Flicker

Discussion in 'HTML' started by Shelly, Nov 20, 2007.

  1. Shelly

    Shelly Guest

    Doesn't anyone have a suggestion for the IE6 flicker problem when mousing
    over menus quickly?

    I tried the Javascript solution I found but it didn't work. It was to put
    this in the <head> area.

    <SCRIPT type=text/javascript>
    try { document.execCommand('BackgroundImageCache', false, true); } catch(e)
    {}
    </SCRIPT>

    --
    Shelly
     
    Shelly, Nov 20, 2007
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Shelly

    Els Guest

    Shelly wrote:

    > Doesn't anyone have a suggestion for the IE6 flicker problem when mousing
    > over menus quickly?
    >
    > I tried the Javascript solution I found but it didn't work. It was to put
    > this in the <head> area.


    Glue the two images together, and just set the background-position to
    change on hover. That way IE6 doesn't fetch the image every time you
    mouse over it.

    --
    Els http://locusmeus.com/
     
    Els, Nov 20, 2007
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Shelly

    Shelly Guest

    Els wrote:
    > Shelly wrote:
    >
    >> Doesn't anyone have a suggestion for the IE6 flicker problem when
    >> mousing over menus quickly?
    >>
    >> I tried the Javascript solution I found but it didn't work. It was
    >> to put this in the <head> area.

    >
    > Glue the two images together, and just set the background-position to
    > change on hover. That way IE6 doesn't fetch the image every time you
    > mouse over it.


    What two images?
    What do you mean by "glue"?

    I have a menu on the side with three menu items. When clicked, two of them
    expand into submenus. (This problem is also there for the submenus). Each
    submenu has a hyperlink. Moving the mouse rapidly up and down causes the
    flicker of the entire screen. The menu items are nothing more than text
    with a background. The colors change on hover. So, I don't know what you
    mean with "glue the two images".

    --
    Shelly
     
    Shelly, Nov 20, 2007
    #3
  4. Shelly

    Els Guest

    Shelly wrote:
    > Els wrote:
    >> Shelly wrote:
    >>
    >>> Doesn't anyone have a suggestion for the IE6 flicker problem when
    >>> mousing over menus quickly?
    >>>
    >>> I tried the Javascript solution I found but it didn't work. It was
    >>> to put this in the <head> area.

    >>
    >> Glue the two images together, and just set the background-position to
    >> change on hover. That way IE6 doesn't fetch the image every time you
    >> mouse over it.

    >
    > What two images?


    The one you see before hovering/mousing over the menu, and the one you
    see while hovering/mousing over it.

    > What do you mean by "glue"?


    'stick' :)

    > I have a menu on the side with three menu items. When clicked, two of them
    > expand into submenus. (This problem is also there for the submenus). Each
    > submenu has a hyperlink. Moving the mouse rapidly up and down causes the
    > flicker of the entire screen.


    Ah see, you didn't explain that in your first post, and you didn't
    give a link either, so I just assumed you were talking about rollover
    images, which do indeed tend to flicker on mouseover in IE6.

    > The menu items are nothing more than text
    > with a background. The colors change on hover. So, I don't know what you
    > mean with "glue the two images".


    Nothing really - forget it. I have no idea what your menu is doing. I
    thought you were using images. Maybe because I saw the word
    "BackgroundImageCache" in your JavaScript snippet?

    If you can give a URL, someone else might see/know what is happening
    and give you a solution.

    --
    Els http://locusmeus.com/
     
    Els, Nov 20, 2007
    #4
  5. Shelly

    Shelly Guest

    Els wrote:
    > Shelly wrote:
    >> Els wrote:
    >>> Shelly wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> Doesn't anyone have a suggestion for the IE6 flicker problem when
    >>>> mousing over menus quickly?
    >>>>
    >>>> I tried the Javascript solution I found but it didn't work. It was
    >>>> to put this in the <head> area.
    >>>
    >>> Glue the two images together, and just set the background-position
    >>> to change on hover. That way IE6 doesn't fetch the image every time
    >>> you mouse over it.

