For all the web developers out there....

[Xavier434]

Originally posted by: NanoStuff

Originally posted by: Xavier434
You can't use any the usual arguments that you find on tech sites when talking to customers when they call and complain about why something doesn't look right in IE or FF.

Yes I can. It takes twice as long to develop a site that's backwards compatible with decade old browsers. Customers that expect this are what we call "low margin customers", those we simply decline.

I should clarify a bit. When I said "doesn't look right in IE or FF" what I really meant was "doesn't look right in the more popular versions of IE or FF". There are limits to everything of course. Your company is wise to decline any customer who isn't worth the money.

 

[JoLLyRoGer]

Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor
Let me guess. You're using style sheets exclusively. LOL. Well, you got what you deserve for buying the l33t hype.

Never had a problem with tables + style sheets.

H3ll YES - QFMFT!!! Sometimes tables are the only way to rock a website! (Although Flash is Flash is Flash in most cases, but that's another animal entirely)

That said,
I typically do my coding for Internet Exploder first (since Microsoft owns the world). And then I'll do some minor adjustments for finding that "acceptable" medium between IE and NutScrape. And if it works in NS, it should be good to go for FF/Mozilla. Conversely, if it's good in IE, then you're typically golden with Opera too.

If I'm feeling really ambitious I'll fire up a *nix box and double check things with Konquerer too (that's how I used to sorta-kinda double check my code for Mac/Safari before Apple relased it for Windows).

 

[JoLLyRoGer]

Originally posted by: Xavier434

Originally posted by: NanoStuff

Originally posted by: Train
My company has about 50 clients who all together have over 10 million page views a DAY. Our core audience is "home owners". We are consistent at about 95% I.E.

I suspect if the majority of clients are in the business of selling diapers to house wives, 95% makes sense. The typical rate for standard wide-audience websites, be it video sites, news sites, IE % is much lower than that.

Even one of my sites oriented around transcribing a local newspaper whose target audience is mostly older individuals maintains 30% Firefox.

95% is pretty high, but you still have to make them look great on both if not perfect. You can't use any the usual arguments that you find on tech sites when talking to customers when they call and complain about why something doesn't look right in IE or FF. They don't care. They just want to make more money than "the other guy" and get to the top of Google. Geeks whine about what is better but in the business world none of that matters.

This is just another reason why I quit being a web developer. Too many headaches.

FYI,

Here is a qick snapshot of my site's browser stats (courtesy of GoDaddy WebStats)

stats.JPG

Like I stated earlier, IE rules the world...

JR..

 

[NanoStuff]

Originally posted by: torpid

Originally posted by: NanoStuff

Originally posted by: torpid
I have never had that problem. IE and FireFox both are similar when I look with them at my apps.

That's because you're not a professional web developer.

Yes, I am.

And you're unaware of IE's compatibility issues? No, you're not.

 

[skrilla]

Originally posted by: yllus

Originally posted by: Winchester
What drives me nuts is how (000000, FFFFFF) colors differ between browsers. I can have one set to match a graphic and it matches perfectly in firefox, but is way off in IE or vice versa.

I have never had this problem. Is this a documented issue?

Never encountered the issue either.

 

[torpid]

Originally posted by: NanoStuff

Originally posted by: torpid

Originally posted by: NanoStuff

Originally posted by: torpid
I have never had that problem. IE and FireFox both are similar when I look with them at my apps.

That's because you're not a professional web developer.

Yes, I am.

And you're unaware of IE's compatibility issues? No, you're not.

You mean compatibility with W3C recommendations? Who the hell cares? I don't use ridiculous AJAX or other javascript, nor newfangled CSS recommendations because I am not stupid enough to assume that every browser on the planet is going to work with it just because W3C recommended it.

Maybe if you wrote apps from the perspective of a user instead of a little kid obsessed with W3C toys, you'd have less of an issue.

 

[jjones]

All browsers suck. It's no more difficult, or easy, to code for one as it is to code for the other. That said, I code for both IE and FF and don't find myself doing anything special to accommodate one or the other. As for Safari and Opera, I just don't care - coding for two turd browsers (IE & FF) is enough and I'm content to assume that it works well enough on the others. If it doesn't, then go buy a pc and/or use a popular browser.

 

[Rangoric]

Originally posted by: skrilla

Originally posted by: yllus

Originally posted by: Winchester
What drives me nuts is how (000000, FFFFFF) colors differ between browsers. I can have one set to match a graphic and it matches perfectly in firefox, but is way off in IE or vice versa.

I have never had this problem. Is this a documented issue?

Never encountered the issue either.

Use a ridge border with a #666666 or #999999 as the color and you will see that they pick different colors for it (Firefox tends to have more of a difference, IE tends to be softer)

I prefer IE because text shows up nicer in it, and it is better behaved out of the box with my mouse. Also because of the stupid thing that making a new tab is a left click and not a right click. Gives the impression that its not an important feature.

 

[HeroOfPellinor]

Originally posted by: ZeroIQ
Using CSS is not buying into the "l33t hype". It's smart. It loads faster than tables and its what will be used in the future; there is no going around it.

I heard that being said 8 years ago. Suppose I'll be hearing it 8 years from now.

 

[randay]

this thread delivers.

 

[Zoblefu]

Web developer here... We develop for the latest version of IE if we're not told to do anything specific, or whatever our client wants. We're a consulting company so taking extra time to make it work in more browsers is no big deal since we get paid by the hour.

All that said, our designer takes care of all of the IE / FF differences in their work and it's not really a "web developer" issue, at least how we define web developer versus designer.

 

[NanoStuff]

Originally posted by: torpid
You mean compatibility with W3C recommendations? Who the hell cares?

Microsoft for one. They know they're a bunch of fuckups for unleashing the horror of IE6, which is why there is an IE7, which is respectably less horrific. They're trying to follow them, therefore they're aware that these standards are standard and their browsers have failed to meet expectations.

 

[mugs]

Originally posted by: NanoStuff

Originally posted by: torpid

Originally posted by: NanoStuff

Originally posted by: torpid
I have never had that problem. IE and FireFox both are similar when I look with them at my apps.

That's because you're not a professional web developer.

Yes, I am.

And you're unaware of IE's compatibility issues? No, you're not.

Maybe he is aware but is able to code to be compatible with both? :Q Because you know, he's a professional.

As much as I like Firefox, and as much as I like to test with Firefox because of its great plugins for web developers, I always test in IE throughout the process and make sure any changes I make will work in both. Waiting until the end to discover incompatibilities is kind of stupid. And if you're going to focus on one and not the other, it really ought to be IE, unless you prefer to limit your audience substantially.

I'm fortunate that in my 9-5 web development job I can be guaranteed that all users will be using the same browser.

 

[torpid]

Originally posted by: mugs

Originally posted by: NanoStuff

Originally posted by: torpid

Originally posted by: NanoStuff

Originally posted by: torpid
I have never had that problem. IE and FireFox both are similar when I look with them at my apps.

That's because you're not a professional web developer.

Yes, I am.

And you're unaware of IE's compatibility issues? No, you're not.

Maybe he is aware but is able to code to be compatible with both? :Q Because you know, he's a professional.

Correct. It's not exactly rocket science. After a few months of doing this, it should be pretty obvious what you should and shouldn't do. Sure, if you want to write a super hi-tech ajax app, you're going to have a lot of incompatibilities between browsers. But to call the dominant browser in the market incompatible is kind of pointless since it is what it is and you aren't going to convince more than a handful of users to switch browsers. Less than a handful, actually, if you work in an environment where the people who use your web apps are doing so as part of their job, where the IT Gestapo (who are often required to wear bike helmets and drool bibs) have their own special views of what is right.

As much as I like Firefox, and as much as I like to test with Firefox because of its great plugins for web developers, I always test in IE throughout the process and make sure any changes I make will work in both. Waiting until the end to discover incompatibilities is kind of stupid. And if you're going to focus on one and not the other, it really ought to be IE, unless you prefer to limit your audience substantially.

He does. See above. He cuts off IE6 users and claims that their business is not important to him.

 

[rh71]

For work, I'm glad they state that they only officially support IE. Makes our coding job easier. Outside of work sites, I only think about IE at the last minute. I need it to look good in Opera.

 

[amdskip]

Our webstats:

MS Internet Explorer No 1470283 82 %
Firefox No 238262 13.2 %
Safari No 53052 2.9 %
Mozilla No 14652 0.8 %
Netscape No 6603 0.3 %
Unknown ? 5536 0.3 %
Opera No 3731 0.2 %
Camino No 470 0 %
Konqueror No 203 0 %
Wget Yes 58 0 %
Others 142 0 %

 

[HeroOfPellinor]

Originally posted by: amdskip
Our webstats:

MS Internet Explorer No 1470283 82 %
Firefox No 238262 13.2 %
Safari No 53052 2.9 %
Mozilla No 14652 0.8 %
Netscape No 6603 0.3 %
Unknown ? 5536 0.3 %
Opera No 3731 0.2 %
Camino No 470 0 %
Konqueror No 203 0 %
Wget Yes 58 0 %
Others 142 0 %

Yeah, but all the COOL people are using Firefox, so they're the ones you need to worry about......er........right?

