or may be instructed to misreport information or don't report information at all. But overall, this is probably a fairly accurate chart for 2004.
  6. somekid007

    somekid007 TS Rookie Posts: 271

    I've been using firefox for about a year now. LOVE IT, will never go back to IE, imo faster than IE
  7. DaveSylvia

    DaveSylvia TS Rookie Posts: 107

    One thing I'd like to mention is the inline Autocomplete option in IE. Back in IE 4.0 the option was enabled by default. I remember watching someone use the feature. He was typing an address and IE had filled in the rest of the address bar with another recently visited site. He then got mad and said "Argh I hate when it does that" and took the mouse and highlighted the part that IE had added to what he had typed. He didn't know that you can just keep typing and IE will remove its suggestion!!! IE 5.0 and subsequent versions have all had that option off by default. I have not yet seen that option available in Firefox or as an extension. This is one of the main reasons I haven't made the switch to Firefox. If any one has any knowledge of an extension with that feature, please let me know!

    Edit 1: I believe Rick mentioned that in SP2 IE has been improved. To expound upon what he said, IE's security is nicely improved (though still not at the level of other browsers such as Opera or Firefox) and a built-in Pop-up blocker is now in place.

    Edit 2:Also, on the subject of tabs, while they are pretty darn nice, a friend of mine stated that he didn't care for them because he felt that it broke consistency with program handling. He felt that there should be a taskbar button for every instance of every program. Perhaps others feel that same way?
  8. Mictlantecuhtli

    Mictlantecuhtli TS Evangelist Posts: 4,345   +11

    That's odd, I have had it in every Mozilla, Firebird, Phoenix and Firefox version I've tested, if I remember correctly. My main browser is still Mozilla 1.4b, but I use Firefox 0.8 & 0.9 sometimes too.
  9. stelex

    stelex TS Rookie

    No, not majority, you build web site that works on ALL resolutions, because you can design web site that works great on 800x600 but looks disaster on 1280x1024. What you have to do is to make it to look same on 800x600, 1024x768 and up.

    Being good web designer is when your web site is working on ALL browsers and in all resolutions. And that's why I test it on all browsers in all resolutions.

    THAT is the bad web designer's attitude. Mate, web page must work on ALL browsers, not only on majority.

    No, mate, we're not blind here, nor dumb. We use it because we find it more useful and more secure than IE.
    Nobody here is forcing or pushing anyone to use FF or Mozilla, we are just putting our experiences on the table for others to see and judge, If you don't find it interesting, that's fine, you keep using IE, someone else will try it and maybe like it, or maybe even not.

    I tried Mozilla 1.something (1.2 I guess) and I didn't like it initially. A little while later someone "opened my eyes" and I never had a need to go back.

    I said, I use Mozilla 1.7 at the moment and the rason I use it is because it (for me) has superior usability comparing to IE. Simple as that.

    If you think McDonald's burgers are better than Kebab or Souvlaki, just because McDonalsd's is everywhere around and cheaper - well, it's up to you to pick your lunch. I know what I pick.

    (And no, I'm not Greek :) )
  10. acidosmosis

    acidosmosis TechSpot Chancellor Posts: 1,350

    Take that way of thinking to an employer and see where it gets you.

    Yes, you can make a page look decent in all resolutions, at least a few anyways (a page is going to look like crap in 600x480 these days in any case), but there are some designs in which a page stays a specific size and does not dynamically change with the viewers resolution. In those cases you want to design for. Guess... 800x600. That is a fact.
  11. DigitAlex

    DigitAlex TechSpot Paladin Posts: 536

    Static design = BAD
    Liquid design = GOOD

    binary, but true ....

    So please acid, review your courses of webdesign a bit ;)
  12. DaveSylvia

    DaveSylvia TS Rookie Posts: 107

    Could you look at your settings and options and find out which option that is? It'd be fantastic if it had that feature. I'd like to clarify my words on this though. I don't mean the feature where you type in an address and a list of alphabetically similar addresses drops down and then you can select which one you want. No, the feature I want will fill in automatically while you are typing.

