Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 32

Thread: NETSCAPE vs. IE

  1. #1

    NETSCAPE vs. IE

    Does netscape 7.0 accept PNG files??

    and just so we dont make this entire thread a waste, ask other questions about netscape an IE

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Circling above the vultur
    Posts
    123
    Google is your friend

    http://www.webcolors.freeserve.co.uk/png/

    Q: Who uses Netscape these days?...
    Logo DesignVector ConversionPrint
    eagleimagery.co.uk
    UK Business Labs Forum - The chemistry in B2B™

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    2,027
    Netscape uses the gecko engine - same as Mozilla, Firefox, Camino etc.

    Yes, it fully supports PNG files.

    IE is the only popular browser that doesn't support them properly.
    Gone.

  4. #4

    Re: NETSCAPE vs. IE

    Originally posted by wuzgood
    Does netscape 7.0 accept PNG files??
    Sure. All modern browsers do, so there'd be no problems in using PNG files for your website.

    As some other guy pointed out, Internet Explorer is probably the only modern browser with poor support for PNGs. Sure, you can use regular PNGs, but if you want to use PNGs with, say, transparency or semi-transparency, only better browsers such as Mozilla Firefox, Opera, Safari, and, as mentioned, Netscape can show those files properly.

    On the site mentioned in my signature there's an example of semi-transparent PNGs. In IE, the semi-transparency doesn't work - however, the PNGs look okay, there's just no semi-transparency effect. In better browsers (such as the ones mentioned above), the semi-transparency works: If you scroll down the page, the menu bar stays on top of the page, and the text of the page seems to "slide" in under the semi-transparent, blue menu background. By the way, the technique used to keep the menu bar visible while scrolling is the position: fixed CSS thing - which is another thing IE doesn't support...
    Jonas Koch Bentzen

  5. #5
    Originally posted by EagleImagery
    Q: Who uses Netscape these days?...
    Who uses Netscape? People who want a better browser than Internet Explorer, I presume. Netscape is far ahead of IE in terms of support for new standards. However, there are browsers that are even farther ahead: Mozilla, Mozilla Firefox, etc. And then there are people who (like me) use Linux - or Mac. We can't use IE, and we don't miss it, since the browsers available for Linux (Mozilla, Mozilla Firefox, Opera, Konqueror, etc.) are so much better than IE.
    Jonas Koch Bentzen

  6. #6
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    2,997
    Originally posted by jonaskb
    Who uses Netscape? People who want a better browser than Internet Explorer, I presume. Netscape is far ahead of IE in terms of support for new standards. However, there are browsers that are even farther ahead: Mozilla, Mozilla Firefox, etc. And then there are people who (like me) use Linux - or Mac. We can't use IE, and we don't miss it, since the browsers available for Linux (Mozilla, Mozilla Firefox, Opera, Konqueror, etc.) are so much better than IE.
    No the answer was written in terms of the fact that less and less people use Netscape as it is no longer developed.

    Mozilla is the engine behind Netscape which of course continues to develop, but we won't be seeing any newer versions of Netscape itself.

  7. #7
    Originally posted by Rich2k
    No the answer was written in terms of the fact that less and less people use Netscape as it is no longer developed.

    Mozilla is the engine behind Netscape which of course continues to develop, but we won't be seeing any newer versions of Netscape itself.
    It's true that AOL who owns Netscape at one point decided to discontinue the Netscape browser - but now it seems they've decided to release at least one more version: Netscape 7.2 will be out this summer.

    Personally, I don't see why anyone would use Netscape. Don't get me wrong - it's far better than IE - but Mozilla and Mozilla Firefox are even better - and they're free as well and contain no advertising.
    Jonas Koch Bentzen

  8. #8
    I would go with FireFox. Its fast, reliabe, and has a small memory footprint.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Detroit
    Posts
    186
    netscape sucks. its the slowest browser ever!!!!

    about standards... having a browser that supports standards means jack sh*t to me. 90 some percent of internet users use IE, so all websites are coded to work in IE. so who cares if a browser supports standards? its not like websites don't render correctly in IE, because webmasters make sure they do! so having a browser that supports standards doesn't add at all to your experience on any website.

    second, if you do care about standards, get firefox! its soooo much faster than netscape!

  10. #10
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Pflugerville, TX
    Posts
    11,231
    A) Netscape is slow as molasses, due to the junk they place in the original Moz. build.

    B) Netscape attempts to install AOL 15 different places on your PC, regardless of how many times you decline it. This is borderline adware behavior.

    C) While NS7 is MARGINALLY better than IE at supporting W3 specs, I still cannot forgive them for releasing NS4, the biggest piece of dung ever compiled.

