 |
 |
 |
 |
| Links Fedora related links from around the WWW |
2005-04-17, 02:41 PM CDT
|
 |
Community Manager
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 1,979
|
|
|
Test your favorite browser
Test your browser with this page. Here is the reference. The closest the browser properly render this smiley, the closest it is for W3C standard. So far, among the browser I used (Opera, Konqueror and Firefox), Firefox is the best.
__________________
CPU: AMD Athlon(tm) 64 X2 Processor 4200+ Manchester overlocked to 2.61GHz
Motherboard: Gigabyte GA-K8NSC-939 nForce3
Videocard: BFG NVidia Geforce 7800GS OC
Memory: 4 x 1GB DDR-RAM OCZ EL Platinium
Storage: 1.2 TB Total HDD
Media: built-in soundcard, 16X DVD burner, 16X DVD-ROM drive
OS: Fedora 12 Constantine x86-64, Rawhide and Windows XP Services Pack 3
|
2005-04-17, 05:43 PM CDT
|
|
Registered User
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 163
|
|
|
I went there with Firefox and it was TERRIBLE. It was a mutant smiley from OUTER SPACE. Not even recognizable. What does that say about my Firefox browser. I usually don't have many issues with it, but it does make me wonder.
|
2005-04-17, 06:00 PM CDT
|
 |
Registered User
|
|
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Bristol, UK
Posts: 457
|
|
Yeah I also got a load of junk with firefox.
Although I was in Windows at the time - perhaps its caught some nasty IE bug? 
Looking at the page in IE - half the page was a giant red block with a bit of yellow in it and the word ERROR. :|
Out of intrest what exactly does this test prove anyway?
Dave
|
2005-04-17, 06:18 PM CDT
|
|
Community Manager
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 1,979
|
|
This test is about W3C standard compliance. Here is more info
__________________
CPU: AMD Athlon(tm) 64 X2 Processor 4200+ Manchester overlocked to 2.61GHz
Motherboard: Gigabyte GA-K8NSC-939 nForce3
Videocard: BFG NVidia Geforce 7800GS OC
Memory: 4 x 1GB DDR-RAM OCZ EL Platinium
Storage: 1.2 TB Total HDD
Media: built-in soundcard, 16X DVD burner, 16X DVD-ROM drive
OS: Fedora 12 Constantine x86-64, Rawhide and Windows XP Services Pack 3
|
2005-04-17, 06:25 PM CDT
|
|
Registered User
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: ark n saw out in the sticks
Posts: 2,321
|
|
|
FC3 with Firefox messed up considerable on the acidtest
FC3 running Dillo was a total disaster for compliance.
guess my browsers are setup not to allow just anything---just as I want them to do.
|
2005-04-18, 12:16 AM CDT
|
 |
Registered User
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2004
Age: 41
Posts: 8,250
|
|
|
ok.........
|
2005-06-27, 10:53 AM CDT
|
 |
Registered User
|
|
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Kosice, Slovakia
Age: 20
Posts: 52
|
|
heh, well... firefox's thing is nothing compared to konqueror's 
__________________
There are 10 kinds of people in the world. Those who understand binary and those who don't.
|
2005-06-27, 11:33 AM CDT
|
 |
Registered User
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Bangalore
Age: 22
Posts: 1,566
|
|
|
That is exactly what I got
From FF in FC4
I'm about to cry. What can be done to improve FF?
Are you sure this isn't for IE compliance?
|
2005-06-27, 11:40 AM CDT
|
 |
Registered User
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: uk
Age: 22
Posts: 703
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by tejas
That is exactly what I got
From FF in FC4
I'm about to cry. What can be done to improve FF?
Are you sure this isn't for IE compliance?
|
its definatly not for ie... mine comes out pants
__________________
ieuuk 
Registered Linux User: #373024
|
2005-06-27, 12:06 PM CDT
|
 |
Registered User
|
|
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Netherlands
Age: 22
Posts: 1,420
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by tejas
That is exactly what I got
From FF in FC4
I'm about to cry. What can be done to improve FF?
Are you sure this isn't for IE compliance?
|
It's to test css2 compliance... (so certainly NOT for M$IE)
Anyway, safari was the first do pass the test, but they haven't released it yet. Konqueror (khtml) developers are heavilly backporting the safaria khtml port (are you still with me  ), so that's why konqueror does it better than firefox. I don't even speak of IE, it isn't worthy to be even mentioned.
__________________
Registered Linux user number 389291
Laptop: Nec Versa p550, Pentium M 1.86GHz, 1024MB ram, x300, 80 GB HD, bluetooth, 2915BG Wlan card
Desktop: Amd Athlon x2 4200+, 2GB ram, Geforce 7300GT 512MB silent, 160GB HD in a nice centurion 534 case 
|
2005-06-28, 06:34 PM CDT
|
|
Registered User
|
|
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Terre Haute, Indiana
Age: 51
Posts: 79
|
|
|
I've just looked at it with
Windows XP - MSIE 6.0.29, Opera 7.54, Firefox 1, Netscape Navigator 7.2, WebTV Viewer
Mac OSX - MSIE 5.2, Netscape Navigator 7.2 and Safari 1.0.3
FC5 Linux - Konqueror 3.4.1, Firefox 1.0.4 and Linux Epiphany 1.7.1
Not one of them renders it properly.
Ray
|
2005-06-28, 06:45 PM CDT
|
|
Registered User
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Toronto, ON
Posts: 408
|
|
|
hehe i don't need a test to tell me that IE is crappy. If only browsers respected some sort of standard(right), site developers wouldn't have to jump through hoops to try and please everyone.
__________________
Peace - To the Middle East.
rayyes.com
|
2005-06-29, 01:49 AM CDT
|
|
Registered User
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: uk
Age: 22
Posts: 703
|
|
|
it is quite impressive the mess ie makes of it though
__________________
ieuuk
Registered Linux User: #373024
|
2005-06-29, 09:21 AM CDT
|
|
Registered User
|
|
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Terre Haute, Indiana
Age: 51
Posts: 79
|
|
I've now got two really simple pages with the images on them - http://brisray.com/test/css2/gary.htm and http://brisray.com/test/css2/acid.htm
Some interesting effects. It looks like all the browsers have a way to go before they are completely compliant - some more than others. Until they are it looks like web developers have to ...
a) "dumb down" their sites
b) add a lot of code to cope with the differences
c) target individual browsers
Ray
Last edited by brisray; 2005-06-29 at 09:42 AM CDT.
Reason: rubbish grammar
|
2005-06-29, 10:09 AM CDT
|
|
Registered User
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Bangalore
Age: 22
Posts: 1,566
|
|
|
If no browser can render it exactly, then who sets these standards?
How do we know what that picture is 'supposed' to look like?
|
| Thread Tools |
Search this Thread |
|
|
|
| Display Modes |
 Linear Mode
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
Automatic Translations (Powered by  ):
All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:22 AM CST.
|
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
|
