Author Topic: I'm moving back to Opera! (Read 23348 times)

Aloone_Jonez · « **Reply #15 on:** 7 January 2010, 12:39 »

Fortunately most sites I visit work with both browsers, albeit with the odd rendering error. I haven't had a problem with either of them yet.

Here's an example of a rendering error I get with Opera but not Firefox.

http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/weather/uk/ee/bedford_forecast_weather.html

I have a feeling it's due to a conflict between Opera and Windows system font being set to large. I don't think I'd get this error if I set the font size to normal. I'm not going to try now because it would involve rebooting; got to love Windows. :

Aloone_Jonez · « **Reply #16 on:** 7 January 2010, 16:42 »

It was the Windows font setting that was causing the problem. It's still Opera's fault because the developers should have tested it with the large font setting. All of the other browsers don't seem to have this problem.

This just goes to show that there are many variables that can influence how well a browsers renders pages.

worker201 · « **Reply #17 on:** 7 January 2010, 23:36 »

Quote from: Aloone_Jonez on 7 January 2010, 02:55

Quote
This site baffles me. I've pored over their code, including all their linked JavaScripts, and can't find the section of code that does the browser check. In fact, if you look at the file javascripts/actions.js, you'll see that there is code that checks if the browser is IE5 or Navigator 4, and then programs the appropriate JavaScript calls. There's actually client-side code in there designed to facilitate old and/or non-IE browsers! But they must do some sort of server-side browser check somewhere.
My guess is it doesn't do a browser check, if a script fails to execute it presumes you're not using IE.

If it did a browser check, it would fail on Opera with the US set to Opera.

If a script failed to execute, an error or warning would be generated, yes? I've been keeping the Firefox error console open while loading these pages, so I would have seen a JavaScript fail. Also, as I said, I have looked over the code - there is no client side JavaScript that tests for browser or loads the browser check failed page that you get in Firefox. So ergo it must be happening on the server side.

Also, Opera, as an also-ran, can fall through if it isn't tested for. Consider the following sample code:

Code: [Select]

if browser = Firefox
then fail
else browser = IE

Obviously, this sample is an exaggeration, but I think you see how less popular browsers can fall through the cracks.

davidnix71 · « **Reply #18 on:** 8 January 2010, 01:12 »

I went there on an Intel Mac running Firefox 3.5.6 with NoScript running. I got a small window box upper right that said I needed to enable JS to get all the features. I also have to allow OpenX.org scripts to run. They didn't seem to care about cookies if you were just looking.

davidnix71 · « **Reply #19 on:** 8 January 2010, 01:45 »

Code: [Select]

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/loose.dtd">
<!--[if IE]>
      <style type="text/css">
       #expander, #wrapper1, #wrapper2, .outer a, .container-left, .container-right, .outer, h2 {zoom: 1;}
      /* The above rule gives hasLayout to some page elements so that IE will not be buggy, oy... */
       </style>
    <![endif]-->
<link title="default" rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" href="/climatechange/lib/css/cc.css">
  	document.cookie="fxlocation=bedford"
<ul id="hnav">
  <li class="top"><a class="mtab" id="mg1" title="" href="/weather/"><strong>Weather</strong>
    <!--[if gte IE 7]><!--></a><!--<![endif]-->
    <!--[if lte IE 6]><table><tr><td><![endif]-->
    <ul class="sub">
      <li><a class="mtab" title="" href="/weather/uk/"><strong>UK</strong></a></li>
    <!--[if gte IE 7]><!--></a><!--<![endif]-->
    <!--[if lte IE 6]><table><tr><td><![endif]-->
    <ul class="sub">
      <li><a class="mtab" title="" href="/climatechange/news/"><strong>News and events</strong></a></li>

    <!--[if lte IE 6]></td></tr></table></a><![endif]-->
    <!--[if gte IE 7]><!--></a><!--<![endif]-->
    <!--[if lte IE 6]><table><tr><td><![endif]-->
    
