<![CDATA[Faldon Forums - Zer: Site Question]]> https://www.faldon.org/topic/5073/ Fri, 19 Mar 2010 21:51:02 +0000 PunBB <![CDATA[Re: Zer: Site Question]]> https://www.faldon.org/post/63653/#p63653 I'm only allowed to say that because at the start of this client (and for a good 3 years) I was one of those unemployed teenagers addicted to Faldon   wink

]]> Fri, 19 Mar 2010 21:51:02 +0000 https://www.faldon.org/post/63653/#p63653 <![CDATA[Re: Zer: Site Question]]> https://www.faldon.org/post/63642/#p63642 Zing!

]]> Fri, 19 Mar 2010 19:47:36 +0000 https://www.faldon.org/post/63642/#p63642 <![CDATA[Re: Zer: Site Question]]> https://www.faldon.org/post/63639/#p63639 Zer wrote:

Ugh. I hope that's wrong. I did my measurement using grep and the resulting log file portion sizes. tongue So hopefully I'm right..

Haha crafty.

Zer wrote:

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.


Mumblee wrote:

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   big_smile

]]> Fri, 19 Mar 2010 19:19:51 +0000 https://www.faldon.org/post/63639/#p63639 <![CDATA[Re: Zer: Site Question]]> https://www.faldon.org/post/63638/#p63638 IE 6 is still 20% because of corporations that mandate it (usually after investing heavily in systems designed for it).  I doubt the Illusorystudios web viewers have much overlap with the employee-base of large technology-resistant corporations, though.

That is to say: your numbers are probably correct, Zer.

]]> Fri, 19 Mar 2010 19:16:54 +0000 https://www.faldon.org/post/63638/#p63638 <![CDATA[Re: Zer: Site Question]]> https://www.faldon.org/post/63637/#p63637 Most things Microsoft are doing these days w.r.t. incompatibility are strategic.
Why do new versions of DirectX require new versions of Windows?
(unless of course their plot is to drive everyone away from native development wink)

]]> Fri, 19 Mar 2010 19:11:22 +0000 https://www.faldon.org/post/63637/#p63637 <![CDATA[Re: Zer: Site Question]]> https://www.faldon.org/post/63636/#p63636 Ugh. I hope that's wrong. I did my measurement using grep and the resulting log file portion sizes. tongue So hopefully I'm right..

]]> Fri, 19 Mar 2010 19:09:47 +0000 https://www.faldon.org/post/63636/#p63636 <![CDATA[Re: Zer: Site Question]]> https://www.faldon.org/post/63635/#p63635 Ok I have it bookmarked now:  http://dev.w3.org/html5/spec/Overview.html  haha.  Some day I'll actually read it (probably when IE9/FF4/etc have at least 50% market share).


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).

]]> Fri, 19 Mar 2010 19:06:04 +0000 https://www.faldon.org/post/63635/#p63635 <![CDATA[Re: Zer: Site Question]]> https://www.faldon.org/post/63634/#p63634 I haven't really looked at the spec, no.  I think IE8 has support for a few limited features, but it is lagging behind WebKit and Opera by quite a bit.

]]> Fri, 19 Mar 2010 18:58:08 +0000 https://www.faldon.org/post/63634/#p63634 <![CDATA[Re: Zer: Site Question]]> https://www.faldon.org/post/63633/#p63633 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Msieshare1

Looks like you're lucky.  IE6 is still 20%.  Crazy.

]]> Fri, 19 Mar 2010 18:56:19 +0000 https://www.faldon.org/post/63633/#p63633 <![CDATA[Re: Zer: Site Question]]> https://www.faldon.org/post/63632/#p63632 Mumblee wrote:
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.

Zer wrote:

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).

]]> Fri, 19 Mar 2010 18:49:33 +0000 https://www.faldon.org/post/63632/#p63632 <![CDATA[Re: Zer: Site Question]]> https://www.faldon.org/post/63631/#p63631 9.64

]]> Fri, 19 Mar 2010 18:46:56 +0000 https://www.faldon.org/post/63631/#p63631 <![CDATA[Re: Zer: Site Question]]> https://www.faldon.org/post/63630/#p63630 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.

]]> Fri, 19 Mar 2010 18:46:00 +0000 https://www.faldon.org/post/63630/#p63630 <![CDATA[Re: Zer: Site Question]]> https://www.faldon.org/post/63629/#p63629 Opera 10 on Win98?

]]> Fri, 19 Mar 2010 18:42:20 +0000 https://www.faldon.org/post/63629/#p63629 <![CDATA[Re: Zer: Site Question]]> https://www.faldon.org/post/63628/#p63628 What's sad is, you can run Opera on Windows 98.

]]> Fri, 19 Mar 2010 18:39:28 +0000 https://www.faldon.org/post/63628/#p63628 <![CDATA[Re: Zer: Site Question]]> https://www.faldon.org/post/63626/#p63626 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.

]]> Fri, 19 Mar 2010 18:36:18 +0000 https://www.faldon.org/post/63626/#p63626