    >>
    >> What two images?

    >
    > The one you see before hovering/mousing over the menu, and the one you
    > see while hovering/mousing over it.
    >
    >> What do you mean by "glue"?

    >
    > 'stick' :)
    >
    >> I have a menu on the side with three menu items. When clicked, two
    >> of them expand into submenus. (This problem is also there for the
    >> submenus). Each submenu has a hyperlink. Moving the mouse rapidly
    >> up and down causes the flicker of the entire screen.

    >
    > Ah see, you didn't explain that in your first post, and you didn't
    > give a link either, so I just assumed you were talking about rollover
    > images, which do indeed tend to flicker on mouseover in IE6.
    >
    >> The menu items are nothing more than text
    >> with a background. The colors change on hover. So, I don't know
    >> what you mean with "glue the two images".

    >
    > Nothing really - forget it. I have no idea what your menu is doing. I
    > thought you were using images. Maybe because I saw the word
    > "BackgroundImageCache" in your JavaScript snippet?
    >
    > If you can give a URL, someone else might see/know what is happening
    > and give you a solution.


    I did in the first post (not this thread). It is
    www.festivalnetwork.com/events.php Do it in IE6. There is no problem in
    IE7 and FF. To make it happen more quickly, expand the Events by Region by
    clicking on it. This happens with top level and sub menus. Just move the
    mouse up and down over the menu quickly.

    --
    Shelly
     
    Shelly, Nov 20, 2007
    #5
  6. Shelly

    Bone Ur Guest

    Well bust mah britches and call me cheeky, on Tue, 20 Nov 2007 19:45:37
    GMT Shelly scribed:

    >> If you can give a URL, someone else might see/know what is happening
    >> and give you a solution.

    >
    > I did in the first post (not this thread). It is
    > www.festivalnetwork.com/events.php Do it in IE6. There is no
    > problem in IE7 and FF. To make it happen more quickly, expand the
    > Events by Region by clicking on it. This happens with top level and
    > sub menus. Just move the mouse up and down over the menu quickly.


    I did this with some css in your stylesheet:

    #SideLink a:hover {
    color: #FFFFFF;
    text-decoration:none;
    XXpadding: 3px 0 0 0;
    text-align:left;
    text-indent: 5px;
    }

    (Notice the XX - a temp. negation) and it stopped flickering on a
    downloaded copy.

    --
    Bone Ur
    Cavemen have formidable pheromones.
     
    Bone Ur, Nov 20, 2007
    #6
  7. Shelly

    Shelly Guest

    Bone Ur wrote:
    > Well bust mah britches and call me cheeky, on Tue, 20 Nov 2007
    > 19:45:37 GMT Shelly scribed:
    >
    >>> If you can give a URL, someone else might see/know what is happening
    >>> and give you a solution.

    >>
    >> I did in the first post (not this thread). It is
    >> www.festivalnetwork.com/events.php Do it in IE6. There is no
    >> problem in IE7 and FF. To make it happen more quickly, expand the
    >> Events by Region by clicking on it. This happens with top level and
    >> sub menus. Just move the mouse up and down over the menu quickly.

    >
    > I did this with some css in your stylesheet:
    >
    > #SideLink a:hover {
    > color: #FFFFFF;
    > text-decoration:none;
    > XXpadding: 3px 0 0 0;
    > text-align:left;
    > text-indent: 5px;
    > }
    >
    > (Notice the XX - a temp. negation) and it stopped flickering on a
    > downloaded copy.


    Awesome!!!! I thank you ever so much. I put it in exactly as you have it
    above. Can you please explain in a little more detail (for my education)
    just what putting XX in front does?

