Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
I have never been one to bash Microsoft, I am just sick of IE, it is such a piece!
- Thread starter macsrules
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
You misread me. I support supporting IE6+ and my point of view is that it shouldn't take hours if one designs well from the outset.
So I think we actually agree.
Perhaps I'm failing to make my point by using PNG alpha as my simplified example when I'm really talking about more complex combinations of, say, the 3px bug, box model issues, lack of :hover for most elements, lack of min- and max-width, list item spacing quirks, and all the other annoyances that overlap to make precise alignment difficult.
More likely, though, it's because I suck as a designer, so I work with a graphic designer who feeds me layouts to code. Since he's not aware of what does and doesn't work, and how, his designs may make IE6 coding (and everything else, too) harder than it should be.
Add in that I'm just not that good so it takes me longer than it should to do things, and I guess that's why what I'm doing sounds silly to you.
Not saying you're wrong, but in defense of myself I assume you're talking about the header in my forum "homepage", in which case yes. That's several years old, goofing with a pseudo-spraypaint effect, and proof that I suck as a designer when left to my own devices (not even valid--XHTML1.1 being served as text). What I was actually refering to is the mouseover glow on the left menu on this site. Doesn't seem particularly lame to me, but then I have admittedly poor taste.
You've raised a few valid points in this thread, so why ruin it and resort to personal bashing?
Fair enough.
I didn't want to get personal but I felt like I wasn't getting through. As for his use of glows even he admits the spray painting effect is bad, years old. My point anyway is that glows were in at one point. Just years ago. Nowadays it's just outdated.
It doesn't sound silly to me. I just don't like it when people blame others - even if it's Microsoft - when the answer may be them.
As for your list of problems
- the 3px bug - http://www.positioniseverything.net/explorer/threepxtest.html
- box model issues - most of these issues are resolved when you force IE into standards compliant mode. Additionally there are some tactics a designer can use to avoid problems, for example, not specifying width and padding or border for an element. http://www.456bereastreet.com/archive/200612/internet_explorer_and_the_css_box_model/
- lack of :hover for most elements - aside for links, I cannot understand why you need :hover for other elements.
- lack of min- and max-width - I use the IE conditionals to get around this. See the link above.
- list item spacing quirks - http://www.456bereastreet.com/archive/200610/closing_the_gap_between_list_items_in_ie/
You probably don't suck. You just have a lot to learn.
I was in your shoes once.
IE is just absolutely shocking. Full stop.
And what is worse is the fact that Microsoft can't actually have the initiative to actually make their browser NORMAL will CSS. I design all my sites with Safari and Firefox... and if they are stupid enough to use IE, then they are stupid enough not to notice how shocking the layout has got
And what is worse is the fact that Microsoft can't actually have the initiative to actually make their browser NORMAL will CSS. I design all my sites with Safari and Firefox... and if they are stupid enough to use IE, then they are stupid enough not to notice how shocking the layout has got
But that's really irrational. It IS microsoft. You're saying we're unskilled enough at forcing IE to work, so it's our fault we have a problem with IE, not microsofts'. You're in a sense defending not using standards.
"we don't need standards - expect everyone else to deal with whatever discrepancies we use."
No, you're missing my point. I'm talking about answers in terms of solutions. If your boss says, hey, why doesn't this work in IE6? The right answer isn't IE6 is crap.* Rather it's: sorry boss, I just need more time.
*most of the time. For most issues with IE, there IS a work-around solution.
*most of the time. For most issues with IE, there IS a work-around solution.
While I appreciate your attempt to be helpful, knowing the solutions wasn't the problem, it's the ease with which I'm able to implement them (or avoid needing them in the first place), and the cumulative number and effect on any given layout, particularly more complicated ones with precise alignment.
Not to mention that, as the sub-linked article notes, you can end up using a half dozen Holly Hacks on more complex layouts.
Again, my point isn't that there are many completely uncorrectable bugs/omissions in IE6, just that cumulatively fixing all of them to behave precisely the same as other browsers is time-consuming. Were I a faster coder like yourself, and if I had enough skill to do attractive layouts myself rather than relying on a graphic designer, hours apparently wouldn't be necessary; for less experienced coders like me, however, if I'm willing to sacrifice some minor visual anomalies it can usually be done quite quickly, which was the point I was trying to make.
Anyway, just pointing out that I'm not a rank amateur when it comes to IE workarounds, just a lot slower than you, and unskilled at graphic design.
Regardless, the fact that there are so many different ways both discovered and necessary to deal with these things, and that even if it's not hugely time consuming they must be done to nearly every layout a pro does, remains reason enough for me to despise IE6 and the Microsoft monopolistic hubris that allowed them to persist so long.
I remember when this first came out, though now that IE5 Mac is functionally dead I usually don't bother with the messier hacks to hide stuff from it and just use * html (or a separate conditional comment stylesheet) to fudge IE6 margins. That's when the height 1% method works; there are occasions (I ran into one recently) where it has issues, and I've needed to resort to more brute-force methods.
Not to mention that, as the sub-linked article notes, you can end up using a half dozen Holly Hacks on more complex layouts.
Of course, but that's most, not all, and those "not all" are nasty, at least for those somewhat less experienced with planning ahead to get around them, like me.
True, but there are occasions. There's also lack of :before and :after, which is annoying and leads to unnecessary inline content addition if you don't want to just leave it off in IE6. (The afore-linked "IE7" script claims to add support, which would be nice, though the last time I tried either an earlier version of it or a similar script it didn't work properly for me.)
Which is what I do as well, particularly if you want to just stick IE6 with a fixed width instead of semi-flexible, but doing that is sort of my point.
That's slightly different from the hack I usually use, but similar. I'm pretty sure I've run into specific cases where it had issues, but maybe I'm remembering wrong.
Again, my point isn't that there are many completely uncorrectable bugs/omissions in IE6, just that cumulatively fixing all of them to behave precisely the same as other browsers is time-consuming. Were I a faster coder like yourself, and if I had enough skill to do attractive layouts myself rather than relying on a graphic designer, hours apparently wouldn't be necessary; for less experienced coders like me, however, if I'm willing to sacrifice some minor visual anomalies it can usually be done quite quickly, which was the point I was trying to make.
Anyway, just pointing out that I'm not a rank amateur when it comes to IE workarounds, just a lot slower than you, and unskilled at graphic design.
Regardless, the fact that there are so many different ways both discovered and necessary to deal with these things, and that even if it's not hugely time consuming they must be done to nearly every layout a pro does, remains reason enough for me to despise IE6 and the Microsoft monopolistic hubris that allowed them to persist so long.
Veiled sarcasm, right?
If not, then you didn't bother reading the thread and just stereotyped it without merit. And I really hope you don't sincerely believe forums aren't meant to voice personal opinion.
From dictionary.com:
2. a court or tribunal: the forum of public opinion.