17 thoughts on “IE7’s out

  1. Squander Two says:

    Judging from all the advertised new features, they should change its name to “Firefox”. Strange, though: no mention of “And we’ve fixed some bugs so that Web designers will no longer have to cripple their pages just to suit us.”

  2. Ben says:

    “And we’ve fixed some bugs so that Web designers will no longer have to cripple their pages just to suit us.”

    If only they would say that, now your IE only code/hacks will have to be split, you’ll have IE5.5 code, some for IE6 and a sprinkling for IE7 to treat ‘normally’. Just to keep things interesting.

    Good ol’ MS, those web designers are lazy sods, let ’em work for it! *shakes fist*

    Of course, if your on XP/Vista, you might just get it flung at you in an update.

  3. Gary says:

    Yeah, it’s a bit of a mess really. A lot of grumbling designers out there.

    On a related note: why oh why oh why is it so difficult for ecommerce sites, online banks etc to use browser sniffer scripts that employ a bit of common sense? Instead of “we do not support this browser, because you’re using 1.5.1.3 and we only know about 1.5.1.2”, howzabout just saying “hey, we don’t know about that browser so be warned – if things go tits up, don’t come crying to us”?

  4. Ben says:

    Because that would make life easier for us, and banks don’t like that. Perhaps the developers are rubbish. Perhaps we should just use the branches instead? Ah, but they keep closing them. I’m starting to think they just want our money, but don’t want us to get to it.

    Meanwhile, I’m usually begin to swear when First Direct keep telling me use Internet Explorer.. when I’m using Internet Explorer..

    As for designers grumbling? I always thought that was a part of the job description..

  5. Ben says:

    The main online banking bit works fine, it’s the digital-banking-plus bit that seems to not like me.

  6. Squander Two says:

    > now your IE only code/hacks will have to be split, you’ll have IE5.5 code, some for IE6 and a sprinkling for IE7 to treat ‘normally’.

    Oh, yes, of course. What I meant was that there are various things that we’re supposed to be able to do according to the HTML and CSS specs which, up till now, we haven’t been able to do, because, whatever the ideal, the reality is that a site that doesn’t work on IE is a bad design. Now, we’ll be able to do those things, even if we do have to waste our time putting in loads of bloody hacks to cope with 5.5 and 6.

    I had to abandon a really nice design a few weeks ago because it relied too heavily on fixed positioning. Time to revisit that, I think.

  7. Gary says:

    Incidentally, while the hype’s centred on FF and IE, don’t forget about Opera. Version 9 is seriously good.

  8. Squander Two says:

    Tried Opera once and it took me all of a minute to decided that it was by far the worst browsing experience ever. I can never understand why other people appear not to have got the same impression and keep recommending it. It’s seriously horrible.

  9. tm says:

    Well so far I have to say I’m not impressed with FF2. it regualrly freezes when loading pages (particularly in a different tab from the one I’m browsing) which 1.5 almost never did. How annoying. It also seems slower and generally clunkier in general I’m afraid.

    And they have decied I would like to see text I type in a box on a web page appear in a serif font – against all good sense.

    Oh and you can no longer go to mozilla.org by clicking on the throbber. Ok so that is an ancient and undiscoverable feature of web browsers, but I am strugling to imagine anyone who is actually *badly* impacted by just keeping it…

  10. Stephen says:

    Decided to live dangerously and upgrade Firefox. So far so good, and one nice thing is that Gary’s RSS feed now no longer looks like words punctuated by ASCII code soup, but instead has proper quote marks ‘n all. Not sure about the spell checker though…

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *