Netscape Navigator RIP

Tolien said:
Contrary to what you suggest, Firefox also has a Quirks Mode, so they're clearly not trying to force anyone into a standards-only world...
Click to expand...

Where did I suggest that? :confused: I think you may have taken me a bit out of context :) I was replying to a particularly common remark that Microsoft's web pages "aren't standards compliant". It's always the same thing... somebody simply runs any given web page through a validator with it set to the strictest standards mode as though that is the only standard in the entire world worth using. And then says "look see, it's not standards compliant!" I'm not saying strict is bad, no way. It's just there is some level of conditioning (mostly through blogs I guess) going on making people think it is the answer to all their problems when in fact there is a good chance it can create even bigger problems for a site like Microsoft.com! But of course the people that blindly advocate it don't know that...
 
NathanE said:
Many Firefox lovers can't believe that there is an Internet out there that doesn't run on a "HTML 4.01 Strict"
Click to expand...

NathanE said:
But then, it probably doesn't help that the authors ... of these alternative browsers seem to condition their users into thinking this misinformed rubbish.
Click to expand...

From that I took that you were saying Mozilla themselves were in some way trying to force "standards or bust", which as I said patently isn't the case. If that's a misinterpretation, my bad, though the rest of my post stands as a general point.

If anything (as I said), I agree that getting a green bar from a validator isn't the be-all - a lot of the Mozilla staff's blogs don't validate, and I wouldn't try to link that with the browser authors - I wouldn't expect the IE team have much input into MS.com.
 
helmutcheese said:
http://mywebpages.comcast.net/SupportCD/FirefoxMyths.html
Click to expand...

If you looked for a piece of software that hasn't had utter garbage posted about it (just look at Vista), you'd be looking for a long time. That site ranks with the "Vista is a total flop because..." blogs.

What's telling is how few of the "myths" were actually published by MoFo and how old they are. Having to trawl blog comments for a "myth" is really scraping the barrel.
 
I agree with most of it and am free to.

I do not hate Firefox but tried it and went back to IE6 then IE7, and anyone on #Winbeta saying FF is better or faster gets laughed at. ;)

You do not like MS OS's dont use Windows or IE, then you can use a MAC or Linux and do next to nothing on them :)

P.S I dont trawl, I know that URL out of memory for times I have posted to let fanboys read it.
 
Last edited:
I didn't say you weren't free to agree with it :confused: and whether you liked it or not is hardly relevant.

Most of the "myths" are utter garbage - anyone can post anything on the internet, so calling something posted on a random blog (or better still, a comment on a blog post - it was that site I was talking about, not you) a "Firefox myth" then launching into a tirade about Fx fanboys is hardly reasonable - hence my comparison with some of the inaccurate crap that's posted about Vista.
 
I tested Vista since early Alpha through to offical Beta Testing, My "Final Report" to MS in layman terms was it was a Buggy, Missing of intended Features, Belated Thrown out the Door 2 years later OS.

Thats why on day or RTM they said the new OS to replace it will be 2009 and I never touched my FREE copy of Vista till nearly 1 year later.

Vista is usable now and the SP1 RC makes it far better (Beta does not) and RTM will be good, I have said since day 1 of RTM, it will take till SP2 to make it really good.
 
So? You're missing my point - a lot of sites publish inaccurate garbage about pieces of software, an example I gave for comparison being all the sites posting sensationalist rubbish about Vista.
The site you linked to is one of them.
 
Back it up its false then or keep quiet TBH. :)

The majority of the World use IE, like it or lump it m8.

Infact What am I even doing in the OS section, never come here, no interest too and know enough not to need to or get support from MS and #Winbeta, but I seen a post By Snowdog highlighted and he had an issue thats common to some users.
 
Coem on guys, who the hell actualyl really cares?

I mean, if you chose BROWSER A over BROWSER B and it displays the pages as its intended to, then why is it so important to anyone else what browser they use?

As long as its not AOL LOL
 
Picking one at random:
Internet Explorer 6 More Secure than Internet Explorer 6

Myth - "Firefox 1.x is more Secure than Internet Explorer 6" - Example

Reality - Internet Explorer 6 has been more secure than Firefox 1.x in 2006. - Source - Source 2

Firefox 1.x (2006) - 13 Advisories = 88 Vulnerabilities
Internet Explorer 6.x (2006) - 16 Advisories = 36 Vulnerabilities
Click to expand...

Ignoring that the "myth" is a regurgitation of a discussion from a lawyer who happens to be CEO (because of course, all CEOs at tech companies are experts) at Mozilla Corporation that's now nearly 3 years old:

Let's get this straight. Less discovered vulnerabilities, means that the product's more secure?

By that logic, IE6 was less secure than Fx 1.x in 2007 - 15 versus 6 advisories, with 4 (average criticality between "Not Critical" and "Less Critical", but nearer the former) unpatched versus 1 ("Not Critical").

The AOL browser's based on IE, so it's not really any worse than IE (neglecting the other crud that AOL bundle with their software).
 
The only non-IE7 users that bother me are the people who do it because it's "fashionable to hate Microsoft".
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom