Firefox VS IE (but we all know firefox owns)

[LEGO]

I have a rant about the issues with IE. Does anybody here know XHTML and CSS? IE is fucktardingly stupid.

http://flatface.net/~chrissi/?page=explain

IE made my site a living hell to code. NOTHING was working - and I still can't get it to work right.

I would presume, right now, that XHTML websites using CSS layout with a menubar at the right side and which use the maximum width of the browser window, are using very ugly hacks to make it work with IE. EVERYTHING I try works in firefox. NOTHING I try works in IE. As such, my website is currently broken in IE. I like my layout and I will not ruin it because of Microsoft.

If you use IE as your primary browser you are holding back the web, you fuckwads. Go educate yourselves about web standards, proprietary CSS codes that force people to think that other browsers are "broken" when the effects do not work in them, security exploits, and the lack of alpha-level opacity support in PNGs. This is what IE is doing to the web. STOP IT, USE FIREFOX AND MAKE MY LIFE EASIER DAMMIT.

I know CSS, and I like it. I was using it back when I had IE, and no problems. You're weird.

PS: It's XML.

[Moogy]

No, it's XHTML. Look it up.

I dabble in web design, I know what she's talking about.

[Squeek]

I think we should have a different poll to determine those who need to be kicked off the interweb. It should look like this:

"Do you use torrents to download stuff?"

A: Yes. I have a program that is not known as "BitTorrent" to do so as well.
B: Yes. Though, I am an idiot and use the program "BitTorrent".
C: No. I know what torrents are and feel so inclined to deny their existance. Love me.
D: Wats a bitorent?lol

[Chrissi]

It's XHTML, and if you just "used it" for awhile, you wont' find any problems. If you try, however, to create a web layout entirely from ONLY CSS AND XHTML, you will stumble over IE's stupidity. A lot.

[LEGO]

Why would you want to do that? Create an entire website just using that crap?????

OH yeah, there's www.xml.org, which is what I was talking about. Perhaps they're two different things.

[Chrissi]

They're pretty much the same.

And it's not crap. It's superior to HTML for many reasons, and I'm not going to explain all of them to you... though you do need a bit of help, so I'll give you some.

FRAMES, TABLES, AND ALL THAT OTHER SHIT ARE BLOATED and they make the browser work harder than it has to. XHTML also separates content from design, a big virtue for the web that makes it infinitely easier to update pages, much like PHP has done.

[lightdarkness]

Yea, what prompted me to make this thread, is my new site layout looks like CRAP in IE, yet awesome in Firefox.

Get firefox.

[Moogy]

PHP + CSS = drool

[Chrissi]

Yes, drool indeed... my website is PHP, CSS, and XHTML powered. Whee! It also looks like utter shit in IE, so don't give me "But it looks dumb!" Go see it in Firefox.

[Chrissi]

I did manage to create a css/xhtml based layout for someone just now, but it's not as pretty as mine. http://rwoar.com/ is the site. It works perfectly in both IE and Firefox but it's not as fancy.

[Squeek]

Wow. I saw your site in firefox. It's so much cooler having that table move up a few hundred pixels.

Why not just use absolute positioning in CSS? It's really simple.

OH. BY THE WAY. I tried out your Mozilla Firefox Internet Web Browser. After customizing and a few daily tasks I'd do on Opera, I promptly deleted it. There are several things that went wrong with the program. A download manager to block my view instead of a new tab. I choose to download and want to customize it to automatically download to desktop, but the options are all disabled. Gotta love that. Customizing the installation also failed due to the inability to select things I wanted.

But all for your site that I never visit to have a table slide up a few hundred pixels.

This doesn't happen with anything else I've used in my entire life. My computer is also one of the best out there presently, so don't blame it on that.

OPERA WILL ALWAYS OWN.

~Squeek

[Chrissi]

Absolute positioning is bad. Relative positioning wins. I have tried absolute positioning but it doesn't work the way I want it to for this case, because of the menu being at the right-hand side. I want my layout to always flow with the browser. Not remain static.

It's not just that. IE's box model prevented me from using borders of any kind - I had to create divs that were 1px larger than what they were containing and use spacers to get any sort of border effect and remain pixel accurate. IE made me rewrite code a few hundred times. IE made me combat the peekaboo bug. IE sucks.

And Opera sucks in some ways, but wins in other ways. Gotta love Opera.

[RobbyZero]

If you don't you use firefox you suck.

Oh gee I suck...

[Squeek]

Well, that is the sole reason I've decided not to be in web design. My cousin was in it and told me he had to code stuff so that it worked in Navigator, IE, Opera, AND Mozilla to get full credit. And code it in perl.

And our teacher for Web Page Development last year (CRAP CLASS OMGZ) constantly yelled at my friend and I for using Notepad to code our documents instead of DreamWeaver.

I just want LD to include Opera in his poll . Like you said, in some ways it loses, in some ways it wins, but we all agree that both of them own the crap outta IE.

~Squeek

[Moogy]

Dreamweaver is better to use, because it allows easy-previewing and crap. As long as you actually know how to code and don't rely on it for everything, Dreamweaver is a VERY useful tool.