    <!--[if gte IE 7]><!--></a><!--<![endif]-->
    <!--[if lte IE 6]><table><tr><td><![endif]-->
  
    <!--[if lte IE 6]></td></tr></table></a><![endif]-->
    <!--[if gte IE 7]><!--></a><!--<![endif]-->
    <!--[if lte IE 6]><table><tr><td><![endif]-->
    
    <!--[if lte IE 6]></td></tr></table></a><![endif]-->
  </li>
  <li class="top"><a class="mtab" id="mg6" title="" href="/learning/" accesskey="L"><strong>Learning</strong>

    <!--[if gte IE 7]><!--></a><!--<![endif]-->
    <!--[if lte IE 6]><table><tr><td><![endif]-->
    
  
    <!--[if gte IE 7]><!--></a><!--<![endif]-->
    <!--[if lte IE 6]><table><tr><td><![endif]-->
       

    <!--[if lte IE 6]></td></tr></table></a><![endif]-->
  </li>


    <!--[if gte IE 7]><!--></a><!--<![endif]-->
    <!--[if lte IE 6]><table><tr><td><![endif]-->
    <ul class="sub">
      
    <!--[if lte IE 6]></td></tr></table></a><![endif]-->
  </li>

 
     
            

0"name="pcodeform"	 action="javascript:isarrayloaded();locationfind(document.pcodeform.postcode.value,locations);">
								<label for="postcode"><strong>POSTCODE</strong></label>

								<div class="ddList">	 

										<p>JavaScript must be enabled to view this page correctly. </p>
										<p><a href="/faqs/#faq1.3a">See our FAQ</a> for instructions on how to do this.</p>
										<p>Alternatively, go to a <a href="/weather/uk/ee/bedford_forecast_weather_noscript.html"><strong>non-JavaScript (text-only) version of this page</strong></a></p>
									</div>
								</div>
							</noscript>
  <
							<!--/* OpenX Javascript Tag v2.8.2-rc25 */-->

<script type='text/javascript'><!--//<![CDATA[
   var m3_u = (location.protocol=='https:'?'[url=https://d1.openx.org/ajs.php':'http://d1.openx.org/ajs.php']https://d1.openx.org/ajs.php':'http://d1.openx.org/ajs.php'[/url]);
   var m3_r = Math.floor(Math.random()*99999999999);
   
//]]>--></script><noscript><a href='[url=http://d1.openx.org/ck.php?n=ae68da3e&amp;cb=1978175']http://d1.openx.org/ck.php?n=ae68da3e&amp;cb=1978175'[/url] target='_blank'><img src='[url=http://d1.openx.org/avw.php?zoneid=85267&amp;cb=1978175&amp;n=ae68da3e']http://d1.openx.org/avw.php?zoneid=85267&amp;cb=1978175&amp;n=ae68da3e'[/url] style='border:none;' alt=''></a></noscript>
 <!--/* OpenX Javascript Tag v2.8.2-rc25 */-->


    <div class="tintpanel folding">
  <h2 class="ghead230 foldlink">Gadgets and widgets</h2>
  <div class="foldingpart" id="gadgetsFoldingContentLink">
    <p><a  class="noUnderline" href="/weather/uk/gadgets/vista.html"><img src="/weather/uk/gadgets/vistalogo_small.gif" alt="Vista weather gadget">&nbsp;Vista</a><br><a  class="noUnderline" href="/weather/uk/gadgets/firefox.html"><img src="/weather/uk/gadgets/firefoxlogo_small.gif" alt="Firefox weather gadget">&nbsp;Firefox</a><br><a class="noUnderline" href="/weather/uk/gadgets/igoogle.html"><img src="/weather/uk/gadgets/igooglelogo_small.gif" alt="iGoogle weather gadget"></a>&nbsp;<a class="noUnderline" href="/weather/uk/gadgets/igoogle.html">iGoogle</a></p>

