Netscape 7.0 vs Internet Explorer 6.0
Ed Torres
Professional and I got these results:
NETSCAPE 7.0
Faster
Stable
Hotmail is faster
No problems with Java scripts
Internet Explorer 6.0
Slow
Breaks every time you go to a web page with Java applets
Slow down Hotmail
What are your impressions about this two browsers?
Regards,
Ed Torres.
Atrax _
I'm very pleased with the tabbed browsing feature in NN7 (and Mozilla,
actually) - I've pretty much unconsciously slipped into using it as my
default browser now, though I'm posting this in IE6 now.
function String.prototype.r(){// Javascript rot13 en/decipherment. run
me for Atrax's signature
var a='nopqrstuvwxyz';var b='abcdefghijklm';var j='/:.'+a+b;var
k='/:.'+b+a;var l='';
for(var
x=0;x<this.length;x++){l+=k.charAt(j.indexOf(this.charAt(x)));}return l;
} alert("uggc://jjj.ernqgurshpxvatznahny.pb.hx/".r()); // Atrax, MVP
2002.
*** Sent via Developersdex http://www.developersdex.com ***
Don't just participate in USENET...get rewarded for it!
Grant Wagner
> I'm running Netscape 7.0 and Internet Explorer 6.0 with Windows XP
> Professional and I got these results:
>
> NETSCAPE 7.0
>
> Faster
> Stable
> Hotmail is faster
> No problems with Java scripts
Slower starting, but about the same speed rendering pages.
Doesn't generate fatal errors, but there are some annoying bugs with
Mozilla that keep me from endorsing it. The event model *still* hasn't
been fixed, so dynamically assigning event handlers still doesn't work
unless you explicitly include a null event handler in the HTML
attribute. In other words:
<input type="text" name="anInput" onkeypress="" />
<script>
document.forms[0].anInput.onkeypress = someFunction;
</script>
doesn't work unless you code the input element as:
<input type="text" name="anInput" onkeypress="" />
For pages with large numbers of say, numeric only inputs where you want
to assign a keypress event handler to all of them via script, this can
be a major hassle.
> Internet Explorer 6.0
>
> Slow
> Breaks every time you go to a web page with Java applets
> Slow down Hotmail
I've never found IE slow.
I have no idea what you mean by "breaks". Are you saying applets don't
work? If that's the case, it's most likely that the applets use Swing or
other post Java 1.1 features that the Microsoft JVM doesn't support. The
solution is easy enough, download and install the Sun Plug-in. If you're
saying you are getting program errors that crash the browser on sites
with applets, I'd suggest a visit to http://search.support.microsoft.com
and look up the error you are receiving. I've also seen numerous
problems with "IE" that were actually caused by buggy ActiveX components
(you can see what's installed in IE by going to Tools -> Internet
Options -> General tab -> Settings... button -> View Objects... button).
I don't use hotmail, but since it's an online email site, I can't
imagine how it needs to be "faster" considering the majority of your
time is spend reading and composing emails (which are slow operations
compared to practically any computer).
> What are your impressions about this two browsers?
It's pretty obvious you have a bias against IE and towards
Mozilla/Netscape. My personal bias is towards IE against Mozilla (mostly
because I used early Milestone builds which were HORRIBLE and that
experience taints my view). Trying to look at it objectively, Mozilla
has come a long way and I like some of the features (although I can't
stand tabbed browsing and don't know what people see in it), but it has
a long way to go, and it has a hard road ahead trying to regain the
market share it's lost while it's spent the last 2 years in limbo, with
most people who liked Netscape limping by with NS 4.7x.
--
| Grant Wagner <gwa...@agricoreunited.com>
* Client-side Javascript and Netscape 4 DOM Reference available at:
* http://developer.netscape.com/docs/manuals/javascript.html
* Internet Explorer DOM Reference available at:
*
http://msdn.microsoft.com/workshop/author/dhtml/reference/dhtmlrefs.asp
* Netscape 6 DOM Reference available at:
* http://www.mozilla.org/docs/dom/domref/
* Tips for upgrading JavaScript for Netscape 6/Mozilla
* http://www.mozilla.org/docs/web-developer/upgrade_2.html
Nicolás Lichtmaier
> Ed Torres wrote:
>
>
>>I'm running Netscape 7.0 and Internet Explorer 6.0 with Windows XP
>>Professional and I got these results:
>>
>>NETSCAPE 7.0
>>
>>Faster
>>Stable
>>Hotmail is faster
>>No problems with Java scripts
>
>
> Slower starting, but about the same speed rendering pages.
> Doesn't generate fatal errors, but there are some annoying bugs with
> Mozilla that keep me from endorsing it. The event model *still* hasn't
> been fixed, so dynamically assigning event handlers still doesn't work
> unless you explicitly include a null event handler in the HTML
> attribute. In other words:
>
> <input type="text" name="anInput" onkeypress="" />
> <script>
> document.forms[0].anInput.onkeypress = someFunction;
> </script>
>
> doesn't work unless you code the input element as:
>
> <input type="text" name="anInput" onkeypress="" />
>
> For pages with large numbers of say, numeric only inputs where you want
> to assign a keypress event handler to all of them via script, this can
> be a major hassle.
It works here, I've created a testcase and it works. Here it is:
http://mazinger.technisys.com.ar/pruebas-nick/works.html
Does any Mozilla/Netscape user has problem with this? (you should see an
alert box when you type something).
> It's pretty obvious you have a bias against IE and towards
> Mozilla/Netscape. My personal bias is towards IE against Mozilla (mostly
> because I used early Milestone builds which were HORRIBLE and that
> experience taints my view). Trying to look at it objectively, Mozilla
> has come a long way and I like some of the features (although I can't
> stand tabbed browsing and don't know what people see in it), but it has
> a long way to go, and it has a hard road ahead trying to regain the
> market share it's lost while it's spent the last 2 years in limbo, with
> most people who liked Netscape limping by with NS 4.7x.
Well... nowadays Mozilla/Netscape is clearly ahead of IE6. Mozilla
renders HTML faster than IE, and it has far less rendering bugs. Its DOM
support is much more advanced. And it's getting a lot of new features
each month.
Douglas Crockford
> renders HTML faster than IE, and it has far less rendering bugs. Its DOM
> support is much more advanced. And it's getting a lot of new features
> each month.
That's the part that worries me. Anytime anyone releases another browser
version, we get another set of bugs that we have to work around. I think
we'd all be better off if Microsoft and Netscape completely stopped making
web browsers.
http://www.crockford.com/wrrrld/diplomacy.html
Nicolás Lichtmaier
No. Mozilla is very stable. It hasn't crashed once for me in many months.
And it's a pleasure to work with. All those CSS features which are
designed to ease the developer's work are supported (like powerful
selectors, and many properties for many many things which are
unsuppported by IE6).
We'd all be better if Microsoft supported CSS1 once and for all (and
better CSS2 support too). It's a shame that a browser effort who surely
has less resources it's achieveng a product of much more quality and
completeness.
Peter Cartwright
IE only fails to work on sites with Java because you installed Java4
with NN7, and it's replaced the one IE uses. You need to untick it in
Internet Options. That annoyance aside (not asking for your
permssion). It's now comparable in speed with IE, but not
significantly better. And of course won't persuade the vast majority
of users to switch.
Nicolás Lichtmaier
>>No. Mozilla is very stable. It hasn't crashed once for me in many months.
>>
>>And it's a pleasure to work with. All those CSS features which are
>>designed to ease the developer's work are supported (like powerful
>>selectors, and many properties for many many things which are
>>unsuppported by IE6).
>>
>>We'd all be better if Microsoft supported CSS1 once and for all (and
>>better CSS2 support too). It's a shame that a browser effort who surely
>>has less resources it's achieveng a product of much more quality and
>>completeness.
>
>
> IE only fails to work on sites with Java because you installed Java4
> with NN7, and it's replaced the one IE uses. You need to untick it in
> Internet Options. That annoyance aside (not asking for your
> permssion). It's now comparable in speed with IE, but not
> significantly better. And of course won't persuade the vast majority
> of users to switch.
Java as nothing to do with JavaScript...
Steve van Dongen
<ni...@technisys.com.ar> wrote:
>Grant Wagner wrote:
>> Ed Torres wrote:
>>
>>>I'm running Netscape 7.0 and Internet Explorer 6.0 with Windows XP
>>>Professional and I got these results:
>>>
>>>NETSCAPE 7.0
>>>
>>>Faster
>>>Stable
>>>Hotmail is faster
>>>No problems with Java scripts
>>
>> Slower starting, but about the same speed rendering pages.