 

[torpid]

Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor

Originally posted by: amdskip
Our webstats:

MS Internet Explorer No 1470283 82 %
Firefox No 238262 13.2 %
Safari No 53052 2.9 %
Mozilla No 14652 0.8 %
Netscape No 6603 0.3 %
Unknown ? 5536 0.3 %
Opera No 3731 0.2 %
Camino No 470 0 %
Konqueror No 203 0 %
Wget Yes 58 0 %
Others 142 0 %

Yeah, but all the COOL people are using Firefox, so they're the ones you need to worry about......er........right?

Don't be ridiculous, obviously the people who use wget are the ones he should covet.

 

[esun]

Some of the arguments you are using are completely inane. Some of you are claiming it isn't important to support FF and other non-IE browsers because your web stats show that not many non-IE users visit your websites. However, you completely ignore the fact that this may be because your websites don't render properly in non-IE browsers. You don't even _know_ how much business you may be losing out on without having a website that's compatible with non-IE browsers.

 

[HeroOfPellinor]

Originally posted by: esun
Some of the arguments you are using are completely inane. Some of you are claiming it isn't important to support FF and other non-IE browsers because your web stats show that not many non-IE users visit your websites. However, you completely ignore the fact that this may be because your websites don't render properly in non-IE browsers. You don't even _know_ how much business you may be losing out on without having a website that's compatible with non-IE browsers.

You're preaching to the converted. If all pages were coded for Camino the way they are for IE, we'd all be using that.

 

[jjones]

Originally posted by: esun
Some of the arguments you are using are completely inane. Some of you are claiming it isn't important to support FF and other non-IE browsers because your web stats show that not many non-IE users visit your websites. However, you completely ignore the fact that this may be because your websites don't render properly in non-IE browsers. You don't even _know_ how much business you may be losing out on without having a website that's compatible with non-IE browsers.

If a browser is capable of requesting a page, the server is capable of recording the browser stat. The stats are accurate and not subject to some unknown demographic not surfing to your site because of browser incompatibility. It's not like google has "this site sucks for Firefox" in their search results descriptions, or your browser has some popup that says "please click okay to proceed to this POS incompatibly designed web page", thereby causing potential site visitors to steer clear.

The only traffic you are potentially losing is site visitors who don't return to your site because they remember that it sucks. But if your content is decent and at least accessible, they come back anyway and put up with it. Hell, I even put up with flash sites occasionally if I need to see the content.

However, I will agree that some efforts towards compatibility should be made because you do not want to alienate site visitors.

 

[MegaVovaN]

Had my share of frustration, I will not work as a web developer.

 

[alkemyst]

Originally posted by: Hyperblaze
Do you enjoy making pages work in IE?

You create a web page that works flawlessly in just about every other browser out there, test it in IE, and it looks like garbage.

I lost count how many hours I've lost just making the web pages in IE just LOOK like they do in firefox/mozilla/safari/netscape/opera.

Some of the rules that IE adheres to are just fucking ridiculus. (one which I discovered today which involves cookies)

I swear that if Microsoft didn't force/shove IE down our throats, nobody would be using this POS.

huh IE is simple...it's the other's that are tricky. As long as you keep good validation and stick to non-proprietary containers you should be ok.

 

[alkemyst]

Originally posted by: sao123
perhaps since only 1% of the total internet users use firefox/mozilla/safari/netscape/opera... perhaps you should just code your web pages for IE and just be done with it...

Much more than that...between my site (main work site, about 250k hits) and peers we are seeing nearly 15-20% FF users.

3% are macintosh using any browser with .5% using FF.

 

[alkemyst]

Originally posted by: tfinch2



http://www.w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_stats.asp

Those are a bit biased towards tech saavy people.

On a typical non-tech type website (my industry is top 10 national home builder), the FF numbers are about half those really.

I pull a lot of trends through google analytics for color depth, resolution, browsers/OS, etc.

Even the times our site is the least busiest to do updates.

We get alot of comments from mac users telling us there is ALMOST as many of them out there as Windows users now...lolz.