]]>]]>Ugh. I hope that's wrong. I did my measurement using grep and the resulting log file portion sizes.
So hopefully I'm right..
Haha crafty.
Most things Microsoft are doing these days w.r.t. incompatibility are strategic.
Yeah. Which is dumb. XP is flawed but so is IE6/7 (and I'm sure DX8/9 is too.. but I'm not a software developer). Most people aren't going to upgrade the OS just to upgrade the browser (as Wu said, most don't even know an upgrade exists), so you just end up with a bunch of people on old OSs still using old browsers.
I doubt the Illusorystudios web viewers have much overlap with the employee-base of large technology-resistant corporations, though.
Or the employee-base of any corporations for that matter 
That is to say: your numbers are probably correct, Zer.
]]>)]]> So hopefully I'm right..]]>Anyways - another quick comment on the site:
The main content div should probably be set to overflow: auto (with the proper adjustments in styling), shouldn't it? Right now pages with long content kind of look funny going off into the darkness (not to mention the footer goes away).
]]>Looks like you're lucky. IE6 is still 20%. Crazy.
]]>Aerius wrote:I'm with you on Firefox. I used to use it primarily but I got tired of the bloat, so now I'm on Chrome and I used Firefox for development (I'll 2nd Firebug).
I don't use IE because.. well I'm on Linux for staters. But even when I'm on Windows I avoid it because of its lack of support for CSS3 and HTML5 stuff - I don't want to be the victim of graceful degradation (or non-graceful for that matter). IE9 looks much better with that, I'll try it out when it hits beta.
Well, HTML5 support is all over the board, with each browser maker supporting different pieces of it (and none of them even coming close to supporting all of the recommendations yet). Lack of CSS3 support is pretty annoying though, but you're right, IE9 will hopefully be much better about that.
Thats definitely true but IE8- has like zero HTML5 support, right? Firefox has not much. Webkit is probably the best. But you're right, no one even close. Have you actually read the spec? I'm going to get around to it eventually.
9.64
Haha nice I'll have to try that. I don't think IE7 will run on 98, will it? They just said that IE9 won't even run on XP (though that might be strategical... which is annoying).
]]>I'm with you on Firefox. I used to use it primarily but I got tired of the bloat, so now I'm on Chrome and I used Firefox for development (I'll 2nd Firebug).
I don't use IE because.. well I'm on Linux for staters. But even when I'm on Windows I avoid it because of its lack of support for CSS3 and HTML5 stuff - I don't want to be the victim of graceful degradation (or non-graceful for that matter). IE9 looks much better with that, I'll try it out when it hits beta.
Well, HTML5 support is all over the board, with each browser maker supporting different pieces of it (and none of them even coming close to supporting all of the recommendations yet). Lack of CSS3 support is pretty annoying though, but you're right, IE9 will hopefully be much better about that.
]]>I don't use IE because.. well I'm on Linux for staters. But even when I'm on Windows I avoid it because of its lack of support for CSS3 and HTML5 stuff - I don't want to be the victim of graceful degradation (or non-graceful for that matter). IE9 looks much better with that, I'll try it out when it hits beta.
]]>