Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Crossing Browser
4 views
Skip to first unread message
Cricca
Jan 15, 2012, 4:38:18 AM1/15/12
to
I want use the "Crossing Browser" technical for create a website for solve
some different behavior between the browsers.
I have searched news in internet and I find this page
http://www.dozarte.com/wordpress/2011/02/24/css-diversi-per-browser-diversi-firefox-internet-explorer-7-e-ie-60/
For try some experiment I have create a sample page with this code
<html>
<head>
<title>Crissing Browser</title>
</head>
<body>
<!--[if IE]>
I am Internet Explorer
<![endif]-->
<!--[if 'Gecko']>
I am Mozilla Firefox
<![endif]-->
<!--[if Opera]>
I am Opera
<![endif]-->
<!--[if chrome]>
I am Google Chrome
<![endif]-->
<!--[if Webkit]>
I am Safari
<![endif]-->
</body>
</html>
If I open the page with Internet Explorer, all is ok, but with the other
browsers the page open is all blank.
Where is my errore?
Someone can help me?
Tanks
Cricca
some different behavior between the browsers.
I have searched news in internet and I find this page
http://www.dozarte.com/wordpress/2011/02/24/css-diversi-per-browser-diversi-firefox-internet-explorer-7-e-ie-60/
For try some experiment I have create a sample page with this code
<html>
<head>
<title>Crissing Browser</title>
</head>
<body>
<!--[if IE]>
I am Internet Explorer
<![endif]-->
<!--[if 'Gecko']>
I am Mozilla Firefox
<![endif]-->
<!--[if Opera]>
I am Opera
<![endif]-->
<!--[if chrome]>
I am Google Chrome
<![endif]-->
<!--[if Webkit]>
I am Safari
<![endif]-->
</body>
</html>
If I open the page with Internet Explorer, all is ok, but with the other
browsers the page open is all blank.
Where is my errore?
Someone can help me?
Tanks
Cricca
Jukka K. Korpela
Jan 15, 2012, 4:47:05 AM1/15/12
to
2012-01-15 11:38, Cricca wrote:
> I want use the "Crossing Browser" technical for create a website for solve
> some different behavior between the browsers.
Stop wanting that. Find out the problems and fix them. And as far as
> I want use the "Crossing Browser" technical for create a website for solve
> some different behavior between the browsers.
it's just a little different rendering, stop seeing it as a problem.
> <!--[if 'Gecko']>
> I am Mozilla Firefox
> <![endif]-->
IE oddity, and you can't extend it to other browsers just by throwing
their names into it.
--
Yucca, http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/
Gus Richter
Jan 15, 2012, 7:29:40 AM1/15/12
to
"Conditional Comments" and "Conditional CSS".
"Conditional Comments" (HTML markup) are ignored by all browsers and can
be seen only in the source. The difference is that *only* IE does
something with <!-- [if ... to present something to the different IE
versions.
"Conditional CSS" is software to assist in providing visitors to your
web site with a stylesheet dependant on the browser that the visitor is
using (IE or any other). The Conditional Comments idea is used and
expanded to include all other browsers and not only IE, for Stylesheet
Rules. One stylesheet on the server containing Conditional Rules for
various browsers and the server sends only the ones needed for the
visiting browser.
You are trying to use the Conditional CSS Rules (called Statements on
their website) intended for Stylesheets as HTML Comments. <!--[if IE]>
is the same in both (for HTML Markup and Conditional CSS), therefore it
works in IE for you. All others are meaningless for IE and are ignored.
All, including the <!--[if IE]> are ignored by all other browsers.
--
Gus
dorayme
Jan 15, 2012, 7:40:07 AM1/15/12
to
In article <jeu6q6$2d0$1...@tdi.cu.mi.it>, "Cricca" <rsup...@email.it>
wrote:
> For try some experiment I have create a sample page with this code
>
> <html>
> <head>
> <title>Crissing Browser</title>
> </head>
> <body>
> <!--[if IE]>
> I am Internet Explorer
> <![endif]-->
> <!--[if 'Gecko']>
> I am Mozilla Firefox
> <![endif]-->
> <!--[if Opera]>
> I am Opera
> <![endif]-->
> <!--[if chrome...
...
that you can talk to various browsers this way. Unfortunately, (or
maybe not really), the conditional construction in the comments are
just for Internet Explorer. There have been various ways and hacks
that people have engineered or discovered to say things to various
non-IE browsers but there are much more important and robust other
things to remember than this.
Some differences are due to different browsers having different
default styles, you can be rid of these by attending to your CSS
sheet. Other differences can occur because your pages render in some
quirk mode (as can happen when there is no doctype declaration).
Most of the serious differences that are worth worrying about are
usually between, on the one hand all the modernish browsers except IE
on the one hand, and IE on the other. In other words, the conditional
that does work happens to be the one that even good webpage makers
find useful, the others that you are imagining would not be all that
useful.
--
dorayme
wrote:
> For try some experiment I have create a sample page with this code
>
> <html>
> <head>
> <title>Crissing Browser</title>
> </head>
> <body>
> <!--[if IE]>
> I am Internet Explorer
> <![endif]-->
> <!--[if 'Gecko']>
> I am Mozilla Firefox
> <![endif]-->
> <!--[if Opera]>
> I am Opera
> <![endif]-->
...
>
> If I open the page with Internet Explorer, all is ok, but with the other
> browsers the page open is all blank.
>
> Where is my errore?
> Someone can help me?
>
One of the nicest mistakes I have seen for a while! Yes, it might seem
> If I open the page with Internet Explorer, all is ok, but with the other
> browsers the page open is all blank.
>
> Where is my errore?
> Someone can help me?
>
that you can talk to various browsers this way. Unfortunately, (or
maybe not really), the conditional construction in the comments are
just for Internet Explorer. There have been various ways and hacks
that people have engineered or discovered to say things to various
non-IE browsers but there are much more important and robust other
things to remember than this.
Some differences are due to different browsers having different
default styles, you can be rid of these by attending to your CSS
sheet. Other differences can occur because your pages render in some
quirk mode (as can happen when there is no doctype declaration).
Most of the serious differences that are worth worrying about are
usually between, on the one hand all the modernish browsers except IE
on the one hand, and IE on the other. In other words, the conditional
that does work happens to be the one that even good webpage makers
find useful, the others that you are imagining would not be all that
useful.
--
dorayme
Gus Richter
Jan 15, 2012, 9:02:52 AM1/15/12
to
On 1/15/2012 7:40 AM, dorayme wrote:
> .... others that you are imagining ....
He's not imagining them. Just using them in the wrong place.
He read about them, as he said, on this Italian web site:
<http://www.dozarte.com/wordpress/2011/02/24/css-diversi-per-browser-diversi-firefox-internet-explorer-7-e-ie-60/>
which in turn wrote about this web site:
<http://www.conditional-css.com/>
Perhaps my response to the OPs question now makes more sense? I was not
expressing an opinion on the software required to make this Conditional
CSS work, which he may or may not be using, at least not properly,
obviously.
--
Ciao,
Gus
> .... others that you are imagining ....
He's not imagining them. Just using them in the wrong place.
He read about them, as he said, on this Italian web site:
<http://www.dozarte.com/wordpress/2011/02/24/css-diversi-per-browser-diversi-firefox-internet-explorer-7-e-ie-60/>
which in turn wrote about this web site:
<http://www.conditional-css.com/>
Perhaps my response to the OPs question now makes more sense? I was not
expressing an opinion on the software required to make this Conditional
CSS work, which he may or may not be using, at least not properly,
obviously.
--
Ciao,
Gus
dorayme
Jan 15, 2012, 5:00:29 PM1/15/12
to
In article <jeumac$cqb$1...@dont-email.me>,
Is it browser sniffing at work along with other things?
> He read about them, as he said, ...
------------
btw, I am reminded:
Years ago, I either just tested or actually used this way for WinIE's
eyes only, *but not MacIE* (there was a MacIE back then):
/* Hide from IE5-mac. Only IE-win sees this. \*/
* html leftPicAndCaption {
margin-right: 10px;
* html ul {
height: 1%;
margin-left: 0;
}
/* End hide from IE5/mac */
--
dorayme
Gus Richter <gusri...@netscape.net> wrote:
> On 1/15/2012 7:40 AM, dorayme wrote:
> > .... others that you are imagining ....
>
>
> He's not imagining them. Just using them in the wrong place.
>
Fair enough, I don't recall seeing your good post when I wrote that.
> On 1/15/2012 7:40 AM, dorayme wrote:
> > .... others that you are imagining ....
>
>
> He's not imagining them. Just using them in the wrong place.
>
Is it browser sniffing at work along with other things?
> He read about them, as he said, ...
> which in turn wrote about this web site:
> <http://www.conditional-css.com/>
>
> Perhaps my response to the OPs question now makes more sense? I was not
> expressing an opinion on the software required to make this Conditional
> CSS work, which he may or may not be using, at least not properly,
> obviously.
Fair enough again.
> <http://www.conditional-css.com/>
>
> Perhaps my response to the OPs question now makes more sense? I was not
> expressing an opinion on the software required to make this Conditional
> CSS work, which he may or may not be using, at least not properly,
> obviously.
------------
btw, I am reminded:
Years ago, I either just tested or actually used this way for WinIE's
eyes only, *but not MacIE* (there was a MacIE back then):
/* Hide from IE5-mac. Only IE-win sees this. \*/
* html leftPicAndCaption {
margin-right: 10px;
* html ul {
height: 1%;
margin-left: 0;
}
/* End hide from IE5/mac */
--
dorayme
Gus Richter
Jan 15, 2012, 8:57:47 PM1/15/12
to
On 1/15/2012 5:00 PM, dorayme wrote:
> Is it browser sniffing at work along with other things?
I imagine so. I have never used the product.
> Is it browser sniffing at work along with other things?
--
Gus
dorayme
Jan 15, 2012, 10:41:14 PM1/15/12
to
In article <jf006s$392$1...@dont-email.me>,
Anyway...
Talking IE conditionals, I am having trouble today catering to IE6 on
my Mac running WinXP in VirtualBox. I might just have to launch a new
site and let it be a bit bad in IE6. Or find a machine that just runs
Windows and IE6 only to test?
But first, can anyone confirm that in IE6 the big text in the
following url is white on black? I have tried it with <!--[if IE6]>
and <!--[if IE 6]>, not sure that makes a difference?
<http://dorayme.netweaver.com.au/ie6ConditionalTest.html>
Perhaps there is a mistake I am not seeing?
--
dorayme
Talking IE conditionals, I am having trouble today catering to IE6 on
my Mac running WinXP in VirtualBox. I might just have to launch a new
site and let it be a bit bad in IE6. Or find a machine that just runs
Windows and IE6 only to test?
But first, can anyone confirm that in IE6 the big text in the
following url is white on black? I have tried it with <!--[if IE6]>
and <!--[if IE 6]>, not sure that makes a difference?
<http://dorayme.netweaver.com.au/ie6ConditionalTest.html>
Perhaps there is a mistake I am not seeing?
--
dorayme
Gus Richter
Jan 16, 2012, 5:34:02 AM1/16/12
to
On 1/15/2012 10:41 PM, dorayme wrote:
> But first, can anyone confirm that in IE6 the big text in the
> following url is white on black? I have tried it with<!--[if IE6]>
> and<!--[if IE 6]>, not sure that makes a difference?
>
> <http://dorayme.netweaver.com.au/ie6ConditionalTest.html>
My IE6 renders white on black if I use <!--[if IE 6]> only.
> But first, can anyone confirm that in IE6 the big text in the
> following url is white on black? I have tried it with<!--[if IE6]>
> and<!--[if IE 6]>, not sure that makes a difference?
>
> <http://dorayme.netweaver.com.au/ie6ConditionalTest.html>
--
Gus
dorayme
Jan 16, 2012, 6:22:17 AM1/16/12
to
In article <jf0uer$vrf$1...@dont-email.me>,
Not sure what you mean by your "only"?
In the head, I now have:
<style type="text/css" media="screen">
p {color: black; background: white; font-size: 1.3em; width: 25em;}
</style>
<!--[if IE 6]>
<style type="text/css" media="screen">
p {color: white; background: black; }
</style>
<![endif]-->
If the conditional works, IE6 should be white text on black bg. It is
not appearing so in my IE6 on VirtualBox nor on screenshots from
Browsershots?
If, instead of above, I had:
<style type="text/css" media="screen">
p {color: black; background: white; font-size: 1.3em; width: 25em;}
</style>
<style type="text/css" media="screen">
p {color: white; background: black; }
</style>
most if not all browsers, including IE6, would show white on black.
But I may be getting the construction wrong, perhaps I will think more
clearly tomorrow.
--
dorayme
In the head, I now have:
<style type="text/css" media="screen">
p {color: black; background: white; font-size: 1.3em; width: 25em;}
</style>
<!--[if IE 6]>
<style type="text/css" media="screen">
p {color: white; background: black; }
</style>
<![endif]-->
If the conditional works, IE6 should be white text on black bg. It is
not appearing so in my IE6 on VirtualBox nor on screenshots from
Browsershots?
If, instead of above, I had:
<style type="text/css" media="screen">
p {color: black; background: white; font-size: 1.3em; width: 25em;}
</style>
<style type="text/css" media="screen">
p {color: white; background: black; }
</style>
most if not all browsers, including IE6, would show white on black.
But I may be getting the construction wrong, perhaps I will think more
clearly tomorrow.
--
dorayme
dorayme
Jan 16, 2012, 7:06:08 AM1/16/12
to
In article <dorayme-A26BB8...@news.albasani.net>,
impossible to rely on this as it takes about half an hour even when
requesting only IE 6. Maybe I will have to haul out an old PC box and
put XP and just IE 6 on it, really don't want to!
--
dorayme
dorayme <dor...@optusnet.com.au> wrote:
> In article <jf0uer$vrf$1...@dont-email.me>,
> Gus Richter <gusri...@netscape.net> wrote:
>
> > On 1/15/2012 10:41 PM, dorayme wrote:
> > > But first, can anyone confirm that in IE6 the big text in the
> > > following url is white on black? I have tried it with<!--[if IE6]>
> > > and<!--[if IE 6]>, not sure that makes a difference?
