firefox highly pointless feature

[Lord Kalthorn]

hmm, the windows task bar grouping looks nicer than the tabs I think.

But only having one program ope, keeping pages in a different workspace uses less resources.

Yeah; they do! Its much nicer to see a list rather than some tabs which get smaller and smaller with more bars! I have 34 Explorer Browsers up right now; what would that look like in Tabs?

It does save resources I suppose; if I have to say it.

 

[DCHWeb]

Hey, I am glad to see someone is finally going to my website. I am sure that longhorn's ie will be better security-wise, with everybody and his grandmother finding holes in it, but the thing I HATE the most is the incompliance (or however you say it) to the W3C Standards. They are there to make developing for the web easier for the webmaster, but if you have to make sure that your page works in a W3C Compliant browser and in Internet Explorer, that just seems to make it harder.

The one thing that they could at least fix is alpha rendering in PNG images. Boy, that one hacks me off.

 

[Lord Kalthorn]

The images work for me? Could just be because I have Adobe Photoshop though; I don't know.

Just out of interest; what are the W3C Standards? Maybe people should just make their sites compliant with Internet Explorer?

 

[DCHWeb]

Have you ever made a PNG image? Most people don't know this, but up until last year i think it was, it was illegal to produce GIFs. When I first began developing for the web, I knew this and researched the third graphic type, the Portable Networks Graphic. When you add Alpha Transparency, something the GIF doesn't support, Internet Explorer "misrenders" them. There is a page here http://trific.ath.cx/web/png/ that shows all the different ways of "misrendering" PNG images. If you'll notice, my Avatar is a PNG, and you see the white box? That is because all of that area is transparent, but because Internet Explorer renders alpha transparency as nothing but the background color of the image, you see the white box. This happens only in IE, not in any of the Gecko browsers, and possibly not in anything else, but I wouldn't know. By the way, this only happens in the windows version of Internet Explorer, not the Mac. Seems to me, if you are going to create a program, the one that is developed to be compatible with another of your programs should be better, but that is just me.

As for the W3C standards, you can find them at http://www.w3.org. If we all started going against their standards and supporting the MSHTML standard, what purpose would that serve? It would be just as difficult to move everybody from other browsers to move to Internet Explorer as it would be to move everybody from Internet Explorer to a Standards Compliance browser. And even if we did, we'd have to move every one to Internet Explorer 6, which is becoming rapidly less compatible with the 9x Series of windows. That would mean moving everyone in the world to Windows XP, no more *nix, no more Win 9x, no more anything but Windows XP. Do you know how EXTREMLY difficult that would be? Microsoft provides patches for everything monthly, and most people update, so why not just fix the bug and let everyone alone.

 

[Lord Kalthorn]

Have you ever made a PNG image? Most people don't know this, but up until last year i think it was, it was illegal to produce GIFs. When I first began developing for the web, I knew this and researched the third graphic type, the Portable Networks Graphic. When you add Alpha Transparency, something the GIF doesn't support, Internet Explorer "misrenders" them. There is a page here http://trific.ath.cx/web/png/ that shows all the different ways of "misrendering" PNG images. If you'll notice, my Avatar is a PNG, and you see the white box? That is because all of that area is transparent, but because Internet Explorer renders alpha transparency as nothing but the background color of the image, you see the white box. This happens only in IE, not in any of the Gecko browsers, and possibly not in anything else, but I wouldn't know. By the way, this only happens in the windows version of Internet Explorer, not the Mac. Seems to me, if you are going to create a program, the one that is developed to be compatible with another of your programs should be better, but that is just me.

Lol, good point. Maybe its because PNG isn't used much; Paint doesn't support it. But on Mac PNGs and used more so it makes sense to be able to render them properly

As for the W3C standards, you can find them at http://www.w3.org. If we all started going against their standards and supporting the MSHTML standard, what purpose would that serve? It would be just as difficult to move everybody from other browsers to move to Internet Explorer as it would be to move everybody from Internet Explorer to a Standards Compliance browser. And even if we did, we'd have to move every one to Internet Explorer 6, which is becoming rapidly less compatible with the 9x Series of windows. That would mean moving everyone in the world to Windows XP, no more *nix, no more Win 9x, no more anything but Windows XP. Do you know how EXTREMLY difficult that would be? Microsoft provides patches for everything monthly, and most people update, so why not just fix the bug and let everyone alone.

Haha! No it wouldn't; so many people use Internet Explorer over the others that it would be nothing changing them from their browsers compared to moving everybody from Internet Explorer. That however, would be complicated! But Windows 98 is being phased out anyway - so in all due time, probably by a year after Longhorn's release and certainly by Blackcomb's Release hardly anybody will be using 9x Windows (except Bluto who will be the only person standing fast with Millenium Edition).

I don't know why not do that; but I'd imagine Microsoft doesn't like W3C therefore they're trying to phase it out. And if they want to - in time they will.

 

[DCHWeb]

The W3C was created, just like the IEEE and the ICANN, to regulate and develop the internet environment. What you are telling me is if Microsoft wanted to, they would phase out the federal government. I don't think so.

As for paint not supporting the PNG, I don't know what windows or what paint you have, but my paint on Windows XP Home edition makes pngs if i tell it to and it can also edit them just as any other graphic format.

I don't know where you get your numbers for browser usage, and frankly, i don't remember where it was I got mine, but last time I checked it was about 67% of IE on windows. It doesn't seem to me that that is an overpowering majority. It would be difficult to convert either side, especially if there are people like you and I on both sides, each refusing to believe that they are wrong. You'd just have to kill them folks. I doubt that that would happen, the government wouldn't like that Idea to much

 

[DCHWeb]

Lord Kalthorn, don't you have someone else to argue with, you are arguing with me on three threads...

I quit...

 

[Lord Kalthorn]

The W3C was created, just like the IEEE and the ICANN, to regulate and develop the internet environment. What you are telling me is if Microsoft wanted to, they would phase out the federal government. I don't think so.

I don't think that they could phase out Federal Government (although I wish I could! Replace it with some far more efficient Centralism) but I do think that there isn't that much the 'Federal' Government could do about it if Microsoft was sneaky about trying to phase out the plan.

As for paint not supporting the PNG, I don't know what windows or what paint you have, but my paint on Windows XP Home edition makes pngs if i tell it to and it can also edit them just as any other graphic format.

Lol! You're right! Getting my PNGs mixed up with my PDFs! Too many Ps for my liking.

I don't know where you get your numbers for browser usage, and frankly, i don't remember where it was I got mine, but last time I checked it was about 67% of IE on windows. It doesn't seem to me that that is an overpowering majority. It would be difficult to convert either side, especially if there are people like you and I on both sides, each refusing to believe that they are wrong. You'd just have to kill them folks. I doubt that that would happen, the government wouldn't like that Idea to much

Haha! Touchet! I didn't get my numbers from anyway; I made it up but I didn't even think it was that low? Dreadful - it can only go up though.

 

[DCHWeb]

Well, I am glad we are done with this arguement. Sheesh, it was wearing me out. As for the numbers going up, we shall see about that...

 

[Lord Kalthorn]

Haha; yeah we'll have to see.

It does take it out of you doesn't it?