    --
    Shelly
     
    Shelly, Nov 20, 2007
    #7
  8. Shelly

    Bone Ur Guest

    Well bust mah britches and call me cheeky, on Tue, 20 Nov 2007 21:45:32
    GMT Shelly scribed:

    >>>> If you can give a URL, someone else might see/know what is
    >>>> happening and give you a solution.
    >>>
    >>> I did in the first post (not this thread). It is
    >>> www.festivalnetwork.com/events.php Do it in IE6. There is no
    >>> problem in IE7 and FF. To make it happen more quickly, expand the
    >>> Events by Region by clicking on it. This happens with top level and
    >>> sub menus. Just move the mouse up and down over the menu quickly.

    >>
    >> I did this with some css in your stylesheet:
    >>
    >> #SideLink a:hover {
    >> color: #FFFFFF;
    >> text-decoration:none;
    >> XXpadding: 3px 0 0 0;
    >> text-align:left;
    >> text-indent: 5px;
    >> }
    >>
    >> (Notice the XX - a temp. negation) and it stopped flickering on a
    >> downloaded copy.

    >
    > Awesome!!!! I thank you ever so much. I put it in exactly as you
    > have it above. Can you please explain in a little more detail (for my
    > education) just what putting XX in front does?


    It's just a cheater way of removing the line from counting. Browsers don't
    parse malformed css so this is like eliminating it. I wouldn't advise
    publishing the page that way; remove the line or change it so it no longer
    has the bad effect. -And you're quite welcome.

    --
    Bone Ur
    Cavemen have formidable pheromones.
     
    Bone Ur, Nov 21, 2007
    #8
  9. Bone Ur wrote:

    >>> XXpadding: 3px 0 0 0;


    /* padding: 3px 0 0 0; */

    > It's just a cheater way of removing the line from counting. Browsers
    > don't parse malformed css so this is like eliminating it. I wouldn't
    > advise publishing the page that way; remove the line or change it so
    > it no longer has the bad effect. -And you're quite welcome.


    Using comment markers to 'remove' it is better. <g> Doing so leaves no
    doubt as to your intentions, and also protects you from next year's
    browser, which might disregard /all/ CSS from that point on.

    --
    -bts
    -Motorcycles defy gravity; cars just suck
     
    Beauregard T. Shagnasty, Nov 21, 2007
    #9
  10. Beauregard T. Shagnasty wrote:
    > Bone Ur wrote:
    >
    >>>> XXpadding: 3px 0 0 0;

    >
    > /* padding: 3px 0 0 0; */
    >
    >> It's just a cheater way of removing the line from counting. Browsers
    >> don't parse malformed css so this is like eliminating it. I wouldn't
    >> advise publishing the page that way; remove the line or change it so
    >> it no longer has the bad effect. -And you're quite welcome.

    >
    > Using comment markers to 'remove' it is better. <g> Doing so leaves no
    > doubt as to your intentions, and also protects you from next year's
    > browser, which might disregard /all/ CSS from that point on.


    I'm using a beta of Next Year's Browser. Damned think can't even *find*
    this year's web sites... ;)

    --
    Blinky
    Killing all posts from Google Groups
    The Usenet Improvement Project - http://improve-usenet.org
     
    Blinky the Shark, Nov 21, 2007
    #10
  11. Shelly

    Bone Ur Guest

    Well bust mah britches and call me cheeky, on Wed, 21 Nov 2007 03:06:49 GMT
    Beauregard T. Shagnasty scribed:

    >>>> XXpadding: 3px 0 0 0;

    >
    > /* padding: 3px 0 0 0; */
    >
    >> It's just a cheater way of removing the line from counting. Browsers
    >> don't parse malformed css so this is like eliminating it. I wouldn't
    >> advise publishing the page that way; remove the line or change it so
    >> it no longer has the bad effect. -And you're quite welcome.

    >
    > Using comment markers to 'remove' it is better. <g> Doing so leaves no
    > doubt as to your intentions, and also protects you from next year's
    > browser, which might disregard /all/ CSS from that point on.


    Agreed. I use it only for "easier" preliminary testing on browsers whose
    reactions I know from experience. (Saves keystrokes.)

    For any permanent change, the line should be dealt with correctly.

    --
    Bone Ur
    Cavemen have formidable pheromones.
     
    Bone Ur, Nov 21, 2007
    #11
  12. Shelly

    Shelly Guest

    Bone Ur wrote:
    > Well bust mah britches and call me cheeky, on Wed, 21 Nov 2007
    > 03:06:49 GMT Beauregard T. Shagnasty scribed:
    >
    >>>>> XXpadding: 3px 0 0 0;

    >>
    >> /* padding: 3px 0 0 0; */
    >>
    >>> It's just a cheater way of removing the line from counting.
    >>> Browsers don't parse malformed css so this is like eliminating it.
    >>> I wouldn't advise publishing the page that way; remove the line or
    >>> change it so it no longer has the bad effect. -And you're quite
    >>> welcome.

    >>
    >> Using comment markers to 'remove' it is better. <g> Doing so leaves
    >> no doubt as to your intentions, and also protects you from next
    >> year's browser, which might disregard /all/ CSS from that point on.

    >
    > Agreed. I use it only for "easier" preliminary testing on browsers
    > whose reactions I know from experience. (Saves keystrokes.)
    >
    > For any permanent change, the line should be dealt with correctly.


    What I normally do to eliminate a line but not remove it is to enclose it in
    a /* */ set.

    As far as handling it correctly, what was wrong with the line:

    padding: 3px 0 0 0;

    that caused it to flicker?

    --
    Shelly
     
    Shelly, Nov 21, 2007
    #12
  13. Shelly

    Bone Ur Guest

    Well bust mah britches and call me cheeky, on Wed, 21 Nov 2007 18:24:38
    GMT Shelly scribed:

    >>>>>> XXpadding: 3px 0 0 0;
    >>>
    >>> /* padding: 3px 0 0 0; */
    >>>
    >>>> It's just a cheater way of removing the line from counting.
    >>>> Browsers don't parse malformed css so this is like eliminating it.
    >>>> I wouldn't advise publishing the page that way; remove the line or
    >>>> change it so it no longer has the bad effect. -And you're quite
    >>>> welcome.
    >>>
    >>> Using comment markers to 'remove' it is better. <g> Doing so leaves
    >>> no doubt as to your intentions, and also protects you from next
    >>> year's browser, which might disregard /all/ CSS from that point on.

    >>
    >> Agreed. I use it only for "easier" preliminary testing on browsers
    >> whose reactions I know from experience. (Saves keystrokes.)
    >>
    >> For any permanent change, the line should be dealt with correctly.

    >
    > What I normally do to eliminate a line but not remove it is to enclose
    > it in a /* */ set.


    That's the right way to comment-out a line in the <style> element.

    > As far as handling it correctly, what was wrong with the line:
    >
    > padding: 3px 0 0 0;
    >
    > that caused it to flicker?


    I can only guess, but first of all, ie handles margins and padding
    differently than standards-compliant browsers. Whether that is relevant
    may not be pertinent in any case; it just might be simply a matter of ie
    redrawing the page with margins/padding included on hover styles and
    execution.

    Maybe someone here knows more about it. I just chalk it up to the
    "brokenness" of ie.

    --
    Bone Ur
    Cavemen have formidable pheromones.
     
    Bone Ur, Nov 21, 2007
    #13
  14. Shelly

    Shelly Guest

    Bone Ur wrote:
    > Well bust mah britches and call me cheeky, on Wed, 21 Nov 2007
    > 18:24:38 GMT Shelly scribed:
    >
    >> As far as handling it correctly, what was wrong with the line:
    >>
    >> padding: 3px 0 0 0;
    >>
    >> that caused it to flicker?

    >
    > I can only guess, but first of all, ie handles margins and padding
    > differently than standards-compliant browsers. Whether that is
    > relevant may not be pertinent in any case; it just might be simply a
    > matter of ie redrawing the page with margins/padding included on
    > hover styles and execution.
    >
    > Maybe someone here knows more about it. I just chalk it up to the
    > "brokenness" of ie.


