re: web browser
Thursday, December 18, 2003 at 1:46 pm
Windows XP Annoyances Discussion Forum
Posted by John Liebson
(728 messages posted)
I neither implied nor stated that poor coding causes crashes in Mozilla; in fact,
I did not say anything about that. What I said was that, even using Mozilla or Firebird,
you need to also have IE for those times that Mozilla/Firebird just won't work. This
is true even with the User Agent Switcher extension, for some pages just won't work
properly except in IE, even when Switcher is used to make MozFire imitate another
browser.
Furthermore, I don't use Mozilla 1.5, as I prefer Firebird; right now, I'm using
the first beta-release version of the next Firebird milestone release, which will
be 0.8. I don't often have crashes using Firebird, but someone found an IE-only page
a few days ago that will crash Firebird every time.
As for IE accepting poor coding, first, I'm not a programmer. However, given the
number of people on the various MozillaZine forums who are web programmers, and the
constant traffic about this subject, I can only conclude that what I said was, in
fact, correct. This traffic often points out the specific coding errors on IE-only
pages; one of those pages is for a private school whose web site I have reason to
use, and whose "webmother," given the information I was given on MozillaZine a number
of months ago, still has not made the requisite changes, so I have to use IE.
On Thursday, December 18, 2003 at 1:01 pm, jagged ben wrote:
>Saying IE is "more accepting" of poor coding is either vague or wrong, depending
>on what you mean exactly.
>
>It's probably true that poor coders are more likely to check how their page looks
>in IE, so unstandard code may more frequently work like the author intended in IE.
> (This applies to companies that make plugins as well.) If IE is "more accepting",
>it is only because people code for it more often. The opposite would be true if
>Mozilla were the more popular browser. It has little to do with the code of the
>browsers themselves.
>
>But if you are implying that bad coding leads to stuff like crashes in Mozilla,
you're
>just wrong. Such problems are as bad if not worse in IE than in Mozilla 1.5. (They
>are rare in both these days.) In this sense, both are good at accepting bad code,
>Mozilla may actually be better.
>
>
- Written in response to:
- re: web browser (jagged ben: Thursday, December 18, 2003 at 1:01 pm)
Responses to this message:
|
|
All messages in this thread [show all]
 | web browser (Richard Smith: Thu, Dec 18, 2003, 7:17 am) |
 | | | | re: web browser (John Liebson: Thu, Dec 18, 2003, 1:46 pm) |
|
