 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Sat, 31 Jul 1999 22:47:34 -0600, "Twyst" <twy### [at] twysted net> wrote:
>Here's a new question: What browsers are people running? I do try to keep my
>site text-friendly, but I need to know how high a level I should be using.
> should I restrict myself to IE 3.0 and netscape 2? (god, I hope not!) )
Hi, Twyst. I use Netscape Communicator v4.6 here. Please consider making
pages that look decent (doesn't have to be award-winning), are logically
arranged, and load fast on a typical modem connection. Thanks for listening.
--
Alan
--------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.povray.org - Home of the Persistence of Vision Ray Tracer
news.povray.org - where POV-Ray enthusiasts around the world can get
together to exchange ideas, information, and experiences with others
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
I'm currently using N3.0 under Win 3.1, but hope to have SuSE Linux 6.1
up soon on a plug in drive. At work I'm using N2.0, which locks up on
Java scripts. We have Red Hat 6.0 loaded on a $00 mhz K6, but are having
problems getting the modem to work.
Ken Matassa
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Twyst wrote in message <37a3d388@news.povray.org>...
>Well, as the overwhelming response is 'No Flash', I won't be using it.
>
>Here's a new question: What browsers are people running? I do try to
keep my
>site text-friendly, but I need to know how high a level I should be
using.
> should I restrict myself to IE 3.0 and netscape 2? (god, I hope
not!) )
CyberDog 2.0 (at home, Netscrape 4.5 if needs be)
IE 4 at work
>Personally, I'm going to shoot for html 4.0 compliant.
CyberDog isn't... it chokes on:
nested tables
javascript (simply ignores it)
some plug-ins
Have Fun
Martin
--
<Spa### [at] tesseractcomau> is a valid address
If you prefer mnemonic addresses you can use:
<Martin 'at' tesseract.com.au> or <Martin.Crisp 'at' Tourism.tas.gov.au>
My opinions should not be taken as indicative of Tourism Tasmania's
opinions
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> Javascript is OK (to handle things like mouseover and popup windows). But
> I agree not to use java with anything necessary. I almost always have
java
> disabled. Java VMs (in my experience) are too unstable. Why should I
> risk crashing Netscape or IE just so I can see some animated banner (which
> I have to wait forever to load over my slow phone connection anyway)?
I agree. I personally HATE java with a passion. In my opinion, it's a total
waste of time. After all, it's touted as 'write once, work everywhere', but
in my experience, it's 'write once, test everywhere'. If you're worried
about portability, try ANSI compliant C.
Javascript, imho, is ok, since often a browser will simply ignore it if it
doesn't understand it.
Twyst
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>
> >Personally, I'm going to shoot for html 4.0 compliant.
>
> CyberDog isn't... it chokes on:
> nested tables
> javascript (simply ignores it)
> some plug-ins
Well, since I do a LOT of my layout with nested tables, there's not much I
can do.
Plugins: well, I've already decided that I don't want to use any (flash was
an idea... but that's been vetoed.) I've never heard of this browser... Is
it anything like Opera?
Twyst
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
In article <37a5632b@news.povray.org> , "Twyst" <twy### [at] twystednet> wrote:
>> CyberDog isn't... it chokes on:
>> nested tables
>> javascript (simply ignores it)
>> some plug-ins
>
>
> Well, since I do a LOT of my layout with nested tables, there's not much I
> can do.
> Plugins: well, I've already decided that I don't want to use any (flash was
> an idea... but that's been vetoed.) I've never heard of this browser... Is
> it anything like Opera?
It is a browser developed by Apple years ago and officially discontinued for
at least two years. It won't run on future Macs anyway.
Thorsten
____________________________________________________
Thorsten Froehlich, Duisburg, Germany
e-mail: tho### [at] trfde
Visit POV-Ray on the web: http://mac.povray.org
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Thorsten Froehlich <tho### [at] trfde> wrote in message
news:37a59b4b@news.povray.org...
> In article <37a5632b@news.povray.org> , "Twyst" <twy### [at] twystednet> wrote:
>
> >> CyberDog isn't... it chokes on:
> >> nested tables
> >> javascript (simply ignores it)
> >> some plug-ins
> >
> >
> > Well, since I do a LOT of my layout with nested tables, there's not much
I
> > can do.
> > Plugins: well, I've already decided that I don't want to use any (flash
was
> > an idea... but that's been vetoed.) I've never heard of this browser...
Is
> > it anything like Opera?
>
> It is a browser developed by Apple years ago and officially discontinued
for
> at least two years. It won't run on future Macs anyway.
>
ah. ok. that means I don't have to worry about it. =D
Anyways.. I have a quick preview of the site look up at
http://24.108.7.134/work.htm
Give me some feedback on it, please.
>
> Thorsten
>
>
> ____________________________________________________
> Thorsten Froehlich, Duisburg, Germany
> e-mail: tho### [at] trfde
>
> Visit POV-Ray on the web: http://mac.povray.org
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Sat, 31 Jul 1999 22:47:34 -0600, Twyst wrote:
>Well, as the overwhelming response is 'No Flash', I won't be using it.
>
>Here's a new question: What browsers are people running?
Netscape 4.5, IE 4 or 5 depending on which machine I'm using, and
whatever version of Lynx came with OpenLinux 2.2. In short,
nothing 100% HTML 4.0 compatible. (But then again, what browser
is?)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Twyst wrote:
> Anyways.. I have a quick preview of the site look up at
> http://24.108.7.134/work.htm
>
> Give me some feedback on it, please.
It loads quickly on my modem connection, looks professional but not glitzy,
and the navigation bar looks efficient and not over done. I would say you
are definitely on the right track with your current implementation.
--
Ken Tyler
mailto://tylereng@pacbell.net
http://home.pacbell.net/tylereng/links.htm
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Twyst wrote:
>
> Anyways.. I have a quick preview of the site look up at
> http://24.108.7.134/work.htm
>
> Give me some feedback on it, please.
>
Loads quickly (even though I have a 14.4 connection right now). Looks neat and
tasteful. Structure seems clear, logical. I like it.
Margus
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
