FYI

Click for info

 

Just downloaded an updated version... 1.0.4. I guess this one fixed the flaw?

 

The more I use Firefox the more problems I have with it. I figured since I've had it installed for so long it was getting screwy. But even on a fresh format its still a little crappy. Video's dont play correctly, half of the webpages I goto dont work right since they are made for IE. etc etc...then they start finding tons of security problems....I cant decide which I like least, IE or Firefox....

 

I have zero problems with firefox there are so many plugins to make vids play with it even gamespot works fine with it

 

Go ahead and make the CynicX browser. Or is there another alternative you prefer?

 

? I don't get this one. What problems? The only problem I've had was when I first started using it the situational awareness of the screen and the tool menus took some getting used to but that common with any new software. If your having problems playing videos then it's a setting issue not the software. I did have to manually set which formats are played with which player. The only site I have to use IE on is the FAPSA site for federal student aid other than that you need to go to the firefox site and get more of the plug'in. I personlly like doing this manually becuase I want to know what goes in and comes out of my system but thats just me.

 

Sorry if my opinion bothers some of you so much.

I've had troubles with videos on this site like this video

http://www.big-boys.com/articles/jeepflips2.html

and someone posted a link

http://www.lego.com/starwars/moviepo...ler1&size=QTlo

is it something I have set wrong? Other sites play .avi and .mpgs fine so I assumed it was Firefox.

I know sites like trdparts4u.com dont work right since they told me it wouldnt..I will also stumbleupon other sites that give me an error saying I cant access since I'm running Mozilla/Firefox Please visit with IE blah blah....

Since I've formated and installed on a fresh install...what settings do I have to set that would effect movies on some webpage but not all webpages?

 

I usually right click on the video or pdf links and use "Save Link As" to put the video or pdf file on my desktop (or wherever). That works a lot better for me than directly opening the file in the Firefox browser.

 

your opinion doesnt bother me I just dont unerstand why its not working for you. thoes links you posted worked for me that yota rolled hard trdparts4u.com works great too that lego vid is quicktime do you have that? what version of firefox are you running?

 

The opinion didn't really bother me it just weird that it doesn't work I haven't had these problems

first go to firefox site and get the latest version

go to :

tools
options
downloads

under file types make sure the file type is set to the right aplication

.mov to quicktime
.wma, .avi to media player
.pdf to acrobat reader and so on

the movies links you gave work without a glitch

sometimes it does work best to right click and save link as then open it from the downloads window but this rare to have to do with a .mov using quicktime. gee mac got something right. anyway make sure have quicktime as well

again under that same download set-up menu hit the plug-in button and you can see which one you have

 

oh great...its gonna be one of "those" programs. I uninstalled it and then I went an deleted the firefox directory...I thought I got everything...apparently I didnt. I reinstalled Firefox and all my old settings were saved. Where would I go to completely removed Firefox?

Once I delete all the cookies it works alot better. I dunno what happened but I guess stuff got a little screwy from not deleteing all my cookies for so long (6 months). I really didnt want to and never had to with IE but I guess its time to change all my passwords anyway...

oh and trdparts4u.com still doesnt work..there is no way it can, my web designer buddy said you can navigate to the product but with firefox you wont be able to click on the product itself and bring up all its additional information such as weight and breif discription. trdparts4u verified that with me and told me to use IE until they redesigned it.

 

Yeah, most sites are designed using some mainstream page designer such as Dreamweaver, Frontpage, or Publisher. The latter of the three tends to have functions that'll only work in IE. Is this really fair on Microsoft's part? Shouldn't they work equally well on all browsers?

They know their product is inferior, so they make it to where people HAVE to use it.

 

Microsoft has no control over how people code their web pages. Your beef should be with people who code to work with the non-W3 compliant things that IE does. If everyone coded to the same standard, theoretically everything could work the same in every browser.

 

[OFFICE_SPACE]Yeah... I'm gonna have to go ahead and kinda disagree with you there, Rob[/OFFICE_SPACE]

I know you work for Microsoft and all, but I was pretty sure that there are some functions that FrontPage and Publusher use that will only work in IE. Kinda like the Powertoy Slideshow that's downloadable from MS's website. It only works in IE. I'm not saying there aren't ways around that or other alternatives... just that there are those little quirks about the programs.

 

...and there are features of other WYSIWYG editors like Dreamweaver that work with other browsers but not IE...

I am not sure what you are disagreeing with.

My point is that were authoring tools to comply with standards, were browsers to comply with standards and were authors to comply with those same standards we wouldn't have these problems. As long as any browser deviates from the standards, tools and authors will code to those deviations. It doesn't matter what browser it is. None of MS's tools own the market for writing sloppy code.

BTW, I see your page doesn't pass a W3C validation... what tool(s) did you use and what browser is it coded for?

 

Just over what my beef should be. You know full well Microsoft codes their software to be most compatible with only their software. How else could they be #1?

Then why do certain functions created through FrontPage or Publisher only work with IE?

So because of this and ways that some websites are coded, I'm forced to jump out from behind my stealthy cloak, FireFox, take a security risk, and revert back to IE to finish what I was doing on that site.

I used DreamWeaver. My site couldn't get any simpler than it is, so I don't quite understand how it didn't pass W3C validation.

 

Nonsense. Please cite some proof of that that isn't a link to some foaming-at-the-mouth open source zealot. Quite the contrary actually, MSFT spends phenominal amounts of money to make their stuff as compatible as it can. The more stuff it is compatible with, them more they sell. Simple business.

There are things like some flavors of DHTML and some sloppy code that is only supported by IE, of that there is no doubt. But at the same time, other authoring tools do things that are specifically not supported by IE or for that matter the W3C standard. They all do it. That's why it's best to actually learn to code instead of having a tool babysit you.

That is 100% the fault of the author of the site. MSFT probably didn't write the page you are referring to, thus it has no control over what kind of sloppy code someone chose to use. It sounds like you are claiming that MSFT is somehow responsible for how web pages are authored. Obviously, that is not the case.

Run the validation tools yourself They bark at your CSS, your lack of alt tags and a few other items.

 

right on someone had the balls to say it. So true. HTML XML and the 20+ other codes are open source. Meaning any tomdick and harry can use it freely. The only reason it wouldn't work with all browsers is sloppy code imcompitant coders

 

I will agree with you that the best way to code is straight from notepad. That way you can fully blame the author. But in reality, how many people are actually going to do that? So while web authoring tools allow designers to create pages that will only work with certain browsers, and some authoring tools are aimed at only being IE compliant. So that sucks.

As far as my site goes... no alt tags?? Gimme a break. I don't generate enough traffic to go back and re-code the whole thing to make it to where an alternate message will pop up in case a image doesn't load. But I do understand that it is a part of having a valid website. There's also a counter that I got the code for from another free site, since I don't know how to code one myself... but it works.

 

I think we are "violently agreeing". Were the authoring tools and browsers to all comply with existing standards, we wouldn't have compatibility problems. But using a tool that may or may not create sloppy code is a choice the author makes. Unfortunately that choice is one that may preclude the site from displaying properly in browsers other than the one the author/tool coded to, that is not the fault of MSFT or anyone else beyond the author.

I am not saying you need to care about alt tags. As the author of the page, that is a choice you make. But, alt tags are used for more than just the case when an image doesn't load. Alt tags are an essential part of making your page accessible to the vision impaired. They are what "screen reader" software uses to describe your page. They are also part of having a low bandwidth story for your site. While not having alt tags has consequences, that is your choice as a page author. It's not the fault of MSFT or the creators of any tool you used.