Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 22.214.171.124
Forum Moderators: open
The server requested a login authentication method that is not supported.
I wonder if that is the message you'll get when trying to login to Gmail. We also get this for various login areas of sites that we manage.
I spoke to my host in depth about this and he states that for our password protected areas to work with Opera, we have to change over to another type of authentication. Unfortunately this type of authentication opens up too many security holes on the server.
We're lucky that all of our clients use IE and Moz for browsing.
pg1, your host is spouting 100% bs. Opera uses 100% standard authentication routines put out by none other than rsa themselves. Opera was not only the first 128 bit secure browser, but also the first to feature TSL 1 security. Tell your tech guy to go back to night school.
I have used every type of ssl system on the web today, and they are all 100% compat with opera and vice-versa.
> We also get this for various login areas
> of sites that we manage.
Yes, from software produced by Microsoft.
As the report notes, as Gmail is a beta service, many things can change before the official launch, but I wonder if they can ever hope to improve the accessibility of their web app without a complete transformation of their entire site...
Do any beta-testers have any feedback on this issue? How important do you think this issue is?
5. What are Gmail's system requirements?
Gmail currently supports the following browsers:
* Microsoft IE 5.5 and newer (Windows)
* Netscape 7.1 and newer (Windows, Macintosh, Linux)
* Mozilla 1.4 and newer (Windows, Macintosh, Linux)
* Mozilla Firefox 0.8 and newer (Windows, Macintosh, Linux)
No Netscape 4.x!
who is still using NN4.x?
What percentage of people on the net use that browser?
Statistically almost no-one: my stats show about 0.2% NN4.X.
I'm surprised at the lack of support for Opera, though tbh it renders almost exactly the same as IE6 (but without the bugs of course! ;) )
My stats are UK only though, what's it like on your side of the Atlantic?
Statistically almost no-one: my stats show about 0.2% NN4.X
Never believe your own stats. NS4 users who may find it difficult or impossible to use your site will never be repeat visitors. IE and NS6 visitors may visit regularly, thus falsely puching up the relativity between the IE and NS4 stats. NS4 users are probably at least double or quadruple the figure you have stated and will be mainly universities or companies that refuse to upgrade for security reasons. If you target these audiences (which Gmail should be - they are targetting everyone) then it should at least function in NS4 even if it does not look visually pixel perfect.
As for Gmail, it's 1997 all over again, with "Best viewed with" for only the most popular current browsers. Will Gmail work in Firefox 0.9 or IE7? Who knows - they might have to rewrite for every new version that comes out, along with complex browser-sniffing routines.
The fact that NN4 won't work is not in itself a catastrophe, but the entire basis of the design and the technology decisions shows that the only people who will be able to use Gmail will be rich people with modern computers, high-speed connections and good vision and motor-skills.
>But when is it time to leave old technologies behind?
Just downloaded and using Opera 7.50 beta 3 - the most advanced browser the net has ever known. It supports more options and featuers than any browser in history.
I also use Netfront and Pocket IE on the Ipaq often.
Shall we not mention my Palm?
Or how about our partners in Europe running Symbian on Nokias fresh off the assembly line?
No, this isn't about the age of technology - if anything, nonstandard code is the obsolete mess.
Clearly google has made a concious choice to leave off those who don't agree with Microsoft and their x-buddies netscape. Lets be honest, if it weren't for all the layed off netscape peeps working at Google, there would be no reason for them to support netscape/mozilla either.
Maybe it is time for Opera to move to a Yahoo as default?
> Are you offering to pay them to do it?
Exactly. I used to work for local government. They had thousands and thousands of computers. My department was one of the smallest and had over one hundred computers. Just downloading and burning to CD and then installing it in our (small) department would cost a fortune in wages alone. Then there are all those machines without a CD drive, those which are so old that they would not run a later browser anyway. It was 2002 when our last Windows 3.1 system was replaced. Windows 95 still existed on plenty of machines - Windows XP was a luxury item.
And in some departments, installing any software, inserting a CD or disk that was not originally council supplied or downloading software was classed as gross misconduct and could mean instant dismissal from your job.
That's why we still have NS4. We still have people using Windows 3.1 and 95 in this world. Should we force them to upgrade their computer to be able to display some simple text?
[edited by: Michael_Anthony at 6:04 pm (utc) on April 12, 2004]