Re: Why VALIGN is not working in IE6, but is in dreamweaver

Discussion in 'HTML' started by Talc Ta Matt, Aug 16, 2003.

  1. Talc Ta Matt

    Talc Ta Matt Guest

    > recommend Mozilla (or another browser which respects
    >standards). ]


    This is like recommending changing screen resolution to view the site, only
    worse.

    And anyone who doesn't build for MSIE is just asking for up to 95% of their
    online income to fly out the window.
    Talc Ta Matt, Aug 16, 2003
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Talc Ta Matt

    JT Guest

    Talc Ta Matt wrote in answer to:

    >>> recommend Mozilla (or another browser which respects
    >>>standards). ]


    >This is like recommending changing screen resolution to view the site,
    >only worse.
    >And anyone who doesn't build for MSIE is just asking for up to 95%
    >of their online income to fly out the window.


    The browser stats for my 700 member club are:-
    all versions of MSIE = 99% - other versions 1%

    OS stats are 98% all Windows versions
    1% Mac - 1% other versions
    JT, Aug 16, 2003
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Talc Ta Matt

    Steven Guest

    JT wrote:
    > Talc Ta Matt wrote in answer to:
    >
    >>>> recommend Mozilla (or another browser which respects
    >>>> standards). ]

    >
    >> This is like recommending changing screen resolution to view the
    >> site, only worse.
    >> And anyone who doesn't build for MSIE is just asking for up to 95%
    >> of their online income to fly out the window.

    >
    > The browser stats for my 700 member club are:-
    > all versions of MSIE = 99% - other versions 1%
    >
    > OS stats are 98% all Windows versions
    > 1% Mac - 1% other versions


    That's rather high, but indeed, most stats give IE at least 90%. Just sites
    with a high-level technical/scientific content may get 20% and more for the
    alternatives.

    Would none of your club members convert to Mozilla (or Opera or ...) when
    given the Choice? Almost no-one actually has chosen to use IE. Free Choice
    is MS's major enemy, but as long as people are too daft to use their senses
    MS is safe.
    I can't understand that IT managers, who _have_ the choice, stay with IE
    when everybody knows that its security leaks are a permanent threat on the
    stability of the computer system. And most also use Outlook, which is even
    worse.

    My home page was built for Mozilla and has just 1 minor quirk in IE: 2 menu
    items where there's no vertical spacing between them. Standard HTML 4.01. No
    problem with Mozilla.
    You don't loose all of your customers on that. Maybe one, and is s/he worth
    the extra time and money you spent "fixing" it? I don't have the time to
    dance to MS's tune.

    BTW, as for the recommendation I clearly said "esp. for non-commercial
    sites".

    Steven
    Steven, Aug 16, 2003
    #3
  4. Talc Ta Matt

    JT Guest

    "Steven" wrote in message to JT.

    >> The browser stats for my 700 member club are:-
    >> all versions of MSIE = 99% - other versions 1%
    >>
    >> OS stats are 98% all Windows versions
    >> 1% Mac - 1% other versions

    >
    >That's rather high, but indeed, most stats give IE at least 90%. Just sites
    >with a high-level technical/scientific content may get 20% and more for the
    >alternatives.
    >
    >Would none of your club members convert to Mozilla (or Opera or ...) when
    >given the Choice?


    We are just your ordinary, average Joe Blogg and are perfectly happy with
    IE.

    >Almost no-one actually has chosen to use IE. Free Choice

    is MS's major enemy, but as long as people are too daft to use their senses
    MS is safe.

    I do have Mozilla, but as a non tech, boring, average retired chap who
    accepts to look at whatever the web site designer throws at me, be it
    Frames, Tables, non CSS, or can't get past the first few lines of
    Validation, so I still prefer IE which is so forgiving for the non tech,
    don't know much Joe Blogg web site design chap who looks after our member's
    web site. So I suppose that makes me and the rest of my club members daft.
    JT, Aug 16, 2003
    #4
  5. Talc Ta Matt

    Kris Guest

    In article <>,
    (Talc Ta Matt) wrote:

    > > recommend Mozilla (or another browser which respects
    > >standards). ]

    >
    > This is like recommending changing screen resolution to view the site, only
    > worse.
    >
    > And anyone who doesn't build for MSIE is just asking for up to 95% of their
    > online income to fly out the window.


    Windows user <> Paying customer

    --
    Kris
    erlands (nl)
    "We called him Tortoise because he taught us" said the Mock Turtle.
    Kris, Aug 16, 2003
    #5
  6. Talc Ta Matt

    Isofarro Guest

    Isofarro, Aug 18, 2003
    #6
  7. Talc Ta Matt

    Kris Guest

    In article <>,
    Michael Weber <> wrote:

    > Hi Kris,
    >
    > [Sun, 17 Aug 2003 01:00:53 +0200/Kris]
    > > In article <>,
    > > Michael Weber <> wrote:
    > >
    > > > > > And last: Many Mac-Users complain that NN7' slowdowns their whole
    > > > > > system.
    > > > >
    > > > > And that makes them... IE users? Didn't you know the end of IE/mac is
    > > > > across the horizon and ringing the door right now?
    > > >
    > > > I know. So a mac-user becomes an MS-like-User: One choice less.
    > > >

    > >
    > > Actually, the range of browsers has only increased. To name a few:
    > > Camino, Safari, Firebird, the OmniWeb browser.

    >
    > Since safari is part of OS X, there is no difference between IE &
    > Win anymore...use it or not.


    That is not true. It may be included with every new version of Mac OS X
    as the default browser, but that is not much of a difference then with
    the earlier situation in which IE/Mac was included, is it?

    Safari is not part of the OS. Rendering libraries are part of the OS,
    made public by Apple for developers to use in their own apps. The
    OmniWeb browser for instance, uses these libraries and is by this
    instantly up to standards again, compared to previous versions.

    >
    > Camino still is beta


    And in my experience more stable than a lot of finished products that
    are around.

    > and Firebird is a "technology preview" with no
    > guarantee of stability. Both based on the same mozilla-thing.


    Rendering engine has little to do with how a browser works for a user.
    It are things like performance, management of favorites, security
    features, stability and speed that make it attractive.

    > ICab
    > is good but cant CSS2 yet, and Omniweb is based on safari


    No. It uses the same rendering libraries. It is still a totally
    different browser.

    > and still
    > in Beta2. Sure, a really big choice.


    I don't see why not.

    --
    Kris
    erlands (nl)
    "We called him Tortoise because he taught us" said the Mock Turtle.
    Kris, Aug 19, 2003
    #7
  8. Talc Ta Matt

    Kris Guest

    In article <>,
    Michael Weber <> wrote:

    > > > Since safari is part of OS X, there is no difference between IE &
    > > > Win anymore...use it or not.

    > >
    > > What? In what way is Safari part of OS X? Yes, it only runs on OS X
    > > (currently), but it's not an OS component in the same way as IE for
    > > Windows.

    >
    > It's the default browser of OS X. Safari uses Rendevouz, just like
    > IE on PC uses some Win-Sys. I cant see a real difference.


    What does Rendezvous have to do with it? Sure it uses RV to detect other
    devices in a network who have their personal websharing up, but in no
    way is that essential. You can just connect to those pages manually,
    without RV.

    --
    Kris
    erlands (nl)
    "We called him Tortoise because he taught us" said the Mock Turtle.
    Kris, Aug 19, 2003
    #8
    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. laurie
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    6,383
    laurie
    Aug 15, 2003
  2. Jason
    Replies:
    25
    Views:
    8,484
    Toby Inkster
    Jan 9, 2005
  3. Replies:
    2
    Views:
    483
  4. Mr. SweatyFinger
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    1,769
    Smokey Grindel
    Dec 2, 2006
  5. Poddys
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    1,837
    Poddys
    Oct 25, 2006
Loading...

Share This Page