    The first screenshot is without inline Autocomplete. The second one is with. In both cases the only thing I typed was "www.es". You can see that in the 2nd screenshot the rest of the address was filled in automatically.

  13. acidosmosis

    acidosmosis TechSpot Chancellor Posts: 1,350

    Alex that is not at all true. That is nothing but your opinion.

    A site such as this http://www.templatemonster.com/flash-templates/5514.html should be designed around 800x600.

    A site such as Techspot which is dynamic is a different story. Both are good designs. It all comes down to preference and opinion.
  14. Nic

    Nic TechSpot Paladin Posts: 1,549

    The TechSpot website appears to be designed for 1024x768 screen resolution and stretches the border area to take up any slack when larger resolutions are used. It doesn't go smaller than 1024x768, and many websites are now like this. The last time I saw an 800x600 monitor it had Windows 3.1 running on it :=).

    Websites designed to fit 800x600 res unfortunately don't look good (too cramped), so what do you do if you are a website designer? If it is a Tech website, then you can expect that most users will be running at least 1024x768 res (visit your favourite tech website and check it out for yourself). If it is a news website, then 800x600 would allow most users to view without sideways scrolling. Here is one website that is designed for 640x480 (http://www.theinquirer.net/) and it is reasonably ok because it is a news site, mostly full of text.

    Designing all your websites for 800x600 res is not a good idea, and it really depends on your target audience, as to what is, or isn't, acceptable. There are no hard and fast rules, but if your website doesn't look good, then you will likely lose return visits, so do your homework before deciding.
  15. acidosmosis

    acidosmosis TechSpot Chancellor Posts: 1,350

    Um. Nick, I didn't say TS was designed for 800x600. I said TS was a different story. Sites like TS aren't going to be designed for "specific" resolutions because it's a site that resizes itself. It will be designed to look better on a few ideal resolutions, but not a specific one. The page I linked though is another story. You'll want that "box" to fit exactly in a 800x600 window, but still look decent in other resolutions. The fact still remains that websites like that which I mentioned need to be built around 800x600 more than any other resolution.
  16. DigitAlex

    DigitAlex TechSpot Paladin Posts: 536

    Designing is not taking static flash 320x240 templates and putting them on the middle of your page ....
  17. Mictlantecuhtli

    Mictlantecuhtli TS Evangelist Posts: 4,345   +11

    My bad, it appears this feature has been removed from Firefox (I didn't find it from about:config either). I have it in Mozilla 1.4 though, but haven't checked 1.7 yet.

  18. DaveSylvia

    DaveSylvia TS Rookie Posts: 107

    Ah yes!! I see! I've always gone for the stand-alone browser and email client in Firefox and Thunderbird than the full package in Mozilla. Perhaps I should utilize Mozilla for once!
  19. acidosmosis

    acidosmosis TechSpot Chancellor Posts: 1,350

    Again Alex there you go making assumptions. I never said ANYTHING about using templates. I was using that page as an example. Please, all of you pull your heads out of your backsides.
  20. All windows users suck !!
  21. howard_hopkinso

    howard_hopkinso TS Rookie Posts: 24,177   +19

    I find your above comment utterly childish and nonsense.

    I like the vast majority of computer users use windows because it`s easy to use and gets the job done.

    If Linux ever gets to the same stage then I would welcome it as a serious alternative.

    As to the original topic. I personally Love the new Firefox because at the moment at least it is much more secure than IE I also like the tabbed browsing element.

    I find that whenever I use IE I get a lot more Tracking cookies and spyware etc.

    Therefore I only use IE for Windows updates and the odd site that doesn`t support Firefox.

    Regards Howard :wave:
Topic Status:
Not open for further replies.

Similar Topics

Add your comment to this article

You need to be a member to leave a comment. Join thousands of tech enthusiasts and participate.
TechSpot Account You may also...