"Unlicensed" displayed across desktop!!

The HTML standard is not designed to look the same way in different entvironments (browsers/platforms).

It's basically a document-logic format, marking up "data" as different types. The entvironment then displays it as it like (m$-dos- and unix-shell-browsers actually exists).

This is very important for the "openness" of, and the democratic idea behind the web. Everyone should be able to view the content.

the <font>-tag was then introduced by w3c/m$ which was a huge mistake - they should have gone directly to css and there by keeping the transformation/styling separated from the data/document-logic.

I've been a webdesigner for a long long time and I do a lot of graphics-intensive and also browser-specific work - so don't get me wrong :)

The future looks great though - with xml and mpeg4 - and m$ is actually beginning to adobt the open standards more and more - it's just hard for them when they still have to support all the shit :mad: they've been doing in the past.
 
I've been using Mozilla for OSX for around 10 days, and find it to be great (Build 2001091313). It's slighlty faster than Netscape 6.1 and definately more stable (has only crashed once in the 10 days).

Omniweb is great, but it slow up on multiple browser pages running.

But, I think we are all destined to change our browsers around for the coming months -- the choice is very promising and extensive.:)
 
Since this is becoming a webdev debate, what's up with IE dropping plug-ins? It seems almost like they're trying to move forward with the w3c, but mostly it feels like their trying to screw over QuickTime by making their browser incompatible with 90% of plug in using pages in existence.

I will use third party browsers as often as I can. I don't want MS to have so much power that they can dictate standards like they currently do to a large degree. I wish the other browsers did css a bit better.
 
Ok, so maybe omniweb doesn't render some stuff correctly. But thats just a matter of time before they get it better. I mean, with mozilla's opensource, it should be only a matter of time.

But seriously, don't you all think the programming in OmniWeb is a lot better than those Carbon browsers? Its very multi-threaded (run top, you'll see). And it *feels* faster, especially on slower computers.
 
iCab feels more complete, has more options, looks more like I expect a browser to. It feels generally better from a user interface point of view.

OmniWeb feels kinda lightweight as a web browser, it doesn't let me put the controls where I want them, it doesn't give me preferences for some behavior that I'd like to control, but in general it does feel like a better application. Like the cedo and UI that are done are superb. It does some cool stuff that I didn't previously expect from a web browser, but it doesn't yet do the things I do expect from a web browser.

If iCab expects to keep up with Omni, they may need to revisit their code base. But in general, their product rocks. competition is good.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top