    My experience is backend, so I am a php person. I know enough html and css
    to get by, but that is not my area of expertise. So, until now, I always
    used the most convenient browser which, in this case, was IE7.

    On this most recent job I have had to do a lot more with htnl and css (like
    this problem). I have had to make sure things work on FF and IE6. The more
    I get into it, the better FF looks as far as quality and more IE
    comparatively looks like a piece of crap. Even a litlle thing like looking
    at page source. On FF it is indented nicely and color coded. On IE it
    comes up in (ugh!) notepad. Then there is the developer tools plugin for
    FF. It is great. You can easily see the javascript and css files (and
    other stuff). (Fortunately, it impossible for it to see the php or asp
    code.) The only drawback to FF is that it takes longer for a first loading.
    I also didn't care enough for Opera or Netscape to consider changing. By
    contrast, I am about to set FF as my default browser.

    --
    Shelly
     
    Shelly, Nov 22, 2007
    #14
  15. Shelly wrote:
    > Bone Ur wrote:
    >> Well bust mah britches and call me cheeky, on Wed, 21 Nov 2007
    >> 18:24:38 GMT Shelly scribed:
    >>
    >>> As far as handling it correctly, what was wrong with the line:
    >>>
    >>> padding: 3px 0 0 0;
    >>>
    >>> that caused it to flicker?

    >> I can only guess, but first of all, ie handles margins and padding
    >> differently than standards-compliant browsers. Whether that is
    >> relevant may not be pertinent in any case; it just might be simply a
    >> matter of ie redrawing the page with margins/padding included on
    >> hover styles and execution.
    >>
    >> Maybe someone here knows more about it. I just chalk it up to the
    >> "brokenness" of ie.

    >
    > My experience is backend, so I am a php person. I know enough html and css
    > to get by, but that is not my area of expertise. So, until now, I always
    > used the most convenient browser which, in this case, was IE7.
    >
    > On this most recent job I have had to do a lot more with htnl and css (like
    > this problem). I have had to make sure things work on FF and IE6. The more
    > I get into it, the better FF looks as far as quality and more IE
    > comparatively looks like a piece of crap.


    You can see what web designers are always b*tching about! Things goes
    smoothly and neat, simple CSS for a nice look and ARGH! it will not work
    in IE!

    > Even a litlle thing like looking
    > at page source. On FF it is indented nicely and color coded. On IE it
    > comes up in (ugh!) notepad. Then there is the developer tools plugin for
    > FF. It is great. You can easily see the javascript and css files (and
    > other stuff). (Fortunately, it impossible for it to see the php or asp
    > code.)


    Better not see it with IE or your server is very badly configured.


    > The only drawback to FF is that it takes longer for a first loading.
    > I also didn't care enough for Opera or Netscape to consider changing. By
    > contrast, I am about to set FF as my default browser.


    Well it would load faster too if was not a web browser but and OS
    component and already preloaded...



    --
    Take care,

    Jonathan
    -------------------
    LITTLE WORKS STUDIO
    http://www.LittleWorksStudio.com
     
    Jonathan N. Little, Nov 22, 2007
    #15
  16. Shelly

    Bone Ur Guest

    Well bust mah britches and call me cheeky, on Thu, 22 Nov 2007 01:43:03
    GMT Shelly scribed:

    >> Maybe someone here knows more about it. I just chalk it up to the
    >> "brokenness" of ie.

    >
    > My experience is backend, so I am a php person. I know enough html
    > and css to get by, but that is not my area of expertise. So, until
    > now, I always used the most convenient browser which, in this case,
    > was IE7.
    >
    > On this most recent job I have had to do a lot more with htnl and css
    > (like this problem). I have had to make sure things work on FF and
    > IE6. The more I get into it, the better FF looks as far as quality
    > and more IE comparatively looks like a piece of crap. Even a litlle
    > thing like looking at page source. On FF it is indented nicely and
    > color coded. On IE it comes up in (ugh!) notepad. Then there is the
    > developer tools plugin for FF. It is great. You can easily see the
    > javascript and css files (and other stuff). (Fortunately, it
    > impossible for it to see the php or asp code.) The only drawback to
    > FF is that it takes longer for a first loading. I also didn't care
    > enough for Opera or Netscape to consider changing. By contrast, I am
    > about to set FF as my default browser.


    Firefox is my default browser, and I like it best. It does have some flaws
    - they all do - but for me, the "user experience" <grin> is the most
    pleasing of the lot. Furthermore, get this. I tried ie7 a bit after it
    came out. True, it supports "the standards" considerably better than does
    ie6, but I still switched right back to 6 because of the other stuff they
    "neglected" (-like the crappy toolbar, no ftp, and more minor but
    irritating imperfections.) Between the two, I will and do stick with ie6.
    Happily, Opera seems to be making key improvements with each update. It
    still has a few operational quirks, but I think eventually it will be a
    top-flight browser. On the down side, I doubt if any browser will _ever_
    be perfect so we'll just have to keep on making hacks for inter-operational
    accordance.

    --
    Bone Ur
    Cavemen have formidable pheromones.
     
    Bone Ur, Nov 22, 2007
    #16
  17. Bone Ur wrote:

    > Firefox is my default browser, and I like it best. It does have some flaws
    > - they all do - but for me, the "user experience" <grin> is the most
    > pleasing of the lot. Furthermore, get this. I tried ie7 a bit after it
    > came out. True, it supports "the standards" considerably better than does
    > ie6, but I still switched right back to 6 because of the other stuff they
    > "neglected" (-like the crappy toolbar,


    "crappy toolbar"? What do you mean, vs IE6? II personally don't like the
    FF default and the first thing I do is drag off the Google Search box to
    clear some space for the Webdeveloper's Bar toggle button and at the
    Enhanced History Manager and Enhanced Bookmark Search buttons. Not sure
    what IE6 has that was so handy.

    > no ftp, and more minor but
    > irritating imperfections.)


    No FTP? Of course because most folks won't need it and FF basic strategy
    is an "a-la-cart" browser and you are suppose to add what you wish via
    extensions:

    https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/search?q=FTP&status=4
    Search Add-ons :: Firefox Add-ons

    I think FireFTP the better extension, there is even an extension to add
    a toolbar button for it.

    > Between the two, I will and do stick with ie6.
    > Happily, Opera seems to be making key improvements with each update. It
    > still has a few operational quirks, but I think eventually it will be a
    > top-flight browser. On the down side, I doubt if any browser will _ever_
    > be perfect so we'll just have to keep on making hacks for inter-operational
    > accordance.
    >


    Funny, I never felt IE6 very customizable and I never like the idea that
    it intensionally blurred the lines between what is local to my system
    and what is not.

    SeaMonkey is my default because I like the suite concept, but I develop
    on Firefox.

    Opera, which I have 3 versions 7-9 for testing has minor but really
    annoying "features" that keep if from my default. The most irritating is
    the inability to drag a URL to another browser, nor receive one from
    another browser. Even as uncooperative as MS can be I can drag a URL
    from Firefox to IE from IE to SeaMonkey or to Netscape and back. While
    developing I will have several browsers open and Opera just refuses to
    play ball. Yes, I can select and copy the address and paste it into the
    address bar, or drag the URL to the desktop and then drag the shortcut
    to Opera, but not browser to browser. Dang it all other browser can do
    it, what's up with Opera?


    --
    Take care,

    Jonathan
    -------------------
    LITTLE WORKS STUDIO
    http://www.LittleWorksStudio.com
     
    Jonathan N. Little, Nov 22, 2007
    #17
  18. Shelly

    BootNic Guest

    "Jonathan N. Little" <> wrote:
    news:22de4$474591f9$40cba7b0$:

    > Bone Ur wrote:
    >
    >> Firefox is my default browser, and I like it best. It does have some
    >> flaws - they all do - but for me, the "user experience" <grin> is the
    >> most pleasing of the lot. Furthermore, get this. I tried ie7 a bit
    >> after it came out. True, it supports "the standards" considerably
    >> better than does ie6, but I still switched right back to 6 because of
    >> the other stuff they "neglected" (-like the crappy toolbar,

    >
    > "crappy toolbar"? What do you mean, vs IE6? II personally don't like
    > the FF default and the first thing I do is drag off the Google Search
    > box to clear some space for the Webdeveloper's Bar toggle button and
    > at the Enhanced History Manager and Enhanced Bookmark Search buttons.
    > Not sure what IE6 has that was so handy.
    >
    >> no ftp, and more minor but irritating imperfections.)

    >
    > No FTP? Of course because most folks won't need it and FF basic
    > strategy is an "a-la-cart" browser and you are suppose to add what you
    > wish via extensions:
    >
    > https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/search?q=FTP&status=4
    > Search Add-ons :: Firefox Add-ons
    >
    > I think FireFTP the better extension, there is even an extension to
    > add a toolbar button for it.
    >
    >> Between the two, I will and do stick with ie6.
    >> Happily, Opera seems to be making key improvements with each update.
    >> It still has a few operational quirks, but I think eventually it will
    >> be a top-flight browser. On the down side, I doubt if any browser
    >> will _ever_ be perfect so we'll just have to keep on making hacks for
    >> inter-operational accordance.
    >>

    >
    > Funny, I never felt IE6 very customizable and I never like the idea
    > that it intensionally blurred the lines between what is local to my
    > system and what is not.
    >
    > SeaMonkey is my default because I like the suite concept, but I
    > develop on Firefox.
    >
    > Opera, which I have 3 versions 7-9 for testing has minor but really
    > annoying "features" that keep if from my default. The most irritating
    > is the inability to drag a URL to another browser, nor receive one
    > from another browser. Even as uncooperative as MS can be I can drag a
    > URL from Firefox to IE from IE to SeaMonkey or to Netscape and back.
    > While developing I will have several browsers open and Opera just
    > refuses to play ball. Yes, I can select and copy the address and paste
    > it into the address bar, or drag the URL to the desktop and then drag
    > the shortcut to Opera, but not browser to browser. Dang it all other
    > browser can do it, what's up with Opera?


    My Opera has a few buttons for such things.

    One for each of the following: FireFox,IE 7,IE 6, Safari, SeaMonkey

    http://operawatch.com/news/2007/07...- internet-explorer-directly-from-opera.html

    --
    BootNic Thursday November 22, 2007 12:36 PM
    People grow through experience if they meet life honestly and
    courageously. This is how character is built.
    *Eleanor Roosevelt*
     
    BootNic, Nov 22, 2007
    #18
  19. Shelly

    Bone Ur Guest

    Well bust mah britches and call me cheeky, on Thu, 22 Nov 2007 14:28:09
    GMT Jonathan N. Little scribed:

    > Bone Ur wrote:
    >
    >> Firefox is my default browser, and I like it best. It does have some
    >> flaws - they all do - but for me, the "user experience" <grin> is the
    >> most pleasing of the lot. Furthermore, get this. I tried ie7 a bit
    >> after it came out. True, it supports "the standards" considerably
    >> better than does ie6, but I still switched right back to 6 because of
    >> the other stuff they "neglected" (-like the crappy toolbar,

    >
    > "crappy toolbar"? What do you mean, vs IE6? II personally don't like
    > the FF default and the first thing I do is drag off the Google Search
    > box to clear some space for the Webdeveloper's Bar toggle button and
    > at the Enhanced History Manager and Enhanced Bookmark Search buttons.
    > Not sure what IE6 has that was so handy.


    It's what it doesn't have. I trim my ie6 toolbar down to 1 line as I do
    in Firefox, but ie6 takes the prize as being the thinnest, thereby
    maximizing content space. You may be able to add crap in ie7, but
    removing it is a different matter. And, btw, what's with the
    "misplaced" refresh button? -Another "wonderful" MS innovation?

    >> no ftp, and more minor but
    >> irritating imperfections.)

