Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 22.214.171.124
Forum Moderators: open
Mozilla for all the reasons above.
Third, because you can customize the heck out of it with simple text based config files and it uses Gecko for it's rendering component (based on the MFC Embed project), plus it is a bit quicker off the mark due to using 100% native widgets and UI (thus skipping the XML parser until it is needed for external rendering).
'Zoom Layout' bookmarklet (based on Jesse Ruderman's):
Yeah, its all about the pie menus, they're just like gestures, only you get visual feedback!
Whenever I can, I like to make sure a site looks good for the early adopters of new tech.
...most of the time IE doesn't work, or at least subtly doesn't work in the most annoying of ways.
Amen. Browser support for CSS has been awful from the very beginnings of CSS, slowing down progress. Not too long ago this very forum was headed with the question "Is CSS ready for Prime Time?" And IE has been every bit the cuplrit in slowing things down that NN4 was.
Sometimes Microsoft development has a built-in disdain for standards that really infuriates me - especially when they have so much market share that it nearly forces you to support their goofiness.
Sometimes, they send you a crafted URL that read a cookie for some sites and send it to their own servers.
I am not antiM$ and just blind. I use Windows 2000 and some tools but whever possible or when it is top higher security I tend to use other tools.
Now, I can understand using a better tool in the toolbox, and in this case, it sounds like opera. From a "purist" standpoint, it sounds as though most webmasters are using opera/mozilla as a better tool. Now, if Opera and Mozilla are so much better, I guess I'll go download them (kind of like going to home depot and buying another tool that I may use). But I still will test my CSS layout in IE and Netcape.
I use IE (I guess shame on me), but that's because that is what 94% of my users use (and this is what my logs say).
Off to download, WFN:)