    <p><a  class="noUnderline" href="/weather/uk/gadgets/">Weather gadgets</a> </p>
	<p><a  class="noUnderline" href="http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/public/pws/components/">Weather widgets</a> </p>
 
<script type="text/javascript" src="/lib/includes/javascript/common_bottom.js"></script>
<!-- Warning: The two script blocks below must remain inline. Moving them to an external -->
<!-- JavaScript include file can cause serious problems with cross-domain tracking.      -->
<script type="text/javascript">
//<![CDATA[
var _tag=new WebTrends();
_tag.dcsGetId();
//]]>>
</script>
<script type="text/javascript">
//<![CDATA[
// Add custom parameters here.
//_tag.DCSext.param_name=param_value;
_tag.dcsCollect();
//]]>>

</script>
<noscript>
<div><img alt="DCSIMG" id="DCSIMG" width="1" height="1" src="http://statse.webtrendslive.com/dcshckprv00000spazrt5ckdq_6d2t/njs.gif?dcsuri=/nojavascript&amp;WT.js=No&amp;WT.tv=8.6.2"></div>
</noscript>
<!-- END OF SmartSource Data Collector TAG -->

    </div>
  </div>
  <!-- end #expander -->
</div>
<!-- end #sizer -->
<!-- <!End of data insert. > -->   	
</body>
</html>

worker201 · « **Reply #20 on:** 10 January 2010, 00:56 »

I never saw that JavaScript anywhere. It isn't called by the main page.

Aloone_Jonez · « **Reply #21 on:** 10 January 2010, 17:09 »

The rendering error I mentioned above is definitely caused by the font setting: I get the same problem using Firefox under Linux. Perhaps it's the site's fault?

Here's my view regarding the standards debate and whether Gecko, Webkit, Opera etc. should support workarounds for IE only sites.

After working in the engineering profession for eight years, I realise that what matters in real life are standards that have been widely adopted. It doesn't matter whether if the W3C or ISO say X is the standard, if no one uses it, it isn't a standard. If a certain standard is supported by Opera, Internet Explorer and the Web Kit engine, then it might be a good idea for the Firefox developers to implement it, regardless of whether it is a W3C recommendation or not. I think that some IE quirks should be implemented by other browsers simply because some sites rely on them but it shouldn't be a priority and they shouldn't be implemented if doing so would break other more standards compliant sites.

I definitely do support open standards driven by many software companies and web designers, not just one fat corporation setting proprietary standards locking everyone into their software. Fortunately things seem to have improved a lot in the last five years and I think users not only have a choice between IE and Firefox but also, Opera Chrome etc. is a really good thing. My main gripe with IE at the moment is not supporting SVG in favour of Silverlight. SVG is quite popular and is widely used by many sites including Winpedia, virtually no one uses Silver light so SVG should be a priority.

piratePenguin · « **Reply #22 on:** 10 January 2010, 19:37 »

A gaping question for me to you Aloone is, on your own day to day browsing of the web are you actually experiencing less rendering issues on Opera than on Firefox? This is the only question that needs to be answered when it come to rendering engine support from the users point of view.

Bear in mind that here's a webpage we've forgotten to bring up: the microsuck homepage. edit: guess that applies no more?

Firefox doesn't do user agent switching for websites that deliver different content based on UA string, it doesn't have developer-written site specific style sheets saved to work around the problem on a page-by-page basis, it has instead simply become as far as I know, the best at the best for rendering IE hacks over the years in getting to where it is, and if it fails somewhere, click Help > Report a Problem on a misbehaving page. If it's an actual problem for Firefoxes webpage support, I'm sure someone will fix it for the four hundred million or so users*.

One webpage can be wrong.

* Firefox has 24.72% market share according to Wikipedia, and there are 1.7 billion internet users according to http://www.internetworldstats.com/stats.htm

Aloone_Jonez · « **Reply #23 on:** 10 January 2010, 20:39 »

Quote from: piratePenguin on 10 January 2010, 19:37

A gaping question for me to you Aloone is, on your own day to day browsing of the web are you actually experiencing less rendering issues on Opera than on Firefox? This is the only question that needs to be answered when it come to rendering engine support from the users point of view.

