Which browser do you use?
Which browser do you use?
What is this? D:
Everyone knows that Mozilla Firefox is the only real browser, everything else is just crap! xP
Also, isn't Firefox the only browser that's coded in C/C++ ? So EVERYONE on here should be using it ;)
Internet explorer is written in C/C++, has been far longer than fairyfox or netcrap navigator. IE is better than firefox, sure firefox had tabs first, but IE did them better, no right clickign to open a new tab, just click a new tab.
I'd say Firefox is getting further away from C/C++ if anything.
I'm waiting for chrome to officially come to Linux, at which point I plan on porting the vimperator plugin (for firefox) ... which I currently use.
I use maxthon wrapper for IE at work and Opera at home (Opera takes longer times to eat all the available RAM before I need to restart it)
I use Firefox because it's available on both Windows and Linux (sharing bookmarks and such). And I don't see anything wrong with it.
I hate IE with a passion, though, just like 99% of other web developers (I am just an amateur). IE just likes to do things differently than everyone else (not supporting standards, supporting the standard syntax but slightly different behaviours... etc), and most sophisticated websites end up having a version for IE, and a version for "everything else". When I make a website, I test with both Firefox and IE, and pretty much make 2 versions of many parts. And after the website is made, I test it in other browsers, and the Firefox version works out of the box most of the time.
I've been using every browser from the above list, and I don't like any of them. They're slow, full of "features" I don't need, and incompatible with each other and the standards.
My favorite "worst browser ever" is IE. Some months ago, it even rejected valid XHTML1.0 pages after an update (if the first line was <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>, IE assumed the document to be XML, not XHTML). I found out as angry IE users wrote me emails because they weren't able to visit my site anymore: they said "you should fix your site immediately"... And then there's "position:fixed;", the most spiffy CSS attribute ever, which Microsoft refused to support for years (and maybe still does).
Currently I'm using Firefox on a regular basis. When I'm at home and need some research paper from ACM or IEEE, I have to ssh to my university account and use lynx to download them (our whole campus subnet has access to ACM et.al., we don't have individual username/password stuff). With the rise of CSS, it's feasible to surf the web with a text browser again.
Generally, I don't understand this constant babble about browsers. It's a simple program which displays web pages. It's about as exciting as a task scheduler: I don't care as long as it does its job.
No right click to open a new tab?......
Well, you can easily add a button to the FF toolbar as well. Rightclick on the toolbar, customize, then drag the "New Tab" button to whereever you like. Also, in FF we have ctrl+t and on a link the middle mouse button...
All browsers except IE adhere pretty strictly to the standard (though some features may not yet be implemented; but standards are very complex, so who can blame them?).
I currently use Firefox, and it's the only browser I'll probably ever use.
<whiney sarcastic voice>Oh but it works with all these other browsers that can only hold market share by being free...</whiney sarcastic voice>
I do like that - that's what sold me on Chrome at first - but the memory usage was pretty high. Really good concept, but when they come out with a version for Linux, then it'll have an advantage.Quote:
no right clickign to open a new tab, just click a new tab
I still use Firefox just for the open-source-ness. It's available for everything, and I'm not worried the Firefox is going to sell my browsing habits to marketing.
Not to sound to much like I'm into archaic nerdery, but I actually have been using w3m for a lot of sites lately - the touchpad on my laptop annoys the heck outta me - so I've been switching over to keyboard for everything...
Also, every web programming book I have ever even looked at has had a few pages they have to devote to explaining what a pain in the ass IE is. It doesn't take much of a brain to recognize that microsoft's intention, by constantly ignoring standards that everyone else seems able to adhere to (and doing it in random, unpredictable ways), is to use their leverage as OS peddlers to shape the market to their own advantage -- which would be everyone else's disadvantage. It is definately a good business practice, if you are a shareholder, but if you believe that it produces better software for people and a better environment for programming you are blind as well as stupid.
A few lines later, they show a minimal strictly conforming document, comparable to the Hello World programs:Quote:
An XML declaration is not required in all XML documents; however XHTML document authors are strongly encouraged to use XML declarations in all their documents.
This is not sloppy code, it's strictly conforming code.Code:
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN"
<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" xml:lang="en" lang="en">
<p>Moved to <a href="http://example.org/">example.org</a>.</p>
I hope that this is not some sort of an argument in favor of IE. IE doesn't support a standard that has been made public nine years ago (!) with the expressed goal of eventually superseding HTML4. Am I the only one who feels ........ed now?Quote:
But Internet Explorer doesn't support XHTML
Just to make things clear: I'm not a fan of the Linux community; I consider these people to be lousy programmers, awful software architects and ridiculous politicians. But at least they manage to adhere to certain standards, which is absolutely central to proper information interchange.
Since I'm an offline-web-developer and my relations living in Windows, IE gives me more features that the other browser don't.
e.g. ActiveX, transition effect,...