Author Topic: Internet Explorer  (Read 1941 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline microsoft windows

  • Blue Troll of Death
  • * Exalted Elder
  • Thread Starter
  • Posts: 3621
  • President of geekhack.org
    • Get Internet Explorer 6
Internet Explorer
« on: Tue, 11 December 2012, 13:11:05 »
Found a funny web site about it the other day:
http://toastytech.com/evil/index.html
CLICK HERE!     OFFICIAL PRESIDENT OF GEEKHACK.ORG    MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN MERRY CHRISTMAS

Offline paradox

  • Posts: 36
Re: Internet Explorer
« Reply #1 on: Sat, 26 January 2013, 10:01:47 »
I don't know how many web designers we have on the site but if you ask them most will agree Internet Explorer is indeed evil.

Offline daerid

  • Posts: 4276
  • Location: Denver, CO
    • Rossipedia
Re: Internet Explorer
« Reply #2 on: Sat, 26 January 2013, 15:15:39 »
Correction: IE < 10 is evil.

10 is actually a fantastic standards compliant browser.

Offline rowdy

  • HHKB Hapster
  • * Erudite Elder
  • Posts: 21175
  • Location: melbourne.vic.au
  • Missed another sale.
Re: Internet Explorer
« Reply #3 on: Sat, 26 January 2013, 21:45:45 »
The nice thing about standards is that there are so many to choose from.
"Because keyboards are accessories to PC makers, they focus on minimizing the manufacturing costs. But that’s incorrect. It’s in HHKB’s slogan, but when America’s cowboys were in the middle of a trip and their horse died, they would leave the horse there. But even if they were in the middle of a desert, they would take their saddle with them. The horse was a consumable good, but the saddle was an interface that their bodies had gotten used to. In the same vein, PCs are consumable goods, while keyboards are important interfaces." - Eiiti Wada

NEC APC-H4100E | Ducky DK9008 Shine MX blue LED red | Ducky DK9008 Shine MX blue LED green | Link 900243-08 | CM QFR MX black | KeyCool 87 white MX reds | HHKB 2 Pro | Model M 02-Mar-1993 | Model M 29-Nov-1995 | CM Trigger (broken) | CM QFS MX green | Ducky DK9087 Shine 3 TKL Yellow Edition MX black | Lexmark SSK 21-Apr-1994 | IBM SSK 13-Oct-1987 | CODE TKL MX clear | Model M 122 01-Jun-1988

Ị̸͚̯̲́ͤ̃͑̇̑ͯ̊̂͟ͅs̞͚̩͉̝̪̲͗͊ͪ̽̚̚ ̭̦͖͕̑́͌ͬͩ͟t̷̻͔̙̑͟h̹̠̼͋ͤ͋i̤̜̣̦̱̫͈͔̞ͭ͑ͥ̌̔s̬͔͎̍̈ͥͫ̐̾ͣ̔̇͘ͅ ̩̘̼͆̐̕e̞̰͓̲̺̎͐̏ͬ̓̅̾͠͝ͅv̶̰͕̱̞̥̍ͣ̄̕e͕͙͖̬̜͓͎̤̊ͭ͐͝ṇ̰͎̱̤̟̭ͫ͌̌͢͠ͅ ̳̥̦ͮ̐ͤ̎̊ͣ͡͡n̤̜̙̺̪̒͜e̶̻̦̿ͮ̂̀c̝̘̝͖̠̖͐ͨͪ̈̐͌ͩ̀e̷̥͇̋ͦs̢̡̤ͤͤͯ͜s͈̠̉̑͘a̱͕̗͖̳̥̺ͬͦͧ͆̌̑͡r̶̟̖̈͘ỷ̮̦̩͙͔ͫ̾ͬ̔ͬͮ̌?̵̘͇͔͙ͥͪ͞ͅ

Offline Internetlad

  • Posts: 710
Re: Internet Explorer
« Reply #4 on: Sun, 27 January 2013, 00:02:55 »
9 & 10 are good. Didn't care much for the prior efforts. I suppose 6 was good. . . for it's day.
"Beep . . . Beep . . . Beep" -Sputnik I


Visit the Typing Test and try!

Offline paradox

  • Posts: 36
Re: Internet Explorer
« Reply #5 on: Sun, 27 January 2013, 11:13:52 »
Correction: IE < 10 is evil.

10 is actually a fantastic standards compliant browser.

True as well.  Microsoft didn't start getting it together until 9.

Offline Malphas

  • Posts: 247
Re: Internet Explorer
« Reply #6 on: Sun, 27 January 2013, 11:17:34 »
I love websites designed like that.

Offline tufty

  • Posts: 347
  • Location: French Alps
Re: Internet Explorer
« Reply #7 on: Sun, 27 January 2013, 13:12:07 »
I suppose 6 was good. . . for it's day.

Good lord no.  No it wasn't.  It was a pox on the internet.  The pubic louse of web browsers.  As someone who used to make a living doing back ends for dynamic, standards-compliant websites, here's how it works:

1 - Client has an idea for a super new website / internet wossaname
2 - Idea gets fleshed out in terms of technical specs, say a day or two of billable time
3 - Designer makes a nice standards compliant xhtml + css mockup, another week or two of billable
4 - Client is pleased.
5 - Developer builds back end and uses mockup to add a nice UI, add another couple of weeks of billable
6 - Client tries it, and is very pleased.
7 - Developer and Designer start to prepare invoices
8 - Client phones up at 11pm and says "what about ie 6?  My mum/sister/significant other uses ie 6, and the test site looks horrible on her computer"

3 months or more of further billable time down the road, the test site looks almost presentable under ie6, but is now horribly bloated, and potentially broken on half the other browsers out there.

Supporting ie6 *tripled* the cost of website development, unless you *only* supported ie6.  The only browser to manage to be worse was ie5.5/mac.



Offline koralatov

  • Posts: 31
Re: Internet Explorer
« Reply #8 on: Mon, 28 January 2013, 03:57:47 »
[…] 3 months or more of further billable time down the road, the test site looks almost presentable under ie6, but is now horribly bloated, and potentially broken on half the other browsers out there. […]
I know a web designer who both loved and hated IE6 for that reason.  On the one hand, it used to make him tear his hair out because its rendering engine was a total mess; on the other, it meant he could invoice more hours.

Offline davkol

  •  Post Editing Timeout
  • Posts: 4994
Re: Internet Explorer
« Reply #9 on: Tue, 29 January 2013, 16:51:32 »
Supporting ie6 *tripled* the cost of website development, unless you *only* supported ie6.  The only browser to manage to be worse was ie5.5/mac.

You don't remember Netscape 4.0, do you?