L.C. Posted September 1, 2008 Report Posted September 1, 2008 This navbar is terrible. What happened to the previous version? That one was so much better and more compatible! O_o Just look at http://network.sscentral.com/ -- THAT doesn't even look right! See http://www.subdir.net/ and http://www.subdir.org/ -- looks totally messed up. And this new version looks obnoxious, blurry, and crammed.
Audry Posted September 1, 2008 Report Posted September 1, 2008 Hi L.C. I dont think it looks THAT bad...
CRe Posted September 1, 2008 Report Posted September 1, 2008 It looks better on IE. PoliX just couldn't figure out how to fix it on FF.
FMBI Posted September 2, 2008 Report Posted September 2, 2008 Wait.. 90% of the people who visit this forum are tech-savvy FF users, and we're the ones getting the short end of the stick?
Hakaku Posted September 2, 2008 Report Posted September 2, 2008 FF isn't as tech savvy as they make it out to be. It's just a coverup for Netscape.
FMBI Posted September 2, 2008 Report Posted September 2, 2008 Uh, FF is massively customizable, has developers who give a !@#$%^&* (well, I suppose the $100 million in ad money might be a motivation?), and offers routine upgrades. Comparing that with Netscape is like comparing an F-16 with a Stone Age cart.
Hakaku Posted September 2, 2008 Report Posted September 2, 2008 Yes, but FF was spawned by Netscape if you follow up on the browser's history. Their aim and name may be different than Netscape's, but that shouldn't be a reason to dissociate it. If you're a web developper, you'll notice that IE handles things better than FF does in some regions, while the opposite is true as well; and it doesn't always mean that they're not following web standards. As for developpers, the only people who benefit the most are search giants like Google, who is suppose to launch its own open-source browser sometime soon. And when you have an open-source browser, you need routine updates or else you're an easy target for people who exploit flaws in its source.
»doc flabby Posted September 3, 2008 Report Posted September 3, 2008 The question is...how does it look in chrome ;P
Sharpflame Posted September 5, 2008 Report Posted September 5, 2008 The question is...how does it look in chrome ;P The current (less good) one looks the same in chrome Though I bet you were asking about the old one, donno
L.C. Posted September 6, 2008 Author Report Posted September 6, 2008 Uh, FF is massively customizable, has developers who give a !@#$%^&* (well, I suppose the $100 million in ad money might be a motivation?), and offers routine upgrades. Comparing that with Netscape is like comparing an F-16 with a Stone Age cart.It is based off of Gecko/Netscape. You can't change that fact. Regardless, this is a webdesigning issue that all webdesigners must face: cross-browser compatibility. The previous one was pretty compatible with both IE and FF, and would only bug up slightly on certain websites (like these IPB forums) -- but it wasn't and obnoxiously noticeable and bothersome as this new one is in my opinion.
CRe Posted September 6, 2008 Report Posted September 6, 2008 Uh, FF is massively customizable, has developers who give a !@#$%^&* (well, I suppose the $100 million in ad money might be a motivation?), and offers routine upgrades. Comparing that with Netscape is like comparing an F-16 with a Stone Age cart.It is based off of Gecko/Netscape. You can't change that fact. Regardless, this is a webdesigning issue that all webdesigners must face: cross-browser compatibility. The previous one was pretty compatible with both IE and FF, and would only bug up slightly on certain websites (like these IPB forums) -- but it wasn't and obnoxiously noticeable and bothersome as this new one is in my opinion. ^^ I agree.
PoLiX Posted September 13, 2008 Report Posted September 13, 2008 I'm just trying to get something fully functional and useable. I have someone realiable redesigning SSCentral, so won't have to wait 1.5yrs for some fonts/graphics we need done and not get them. Taking it back to the way I ran it as a functional site also. Not some static sit there and do nothing site. Mostly tailoring it like any other website for a program. News, About, Features, Downloads, Media, ~Mystery Link~, Forums. Pretty much we're redesigning all the sites around our community. SSDownloads is getting a face lift in the next few weeks. IPB 3.0 will give SSForum a needed facelift and new features. SSCentral redesign. And the re-introduction of an old site with a new face and functionality. SSForum's issues gave us a hiccup, but SSDownloads will be back on par shortly.
PoLiX Posted September 13, 2008 Report Posted September 13, 2008 Oh and on the trend of SSForum and browsers... Was 52-45 FF, but now 49-46 with IE taking lead in past few months, and trending upwards.
PoLiX Posted September 21, 2008 Report Posted September 21, 2008 All fixed... it seems: body { margin: 0px; padding 0px; };doesn't flow with FF/Chrome/etc... Removed all the ; (semi-colons) from the end of the css lines, and all works... I don't get it, but eh. Works on FF2/Chrome/IE. Seems FF3 has some weird issue with Optgroup and tabbing the options 1 space to the right, but I'll look into it.
Dav Posted September 21, 2008 Report Posted September 21, 2008 yeah IE seems a lot more tolerant the FF and chrome... Nice work polix as per.
Hakaku Posted September 21, 2008 Report Posted September 21, 2008 Well Chrome's code is heavily based off Firefox, so I'd expect it to work if FF does.
L.C. Posted September 22, 2008 Author Report Posted September 22, 2008 it seems: body { margin: 0px; padding 0px; };doesn't flow with FF/Chrome/etc...That's because you aren't supposed to have a trailing ;.
PoLiX Posted September 22, 2008 Report Posted September 22, 2008 Well, tell that to the web consortium's (sp?) web certifications I took back in HS. Took HTML, CSS, and XHTML, and always was required to do so. And until recently, have never had any issues.
Recommended Posts