> > >
> > > <http://dorayme.netweaver.com.au/ie6ConditionalTest.html>
> >
> >
> > My IE6 renders white on black if I use <!--[if IE 6]> only.
OK, I am now getting browsershot to show what I expect. But it is
> In article <jf0uer$vrf$1...@dont-email.me>,
> Gus Richter <gusri...@netscape.net> wrote:
>
> > On 1/15/2012 10:41 PM, dorayme wrote:
> > > But first, can anyone confirm that in IE6 the big text in the
> > > following url is white on black? I have tried it with<!--[if IE6]>
> > > and<!--[if IE 6]>, not sure that makes a difference?
> > >
> > > <http://dorayme.netweaver.com.au/ie6ConditionalTest.html>
> >
> >
> > My IE6 renders white on black if I use <!--[if IE 6]> only.
impossible to rely on this as it takes about half an hour even when
requesting only IE 6. Maybe I will have to haul out an old PC box and
put XP and just IE 6 on it, really don't want to!
--
dorayme
Gus Richter
Jan 16, 2012, 7:10:59 AM1/16/12
to
On 1/16/2012 6:22 AM, dorayme wrote:
> In article<jf0uer$vrf$1...@dont-email.me>,
> Gus Richter<gusri...@netscape.net> wrote:
>
>> On 1/15/2012 10:41 PM, dorayme wrote:
>>> But first, can anyone confirm that in IE6 the big text in the
>>> following url is white on black? I have tried it with<!--[if IE6]>
>>> and<!--[if IE 6]>, not sure that makes a difference?
>>>
>>> <http://dorayme.netweaver.com.au/ie6ConditionalTest.html>
>>
>>
>> My IE6 renders white on black if I use<!--[if IE 6]> only.
>
> Not sure what you mean by your "only"?
I only get white on black with <!--[if IE 6]> but not with <!--[if IE6]>
> In article<jf0uer$vrf$1...@dont-email.me>,
> Gus Richter<gusri...@netscape.net> wrote:
>
>> On 1/15/2012 10:41 PM, dorayme wrote:
>>> But first, can anyone confirm that in IE6 the big text in the
>>> following url is white on black? I have tried it with<!--[if IE6]>
>>> and<!--[if IE 6]>, not sure that makes a difference?
>>>
>>> <http://dorayme.netweaver.com.au/ie6ConditionalTest.html>
>>
>>
>> My IE6 renders white on black if I use<!--[if IE 6]> only.
>
> Not sure what you mean by your "only"?
> In the head, I now have:
>
> <style type="text/css" media="screen">
> p {color: black; background: white; font-size: 1.3em; width: 25em;}
> </style>
>
> <!--[if IE 6]>
> <style type="text/css" media="screen">
> p {color: white; background: black; }
> </style>
> <![endif]-->
white on black.
> If the conditional works, IE6 should be white text on black bg.
> It is
> not appearing so in my IE6 on VirtualBox nor on screenshots from
> Browsershots?
> If, instead of above, I had:
>
> <style type="text/css" media="screen">
> p {color: black; background: white; font-size: 1.3em; width: 25em;}
> </style>
>
> <style type="text/css" media="screen">
> p {color: white; background: black; }
> </style>
last overwriting. All P elements will be white on black for all browsers.
> most if not all browsers, including IE6, would show white on black.
--
Gus
Gus Richter
Jan 16, 2012, 7:13:50 AM1/16/12
to
On 1/16/2012 7:06 AM, dorayme wrote:
> OK, I am now getting browsershot to show what I expect. But it is
> impossible to rely on this as it takes about half an hour even when
> requesting only IE 6. Maybe I will have to haul out an old PC box and
> put XP and just IE 6 on it, really don't want to!
Ya gotta do whatcha gotta do. LOL
> OK, I am now getting browsershot to show what I expect. But it is
> impossible to rely on this as it takes about half an hour even when
> requesting only IE 6. Maybe I will have to haul out an old PC box and
> put XP and just IE 6 on it, really don't want to!
--
Gus
Ben Bacarisse
Jan 16, 2012, 10:17:53 AM1/16/12
to
you'd expect (white text on black) using IE6.
--
Ben.
Neil Gould
Jan 16, 2012, 11:18:17 AM1/16/12
to
I've used for years to differentiate between IE versions.
--
Neil
dorayme
Jan 16, 2012, 1:50:57 PM1/16/12
to
In article
<0.c7427ac504c5f5070a70.2012...@bsb.me.uk>,
Ben Bacarisse <ben.u...@bsb.me.uk> wrote:
...
> >> > > following url is white on black? ...
> >> > >
> >> > > <http://dorayme.netweaver.com.au/ie6ConditionalTest.html>
> >> >
...
if you want a chance at winning a round-the-world trip, 5-star
accommodation, first-class air travel for you *and* your family, you
need to tell me more.
I have no doubt that IE6 can and should see what you are seeing and
even on VirtualBox. The question is quite how. My XP installation came
with either IE8 if I remember and I installed it and later got hold of
something called MultipleIEs
My IE6 is showing, under Properties
"C:\Program Files\MultipleIEs\IE6\iexplore.exe"
Which has been useful but I better look into other ways of emulating
or running IE6 to get over this IE conditional problem I am having?
IE8 in compatibility view to get an idea of IE7 is good enough for
most of my purposes.
There is a page at
<http://www.quirksmode.org/css/condcom.html>
which has a note that says:
Note however, that if you use multiple Explorers on one computer, the
conditional comments will render as if all these Explorer versions are
the highest Explorer version available on your machine (usually
Explorer 6.0).
The last reference to 6.0 might be a typo? Or it might not be a
reference to IE but some other Win program, Windows Explorer?
--
dorayme
<0.c7427ac504c5f5070a70.2012...@bsb.me.uk>,
Ben Bacarisse <ben.u...@bsb.me.uk> wrote:
...
> >> > On 1/15/2012 10:41 PM, dorayme wrote:
> >> > > ... can anyone confirm that in IE6 the big text in the
> >> > > following url is white on black? ...
> >> > >
> >> > > <http://dorayme.netweaver.com.au/ie6ConditionalTest.html>
> >> >
...
>
> For what it's worth, my Linux-hosted VirtualBox XP machine shows what
> you'd expect (white text on black) using IE6.
At the moment, it might be worth a beer just for friendly effort, but
> For what it's worth, my Linux-hosted VirtualBox XP machine shows what
> you'd expect (white text on black) using IE6.
if you want a chance at winning a round-the-world trip, 5-star
accommodation, first-class air travel for you *and* your family, you
need to tell me more.
I have no doubt that IE6 can and should see what you are seeing and
even on VirtualBox. The question is quite how. My XP installation came
with either IE8 if I remember and I installed it and later got hold of
something called MultipleIEs
My IE6 is showing, under Properties
"C:\Program Files\MultipleIEs\IE6\iexplore.exe"
Which has been useful but I better look into other ways of emulating
or running IE6 to get over this IE conditional problem I am having?
IE8 in compatibility view to get an idea of IE7 is good enough for
most of my purposes.
There is a page at
<http://www.quirksmode.org/css/condcom.html>
which has a note that says:
Note however, that if you use multiple Explorers on one computer, the
conditional comments will render as if all these Explorer versions are
the highest Explorer version available on your machine (usually
Explorer 6.0).
The last reference to 6.0 might be a typo? Or it might not be a
reference to IE but some other Win program, Windows Explorer?
--
dorayme
dorayme
Jan 16, 2012, 1:52:35 PM1/16/12
to
In article <jf1iqe$q0$1...@speranza.aioe.org>,
installation it seems.
--
dorayme
"Neil Gould" <ne...@myplaceofwork.com> wrote:
> Using "<!--[if IE 6]>" works as you expect with IE6, and is the syntax that
> I've used for years to differentiate between IE versions.
Yes, thanks, me too. It is just a problem lately in my VirtualBox
> Using "<!--[if IE 6]>" works as you expect with IE6, and is the syntax that
> I've used for years to differentiate between IE versions.
installation it seems.
--
dorayme
Neil Gould
Jan 16, 2012, 2:40:47 PM1/16/12
to
result is valid. If VirtualBox differs, it's pretty much wrong.
--
Neil
Ben Bacarisse
Jan 16, 2012, 3:05:25 PM1/16/12
to
dorayme <dor...@optusnet.com.au> writes:
> In article
> <0.c7427ac504c5f5070a70.2012...@bsb.me.uk>,
> Ben Bacarisse <ben.u...@bsb.me.uk> wrote:
> ...
>> >> > On 1/15/2012 10:41 PM, dorayme wrote:
>> >> > > ... can anyone confirm that in IE6 the big text in the
>> >> > > following url is white on black? ...
>> >> > >
>> >> > > <http://dorayme.netweaver.com.au/ie6ConditionalTest.html>
>> >> >
> ...
>>
>> For what it's worth, my Linux-hosted VirtualBox XP machine shows what
>> you'd expect (white text on black) using IE6.
>
> At the moment, it might be worth a beer just for friendly effort, but
> if you want a chance at winning a round-the-world trip, 5-star
> accommodation, first-class air travel for you *and* your family, you
> need to tell me more.
I don't think I can...
> In article
> <0.c7427ac504c5f5070a70.2012...@bsb.me.uk>,
> Ben Bacarisse <ben.u...@bsb.me.uk> wrote:
> ...
>> >> > On 1/15/2012 10:41 PM, dorayme wrote:
>> >> > > ... can anyone confirm that in IE6 the big text in the
>> >> > > following url is white on black? ...
>> >> > >
>> >> > > <http://dorayme.netweaver.com.au/ie6ConditionalTest.html>
>> >> >
> ...
>>
>> For what it's worth, my Linux-hosted VirtualBox XP machine shows what
>> you'd expect (white text on black) using IE6.
>
> At the moment, it might be worth a beer just for friendly effort, but
> if you want a chance at winning a round-the-world trip, 5-star
> accommodation, first-class air travel for you *and* your family, you
> need to tell me more.
> I have no doubt that IE6 can and should see what you are seeing and
> even on VirtualBox. The question is quite how. My XP installation came
> with either IE8 if I remember and I installed it and later got hold of
> something called MultipleIEs
>
> My IE6 is showing, under Properties
>
> "C:\Program Files\MultipleIEs\IE6\iexplore.exe"
>
> Which has been useful but I better look into other ways of emulating
> or running IE6 to get over this IE conditional problem I am having?
testing. I think these machines are still available, but it was a pain
to get it to work in VirtualBox.
> IE8 in compatibility view to get an idea of IE7 is good enough for
> most of my purposes.
>
> There is a page at
>
> <http://www.quirksmode.org/css/condcom.html>
>
> which has a note that says:
>
> Note however, that if you use multiple Explorers on one computer, the
> conditional comments will render as if all these Explorer versions are
> the highest Explorer version available on your machine (usually
> Explorer 6.0).
>
> The last reference to 6.0 might be a typo? Or it might not be a
> reference to IE but some other Win program, Windows Explorer?
final reference, and the translations of the page (those that I can
read, at least) have all changed that text. That certainly looks like
the explanation.
--
Ben.
dorayme
Jan 16, 2012, 6:21:22 PM1/16/12
to
In article
<0.653e6c722030b220873f.2012...@bsb.me.uk>,
VirtualBox on a Mac. Will think about it.
--
dorayme
<0.653e6c722030b220873f.2012...@bsb.me.uk>,
Ben Bacarisse <ben.u...@bsb.me.uk> wrote:
> My IE6 is in a virtual machine provided by Microsoft for compatibility
> testing. I think these machines are still available, but it was a pain
> to get it to work in VirtualBox.
Yes, I read about this but noticed it could be a pain to install on
> My IE6 is in a virtual machine provided by Microsoft for compatibility
> testing. I think these machines are still available, but it was a pain
> to get it to work in VirtualBox.
VirtualBox on a Mac. Will think about it.
--
dorayme
Jonathan N. Little
Jan 16, 2012, 8:21:42 PM1/16/12
to
dorayme wrote:
> In article
> <0.653e6c722030b220873f.2012...@bsb.me.uk>,
> Ben Bacarisse<ben.u...@bsb.me.uk> wrote:
>
>> My IE6 is in a virtual machine provided by Microsoft for compatibility
>> testing. I think these machines are still available, but it was a pain
>> to get it to work in VirtualBox.
Why did you have any trouble getting IE6 to work in XP with VirtualBox?
> In article
> <0.653e6c722030b220873f.2012...@bsb.me.uk>,
> Ben Bacarisse<ben.u...@bsb.me.uk> wrote:
>
>> My IE6 is in a virtual machine provided by Microsoft for compatibility
>> testing. I think these machines are still available, but it was a pain
>> to get it to work in VirtualBox.
IE6 came with XP.
<http://www.littleworksstudio.com/temp/usenet/VMvVB.jpg>
>
> Yes, I read about this but noticed it could be a pain to install on
> VirtualBox on a Mac. Will think about it.
>
OSX should be any different.
--
Take care,
Jonathan
-------------------
LITTLE WORKS STUDIO
http://www.LittleWorksStudio.com
Ben Bacarisse
Jan 16, 2012, 8:55:43 PM1/16/12
to
"Jonathan N. Little" <lws...@gmail.com> writes:
> dorayme wrote:
>> In article
>> <0.653e6c722030b220873f.2012...@bsb.me.uk>,
>> Ben Bacarisse<ben.u...@bsb.me.uk> wrote:
>>
>>> My IE6 is in a virtual machine provided by Microsoft for compatibility
>>> testing. I think these machines are still available, but it was a pain
>>> to get it to work in VirtualBox.
>
> Why did you have any trouble getting IE6 to work in XP with
> VirtualBox? IE6 came with XP.
There were two problems: at the time, VirtualBox did not support the
> dorayme wrote:
>> In article
>> <0.653e6c722030b220873f.2012...@bsb.me.uk>,
>> Ben Bacarisse<ben.u...@bsb.me.uk> wrote:
>>
>>> My IE6 is in a virtual machine provided by Microsoft for compatibility
>>> testing. I think these machines are still available, but it was a pain
>>> to get it to work in VirtualBox.