    >
    > No FTP? Of course because most folks won't need it and FF basic
    > strategy is an "a-la-cart" browser and you are suppose to add what you
    > wish via extensions:
    >
    > https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/search?q=FTP&status=4
    > Search Add-ons :: Firefox Add-ons
    >
    > I think FireFTP the better extension, there is even an extension to
    > add a toolbar button for it.


    I was comparing ie6 to ie7, not either to Firefox. FF is my main
    browser, but I still use ie6 for various functions not limited to
    testing. The drag-and-drop folder-view ftp is great.

    >> Between the two, I will and do stick with ie6.
    >> Happily, Opera seems to be making key improvements with each update.
    >> It still has a few operational quirks, but I think eventually it will
    >> be a top-flight browser. On the down side, I doubt if any browser
    >> will _ever_ be perfect so we'll just have to keep on making hacks for
    >> inter-operational accordance.
    >>

    >
    > Funny, I never felt IE6 very customizable and I never like the idea
    > that it intensionally blurred the lines between what is local to my
    > system and what is not.
    >
    > SeaMonkey is my default because I like the suite concept, but I
    > develop on Firefox.
    >
    > Opera, which I have 3 versions 7-9 for testing has minor but really
    > annoying "features" that keep if from my default.


    Agreed. I use SeaMonkey, too, but wish Mozilla would update its
    "preferences" addressing to the "tools" menu item where it belongs.
    Also, I like Opera's "Quick Preferences" idea for on-the-fly changes (but
    it _does_ have some issues elsewhere.)

    > The most irritating
    > is the inability to drag a URL to another browser, nor receive one
    > from another browser. Even as uncooperative as MS can be I can drag a
    > URL from Firefox to IE from IE to SeaMonkey or to Netscape and back.
    > While developing I will have several browsers open and Opera just
    > refuses to play ball. Yes, I can select and copy the address and paste
    > it into the address bar, or drag the URL to the desktop and then drag
    > the shortcut to Opera, but not browser to browser. Dang it all other
    > browser can do it, what's up with Opera?


    Well, I actually never tried that. Ya sure you're not just being
    doraymeish in your expectations? True, if it can be done with other
    browsers, it probably should be available in Opera, but it's such a
    trifling little thing one would expect to be out of the realm of things
    which can make a grown man cry...

    --
    Bone Ur
    Cavemen have formidable pheromones.
     
    Bone Ur, Nov 22, 2007
    #19
  20. BootNic wrote:
    > "Jonathan N. Little" <> wrote:
    > news:22de4$474591f9$40cba7b0$:


    > My Opera has a few buttons for such things.
    >
    > One for each of the following: FireFox,IE 7,IE 6, Safari, SeaMonkey
    >
    > http://operawatch.com/news/2007/07...> internet-explorer-directly-from-opera.html
    >


    So I have to make a button for each browser that I would like Opera to
    open a link in? Somehow this is equivalent to being able to drag any
    link or address in the address bar to any available browser window
    (regardless of the branding)?

    --
    Take care,

    Jonathan
    -------------------
    LITTLE WORKS STUDIO
    http://www.LittleWorksStudio.com
     
    Jonathan N. Little, Nov 22, 2007
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. VB Programmer

    Question: flicker on refresh

    VB Programmer, Jul 21, 2003, in forum: ASP .Net
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    696
    VB Programmer
    Aug 6, 2003
  2. Steve C. Orr [MVP, MCSD]

    stop postback flicker

    Steve C. Orr [MVP, MCSD], Dec 15, 2003, in forum: ASP .Net
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    3,289
    Mary Simpson
    Dec 16, 2003
  3. Binny

    Flicker and datagrid

    Binny, Dec 16, 2003, in forum: ASP .Net
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    696
    Binny
    Dec 16, 2003
  4. ujjc001
    Replies:
    8
    Views:
    4,497
    Jason
    Jan 5, 2005
  5. simon
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    7,493
    dkode
    Mar 23, 2006
Loading...

Share This Page