Miscellaneous > Applications
Firefox myths
piratePenguin:
--- Quote from: Mastertech ---
Maybe you and all the Firefox promoters can do a better job of this instead of misleading people into thinking Firefox is some meca of W3C standards support.
--- End quote ---
Firefox has very good W3C standards support.
--- Quote ---This is not my job and has nothing to do with the Myth. Why would people think Firefox sucks if you tell them it does not fully support standards? Oh thats right because that is what the fanboys say about IE. Hum looks like the truth hurts more when you spread lies.
--- End quote ---
WTF? IE has shit standards compliance. How come it doesn't support XHTML, which was to revolutionize the web - and seven years later IE doesn't support it. IE has shit support for W3C standards.
--- Quote ---
Since no browser has full standards compliance it is not possible to say.
--- End quote ---
Bullshit. It is not exactly EASY to just support even 100% of HTML 4.01. But if one browser supports 90% of it and another browser supports 10% of it - couldn't it be possible that standards compliance would be a strong point of the former?
--- Quote ---
I never made this claim. Read carefully.
--- End quote ---
I never claimed you made that claim. Read carefully.
--- Quote ---
That is your opinion and there is no way to prove otherwise.
--- End quote ---
Do you think they are pretty big then?
--- Quote ---
I am well aware of this claim but we will have to wait until FF 3.0 to be sure. How "good" Firefox supports standards is NOT the Myth.
--- End quote ---
But it is a TRUTH that FF has very good support for W3C standards.
--- Quote ---
No one is disputing whether Firefox has decent support for W3C standards.
--- End quote ---
Really?:
--- Quote ---If standards compliance is Firefox's strong point why does it have incomplete support? Why does it not pass Acid2?
--- End quote ---
It has incomplete support because gecko isn't complete - it'd being developed all the time, getting better all the time.
--- Quote ---
David's page doesn't even cover any of the real Myths out there.
--- End quote ---
...example?
--- Quote ---The only reason people would overreact is if they were misled to begin with.
--- End quote ---
6 billion people aren't all genius at everything.
--- Quote ---I've noticed one of the most self-serving reasons that certain people (web developers) push Firefox is in their opinion to make their job easier. This is the most dishonest thing I can think of.
--- End quote ---
Web-developers develop the web. The W3C develop standards to make their life easier. The web-developer in this day and age is not supposed to be implementing hacks for each web-browser - and they don't that much, except for IE.
There are MANY reasons people don't want IE dominating the web. MS are fucking the web up, that's one. MS are already too powerful, that's another. IE only works on Windows natively, that's another. IE is non-free software, that's another.... IE is SHIT, that's another....
--- Quote ---
Web developers always go off topic like this. Honestly people don't care about something they do not use. Completely irrelevant to the page.
--- End quote ---
SO WHAT, I'm replying to your stupid fucking comments here (about standards compliance and such), not everything I say has to be related to the page.
--- Quote ---
Again off topic but end users don't care. Sorry to say this but I would code pages so all the major browsers could access the page. Otherwise you are shutting out 85% or our audience which is a bad idea.
--- End quote ---
OH shit - I never noticed.
The stuff on my site is nothing important. Most of it is JS/SVG stuff that won't work in IE anyhow. I have to get to work on a HTML 4.01 page to educate IE users soon...
--- Quote ---
Yeah right except the hundreds of thousands of visitors who appreciate it.
--- End quote ---
LOL!
--- Quote ---Yes of course Opera is not fully standards compliant. That changes nothing in regards to Firefox not being fully standards compliant either. What is this sort of Defense?
--- End quote ---
No it's not. My point is that there's Opera users (the Opera CEO!) going around saying Opera is fully standards compliance.
It's not only FF users who are misled using your logic :p (as opposed to just not being careful enuff, or just not being knowledgable enuff, or any other possible explanation...)
--- Quote ---Oh it is ok I robbed the bank because someone else did? Interesting logic or really a diversion? How come Firefox promoters must always redirect things instead of dealing with the truth?
--- End quote ---
:rolleyes:
Dark_Me:
--- Quote ---That is such nonsense. IE doesn't run Windows.
--- End quote ---
One would hope not no. Learn what a shell is.
--- Quote ---Why not stick to facts you can substantiate?
--- End quote ---
Pardon? What does that mean?
Mastertech:
--- Quote from: piratePenguin ---Firefox has very good W3C standards support.
--- End quote ---
In your opinion and I am sure many others. But this is irrelevant to the Myth. There are no Myths that Firefox does not have good/decent W3C standards support. This has nothing to do with the Myth. Anyone can check the source to see a general idea of it's standards support and even get a relative comparison to IE and Opera.
--- Quote from: piratePenguin ---WTF? IE has shit standards compliance. How come it doesn't support XHTML, which was to revolutionize the web - and seven years later IE doesn't support it. IE has shit support for W3C standards.
--- End quote ---
Does it? Apparently IE supports the most commonly used standards fairly well and the key ones that it does not IE7 fixes, mainly CSS issues and the hacks you talk about. Standards and CSS in IE
--- Quote from: piratePenguin ---Bullshit. It is not exactly EASY to just support even 100% of HTML 4.01. But if one browser supports 90% of it and another browser supports 10% of it - couldn't it be possible that standards compliance would be a strong point of the former?
--- End quote ---
Possibly if you were selling the Browser to Web Developers. Don't get me wrong I am well aware of Web Developers concerns. I however take the perspective of the average end user. They simply do not care and for good reason. What end users care about is web page compatibility, they really do not want to hear excuses why something breaks.
--- Quote from: piratePenguin ---I never claimed you made that claim. Read carefully.
--- End quote ---
No you just said I must be fooling myself ect... so I do not know who you were talking to.
--- Quote from: piratePenguin ---Do you think they are pretty big then?
--- End quote ---
I believe it is quite legitimate. Simply read the the about page:
"Founded in 1998, The Web Standards Project (WaSP) fights for standards that reduce the cost and complexity of development while increasing the accessibility and long-term viability of any site published on the Web. We work with browser companies, authoring tool makers, and our peers to deliver the true power of standards to this medium."
That is pretty much your concerns. Funny how if Firefox passed this test I believe you would have a very different view on this. See these are the things that concern me about people who pander Firefox. Firefox can do no wrong until something else does it better than whatever it is the other browser does better is not important. That to me is very suspect.
--- Quote from: piratePenguin ---But it is a TRUTH that FF has very good support for W3C standards.
--- End quote ---
Again this is your opinion, I am not disputing it. I really don't care because in the terms of the page I am simply addressing the Myths outlined.
--- Quote from: piratePenguin ---It has incomplete support because gecko isn't complete - it'd being developed all the time, getting better all the time.
--- End quote ---
Whatever, that is still an excuse. The point is clear it doesn't fully support W3C standards and that is what the Myth is about.
--- Quote from: piratePenguin ---...example?
--- End quote ---
ActiveX, OS Integration ect... It also provides no source or reproduceable documented proof for flat out misleading statements like:
"In regard to webpage rendering, Firefox is most often faster than Internet Explorer" - Really where is the proof? I provide proof for everything I debunk. Yet he is allowed to get away with BS like this on the whole page. But see that is what the Fanboys want to hear.
--- Quote from: piratePenguin ---6 billion people aren't all genius at everything.
--- End quote ---
Which is why I made the page.
--- Quote from: piratePenguin ---Web-developers develop the web. The W3C develop standards to make their life easier. The web-developer in this day and age is not supposed to be implementing hacks for each web-browser - and they don't that much, except for IE.
There are MANY reasons people don't want IE dominating the web. MS are fucking the web up, that's one. MS are already too powerful, that's another. IE only works on Windows natively, that's another. IE is non-free software, that's another.... IE is SHIT, that's another....
SO WHAT, I'm replying to your stupid fucking comments here (about standards compliance and such), not everything I say has to be related to the page.
--- End quote ---
I don't focus on emotional reasons here. I stick to the facts. I completely understand why you care, I simply do not.
--- Quote from: piratePenguin ---No it's not. My point is that there's Opera users (the Opera CEO!) going around saying Opera is fully standards compliance.
--- End quote ---
I really don't care. Opera is obviously not fully standards compliant. I make no claim on the page otherwise.
--- Quote from: piratePenguin ---It's not only FF users who are misled using your logic :p (as opposed to just not being careful enuff, or just not being knowledgable enuff, or any other possible explanation...)
--- End quote ---
Misled, that is exactly the opposite of what my page is about. With the information I provide they can now make a non-biased, non-fanboy influenced decision.
piratePenguin:
--- Quote ---That is pretty much your concerns. Funny how if Firefox passed this test I believe you would have a very different view on this. See these are the things that concern me about people who pander Firefox. Firefox can do no wrong until something else does it better than whatever it is the other browser does better is not important. That to me is very suspect.
--- End quote ---
Ah sure Firefox advocates are the spawn of the devil.
Fanboy.
pofnlice:
yes...I used to have to clean viruses with IE all the time. At least once a week. My wife isn't very discriminate about what sites she goes to and whether or not she will allow an active x control to download or cookies.
I have only had to do this once with firefox. I haven't used or tried opera in about 1 1/2 years.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version