Short straw for Firefox users? - bit-tech.net Forums

The_Pope · 24th Jun 2005, 05:10

http://www.bit-tech.net/news/2005/06...fox_compliant/

Quote:

One in ten UK websites fail to work properly when viewed in Firefox, according to a study of "100 leading consumer sites" by web-testing firm SciVisum, reports the BBC.

RotoSequence · 24th Jun 2005, 05:20

Id peg it down to developer ignorance. I still know way too many people who design websites using applications like front page. I dont know how bad this is in the professional market, but I doubt that this is the prime culprit. The problem ultimately most likely comes down to corproate ignorance about which browsers people are using to view their websites.

Firefox for the Security and tabbed browsing win

Did you pull that FireFox vs IE graph completely out of your asses, by chance?

Firehed · 24th Jun 2005, 06:45

Agreed, Roto. If MS doesn't adhere to (their own?) standards, Frontpage sure won't, and a lot of, well, noob pages are made in frontpage. According to my brother, it's the only way they teach you web design at my old middle school. Scary thought, considering I can pwn any frontpage user in notepad in half the time.

relix · 24th Jun 2005, 07:27

Oh, this is interesting. I seem to remember one of the arguments of the firefox users that their browser displayed more webpages correct than Opera. But that aside - I don't want another Opera vs Firefox war - how come Bit-Tech claims standard compliance while in the W3C validator 60 errors come up?

ZERO <ibis> · 24th Jun 2005, 07:32

firefox PWN5!!!!!!!!!!!!!

there are so many 1337 addons. and it's great to reprogram from about:config

firefox is like the best thing to come to a pc

Hamish · 24th Jun 2005, 07:39

breaking news: 1 in 10 UK sites aren't worth my bandwidth anyway
Odeon works fine in firefox if you use the text based listing anyway, which i do in ie too because their site is ****ing horrible in any browser

The_Pope · 24th Jun 2005, 08:48

Quote:

how come Bit-Tech claims standard compliance while in the W3C validator 60 errors come up?

There are several valid reasons, though RTT is better qualified to explain them. My understanding of them is twofold:

1) Our original code was fully compliant, but we had to break a few things to get it to display correctly in IE

2) There was something really really tiny and minor which didn't warrant the work in order to satisfy the Compliancy checker. UPDATE: ah yes - it's a bunch of stuff to do with the Flash banners - nothing "important"

The bottom line is that the site should be nigh on identical in:

Internet Explorer
Firefox
Safari
Opera

If you're a non-codie, you'd be utterly gobsmacked at the perfectly correct code that works fine in some browsers and not in others - it really is a minefield. At the end of the day, we have made a commitment to make bit-tech as functional as possible across the entire spectrum of browsers, and will continue to do so - I expect there'll be a bunch more work required when IE7 lands.

I'll ask our codies to drop in here for Expert Comments if you like

relix · 24th Jun 2005, 08:56

The_Pope, yes, being a webmaster myself, I understand completly.

Do check out my blog though, although not as complex - both visibly or underneath the hood - as the Bit-Tech site, it's a fine example that shows that cross-compatible code shouldn't stand in the way of standard compliancy. It's XHTML 1.0 Transitional valid, and displays identical in IE, Opera, Firefox and Safari. Or, of course, I was just lucky my code didn't use any of the broken stuff, even though it still took me a week to get it cross-browser compatible. I can't imagine how long it would take the bit-site to get it right, so I understand that you don't want to spend months getting it right, even though it displays correctly.

The_Pope · 24th Jun 2005, 09:02

I'm no codie myself, but I was Chief Beta Tester of the new design, and it was an incredibly frustrating process. BUT we got there in the end

felix the cat · 24th Jun 2005, 10:18

coding is ok
finding errors in code =

will. · 24th Jun 2005, 10:47

I have made a couple of websites that use various scripts and complicated layouts and in most cases when using dreamweaver its internet explorer that can't display them propely, especially when using my prefered image format .png (it displays them too dark for some odd reason)

Also, it is often down to the websites designer, they have to test it on all majour browsers, anyone who doesn't is not really serious about their website being view by the masses.

webbyman · 24th Jun 2005, 12:05

Quote:

Originally Posted by Firehed

Agreed, Roto. If MS doesn't adhere to (their own?) standards, Frontpage sure won't, and a lot of, well, noob pages are made in frontpage. According to my brother, it's the only way they teach you web design at my old middle school. Scary thought, considering I can pwn any frontpage user in notepad in half the time.

my gf was taught to make websites in publisher for her gcse corsework

edit: firefox owns

and check the battle field, i'v been following it from 2004, ie have been loosing the market share at a steady rate

*about 1-2% a month now..*

here

Da Dego · 24th Jun 2005, 13:46

Quote:

Originally Posted by relix

The_Pope, yes, being a webmaster myself, I understand completly.

Do check out my blog though, although not as complex - both visibly or underneath the hood - as the Bit-Tech site, it's a fine example that shows that cross-compatible code shouldn't stand in the way of standard compliancy. It's XHTML 1.0 Transitional valid, and displays identical in IE, Opera, Firefox and Safari. Or, of course, I was just lucky my code didn't use any of the broken stuff, even though it still took me a week to get it cross-browser compatible. I can't imagine how long it would take the bit-site to get it right, so I understand that you don't want to spend months getting it right, even though it displays correctly.

@Relix,
The errors on the bit-tech site that you see are due to the adverts on the main pages. The way they want their images and flash items linked is not W3 compliant. As for the forums, well, there are a couple bugs being chased, but that's due to VB script and (again) the adverts. The actual page itself is W3 compliant for XML Transitional (personally, I'm a fan of strict, it clears up a few more problems).

@Roto,
Agreed. Actually, over here even in college you are taught to program webpages using Frontpage or dreamweaver. Those of us who really hand-code are very few and far-between. It's frightening that I have to teach computer programmers how to work in HTML...they learn VB, C++, and even how to write their own OS...and then get a crash course in frontpage for a half of a semester for "Practical applications." My two best friends are both computer engineers, and I still have to walk them through basic page creation outside of a Microsoft or Macromedia product. These WYSIWIG editors are frightening...and create a giant mess of tag soup that people don't know well enough to correct.

Oh, and FF rocks.

Zidane · 24th Jun 2005, 14:09

Quote:

Originally Posted by from the article

Of the websites that SciVisum tested, 3% were found to be turning away non Internet Explorer (IE) users and 7% of the sites included non-standard code recognised only by Microsoft's browser.

theres lies, damn lies and statistics. of the 10 that didnt work, 3 were simply redirects, and 7 were using non-standard code. i wouldnt exactly call that a problem with firefox, more a problem with the sites.

i think the "study" itself was not particularly good. they examined 100 websites, and made a global statement of "1 in 10 uk websites"... thats some serious data extrapolation there. considering the billions of websites (i dont know the actual number of "uk" sites, but im assuming millions), simply checking 100 makes the sample size far too small to make the "study" an effective representation of the norm. as an example, if i checked bit-tech users, i bet i could find 10 that have a spotty face, thus i could say "1 in 10 bit-tech users has more warts than skin cells!". it might be a semi-accurate statement for my study, but really doesnt represent the entrie bit-tech audience.

i think firefox is better than IE. my father (the perfect example of a 12'o'clock flasher) also loves firefox. he doesnt even know what http is, but he does know if he middle-clicks he gets a new tab and firefox magics away all the popups. firefox is awesome, not just for geeks, but for people who want to use the internet instead of treading water in the wave of popups.

FILTHY1337 · 24th Jun 2005, 17:51

how manny of you actually frequent a site that doesnt work in firefox, i have been using firefox for over 1 1/2 years and i have only seen 1 website that wouldent load and that was freeipods.com. If any of you do, there is a cure there is a plug-in for firefox that open webpages in IE.

cpemma · 24th Jun 2005, 18:42

Quote:

bit-tech readers are way ahead of the curve in the adoption of so-called "alternative" browsers...By the time Firefox 1.0 was launched in November 2004, it (IE) had dropped to 58%, with Firefox users making up a third.

Interesting. SPCR (quieter geeks than Bit

) reported in January '05, "Our tracking systems tell us that 63% of visitors are using IE, and 25% are using Netscape Navigator, with Opera at 4.2% and unknown at 6%. Mozilla Firefox is not specifically accounted for because it is too new." Yet a SPCR poll launched at the time shows only 12% IE, but 72% Firefox, 10% Opera. And 0% NN, so the 25% are presumably Moz/FF.

My inference is, FF & Opera users like taking part in polls more than IE users.

The SPCR tracking system results give another clue - I've come across sites that browser-sniff and serve a Netscape page incompatible with the Fox. Don't blame IE for everything, including the weather.

battery · 24th Jun 2005, 19:08

Quote:

Originally Posted by FILTHY1337

how manny of you actually frequent a site that doesnt work in firefox, i have been using firefox for over 1 1/2 years and i have only seen 1 website that wouldent load and that was freeipods.com. If any of you do, there is a cure there is a plug-in for firefox that open webpages in IE.

Indeed.

On the frontpage topic, why bother - MS office packages (word / excel / powerpoint) "export/save as" .html. We use this method at work so that anyone can update the company intranet (none customer facing) for their department...It creates some daft code that is not needed but gets the job done and it works. Granted if the IT admins were to let firefox loose then there may be problems...

At home I'm firefox 100% it rocks due IMHO to better security, faster renders and better UI + the rest.

drinn · 24th Jun 2005, 19:12

I have to give the point to Firefox!
That's because of it's useful addons like Adblock which removes irritating
advertisements from different websites, and effective Pop-up blocker.

The battle between IE & Opera is very hard, I think. Opera has nice skins
category etc. "cool" stuff, but it's a hell to webmaster.. Experienced webmasters
should know it better. For example almost all my websites have worked fine in
Firefox & IE, but some particulars looks awful on Opera. Even the code has been valid.

IE browser is famous for its risky security holes, there's no "New page / tab"
system which throws its in the same level where Opera is and good Pop-up
blocker is missing. Otherwise its a great browser.

So go and download Firefox!

OneSeventeen · 24th Jun 2005, 21:46

Oddly enough, I don't think firefox is a perfect browser.

I think it is the best, however, and I appreciate where Internet Explorer has tried to take us, as far as web technology goes, I just feel the lack of standards compliance is where things fell away. DirectX is great in games, and highly frightening in web sites. That fact alone keeps me from using IE, and the plugins and free price tag are what lure me to firefox.

(sorry opera users, I used opera for a while, but am too cheap to pay for a browser when I don't have to. It is a great browser, but I'm cheap and value my desktop real estate.)

I install firefox on every machine I can. The fact that various governments have warned against using internet explorer without windows XP service pack 2 makes me shudder to think my insurance company and bank use internet explorer!

Cheap Mod Wannabe · 25th Jun 2005, 01:59

To anyone who's thinking that Internet Explorer is better just because many website layouts are different in Firefox.... Go get a PDA, with WiFi and go to a hotspot. Then try surfing the net for 30mins or an hour. After that go back, install firefox and you'll be feeling like you just bought geforce 7800 or switched to Geico.

I do not mind those layout problems. I mind the popups and no tabbed browsing.

24th Jun 2005, 05:20	#2
RotoSequence Lazy Lurker Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: 'States Posts: 4,527	Id peg it down to developer ignorance. I still know way too many people who design websites using applications like front page. I dont know how bad this is in the professional market, but I doubt that this is the prime culprit. The problem ultimately most likely comes down to corproate ignorance about which browsers people are using to view their websites. Firefox for the Security and tabbed browsing win Did you pull that FireFox vs IE graph completely out of your asses, by chance? __________________ Technology Schmecnology

24th Jun 2005, 06:45	#3
Firehed Why not? I own a domain to match. Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: An hour north of Boston Posts: 12,576	Agreed, Roto. If MS doesn't adhere to (their own?) standards, Frontpage sure won't, and a lot of, well, noob pages are made in frontpage. According to my brother, it's the only way they teach you web design at my old middle school. Scary thought, considering I can pwn any frontpage user in notepad in half the time. __________________ hire me @ eric-stern.com - web developer and php ninja pics @ my smugmug :: Twitter @firehed :: blog @ firehed.net 40D\|580EXII\|285HV\|AB800\|70-200f/4LIS\|17-50f/2.8\|150f/2.8Macro\|50f/1.8 MacPro @ 8x2.8GHz, 10GB FBDDR2, 3TB HD :: MBP @ 2x2.2GHz, 4GB DDR2, 320GB HD

24th Jun 2005, 07:27	#4
relix the freaky belgian Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: 51° 20' 2", 3° 17' 35" Posts: 5,931	Oh, this is interesting. I seem to remember one of the arguments of the firefox users that their browser displayed more webpages correct than Opera. But that aside - I don't want another Opera vs Firefox war - how come Bit-Tech claims standard compliance while in the W3C validator 60 errors come up? __________________ He'll be irresistibly drawn to large cities where he'll back up plumbing, reverse street signs, and steal everyone's left shoe. Seenly: Take snapshots with your webcam in your browser Last edited by relix; 24th Jun 2005 at 07:33.

24th Jun 2005, 08:56	#8
relix the freaky belgian Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: 51° 20' 2", 3° 17' 35" Posts: 5,931	The_Pope, yes, being a webmaster myself, I understand completly. Do check out my blog though, although not as complex - both visibly or underneath the hood - as the Bit-Tech site, it's a fine example that shows that cross-compatible code shouldn't stand in the way of standard compliancy. It's XHTML 1.0 Transitional valid, and displays identical in IE, Opera, Firefox and Safari. Or, of course, I was just lucky my code didn't use any of the broken stuff, even though it still took me a week to get it cross-browser compatible. I can't imagine how long it would take the bit-site to get it right, so I understand that you don't want to spend months getting it right, even though it displays correctly. __________________ He'll be irresistibly drawn to large cities where he'll back up plumbing, reverse street signs, and steal everyone's left shoe. Seenly: Take snapshots with your webcam in your browser

24th Jun 2005, 10:18	#10
felix the cat Spaceman Spiff Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Planet Mok Posts: 4,614	coding is ok finding errors in code = __________________ A8NSli-D ::X2 3800+ :: 2gb Corsair :: Radeon X1800 :: 4Seagates :: onboard sound ::

24th Jun 2005, 07:32	#5
ZERO <ibis> Supermodder Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Atlanta Posts: 263	firefox PWN5!!!!!!!!!!!!! there are so many 1337 addons. and it's great to reprogram from about:config firefox is like the best thing to come to a pc

24th Jun 2005, 07:39	#6
Hamish I Mod, Therefore I Own Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: London Posts: 3,587	breaking news: 1 in 10 UK sites aren't worth my bandwidth anyway Odeon works fine in firefox if you use the text based listing anyway, which i do in ie too because their site is ****ing horrible in any browser

24th Jun 2005, 09:02	#9
The_Pope Geoff Richards Moderator Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: UK Posts: 2,089	I'm no codie myself, but I was Chief Beta Tester of the new design, and it was an incredibly frustrating process. BUT we got there in the end

24th Jun 2005, 10:47	#11
will. A motorbike of jealousy! Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: Yorkshire! Posts: 4,403	I have made a couple of websites that use various scripts and complicated layouts and in most cases when using dreamweaver its internet explorer that can't display them propely, especially when using my prefered image format .png (it displays them too dark for some odd reason) Also, it is often down to the websites designer, they have to test it on all majour browsers, anyone who doesn't is not really serious about their website being view by the masses. __________________ work \| play \| blog PS3 & 360: willblack Flickr my twitter. Last.FM Check out my Last.FM & iToggle & Nav-o-Matic jQuery plugins.

24th Jun 2005, 17:51	#15
FILTHY1337 Senior Overclocker Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: NY, to small to know Posts: 819	how manny of you actually frequent a site that doesnt work in firefox, i have been using firefox for over 1 1/2 years and i have only seen 1 website that wouldent load and that was freeipods.com. If any of you do, there is a cure there is a plug-in for firefox that open webpages in IE. __________________ -=Abandon Hope All YE Who Enter =-(my mod station) Formerly ocedAMD@3000+

24th Jun 2005, 19:12	#18
drinn Multimodder Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: Finland, Helsinki Posts: 196	I have to give the point to Firefox! That's because of it's useful addons like Adblock which removes irritating advertisements from different websites, and effective Pop-up blocker. The battle between IE & Opera is very hard, I think. Opera has nice skins category etc. "cool" stuff, but it's a hell to webmaster.. Experienced webmasters should know it better. For example almost all my websites have worked fine in Firefox & IE, but some particulars looks awful on Opera. Even the code has been valid. IE browser is famous for its risky security holes, there's no "New page / tab" system which throws its in the same level where Opera is and good Pop-up blocker is missing. Otherwise its a great browser. So go and download Firefox! __________________

24th Jun 2005, 21:46	#19
OneSeventeen Oooh Shiny! Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: Albuquerque, NM Posts: 3,447	Oddly enough, I don't think firefox is a perfect browser. I think it is the best, however, and I appreciate where Internet Explorer has tried to take us, as far as web technology goes, I just feel the lack of standards compliance is where things fell away. DirectX is great in games, and highly frightening in web sites. That fact alone keeps me from using IE, and the plugins and free price tag are what lure me to firefox. (sorry opera users, I used opera for a while, but am too cheap to pay for a browser when I don't have to. It is a great browser, but I'm cheap and value my desktop real estate.) I install firefox on every machine I can. The fact that various governments have warned against using internet explorer without windows XP service pack 2 makes me shudder to think my insurance company and bank use internet explorer! __________________ If God had intended us to use the Metric system we would have been born with 10 fingers and 10 toes. Christian Technology Podcast - Geekons.com

25th Jun 2005, 01:59	#20
Cheap Mod Wannabe Ultramodder Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Glen Cove, NY Posts: 1,215	To anyone who's thinking that Internet Explorer is better just because many website layouts are different in Firefox.... Go get a PDA, with WiFi and go to a hotspot. Then try surfing the net for 30mins or an hour. After that go back, install firefox and you'll be feeling like you just bought geforce 7800 or switched to Geico. I do not mind those layout problems. I mind the popups and no tabbed browsing.