    I absolutely refuse to use Netscape, and like most developers, IE is simply not an option (except for testing purposes). The original build, Moz., is perfectly fine. FireFox is not as fast as claimed, but it's pretty lean nonetheless. KMeleon is the speedster, and has very good W3 support. Opera is my browser of choice, always and forever. Opera had 15 million downloads last year, up from 12 million in 2002 (I read their annual report). This is a very encouraging sign!

    Paul H
    Studio1337___̴ı̴̴̡̡̡ ̡͌l̡̡̡ ̡͌l̡*̡̡ ̴̡ı̴̴̡ ̡̡͡|̲̲̲͡͡͡ ̲▫̲͡ ̲̲̲͡͡π̲̲͡͡ ̲̲͡▫̲̲͡͡ ̲|̡̡̡ ̡ ̴̡ı̴̡̡ ̡͌l̡̡̡̡.__Web Design

  11. #11
    I don't use Netscape but I have sympathy for it. I'll miss him

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Vancouver BC, eh?
    Posts
    571
    Netscape CSS support is horrible. I am personally glad it is dying (or hope it will). It is bloated, full of spyware and imo is not compliant.

    I always got the feeling that Netscape had a completely different group of developers with each version and never really had a focused direction.

    Mozilla (and Firefox) and Opera are the way to go with compliant browsers. Firefox is the fastest of these, at least on my machine. Once it is loaded it responds as fast as IE.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    2,997
    Originally posted by blackdog
    netscape sucks. its the slowest browser ever!!!!

    about standards... having a browser that supports standards means jack sh*t to me. 90 some percent of internet users use IE, so all websites are coded to work in IE. so who cares if a browser supports standards? its not like websites don't render correctly in IE, because webmasters make sure they do! so having a browser that supports standards doesn't add at all to your experience on any website.

    second, if you do care about standards, get firefox! its soooo much faster than netscape!
    I am on the fence about this

    From the point of view of a web designer, standards are excellent because it allows me (well it should allow me) to design a site but only have to test it on a single browser to know that it will work on all browsers, or work well on accessible browsing systems.

    On the other hand why does the W3C have the exclusive right to tell us what can and can't be done on the web? Personally I only think it's listened to because Tim Berners-Lee is at the top of it. Internet Explorer 4 when it came around was a revolution in browsing when you compare it to the likes of Netscape 4, it it was still the top of the game when 6 came out.

    Nowadays though the other browsers have finally caught up and in some cases surpassed. However for the moment it's too little too late. If Netscape had done this 4 years back they may still have a % of the market worth talking about.

    I saw a poster on Slashdot who said he designed his site entirely standards compliant but it didn;t render at all in IE... he said he didn';t care as all he cared about was the standards. I just hope he wasn't trying to run a business with that attitude!

  14. #14
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Pflugerville, TX
    Posts
    11,231
    The W3C does not have exclusive rights to anything. The documents they publish as "specs" are no more than recommendations. They simply happen to be the most thoroughly developed, widely accepted standards available.

    Also, I'm not sure I buy into the 90%+ statistic, since so many browsers spoof IE UA strings so that they will pass through sniffers, which 99% of the time are worthless and inappropriately implemented.

    And yes, Websites DO render incorrectly in IE, mostly because the same narrow-sighted developers who only test IE also fail to test the many usability features inherent in "the only browser that matters." Or worse, they will try to cripple browsers with silly techniques such as font fixing and !important.

    Paul H
    Studio1337___̴ı̴̴̡̡̡ ̡͌l̡̡̡ ̡͌l̡*̡̡ ̴̡ı̴̴̡ ̡̡͡|̲̲̲͡͡͡ ̲▫̲͡ ̲̲̲͡͡π̲̲͡͡ ̲̲͡▫̲̲͡͡ ̲|̡̡̡ ̡ ̴̡ı̴̡̡ ̡͌l̡̡̡̡.__Web Design

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Vancouver BC, eh?
    Posts
    571
    Well if the w3 doesn't set the standards who will? Microsoft? They at least try ... You say 2 things in your statement - standards are excellent and why does the w3 tell us what can be done on the web. w3 is a committee last time I checked. Any mature technology is going to have some standards set, otherwise you will just further the whole hacking scenario.

    I don't think of them telling us what can and can't be done, but more like if we have this feature, how should browsers render it? They aren't telling me what I can create and how. It's only defining what the tools will behave like. I personally am tired of trying to get CSS layouts working properly between browsers.
    I mean you make a div with some margin and padding. Firefox it's fine, IE adds the margin to the total size. Firefox keeps the width 100% and absorbs the margin. It's these types of things that make me wish IE would just buckle down and make a compliant browser. It's not stifling my creativity, it's making me spend more time finding hacks to get around these "bugs" imo.

    I agree what you say about that Slashdot article. There is a difference between being vigilant and stupid. Regardless, right now IE holds the majority of the market, and until that changes and you want to render sites you have to make some alterations.

