Netscape for X?
- Thread starter VGZ
- Start date
Its truly not that hard to create multiple browser compliant javascript and html. And quite frankly, if it weren't for javascript and graphical websites, the web would be a far more boring place. The problem is that the majority of people out there don't take the time to work on compliancy, because they have a specific browser preference and that's all that matters to them.
Put in the time and effort and you can produce a workable design that offers the info without crashing your browser or overloading slow connections. That's what seperates a designer from a dabbler. If people wanted websites that were text only without mouseover effects and javascript functionality, then web designers wouldn't be needed, they'd have text files instead.
And finally, CSS, while wonderful in a lot of cases, has its own issues. Its wonderfully functional, but very global as well. The font tag is far more identifable when scanning through code. Personally, I use both for the double insurance it provides, keeping compatability with older browsers while utilizing the features offered by CSS.
It all comes down to 'The value you get is the work you put in.'
Put in the time and effort and you can produce a workable design that offers the info without crashing your browser or overloading slow connections. That's what seperates a designer from a dabbler. If people wanted websites that were text only without mouseover effects and javascript functionality, then web designers wouldn't be needed, they'd have text files instead.
And finally, CSS, while wonderful in a lot of cases, has its own issues. Its wonderfully functional, but very global as well. The font tag is far more identifable when scanning through code. Personally, I use both for the double insurance it provides, keeping compatability with older browsers while utilizing the features offered by CSS.
It all comes down to 'The value you get is the work you put in.'
strobe
Puny Member
No, it comes down to web sites which piss me off because they don't work when you turn off JavaScript!
BTW the web was a lot more enjoyable before the animated GIF was invented. There was less lag too, oh well. Guess we better make the web more 'interesting' so people spend more time surfing and less time finding.
BTW the web was a lot more enjoyable before the animated GIF was invented. There was less lag too, oh well. Guess we better make the web more 'interesting' so people spend more time surfing and less time finding.
Schizophonic
Registered
i am still running OS 9 ( OS X sould arrive on monday ), and i never, ever use IE5, it is just too slow, netscape on the other hand is fantastic. Much quicker than IE5 Standalone, and the integrated IE5 in AOHell (aol). The aqua netscape 6 thing is more than likely a kaleidoscope scheme, like the aqua one i am using now ( check out http://www.kaleidoscope.net and http://www.railheaddesign.com )i hav got total aqua on os 9. Oh and netscape 6 is total pants at the moment, it takes ages to load and is just generally slower that 4.76. Even worse that IE5 and that is saying something!
rharder
Do not read this sign.
hello world has it right: Netscape seems to be getting worse and worse.
<strong>I'm a web developer too</strong>, and Netscape is always the lowest common denominator. People used to claim that it just "more strictly follows HTML guidelines," but even my most perfectly formed code can't get Netscape to handle a table properly. Or CSS stylesheets for that matter.
And N6? Why would I ever want to use an application that doesn't even use the host OS's widgets for menus and such? Do they think they're Sierra or something?
-Rob
<strong>I'm a web developer too</strong>, and Netscape is always the lowest common denominator. People used to claim that it just "more strictly follows HTML guidelines," but even my most perfectly formed code can't get Netscape to handle a table properly. Or CSS stylesheets for that matter.
And N6? Why would I ever want to use an application that doesn't even use the host OS's widgets for menus and such? Do they think they're Sierra or something?
-Rob
marmoset
Official Volunteer
They are making progress towards getting Mozilla to build with
a native Mach-O back end. If they succeed in
this, it should be, in theory, practical to build a nice,
Cocoa-native/Aqua-goodness front-end and embed
Mozilla's nicely standards-compliant (the most conformant CSS
and all that happy crap) rendering engine in it.
See the netscape.public.mozilla.macosx newsgroup for
details.
a native Mach-O back end. If they succeed in
this, it should be, in theory, practical to build a nice,
Cocoa-native/Aqua-goodness front-end and embed
Mozilla's nicely standards-compliant (the most conformant CSS
and all that happy crap) rendering engine in it.
See the netscape.public.mozilla.macosx newsgroup for
details.
AdmiralAK
Simply Daemonic
I dont use N6 .. it sux....
apparently there is a netscape 4.77!!!
What the heck is the deal with this ????
Anyone know ? I am still usung N4.72 as my primary browser because it looks more "normal"
than IE when it comes to rendering pages. My Pages seem to work better plus it supports macgreek which is the only input method for my greek pages (which are 50% of my web work) but IE does not. The only way to do greek for IE would be to use winblows for the input (which I did, and then did some tricky conversion to get it to work sanelly on both macs & PCs ... but no I forgot the trick....AARRRGGGHHH I WANT UNICODE
)
ADMIRAL
apparently there is a netscape 4.77!!!
What the heck is the deal with this ????
Anyone know ? I am still usung N4.72 as my primary browser because it looks more "normal"
than IE when it comes to rendering pages. My Pages seem to work better plus it supports macgreek which is the only input method for my greek pages (which are 50% of my web work) but IE does not. The only way to do greek for IE would be to use winblows for the input (which I did, and then did some tricky conversion to get it to work sanelly on both macs & PCs ... but no I forgot the trick....AARRRGGGHHH I WANT UNICODE
)ADMIRAL