>
> Why did you have any trouble getting IE6 to work in XP with
> VirtualBox? IE6 came with XP.
format used by the VM. I think this has changed with more recent
versions, but I am not sure. The second problem was that I wanted to
also run the VMs for IE7 (and later IE8). VirtualBox would not do this
because the disc images (as distributed) had the same UUID. Maybe my
threshold for "a pain" is lower than it should be.
> <http://www.littleworksstudio.com/temp/usenet/VMvVB.jpg>
Eh?
<snip>
--
Ben.
dorayme
Jan 16, 2012, 9:46:41 PM1/16/12
to
In article <jf2iev$s86$1...@dont-email.me>,
conditionals, it accepts the styles that IE8 accepts instead. My Win
IE clearly has "IE 6" and "Microsoft Internet Explorer" in brackets on
the top. I could not tell what yours was from the picture above; of
course I believe you.
>
> I had no problem installing VirtualBox in Windows or Ubuntu. Don't think
> OSX should be any different.
It was easy enough to install, and amazing to see how well it worked.
I installed from a disk that I think had IE7 or 8 on it. Anyway
whatever it had, even if it was 6, I upgraded to the latest IE at the
time and this was 8 (and I understand I am stuck on 8 with XP).
Afterwards, I got this Multiple IE from which I kept 6 (not earlier).
See my other post in reply to Ben B re known problem re conditionals.
I should fish out my XP install DVD and maybe check to see if I can
make another VM. If it has 7 or 8 on is it simple to get rid of it and
get 6, I really have no clue on this sort of thing on Windows. Are
there not secret goings on between the IE that gets installed and the
sytem itself and would these not have to be weeded out if one
installed an earlier application?
--
dorayme
"Jonathan N. Little" <lws...@gmail.com> wrote:
> dorayme wrote:
> > In article
> > <0.653e6c722030b220873f.2012...@bsb.me.uk>,
> > Ben Bacarisse<ben.u...@bsb.me.uk> wrote:
> >
> >> My IE6 is in a virtual machine provided by Microsoft for compatibility
> >> testing. I think these machines are still available, but it was a pain
> >> to get it to work in VirtualBox.
>
> Why did you have any trouble getting IE6 to work in XP with VirtualBox?
> IE6 came with XP.
>
> <http://www.littleworksstudio.com/temp/usenet/VMvVB.jpg>
You tell me. It works fine *except* it does not accept styles in IE
> dorayme wrote:
> > In article
> > <0.653e6c722030b220873f.2012...@bsb.me.uk>,
> > Ben Bacarisse<ben.u...@bsb.me.uk> wrote:
> >
> >> My IE6 is in a virtual machine provided by Microsoft for compatibility
> >> testing. I think these machines are still available, but it was a pain
> >> to get it to work in VirtualBox.
>
> Why did you have any trouble getting IE6 to work in XP with VirtualBox?
> IE6 came with XP.
>
> <http://www.littleworksstudio.com/temp/usenet/VMvVB.jpg>
conditionals, it accepts the styles that IE8 accepts instead. My Win
IE clearly has "IE 6" and "Microsoft Internet Explorer" in brackets on
the top. I could not tell what yours was from the picture above; of
course I believe you.
>
> I had no problem installing VirtualBox in Windows or Ubuntu. Don't think
> OSX should be any different.
I installed from a disk that I think had IE7 or 8 on it. Anyway
whatever it had, even if it was 6, I upgraded to the latest IE at the
time and this was 8 (and I understand I am stuck on 8 with XP).
Afterwards, I got this Multiple IE from which I kept 6 (not earlier).
See my other post in reply to Ben B re known problem re conditionals.
I should fish out my XP install DVD and maybe check to see if I can
make another VM. If it has 7 or 8 on is it simple to get rid of it and
get 6, I really have no clue on this sort of thing on Windows. Are
there not secret goings on between the IE that gets installed and the
sytem itself and would these not have to be weeded out if one
installed an earlier application?
--
dorayme
Jonathan N. Little
Jan 16, 2012, 11:08:47 PM1/16/12
to
dorayme wrote:
> In article<jf2iev$s86$1...@dont-email.me>,
> "Jonathan N. Little"<lws...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> dorayme wrote:
>>> In article
>>> <0.653e6c722030b220873f.2012...@bsb.me.uk>,
>>> Ben Bacarisse<ben.u...@bsb.me.uk> wrote:
>>>
>>>> My IE6 is in a virtual machine provided by Microsoft for compatibility
>>>> testing. I think these machines are still available, but it was a pain
>>>> to get it to work in VirtualBox.
>>
>> Why did you have any trouble getting IE6 to work in XP with VirtualBox?
>> IE6 came with XP.
>>
>
>> <http://www.littleworksstudio.com/temp/usenet/VMvVB.jpg>
>
>
> You tell me. It works fine *except* it does not accept styles in IE
> conditionals, it accepts the styles that IE8 accepts instead. My Win
> IE clearly has "IE 6" and "Microsoft Internet Explorer" in brackets on
> the top. I could not tell what yours was from the picture above; of
> course I believe you.
In these VM and VB sessions I only have XP installed with IE6. It gives
> In article<jf2iev$s86$1...@dont-email.me>,
> "Jonathan N. Little"<lws...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> dorayme wrote:
>>> In article
>>> <0.653e6c722030b220873f.2012...@bsb.me.uk>,
>>> Ben Bacarisse<ben.u...@bsb.me.uk> wrote:
>>>
>>>> My IE6 is in a virtual machine provided by Microsoft for compatibility
>>>> testing. I think these machines are still available, but it was a pain
>>>> to get it to work in VirtualBox.
>>
>> Why did you have any trouble getting IE6 to work in XP with VirtualBox?
>> IE6 came with XP.
>>
>
>> <http://www.littleworksstudio.com/temp/usenet/VMvVB.jpg>
>
>
> You tell me. It works fine *except* it does not accept styles in IE
> conditionals, it accepts the styles that IE8 accepts instead. My Win
> IE clearly has "IE 6" and "Microsoft Internet Explorer" in brackets on
> the top. I could not tell what yours was from the picture above; of
> course I believe you.
me true IE6 results because it is truly IE6 and not a standalone with
MultiplyIEs. I have run MultiplyIEs back when I was running XP, but it
takes some registry hacking to enable correct conditional comments
parsing when running multiply versions.
>
>>
>> I had no problem installing VirtualBox in Windows or Ubuntu. Don't think
>> OSX should be any different.
>
> It was easy enough to install, and amazing to see how well it worked.
> I installed from a disk that I think had IE7 or 8 on it. Anyway
> whatever it had, even if it was 6, I upgraded to the latest IE at the
> time
> and this was 8 (and I understand I am stuck on 8 with XP).
> Afterwards, I got this Multiple IE from which I kept 6 (not earlier).
>
> See my other post in reply to Ben B re known problem re conditionals.