  16. #16
    wow thanks to ALL of you for your replies

    very interesting topic i happend to have brought up

    well once again, thanks for everything and happy webdesign

  17. #17
    my personal website is not rendered well in IE, and i'm following the standards very strictly, and validated. so what's wrong with IE? it doesn't follow even the simplest rule...!!

    over 80% of the population use IE, that doesn't mean we shouldn't follow standards. besides, why should IE not follow the standards? IE assumes the badly written codes written by amateurs and that's not the right way.

    i've realise that i've come to the point that i will not bother 'bout IE users for my site, as long as my site works perfectly based on the standards, i'm happy. if my visitors aren't happy, they can either leave or change the browser...

    if we, website designers/developers, continue to cater for a badly coded browser, who would change for a better browser? i for one put Firefox straight up front on my website, they can choose to change for the better, or continue to suffer whenever they come to my website. i have no problems having less visitors. the main thing is, they need to realise that IE isn't a good working browser.

    proper coding helps everyone far greater than badly written webpages that renders well on ONE browser.

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Detroit
    Posts
    186
    Originally posted by ktwilight
    my personal website is not rendered well in IE, and i'm following the standards very strictly, and validated. so what's wrong with IE? it doesn't follow even the simplest rule...!!

    over 80% of the population use IE, that doesn't mean we shouldn't follow standards. besides, why should IE not follow the standards? IE assumes the badly written codes written by amateurs and that's not the right way.
    You don't have to write bad code for something to render correctly in IE.

    i've realise that i've come to the point that i will not bother 'bout IE users for my site, as long as my site works perfectly based on the standards, i'm happy. if my visitors aren't happy, they can either leave or change the browser...
    spoken like a true blogger

    i for one depend on my sites for money. if people can't view my sites in IE, I wont make money. web standards are all fine and dandy, but if they don't pay the bills, screw 'em.

    if we, website designers/developers, continue to cater for a badly coded browser, who would change for a better browser? i for one put Firefox straight up front on my website, they can choose to change for the better, or continue to suffer whenever they come to my website. i have no problems having less visitors. the main thing is, they need to realise that IE isn't a good working browser.
    first, taking on microsoft by putting a firefox button on your site is going to do nothing. second, it doesn't matter how much you bitch and moan, there will be NO NEW UPDATES FOR IE6. None. Zero. Zilch. And thats straight from the horse's mouth. The next version of IE which will come out with the new OS will be better.

    proper coding helps everyone far greater than badly written webpages that renders well on ONE browser.
    like i said before you don't have to write bad code for something to render correctly IE. you can write perfectly valid code that will work perfectly in IE, Nutscape, Firefox and Mozilla. You're being a drama queen and making it sound like IE is forcing you to write invalid code that won't render in any other browser.

  19. #19
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    357
    Netscape is bad. Mozilla Firefox is good. They both support PNG files though.

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Philippines
    Posts
    2
    what's wrong with IE ? , I depend on it

  21. #21
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    2,997
    Originally posted by 2slick
    what's wrong with IE ? , I depend on it
    Depends on what side of the fence you sit on. For is standards support, it's terrible. Sure most things work but they don't all work the way they were intended... or how any other browser on the planet interprets them.

    Yet we should also be thankful the browser has got as far as it has because of IE.... sure it would have happened eventually but without IE4 would Netscape really have open sourced the Mozilla code?

  22. #22
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Mountain View, CA
    Posts
    229
    It's all about firefox. The other alternative I use is SlimBrowser.
    DreamLogic Cult Film and Music Reviews
    STOPware - Visitor Management solutoins

  23. #23
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    The Netherlands
    Posts
    4
    IE doesn't abide all standards, true, but that's not necessarily a bad thing..

  24. #24
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Houston, TX - Originally from UK
    Posts
    707
    Quote Originally Posted by Peter W
    IE doesn't abide all standards, true, but that's not necessarily a bad thing
    How can it possibly be a good thing?
    Kinkamono Internet Services - The Internet. Done Right.
    Dive In...

  25. #25
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Vancouver BC, eh?
    Posts
    571
    Originally posted by Peter W
    IE doesn't abide all standards, true, but that's not necessarily a bad thing..
    Some things that IE does I think are nice, like colored scrollbars and setting cell height. I wish that was a standard. But what irks me about IE is the way it handles CSS positioning when the w3 decided on a good approach ages ago. IE still does not follow these rules, so you get all these CSS layout hacks. Having to code different sets of rules because they decided to do it "their own way" for an application that imo should be cross compatable.
    I use IE all the time, and Firefox. I like IE, it's fast on windows. But as a developer I wish they would grasp new technology a little better. Maybe IE 7 will be different?

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •