Internet Explorer 7 vs Firefox: Which is Better?

[Mike628]

Internet Explorer 7 ?

lol..any one notice that they're trying to get it to look like fire fox =]

lol..
gotta love fire fox!

 

[rock4christ]

ff w/ no addons is still better than IE7, because fewer viruses are made for it. with the right addons, like I am at now, I can't stand IE.

 

[-Job-]

It would have been nicer if they had copied FireFox enough to offer native support of XUL.

 

[Moridin]

I find both IE6 and IE7 to be of immense value. It is used by the majority of the worlds population who owns a computer, so web design needs to take the versions of that browser into account nonetheless.

 

[rock4christ]

I find both IE6 and IE7 to be of immense value. It is used by the majority of the worlds population who owns a computer, so web design needs to take the versions of that browser into account nonetheless.

true, I test html in IE and FF. but in terms of features it sucks.

 

[Anttech]

I find both IE6 and IE7 to be of immense value. It is used by the majority of the worlds population who owns a computer, so web design needs to take the versions of that browser into account nonetheless.

Web design needs to follow RFC's not Microsoft.

 

[Moridin]

Web design needs to follow RFC's not Microsoft.

Nevertheless, there is a large portion of humans that do use IE6/IE7 so in order to maximize the level of good exposure, one needs to make the design cross browser, even if IE5/IE7 is a bad browser and doesn't understand correct code. If your website looks like crap in IE6/IE7 you are bound to loose visitors and clients.

Actually, web design should following W3C standards, not any independent company. After all, they are the ones that made the Internet.

http://www.w3.org/Consortium/

 

[Anttech]

That is what I said, you need to follow RFC's not Microsoft. You do know what an RFC is right?

After all, they are the ones that made the Internet.

Well maybe they help define the application layer, but not the network layer.

 

[Moridin]

That is what I said, you need to follow RFC's not Microsoft. You do know what an RFC is right?

Well maybe they help define the application layer, but not the network layer.

I'm not exactly sure how much you know about the history of the Internet, but it was officially created by Tim Berners-Lee back in '89, when we was working at CERN. Since then, he founded the W3C and that organization is the leading organization in the world in this matter. Anyone with web design experience should know that.

RFC isn't really the issue here.

 

[Anttech]

At the Application Layer. Not the Network layer

And yes RFC's are absolutely the issue here, why do you think they are not?

It seems you don't know what an RFC is, here is an example:

http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2854.txt

This is what the internet is built on, Requests for Comment!

 

[Moridin]

At the Application Layer. Not the Network layer

And yes RFC's are absolutely the issue here, why do you think they are not?

It seems you don't know what an RFC is, here is an example:

http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2854.txt

This is what the internet is built on, Requests for Comment!

As I said, that is highly irrelevant for the discussion. I'll just repost the parts of my earlier post, which you have not replied to.

Nevertheless, there is a large portion of humans that do use IE6/IE7 so in order to maximize the level of good exposure, one needs to make the design cross browser, even if IE5/IE7 is a bad browser and doesn't understand correct code. If your website looks like crap in IE6/IE7 you are bound to loose visitors and clients.

Web design should follow W3C standards, no matter what, which is possible when at the same time making your design as cross browser as possible.

 

[Anttech]

Highly irrelevant to the discussion? You have even said:

Actually, web design should following W3C standards, not any independent company. After all, they are the ones that made the Internet.

Considering that application layer standard is an RFC, it seems you are contradicting yourself. So if it is so irrelevant why are you stating that one should follow rfc's then?

Regardless I think your methodology for coding is not normal, you don't bend to the will of a company you follow the Open Standards, as I have stated 3 times, and you have stated once.

IE7 is rfc compliant as best as M$ can do..

m not exactly sure how much you know about the history of the Internet,

As for this, I work for a teleco, I know how the internet works, and I can guarantee I know it in more technical depth than anyone on this board (at layer 4 and below; OSI)

*ducks and waits for the onslaught*

 

[verty]

Well maybe they help define the application layer, but not the network layer.

This seems like a fruitless point. It's a chicken and egg situation whether TCP/IP or HTML drove the internet.

 

[Anttech]

This seems like a fruitless point. It's a chicken and egg situation whether TCP/IP or HTML drove the internet.

no it is not, the application layer is defined differently than the network layer, by different bodies, in a different way. An rfc pertaning to the structure of http is nothing to do with an rfc describing ipsec for example. w3.org have nada/nothing/zip to do with how BGP works for another example.

I am not asserting nor am i saying anything about who *ïnvented* the internet. I am talking about how internet protocols work today, and they are all described via open standards. Some start of life, like mpls, being devoped by 1 company, cisco in this case. But for the protocol to become a standard it needs to be defined in an rfc, and presented to the IETF. Its the IT methodology and process of the internet!