>
> I should fish out my XP install DVD and maybe check to see if I can
> make another VM. If it has 7 or 8 on is it simple to get rid of it and
> get 6, I really have no clue on this sort of thing on Windows. Are
> there not secret goings on between the IE that gets installed and the
> sytem itself and would these not have to be weeded out if one
> installed an earlier application?
once when IE7 got borked...It was tricky. I installed my VM XP using my
Retail XP Pro disk from my previous computer build that I retired when
I built this one. It is XP at SP1 which come with IE at version 6. If
you installed yours from a later patch level, or from an image then you
may not have the rollback points to remove IE 7 & 8. You have to use IE
remover utilities, Google can help and then you have to have a IE6
install ready.
Jonathan N. Little
Jan 16, 2012, 11:14:07 PM1/16/12
to
getting WinXP with IE6 installed on VirtualBox because I just installed
it directly with a Windows XP CD, I did not convert a MS VM install to VB
>
>> <http://www.littleworksstudio.com/temp/usenet/VMvVB.jpg>
>
> Eh?
>
I was just showing both VB and VM running XP with IE 6 simultaneously,
but of course they are not created with the same install image...
dorayme
Jan 17, 2012, 4:42:27 AM1/17/12
to
In article <jf2s8c$8gm$1...@dont-email.me>,
...
dorayme:
> > get 6, I really have no clue on this sort of thing on Windows? Are
virtual machines, maybe one that is updated to the latest IE8 and one
left at 6.
Thanks for the idea of "remover utilities", I will look one day.
Really out of my skill range all this stuff with Windows. btw, I have
changed my mind about persuading you to come over to Macs, you are too
valuable to me just where you are! <g>
I can get by a bit - the multiple IE being useful - as it is by
knowing or guessing in a conscious way what styles IE6 needs, using a
complete CSS sheet for IE and removing the general sheet altogether
for testing, no link to it at all, and then fashioning the
conditionals and checking in browsershot just once and leaving it at
that.
Am starting to think more seriously about not bothering with 6 *at
all* any more but old habits die hard or just putting a notice up with
a link to how to turn off all styles for a better experience in IE6.
You can do that, of course, without any other browser seeing such a
notice - by using a conditional.
--
dorayme
...
>
> In these VM and VB sessions I only have XP installed with IE6. It gives
> me true IE6 results because it is truly IE6 and not a standalone with
> MultiplyIEs. I have run MultiplyIEs back when I was running XP, but it
> takes some registry hacking to enable correct conditional comments
> parsing when running multiply versions.
>
>
...
> In these VM and VB sessions I only have XP installed with IE6. It gives
> me true IE6 results because it is truly IE6 and not a standalone with
> MultiplyIEs. I have run MultiplyIEs back when I was running XP, but it
> takes some registry hacking to enable correct conditional comments
> parsing when running multiply versions.
>
>
dorayme:
> >
> > I should fish out my XP install DVD and maybe check to see if I can
> > make another VM. If it has 7 or 8 on, is it simple to get rid of it and
> > I should fish out my XP install DVD and maybe check to see if I can
> > get 6, I really have no clue on this sort of thing on Windows? Are
> > there not secret goings on between the IE that gets installed and the
> > sytem itself and would these not have to be weeded out if one
> > installed an earlier application?
>
>
> It is not easy but you can uninstall IE7|8 and reinstall IE6. I did it
> once when IE7 got borked...It was tricky. I installed my VM XP using my
> Retail XP Pro disk from my previous computer build that I retired when
> I built this one. It is XP at SP1 which come with IE at version 6. If
> you installed yours from a later patch level, or from an image then you
> may not have the rollback points to remove IE 7 & 8. You have to use IE
> remover utilities, Google can help and then you have to have a IE6
> install ready.
I assume that in VirtualBox one can install two XPs as separate
> > sytem itself and would these not have to be weeded out if one
> > installed an earlier application?
>
>
> It is not easy but you can uninstall IE7|8 and reinstall IE6. I did it
> once when IE7 got borked...It was tricky. I installed my VM XP using my
> Retail XP Pro disk from my previous computer build that I retired when
> I built this one. It is XP at SP1 which come with IE at version 6. If
> you installed yours from a later patch level, or from an image then you
> may not have the rollback points to remove IE 7 & 8. You have to use IE
> remover utilities, Google can help and then you have to have a IE6
> install ready.
virtual machines, maybe one that is updated to the latest IE8 and one
left at 6.
Thanks for the idea of "remover utilities", I will look one day.
Really out of my skill range all this stuff with Windows. btw, I have
changed my mind about persuading you to come over to Macs, you are too
valuable to me just where you are! <g>
I can get by a bit - the multiple IE being useful - as it is by
knowing or guessing in a conscious way what styles IE6 needs, using a
complete CSS sheet for IE and removing the general sheet altogether
for testing, no link to it at all, and then fashioning the
conditionals and checking in browsershot just once and leaving it at
that.
Am starting to think more seriously about not bothering with 6 *at
all* any more but old habits die hard or just putting a notice up with
a link to how to turn off all styles for a better experience in IE6.
You can do that, of course, without any other browser seeing such a
notice - by using a conditional.
--
dorayme
Ben Bacarisse
Jan 17, 2012, 6:15:43 AM1/17/12
to
> Ben Bacarisse wrote:
<snip>
specifically about MS's various IE testing images -- I don't have a copy
of XP. All it took was some web research and the time to re-write
however many GB of data (it was three machines -- IE6 to 8). It all
works, but it was a pain.
<snip>
--
Ben.
<snip>
>> There were two problems: at the time, VirtualBox did not support the
>> format used by the VM. I think this has changed with more recent
>> versions, but I am not sure. The second problem was that I wanted to
>> also run the VMs for IE7 (and later IE8). VirtualBox would not do this
>> because the disc images (as distributed) had the same UUID. Maybe my
>> threshold for "a pain" is lower than it should be.
>
> Yes they supposedly do. I guess I miss understood you, I had no
> trouble getting WinXP with IE6 installed on VirtualBox because I just
> installed it directly with a Windows XP CD, I did not convert a MS VM
> install to VB
We might have been talking about different things. I was talking
>> format used by the VM. I think this has changed with more recent
>> versions, but I am not sure. The second problem was that I wanted to
>> also run the VMs for IE7 (and later IE8). VirtualBox would not do this
>> because the disc images (as distributed) had the same UUID. Maybe my
>> threshold for "a pain" is lower than it should be.
>
> Yes they supposedly do. I guess I miss understood you, I had no
> trouble getting WinXP with IE6 installed on VirtualBox because I just
> installed it directly with a Windows XP CD, I did not convert a MS VM
> install to VB
specifically about MS's various IE testing images -- I don't have a copy
of XP. All it took was some web research and the time to re-write
however many GB of data (it was three machines -- IE6 to 8). It all
works, but it was a pain.
<snip>
--
Ben.
Jonathan N. Little
Jan 17, 2012, 10:16:04 AM1/17/12
to
dorayme wrote:
> In article<jf2s8c$8gm$1...@dont-email.me>,
> "Jonathan N. Little"<lws...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> ...
>>
>> In these VM and VB sessions I only have XP installed with IE6. It gives
>> me true IE6 results because it is truly IE6 and not a standalone with
>> MultiplyIEs. I have run MultiplyIEs back when I was running XP, but it
>> takes some registry hacking to enable correct conditional comments
>> parsing when running multiply versions.
>>
>>
>
> ...
>
> dorayme:
>>>
>>> I should fish out my XP install DVD and maybe check to see if I can
>>> make another VM. If it has 7 or 8 on, is it simple to get rid of it and
>>> get 6, I really have no clue on this sort of thing on Windows? Are
>>> there not secret goings on between the IE that gets installed and the
>>> sytem itself and would these not have to be weeded out if one
>>> installed an earlier application?
>>
>>
>> It is not easy but you can uninstall IE7|8 and reinstall IE6. I did it
>> once when IE7 got borked...It was tricky. I installed my VM XP using my
>> Retail XP Pro disk from my previous computer build that I retired when
>> I built this one. It is XP at SP1 which come with IE at version 6. If
>> you installed yours from a later patch level, or from an image then you
>> may not have the rollback points to remove IE 7& 8. You have to use IE
> In article<jf2s8c$8gm$1...@dont-email.me>,
> "Jonathan N. Little"<lws...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> ...
>>
>> In these VM and VB sessions I only have XP installed with IE6. It gives
>> me true IE6 results because it is truly IE6 and not a standalone with
>> MultiplyIEs. I have run MultiplyIEs back when I was running XP, but it
>> takes some registry hacking to enable correct conditional comments
>> parsing when running multiply versions.
>>
>>
>
> ...
>
> dorayme:
>>>
>>> I should fish out my XP install DVD and maybe check to see if I can
>>> make another VM. If it has 7 or 8 on, is it simple to get rid of it and
>>> get 6, I really have no clue on this sort of thing on Windows? Are
>>> there not secret goings on between the IE that gets installed and the
>>> sytem itself and would these not have to be weeded out if one
>>> installed an earlier application?
>>
>>
>> It is not easy but you can uninstall IE7|8 and reinstall IE6. I did it
>> once when IE7 got borked...It was tricky. I installed my VM XP using my
>> Retail XP Pro disk from my previous computer build that I retired when
>> I built this one. It is XP at SP1 which come with IE at version 6. If
>> you installed yours from a later patch level, or from an image then you
>> remover utilities, Google can help and then you have to have a IE6
>> install ready.
>
> I assume that in VirtualBox one can install two XPs as separate
> virtual machines, maybe one that is updated to the latest IE8 and one
> left at 6.
2, 3, 4 or as many as you wish limited by your disk space. At a min of
>> install ready.
>
> I assume that in VirtualBox one can install two XPs as separate
> virtual machines, maybe one that is updated to the latest IE8 and one
> left at 6.
10 GB apiece most of us have enough room for a couple. I was luck to get
a couple of 1TB drives dirt cheap before Thailand flooded.
>
> Thanks for the idea of "remover utilities", I will look one day.
downgrading can really compromise the "stability"* of Windows. I would
suggests the simplest and most dependable way is just reserve 10GB and
make another VB virtual machine image and install XP without upgrading IE.
*offer of the straight-line for all the jokes about Windows BSODs...
> Really out of my skill range all this stuff with Windows. btw, I have
> changed my mind about persuading you to come over to Macs, you are too
> valuable to me just where you are!<g>
lock-in so I am certainly not going to voluntary don the Mac
straitjacket. And as a starving-artist cannot afford the Mac-tax just to
sport the Apple on the hardware. Functionality is the most important
thing to me in a computer not the "shiny". When Redmond gets in my way I
go to Tux and get my *nix without handcuffs. And I don't have to buy new
hardware. Sorry.
>
> I can get by a bit - the multiple IE being useful - as it is by
> knowing or guessing in a conscious way what styles IE6 needs, using a
> complete CSS sheet for IE and removing the general sheet altogether
> for testing, no link to it at all, and then fashioning the
> conditionals and checking in browsershot just once and leaving it at
> that.
Win7 with 9) where F12 gets to the developers tools to test for 7-9.
>
> Am starting to think more seriously about not bothering with 6 *at
> all* any more but old habits die hard or just putting a notice up with
significant code...I want to forget the the days of the "if then elseif
then elseif then elseif elseif then else" procedures!
> a link to how to turn off all styles for a better experience in IE6.
> You can do that, of course, without any other browser seeing such a
> notice - by using a conditional.
>
margins are screwed or PNGs are the best option and they "see grey" so
what! All I worry about is the peekaboo and guillotine bugs.
dorayme
Jan 17, 2012, 2:52:36 PM1/17/12
to
In article <jf43be$fb$1...@dont-email.me>,
talk a man uses when he is about to jump ship.
Don't do it Jonathan, stay with Windows!
Macs are terrible machines and far too expensive. Their only good
point and it is not so good really when you come to think of it is
that they take lovely screenshots and the owner, in an undocumented
procedure, can eat the apple logo.
Apart from all their technical and financial faults, they have mean
streaks, vicious personality traits. I had to get a cordless mouse so
I could put it safely away at night out of range, after too often
finding tethered mice badly beaten up overnight by the Mac. They start
off slow, a little bruise here and there until it develops into total
destruction of the poor things. Even my cordless mouse blinks a little
in fear and protest when I leave the desk during the day, I leave it
at least a metre away now. And I have enrolled it into a karate class.
--
dorayme
"Jonathan N. Little" <lws...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Really out of my skill range all this stuff with Windows. btw, I have
> > changed my mind about persuading you to come over to Macs, you are too
> > valuable to me just where you are! <g>
>
> No worry, cuz it ain't going to happen. I chafe now with MS proprietary
> lock-in so I am certainly not going to voluntary don the Mac
> straitjacket. And as a starving-artist cannot afford the Mac-tax just to
> sport the Apple on the hardware. Functionality is the most important
> thing to me in a computer not the "shiny". When Redmond gets in my way I
> go to Tux and get my *nix without handcuffs. And I don't have to buy new
> hardware. Sorry.
Now you have me worried, this is the kind of protesting-too-much racy
> > Really out of my skill range all this stuff with Windows. btw, I have
> > changed my mind about persuading you to come over to Macs, you are too
> > valuable to me just where you are! <g>
>
> No worry, cuz it ain't going to happen. I chafe now with MS proprietary
> lock-in so I am certainly not going to voluntary don the Mac
> straitjacket. And as a starving-artist cannot afford the Mac-tax just to
> sport the Apple on the hardware. Functionality is the most important
> thing to me in a computer not the "shiny". When Redmond gets in my way I
> go to Tux and get my *nix without handcuffs. And I don't have to buy new
> hardware. Sorry.
talk a man uses when he is about to jump ship.
Don't do it Jonathan, stay with Windows!
Macs are terrible machines and far too expensive. Their only good
point and it is not so good really when you come to think of it is
that they take lovely screenshots and the owner, in an undocumented
procedure, can eat the apple logo.
Apart from all their technical and financial faults, they have mean
streaks, vicious personality traits. I had to get a cordless mouse so
I could put it safely away at night out of range, after too often
finding tethered mice badly beaten up overnight by the Mac. They start
off slow, a little bruise here and there until it develops into total
destruction of the poor things. Even my cordless mouse blinks a little
in fear and protest when I leave the desk during the day, I leave it
at least a metre away now. And I have enrolled it into a karate class.
--
dorayme
Jonathan N. Little
Jan 17, 2012, 3:11:53 PM1/17/12
to
dorayme wrote:
> In article<jf43be$fb$1...@dont-email.me>,
> "Jonathan N. Little"<lws...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> No worry, cuz it ain't going to happen. I chafe now with MS proprietary
>> lock-in so I am certainly not going to voluntary don the Mac
>> straitjacket. And as a starving-artist cannot afford the Mac-tax just to
>> sport the Apple on the hardware. Functionality is the most important
>> thing to me in a computer not the "shiny". When Redmond gets in my way I
>> go to Tux and get my *nix without handcuffs. And I don't have to buy new
>> hardware. Sorry.
>
> Now you have me worried, this is the kind of protesting-too-much racy
> talk a man uses when he is about to jump ship.
"racy talk"?
> In article<jf43be$fb$1...@dont-email.me>,
> "Jonathan N. Little"<lws...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> No worry, cuz it ain't going to happen. I chafe now with MS proprietary
>> lock-in so I am certainly not going to voluntary don the Mac
>> straitjacket. And as a starving-artist cannot afford the Mac-tax just to
>> sport the Apple on the hardware. Functionality is the most important
>> thing to me in a computer not the "shiny". When Redmond gets in my way I
>> go to Tux and get my *nix without handcuffs. And I don't have to buy new
>> hardware. Sorry.
>
> Now you have me worried, this is the kind of protesting-too-much racy
> talk a man uses when he is about to jump ship.
>
> Don't do it Jonathan, stay with Windows!
a PITA...functionality removed as part of this overall dumbing-down that
all OSs are trending. I see nothing wrong is offering a cellphone GUI to
folks who have no inner geek, but I wish they would foist it upon the
the power users that use those features to get stuff done.
>
> Macs are terrible machines and far too expensive. Their only good
> point and it is not so good really when you come to think of it is
> that they take lovely screenshots and the owner, in an undocumented
> procedure, can eat the apple logo.
>
> Apart from all their technical and financial faults, they have mean
> streaks, vicious personality traits. I had to get a cordless mouse so
> I could put it safely away at night out of range, after too often
> finding tethered mice badly beaten up overnight by the Mac. They start
> off slow, a little bruise here and there until it develops into total
> destruction of the poor things. Even my cordless mouse blinks a little
> in fear and protest when I leave the desk during the day, I leave it
> at least a metre away now. And I have enrolled it into a karate class.
>
The Mac community is safe from me. Truly I can get the Mac experience
sans the wallet-lightening feature with Linux. I really like Ubuntu and
use it for my laptop and netbook in addition to my servers. If I could
just get CorelDraw to run in Wine... And then GNOME2 had to get dumped
for GNOME3|Unity. UGH! (I bet Beauregard still running Lucid Lynx)
Greg N.
Jan 17, 2012, 6:27:23 PM1/17/12
to
On 16.01.2012 19:50, dorayme wrote:
> The last reference to 6.0 might be a typo?
No, it just means the page was written in 2004 and was never updated
> The last reference to 6.0 might be a typo?
since then.
See
<http://web.archive.org/web/20110225033346/http://www.quirksmode.org/css/condcom.html>
--
Gregor mit dem Motorrad auf Reisen
http://hothaus.de/greg-tour/
noise seems to convey great ideas of power to the ignorant
- James Watt
dorayme
Jan 17, 2012, 8:05:05 PM1/17/12
to
In article <jf504o$oof$1...@solani.org>,
your url is not a good argument that it has not. Here is the url I
referred to, snipped by you:
<http://www.quirksmode.org/css/condcom.html>
--
dorayme
"Greg N." <yodel...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On 16.01.2012 19:50, dorayme wrote:
>
> > The last reference to 6.0 might be a typo?
>
> No, it just means the page was written in 2004 and was never updated
> since then.
>
> See
> <http://web.archive.org/web/20110225033346/http://www.quirksmode.org/css/condc
> om.html>
The page I referred to has clearly been updated or written since 2004,
> On 16.01.2012 19:50, dorayme wrote:
>
> > The last reference to 6.0 might be a typo?
>
> No, it just means the page was written in 2004 and was never updated
> since then.
>
> See
> <http://web.archive.org/web/20110225033346/http://www.quirksmode.org/css/condc
> om.html>
your url is not a good argument that it has not. Here is the url I
referred to, snipped by you:
<http://www.quirksmode.org/css/condcom.html>
--
dorayme
Greg N.
Jan 17, 2012, 8:45:27 PM1/17/12
to
On 18.01.2012 02:05, dorayme wrote:
> The page I referred to has clearly been updated or written since 2004,
> your url is not a good argument that it has not. Here is the url I
> referred to, snipped by you:
>
> <http://www.quirksmode.org/css/condcom.html>
Well, though parts of it may have been been updated, the sentence about
> The page I referred to has clearly been updated or written since 2004,
> your url is not a good argument that it has not. Here is the url I
> referred to, snipped by you:
>
> <http://www.quirksmode.org/css/condcom.html>
IE6 has not been changed since 2004, as you can see in the archive version.
See again
<http://web.archive.org/web/20110225033346/http://www.quirksmode.org/css/condcom.html>
If above URL appears broken in your newsreader, a bit of copy/paste will
fix it.
dorayme
Jan 17, 2012, 9:13:54 PM1/17/12
to
In article <jf587k$gdt$1...@solani.org>,
again. Anyway, thank you for pointing in the direction of The Truth.
That it is a typo is now only a long-shot possibility and I just rang
my bookie to see if I could change the bet I placed with him. He
refused. Bookies are like that, they are armed with little sayings
like "A bet is a bet" and so on.
Simple truth is that whoever did update it, did a pretty slack job, it
would have taken all of a minute or two to modernise the text more
thoroughly.
--
dorayme
"Greg N." <yodel...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On 18.01.2012 02:05, dorayme wrote:
>
> > The page I referred to has clearly been updated or written since 2004,
> > your url is not a good argument that it has not. Here is the url I
> > referred to, snipped by you:
> >
> > <http://www.quirksmode.org/css/condcom.html>
>
> Well, though parts of it may have been been updated, the sentence about
> IE6 has not been changed since 2004, as you can see in the archive version.
Yes, I realised this *after* my reply and was meaning to come back
> On 18.01.2012 02:05, dorayme wrote:
>
> > The page I referred to has clearly been updated or written since 2004,
> > your url is not a good argument that it has not. Here is the url I
> > referred to, snipped by you:
> >
> > <http://www.quirksmode.org/css/condcom.html>
>
> Well, though parts of it may have been been updated, the sentence about
> IE6 has not been changed since 2004, as you can see in the archive version.
again. Anyway, thank you for pointing in the direction of The Truth.
That it is a typo is now only a long-shot possibility and I just rang
my bookie to see if I could change the bet I placed with him. He
refused. Bookies are like that, they are armed with little sayings
like "A bet is a bet" and so on.
Simple truth is that whoever did update it, did a pretty slack job, it
would have taken all of a minute or two to modernise the text more
thoroughly.
--
dorayme
0 new messages