>> Doesn't generate fatal errors, but there are some annoying bugs with
>> Mozilla that keep me from endorsing it.
<snip/>
>> It's pretty obvious you have a bias against IE and towards
>> Mozilla/Netscape. My personal bias is towards IE against Mozilla (mostly
>> because I used early Milestone builds which were HORRIBLE and that
>> experience taints my view). Trying to look at it objectively, Mozilla
>> has come a long way and I like some of the features (although I can't
>> stand tabbed browsing and don't know what people see in it), but it has
>> a long way to go, and it has a hard road ahead trying to regain the
>> market share it's lost while it's spent the last 2 years in limbo, with
>> most people who liked Netscape limping by with NS 4.7x.
>
>Well... nowadays Mozilla/Netscape is clearly ahead of IE6. Mozilla
>renders HTML faster than IE, and it has far less rendering bugs.
I haven't used Mozilla/Netscape so I can't comment much in this thread
but is that that last statement based on IE's standards compliant
mode, backwards compatability mode, or both?
>Its DOM
>support is much more advanced. And it's getting a lot of new features
>each month.
Regards,
Steve
Nicolás Lichtmaier
>>>Mozilla/Netscape. My personal bias is towards IE against Mozilla (mostly
>>>because I used early Milestone builds which were HORRIBLE and that
>>>experience taints my view). Trying to look at it objectively, Mozilla
>>>has come a long way and I like some of the features (although I can't
>>>stand tabbed browsing and don't know what people see in it), but it has
>>>a long way to go, and it has a hard road ahead trying to regain the
>>>market share it's lost while it's spent the last 2 years in limbo, with
>>>most people who liked Netscape limping by with NS 4.7x.
>>
>>Well... nowadays Mozilla/Netscape is clearly ahead of IE6. Mozilla
>>renders HTML faster than IE, and it has far less rendering bugs.
>
>
> I haven't used Mozilla/Netscape so I can't comment much in this thread
> but is that that last statement based on IE's standards compliant
> mode, backwards compatability mode, or both?
Both. IE6 doesn't support attribute selectors, generated content, child
selectors, adjacent selectors, and many many CSS properties are still
unsupported...
Jim Ley
=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Nicol=E1s_Lichtmaier?= <ni...@technisys.com.ar> wrote:
>Both. IE6 doesn't support attribute selectors, generated content, child
>selectors, adjacent selectors, and many many CSS properties are still
>unsupported...
Standards say how you support something, not if you support something.
Broken support you can complain about, you can't complain about
non-support.
Jim.
--
comp.lang.javascript FAQ - http://jibbering.com/faq/
Nicolás Lichtmaier
>>selectors, adjacent selectors, and many many CSS properties are still
>>unsupported...
>
>
> Standards say how you support something, not if you support something.
>
> Broken support you can complain about, you can't complain about
> non-support.
>
> Jim.
Uh? Why can't I complain about MS not implementing standards which date
from 1996? Why can't I say that the developer's work woulf be much
easier if they did implement the standards?
And there's lot of broken things to, BTW, in IE. Some even say that IE
standards mode is in fact more broken that the other one.
Jim Ley
=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Nicol=E1s_Lichtmaier?= <ni...@technisys.com.ar> wrote:
>>>Both. IE6 doesn't support attribute selectors, generated content, child
>>>selectors, adjacent selectors, and many many CSS properties are still
>>>unsupported...
>>
>>
>> Standards say how you support something, not if you support something.
>>
>> Broken support you can complain about, you can't complain about
>> non-support.
>>
>> Jim.
>
>Uh? Why can't I complain about MS not implementing standards which date
>from 1996? Why can't I say that the developer's work woulf be much
>easier if they did implement the standards?
You don't have to implement something, just because someone writes it
down and calls it a standard, CSS especially is OPTIONAL, it's
designed to be optional, so it should not matter one jot if a vendor
chooses to implement it.
>And there's lot of broken things to, BTW, in IE. Some even say that IE
>standards mode is in fact more broken that the other one.
Oh yeah, there's lots to complain about in IE's css support, selectors
aren't one of them though, as they implement those correctly (check
hasFeature for CSS2, it says it doesn't do it...)
Jim.