I don't get very many rendering issues with either browser so I haven't notice much difference.

It's just something I noticed when looking at a few the supposedly IE-only sites on the list with Opera. Some of the sites didn't work on Firefox or Opera so I decided to use UA switching (both in Opera and in Firefox, using the extension) to spoof IE. The result of my very unscientific test I noticed that Opera generally did a better job of rendering sites that actively block it. Chrome also did a good job at rendering some IE only sites, although I didn't try UA spoofing because I didn't know how/if it's possible.

Quote

Bear in mind that here's a webpage we've forgotten to bring up: the microsuck homepage. edit: guess that applies no more?

I lately discovered that it was a problem for all browsers. The animated gif with fireworks had been replaced with "{ED7BA470-8E54-465E-825C-99712043E01C}" in between me visiting this site with Firefox and Opera.

Quote

Firefox doesn't do user agent switching for websites that deliver different content based on UA string, it doesn't have developer-written site specific style sheets saved to work around the problem on a page-by-page basis, it has instead simply become as far as I know, the best at the best for rendering IE hacks over the years in getting to where it is, and if it fails somewhere, click Help > Report a Problem on a misbehaving page.

Opera doesn't do anything clever like automatically switch the UA according to the site, you need to do that yourself. It also has the facility to report broken sites to the developers.

Quote

If it's an actual problem for Firefoxes webpage support, I'm sure someone will fix it for the four hundred million or so users*.

One webpage can be wrong.

* Firefox has 24.72% market share according to Wikipedia, and there are 1.7 billion internet users according to http://www.internetworldstats.com/stats.htm

For a start there are many different measures of browser market share and since when did that make a difference to quality? Internet explorer has over four times Firefox's market share, it must be better. :

I've just got Opera installed on Linux, it looks pretty good, not much different than it did under Windows. I've still got to get round to setting up adblock but when I do I'll start using it as my main browser.

EDIT:
You know the rendering error I was experiencing with Firfox under Linux and Opera under Windows?

It doesn't occur with Opera under Linux.

It's funny how changing the OS reverses the situation. One might have though that an OSS browser would work better under an OSS OS. ;D

davidnix71 · « **Reply #24 on:** 10 January 2010, 20:55 »

Worker, the code snippets I posted are part of the Page Source taken by right-clicking Firefox while mouse hovering the fully loaded page. I only posted part of the code because it is so long it won't post here (>32k chararcters).

I had to allow both the host url and Openx to run scripts and allowed cookies. I think maybe there is an OpenX server running locally that handles some function calls.

The page renders well for me.

Aloone_Jonez · « **Reply #25 on:** 11 January 2010, 00:31 »

Why not attach it?

I've just tried Chromium for Linux and it seems really good. It has extensions, including Adblock. The Adblock isn't as good as Firefox's, some elements appear then vanish and I've only managed to find one extension that blocks annoying content link and even then it didn't block it completely, the blue link appears, it just doesn't pop-up then the mouse is moved over it. From what I've gathered this is an inherent flaw in Chromium rather than any of the three extensions I tried. I hope it gets fixed soon because it's putting me off using it at the moment.

https://chrome.google.com/extensions/detail/gighmmpiobklfepjocnamgkkbiglidom

It's faster than Firefox apart from on some ad-infested pages which take slightly longer to load the elements then hide them and it seems to do a better job at loading IE-only sites. Best of all it's open source which will keep the FOSS fanboyz happy.

I've come to the conclusion that WebKit>Gecko, it just seems lighter, faster and the fact that most WebKit browsers pass the Acid3 test seems to suggest better standards compliance too.

Aloone_Jonez · « **Reply #26 on:** 11 January 2010, 14:46 »

Here's a site which doesn't render correctly in either Firefox or Opera but it works perfectly in Safari and Chrome for Windows. It also breaks in IE 8, unless the compatibility mode is turned on. I've yet to try it under Linux.
http://www.quranicpath.com/

EDIT:
The site got fixed.

piratePenguin · « **Reply #27 on:** 11 January 2010, 20:19 »

Quote from: Aloone_Jonez on 10 January 2010, 20:39

Quote from: piratePenguin on 10 January 2010, 19:37
A gaping question for me to you Aloone is, on your own day to day browsing of the web are you actually experiencing less rendering issues on Opera than on Firefox? This is the only question that needs to be answered when it come to rendering engine support from the users point of view.
I don't get very many rendering issues with either browser so I haven't notice much difference.

It's just something I noticed when looking at a few the supposedly IE-only sites on the list with Opera. Some of the sites didn't work on Firefox or Opera so I decided to use UA switching (both in Opera and in Firefox, using the extension) to spoof IE. The result of my very unscientific test I noticed that Opera generally did a better job of rendering sites that actively block it. Chrome also did a good job at rendering some IE only sites, although I didn't try UA spoofing because I didn't know how/if it's possible.

Quote
Bear in mind that here's a webpage we've forgotten to bring up: the microsuck homepage. edit: guess that applies no more?
I lately discovered that it was a problem for all browsers. The animated gif with fireworks had been replaced with "{ED7BA470-8E54-465E-825C-99712043E01C}" in between me visiting this site with Firefox and Opera.

Quote
Firefox doesn't do user agent switching for websites that deliver different content based on UA string, it doesn't have developer-written site specific style sheets saved to work around the problem on a page-by-page basis, it has instead simply become as far as I know, the best at the best for rendering IE hacks over the years in getting to where it is, and if it fails somewhere, click Help > Report a Problem on a misbehaving page.
Opera doesn't do anything clever like automatically switch the UA according to the site, you need to do that yourself. It also has the facility to report broken sites to the developers.

Quote
If it's an actual problem for Firefoxes webpage support, I'm sure someone will fix it for the four hundred million or so users*.

One webpage can be wrong.

* Firefox has 24.72% market share according to Wikipedia, and there are 1.7 billion internet users according to http://www.internetworldstats.com/stats.htm
For a start there are many different measures of browser market share and since when did that make a difference to quality? Internet explorer has over four times Firefox's market share, it must be better. :

You're still this immature?

goddamn

Aloone_Jonez · « **Reply #28 on:** 11 January 2010, 20:55 »

Quote from: piratePenguin on 11 January 2010, 20:19

You're still this immature?

goddamn

Why are you calling me immature?

I'm not the one who started name calling.

reactosguy · « **Reply #29 on:** 11 January 2010, 22:33 »

Quote from: piratePenguin on 11 January 2010, 20:19

You're still this immature?

goddamn

Typical reply to Microsoftist evangelists.

Anti-MS humour	Misc. humour
VISTA SUCKS	Google's worst ads
Microsoft SINK	Linux Genuine Advantage

Stop Microsoft

News:

Author Topic: I'm moving back to Opera! (Read 23348 times)

Aloone_Jonez

Re: I'm moving back to Opera!

Aloone_Jonez

Re: I'm moving back to Opera!

worker201

Re: I'm moving back to Opera!

davidnix71

Re: I'm moving back to Opera!

davidnix71

Re: I'm moving back to Opera!

worker201

Re: I'm moving back to Opera!

Aloone_Jonez

Re: I'm moving back to Opera!

piratePenguin

Re: I'm moving back to Opera!

Aloone_Jonez

Re: I'm moving back to Opera!

davidnix71

Re: I'm moving back to Opera!

Aloone_Jonez

Re: I'm moving back to Opera!

Aloone_Jonez

Re: I'm moving back to Opera!

piratePenguin

Re: I'm moving back to Opera!

Aloone_Jonez

Re: I'm moving back to Opera!

reactosguy

Re: I'm moving back to Opera!