I want WinCustomize to look good in Mozilla!

Friday, June 14, 2002 by devhen | Discussion: WinCustomize Talk

I know, its WINcustomize, but still, I would be so happy if thinkgs looked right in Mozilla. For example, right now I can't see what I'm typi9jng because the textarea is mysteriously narrow. Didn't look like this in IE! ... Mozilla forever!!!!
34 Reply 2 Referrals
First Previous Page 1 of 2 Next Last
craeonics
Reply #1 Friday, June 14, 2002 6:45 AM
It works a-okay in Mozilla over here in craeland though. Always has.

MikeB314
Reply #2 Friday, June 14, 2002 6:53 AM
Yeah, and maybe they could shrink it down to 320x240 for my PocketPC while they're at it. Haha.

Serioulsy though, it is up to the makers of the browser to conform to W3C standards. As a Web designer, you have to focus on the majority of your audience, which are using IE or Netscape. If someone else comes along and makes a browser, and 20 people out of 2 million start using it, you can't redesign your site for it. If everyone did that, we'd have the Web of 1995, with plain white (or grey) pages and blue links all lined up in a single column. You should complain to the developers of Mozilla that it does not meet W3C specifications.

FYI: W3C = World Wide Web Consortium http://www.w3.org/

Woodbridge
Reply #3 Friday, June 14, 2002 8:03 AM
I'm running Mozilla now and its underlining and bolding every bit of text I move my mouse over. Which makes the text bigger and shifts everything about. This is the only site that does this (that I've seen)

Using Mozilla 1.1 alpha



T-Man
Reply #4 Friday, June 14, 2002 9:30 AM
Running Mozilla 1.0 and all looks good here. Seems to me the problem is most likely mozilla. We are definitely not going to rewrite code for each version of mozilla that comes out.

Ruthven
Reply #5 Friday, June 14, 2002 10:44 AM
Um, Mozilla conforms closer to the W3C standards that IE does. Regardless, I find WC looks just fine in Mozilla and/or Netscape since the redesign. Used to have all sorts of problems BEFORE, but it's great now!

Ruthven
Reply #6 Friday, June 14, 2002 10:45 AM
errr.. that "that" in that first sentence in that post up there should be a "than." :-/

T-Man
Reply #7 Friday, June 14, 2002 11:28 AM
It is such a pain to make everything work in all the browsers. Between IE, Opera, Netscape and Mozilla and with each of their different versions each one has its own set of issues that you have to code around. And of course there are people still using each version. We still have people using Netscape 4.7. Our work is cut out for us!

However, I have to give Alexandrie the credit here. She handles the presentation of the site and had done a great job with it so far!

baren
Reply #8 Friday, June 14, 2002 11:49 AM
The issue with underlining and bolding the text on the page in Mozilla is explainable -- the site's style sheets specify that it should be. Apparently many browsers don't support hover markup on blocks, but Mozilla 1.1a does.

It's presence in the style sheets is probably a mistake, not corrected because in testing it didn't cause a visual glitch with IE. One way or another, though, it should be removed. It looks terrible.

Ruthven
Reply #9 Friday, June 14, 2002 12:02 PM
Well, that's the argument I've always had against IE. It tends to "correct" what are in actuality coding mistakes. Unfortunately, the program is so ubiquitous now that sites just have to program toward it for their primary outlet. And when sites are as complex and interactive as WC, it gets difficult to please all the people all the time.

But my hat's definately off to Alexandrie -- I truly find that with the redesign this is one of the most cross-browser compatible complex sites I visit! Far as problems with Mozilla 1.1, I wouldn't go changing the coding until that's actually released, and not just an Alpha version!

devhen
Reply #10 Friday, June 14, 2002 8:38 PM
mozilla is the browser that supports w3c here, not ie. and netscape uses mozilla's engine and therefore if you write a page to be compatible with ns it will as well be compatible with moz. and the moz engine does not require re-writing of web pages every time a new moz is released. because its based on standards . w3c standards. still, great site. sorry to complain

paxx
Reply #11 Friday, June 14, 2002 9:00 PM
devhen, just to prove you wrong, the problem you are talking about isn't there with the final release of Mozilla 1.0, which is the ONLY official release.
So, so far, there is nothing to be alarmed about. Nobody is ever going to support alpha versions.

devhen
Reply #12 Friday, June 14, 2002 9:26 PM
understood. i had a feeling that it was the 1.1alpha but I no longer have 1.0 so i couldn't make sure. so the css works in 1.0? entire paragraphs are not underlined/bolded when you hover over them? ...

jtfolden
Reply #13 Friday, June 14, 2002 10:10 PM
Works fine here in Chimera for OS X, which is based on the Mozilla 1.0 engine.

kith
Reply #14 Saturday, June 15, 2002 1:43 AM
I think we have the basis of a new poll:

What browser do you use to access this site?

1) Skinbrowser
2) Internet Explorer
3) Netscape
4) Mozilla
5) Opera

jark
Reply #15 Saturday, June 15, 2002 5:14 AM
do NOT use mozilla 1.1 alpha. it appears to have a b0rked rendering engine. i had to drop back to 1.0 due to many rendering issues with many sites in 1.1 alpha.

Woodbridge
Reply #16 Saturday, June 15, 2002 7:02 AM
This is the only site I've come accross that does the bold/underline thing. Back to Mozzy 1.0 it is then

Woodbridge
Reply #17 Saturday, June 15, 2002 7:07 AM
Thats better.

craeonics
Reply #18 Saturday, June 15, 2002 8:54 AM
Ah well, that's why it's an alpha. Stuff like that is called a "regression". It'll probably be fixed in the next release.

MikeB314
Reply #19 Saturday, June 15, 2002 9:11 AM
Bill Sawyer, that is a good idea for a poll. Even though this site's log files already give those answers to the admins, I'd be interested in knowing. I'm not sure if I'd include SkinBrowser as an option though, since it uses IE for several parts, and a lot of people probably switch between it and thier regular browser.

As for the W3C compliance thing, yeah yeah, I know. IE is famous for not exaclty complying, but it is mostly because MS tends to introduce new features that the W3C has not yet adopted (IE supported hover effects for text long before anyone else). I also agree that it can be a little too forgiving. I have designed many a site that looked great in IE, only to find out it was broken in every other browser.

My rule of thumb these days is to design for Netscape Navigator 4.7. If it works in that browser, it will work in just about every modern browser on any platform.

Powered by SkinBrowser!

T-Man
Reply #20 Saturday, June 15, 2002 11:08 AM
Here are some stats that we get through hitbox:

IE: 77.41%
Other: 17.78%
Netscape: 4.81%

Unfortunately they are not giving us real specifics. But compare those stats to a year ago:

IE: 95.71%
Other: 2.35%
Netscape: 1.94%

Looks like Microsoft is losing some ground in the browser war. At least here on WinCustomize. Looks like they started dropping around November of last year. Those are some significant changes!

Please login to comment and/or vote for this skin.

Welcome Guest! Please take the time to register with us.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:

  • Richer content, access to many features that are disabled for guests like commenting on the forums and downloading skins.
  • Access to a great community, with a massive database of many, many areas of interest.
  • Access to contests & subscription offers like exclusive emails.
  • It's simple, and FREE!
Login
First Previous Page 1 of 2 Next Last

Home | About | Privacy | Upload Guidelines | Terms of Service | Help
Copyright © Stardock Corporation. All Rights Reserved.


web-wc01