Netscape 4.8 users must hate the web by now!

Discussion in 'HTML' started by Richard, Jan 3, 2005.

  1. Richard

    Richard Guest

    Richard, Jan 3, 2005
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Richard

    Al Jones Guest

    Al Jones, Jan 3, 2005
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Richard

    Lunchbox G4 Guest

    Richard wrote:
    > http://www.geocities.com/r_bullis/netscape48.jpg
    >
    > I installed NS4.8 just to see how it would hande my site.
    > The photo says it all.
    >
    >



    Haha. I'm surprised it ran on a modern computer, let alone viewed a
    website. Good one.

    //LBG4
     
    Lunchbox G4, Jan 3, 2005
    #3
  4. Richard

    Richard Guest

    Lunchbox G4 wrote:

    > Richard wrote:
    >> http://www.geocities.com/r_bullis/netscape48.jpg
    >>
    >> I installed NS4.8 just to see how it would hande my site.
    >> The photo says it all.
    >>
    >>



    > Haha. I'm surprised it ran on a modern computer, let alone viewed a
    > website. Good one.


    NS 4.0 and earlier were designed to run on windows 3.1. Hardly suitable for
    use in ME.
    I tried installing IE 1.0 and got instant error messages and could not open.
    It would appear then, that if one wants to surf in modern technology, one
    must have the appropriate modern tools.
     
    Richard, Jan 3, 2005
    #4
  5. Richard

    Duende Guest

    While sitting in a puddle Richard scribbled in the mud:

    > http://www.geocities.com/r_bullis/netscape48.jpg
    >
    > I installed NS4.8 just to see how it would hande my site.
    > The photo says it all.
    >
    >


    Looks the same in firefox

    --
    D?
    If it ain't broken fix it anyway.
     
    Duende, Jan 3, 2005
    #5
  6. Blinky the Shark, Jan 3, 2005
    #6
  7. Richard

    Duende Guest

    While sitting in a puddle Blinky the Shark scribbled in the mud:

    > Duende wrote:
    >
    >> While sitting in a puddle Richard scribbled in the mud:

    >
    >>> http://www.geocities.com/r_bullis/netscape48.jpg

    >
    >>> I installed NS4.8 just to see how it would hande my site.
    >>> The photo says it all.

    >
    >> Looks the same in firefox

    >
    > Here...
    >
    > FF 1.0: http://blinkynet.net/stuff/bull.jpg
    >

    Now why did you show him that. you're messing up my fun.:(


    --
    D?
    If it ain't broken fix it anyway.
     
    Duende, Jan 3, 2005
    #7
  8. Duende wrote:
    > While sitting in a puddle Blinky the Shark scribbled in the mud:


    >> Duende wrote:


    >>> While sitting in a puddle Richard scribbled in the mud:


    >>>> http://www.geocities.com/r_bullis/netscape48.jpg


    >>>> I installed NS4.8 just to see how it would hande my site.
    >>>> The photo says it all.


    >>> Looks the same in firefox


    >> Here...


    >> FF 1.0: http://blinkynet.net/stuff/bull.jpg


    > Now why did you show him that. you're messing up my fun.:(


    Didn't see the header X-Keyword: shhhh!

    --
    Blinky Linux Registered User 297263
     
    Blinky the Shark, Jan 3, 2005
    #8
  9. Richard

    jake Guest

    In message <>, Richard <Anonymous@127.001>
    writes
    >http://www.geocities.com/r_bullis/netscape48.jpg
    >
    >I installed NS4.8 just to see how it would hande my site.
    >The photo says it all.
    >
    >

    Why not simply hide your main CSS from old Netscapes, but also provide a
    stylesheet that old Netscapes *can* use to provide a basic -- but
    acceptable -- page?

    Providing the page is marked-up properly it should still be usable.

    regards.

    --
    Jake
     
    jake, Jan 3, 2005
    #9
  10. In article <>, Anonymous@127.001 says...
    > Lunchbox G4 wrote:
    >
    > > Richard wrote:
    > >> http://www.geocities.com/r_bullis/netscape48.jpg
    > >>
    > >> I installed NS4.8 just to see how it would hande my site.
    > >> The photo says it all.
    > >>
    > >>

    >
    >
    > > Haha. I'm surprised it ran on a modern computer, let alone viewed a
    > > website. Good one.

    >
    > NS 4.0 and earlier were designed to run on windows 3.1. Hardly suitable for
    > use in ME.


    NN4 had 16 and 32-bit versions, so one of them was perfectly suitable
    for ME. Even NN1 had a specific 32-bit version. ME, on the other hand,
    is the worst operating system ever released. MS pedalled it as an
    upgrade and some suckers fell for it.


    > I tried installing IE 1.0 and got instant error messages and could not open.
    > It would appear then, that if one wants to surf in modern technology, one
    > must have the appropriate modern tools.


    Well, duh. How long has it been known that you can run one version of
    IE at a time, and later versions are tightly integrated in to the OS?

    --
    Hywel http://kibo.org.uk/
    I do not eat quiche.
     
    Hywel Jenkins, Jan 3, 2005
    #10
  11. Richard

    Neal Guest

    On Mon, 3 Jan 2005 10:27:24 -0000, Hywel Jenkins
    <> wrote:

    > Well, duh. How long has it been known that you can run one version of
    > IE at a time, and later versions are tightly integrated in to the OS?


    I used to run IE 5.01, 5.5 and 6 concurrently. Nowadays I don't bother
    with IE 5.x.
     
    Neal, Jan 3, 2005
    #11
  12. In article <>,
    says...
    > On Mon, 3 Jan 2005 10:27:24 -0000, Hywel Jenkins
    > <> wrote:
    >
    > > Well, duh. How long has it been known that you can run one version of
    > > IE at a time, and later versions are tightly integrated in to the OS?

    >
    > I used to run IE 5.01, 5.5 and 6 concurrently. Nowadays I don't bother
    > with IE 5.x.


    Though you had to do some modifications to the OS to allow that, no?

    --
    Hywel http://kibo.org.uk/
    I do not eat quiche.
     
    Hywel Jenkins, Jan 3, 2005
    #12
  13. In article <>,
    says...
    > On Mon, 3 Jan 2005 10:27:24 -0000, Hywel Jenkins
    > <> wrote:
    >
    > > Well, duh. How long has it been known that you can run one version of
    > > IE at a time, and later versions are tightly integrated in to the OS?

    >
    > I used to run IE 5.01, 5.5 and 6 concurrently. Nowadays I don't bother
    > with IE 5.x.


    Come to think of it, aren't 5, 5.5 and 6 the same but with different
    icons?

    --
    Hywel http://kibo.org.uk/
    I do not eat quiche.
     
    Hywel Jenkins, Jan 3, 2005
    #13
  14. Richard

    Neal Guest

    On Mon, 3 Jan 2005 10:44:38 -0000, Hywel Jenkins
    <> wrote:

    > In article <>,
    > says...
    >> On Mon, 3 Jan 2005 10:27:24 -0000, Hywel Jenkins
    >> <> wrote:
    >>
    >> > Well, duh. How long has it been known that you can run one version of
    >> > IE at a time, and later versions are tightly integrated in to the OS?

    >>
    >> I used to run IE 5.01, 5.5 and 6 concurrently. Nowadays I don't bother
    >> with IE 5.x.

    >
    > Though you had to do some modifications to the OS to allow that, no?


    Nope. <ttp://labs.insert-title.com/labs/?ID=795>
     
    Neal, Jan 3, 2005
    #14
  15. In article <>,
    says...
    > On Mon, 3 Jan 2005 10:44:38 -0000, Hywel Jenkins
    > <> wrote:
    >
    > > In article <>,
    > > says...
    > >> On Mon, 3 Jan 2005 10:27:24 -0000, Hywel Jenkins
    > >> <> wrote:
    > >>
    > >> > Well, duh. How long has it been known that you can run one version of
    > >> > IE at a time, and later versions are tightly integrated in to the OS?
    > >>
    > >> I used to run IE 5.01, 5.5 and 6 concurrently. Nowadays I don't bother
    > >> with IE 5.x.

    > >
    > > Though you had to do some modifications to the OS to allow that, no?

    >
    > Nope. <ttp://labs.insert-title.com/labs/?ID=795>


    Ah, yes. I remember seeing that now.

    --
    Hywel http://kibo.org.uk/
    I do not eat quiche.
     
    Hywel Jenkins, Jan 3, 2005
    #15
  16. Richard

    Richard Guest

    Duende wrote:

    > While sitting in a puddle Richard scribbled in the mud:


    >> http://www.geocities.com/r_bullis/netscape48.jpg
    >>
    >> I installed NS4.8 just to see how it would hande my site.
    >> The photo says it all.
    >>
    >>


    > Looks the same in firefox


    yo, yo-yo, I use ff 1. I know how it looks.
     
    Richard, Jan 3, 2005
    #16
  17. Richard

    Richard Guest

    jake wrote:

    > In message <>, Richard <Anonymous@127.001>
    > writes
    >>http://www.geocities.com/r_bullis/netscape48.jpg
    >>
    >>I installed NS4.8 just to see how it would hande my site.
    >>The photo says it all.
    >>
    >>

    > Why not simply hide your main CSS from old Netscapes, but also provide a
    > stylesheet that old Netscapes *can* use to provide a basic -- but
    > acceptable -- page?


    > Providing the page is marked-up properly it should still be usable.


    > regards.


    Why? Because I am not going to bend over backwards to cater to 5% of users.
    When it's simpler for that 5% to simply upgrade to a more modern browser.
    If you can upgrade your operating system, why can't you upgrade your
    browser?
     
    Richard, Jan 3, 2005
    #17
  18. In article <>, Anonymous@127.001 says...
    > jake wrote:
    >
    > > In message <>, Richard <Anonymous@127.001>
    > > writes
    > >>http://www.geocities.com/r_bullis/netscape48.jpg
    > >>
    > >>I installed NS4.8 just to see how it would hande my site.
    > >>The photo says it all.
    > >>
    > >>

    > > Why not simply hide your main CSS from old Netscapes, but also provide a
    > > stylesheet that old Netscapes *can* use to provide a basic -- but
    > > acceptable -- page?

    >
    > > Providing the page is marked-up properly it should still be usable.

    >
    > > regards.

    >
    > Why? Because I am not going to bend over backwards to cater to 5% of users.
    > When it's simpler for that 5% to simply upgrade to a more modern browser.


    How did you figure that out, RtS? How "easy" is it for an organisation
    with 3,000 desktops running NN4.7 to upgrade?

    > If you can upgrade your operating system, why can't you upgrade your
    > browser?


    How do you know that the user has upgraded their operating system. You
    haven't, have you?

    Supposing there are 500,000,000 Internet users, that gives 25,000,000 NN
    users. If each of them requires an average of 15 minutes to upgrade it
    will take 12-man years for them to do it. How is that easier than you
    spending a few minutes ... Actually, I see your point. It will be
    easier, and quicker, for them to upgrade rather than wait for you to get
    your code right.

    --
    Hywel http://kibo.org.uk/
    I do not eat quiche.
     
    Hywel Jenkins, Jan 3, 2005
    #18
  19. Hywel Jenkins wrote:

    > Supposing there are 500,000,000 Internet users, that gives 25,000,000 NN
    > users.


    Your manipulation of numbers would put the most bias pollster to shame.

    --
    -=tn=-
     
    Travis Newbury, Jan 3, 2005
    #19
  20. Richard

    Toby Inkster Guest

    Hywel Jenkins wrote:

    > Come to think of it, aren't 5, 5.5 and 6 the same but with different
    > icons?


    Not quite. There are major differences in the rendering engines between
    them all. e.g. IE 5.x has a broken CSS box model; IE 6 uses the broken
    model in quirks mode, but an improved box model in standards mode.

    --
    Toby A Inkster BSc (Hons) ARCS
    Contact Me ~ http://tobyinkster.co.uk/contact
     
    Toby Inkster, Jan 3, 2005
    #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. NeoGeoSNK
    Replies:
    25
    Views:
    973
    NeoGeoSNK
    Nov 24, 2006
  2. Steven T. Hatton

    Now here is something I hate!

    Steven T. Hatton, Nov 12, 2006, in forum: C++
    Replies:
    10
    Views:
    617
    Noah Roberts
    Nov 14, 2006
  3. Replies:
    0
    Views:
    376
  4. Brian Binnerup

    Do MSFT programmers hate Mozilla Firefox users? (Border problem).

    Brian Binnerup, Nov 11, 2004, in forum: ASP .Net Datagrid Control
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    366
    Brian Binnerup
    Nov 12, 2004
  5. Replies:
    0
    Views:
    98
Loading...

Share This Page