Forum Moderators: open
In reality, the answers to your question will be all over the place. I suggest it really depends upon the audience you're trolling for. Think of the computer and browser they're most likely to have access to. ie: if it's a big business they'll most likely have a current IE browser - unless of course you're after the geek section which is more likely to be using Opera, Konqueror, or Firebird.
But if you're just looking to capture the majority then Moz & IE would be a good basic start.
I read that 92% of users only use IE anyway so should I even bother with Netscape?
Even though only 10% of your visitors may be using a non-IE browser, that's still one out of every 10 visitors to your site that are going to say "who the hell designed THIS?" --- and that's a LOT of people.
From the replies so far, I was going to test with IE 5.0, 5.5,(what about version 6.0?) 7.0 and Mozilla? I just hope these are the most popular - well IE is the most popular browser - ISN'T IT? so maybe I should spend 90% of my time testing with IE? Netscape seems to give me so many problems that I feel that I could spend months trying to resolve them and maybe that isn't worth my time?
Netscape seems to give me so many problems that I feel that I could spend months trying to resolve them and maybe that isn't worth my time?
I agree. But NN 7 does work pretty well. Anything older than NN7 is a waste of your time. (despite what fanatics will tell you). Mozilla does what Netscape does anyway, so you're OK with Mozilla.
There should be standards every Software-House should follow whilst developing Browsers. I don't blame Netscape for sticking to their believes and try to make a living as the first available browser in the market was developed by them, but I personally blame Microsoft for this whole mess.
Since Mozilla/firebird and opera are available for free download, there's not much reason to not test on them, plus you might find you like them yourself.
The same can't be said for Javascript, unfortunately, that's a crap shoot, especially with Safari and Mac IE, you're best off putting browser detection on your scripts to avoid errors, or better yet, method based testing.
Other than that, you should verify your site with IE6, IE5.5, IE5.01, Mozilla (the latest version from mozilla.org - Mozilla users are generally quick to upgrade and the rendering changes very little for each release). Your page should not crash Netscape 4, although it is perfectly acceptable to serve an unstyled page. If you have a more technically-minded audience, you should test with Opera (latest version) and Konqueror. If you can afford a Mac for testing, add IE5.2 and Safari (latest version) to the list as well.
Mac IE is about 6% or 7% on many general sites and it does NOT behave the same as IE on WIndows.
That's certainly true. A graphic designer Mac friend has had to memorize the layout of a major airline website because it appears as all black on her Mac....
Mozilla 1.5 or Firebird 0.7
I've had a few cases (with my own code and as a visitor to other sites) where these don't render the same. The Firebird Password Manager is terrible compared to Mozilla. I would say if it works in Firebird, it will work in Mozilla, but not necessarily the other way around.
Tom
There should be standards every Software-House should follow whilst developing Browsers.
Although this isn't directly related to this topic, I believe it to be important to note: Just because someone is using an old browser, it doesn't mean that they're poor. Up until a few months ago, a friend of mine was still using Windows 95 with a 10K modem. Although Windows 95 isn't unusual for England (we're generally a few years behind the US), to be using a 10K modem up until a few months ago really was quite alarming. I have a 56K connection, and many people would describe that as extremely slow. I dread to think what browser he was using (I'm veering towards IE 3.0). Although he isn't exactly "super-rich", he certainly isn't poor. I wouldn't describe him as technically challenged either.
I was scared that the browsers would be antique, but they were all IE 5.5.
Just because a person is using Windows 95, there is no excuse for them to be using an obsolete browser. Upgrades are free.
Time marches on. If people want to use obsolete equipment, they won't be able to keep up.
I don't waste my programming time worrying about people with antique software.
There already is. It's called the W3C. Unfortunately, whilst Opera, Mozilla, Netscape (these days anyway), Konqueror and Safari obide closely to these standards, IE doesn't.
Should I develop websites according to these standards, do you think? Are these safe norms one can expect to rely on? (or are these really THE norms)
Just because a person is using Windows 95, there is no excuse for them to be using an obsolete browser. Upgrades are free.Time marches on. If people want to use obsolete equipment, they won't be able to keep up.
I absolutely agree with you. There is no point on living in the neandertal age of the IT world.
But as hartlandcat pointed out, the developer must be sensible whilst delivering web pages into the Internet as there are many users out there (probably more than we would expect) who use late software/hardware versions.
[edited by: dnimrodx at 5:50 pm (utc) on Feb. 2, 2004]
Should I develop websites according to these standards
yes
there are many users out there (probably more than we would expect) who use late software/hardware versions.
So? Time is money. If you have the time to spend to cater to those people, great. I don't.
So? Time is money. If you have the time to spend to cater to those people, great. I don't.
No, I don't have the time to cater for them. I am just saying I won't use cutting edge features on my web pages in order to provide (some) compatibility with older software/hardware versions.
I don't waste my programming time worrying about people with antique software.
Just my 2 cents,
Many schools, colleges, business and home users never or can't upgrade their browser versions. A few examples,
1) My college used a program that returned all machines to default when the power was cycled. This way teachers didn't have to waste time making sure all students were on the same page. Some rooms at my college were using the newest technology, but typing or autocad, there was no reason for the college to update machines that didn't need to be updated. So many computers across the campus had default windows 95, NT installed. This is proabably similiar at colleges everywhere. So if your ready to exclude tens of thousands of students who surf that web while at school then don't bother coding for antique browsers.
2) At another job I was at they used default windows 98 computers. They were just used to connent to the companies server to update numbers and what not, but many employees used to spend lots of time surfing on these computers. None would dare update it for fear of getting in trouble but a lot of time was spent surfing.
3) Having done computer repair I am always blown away by the amount of people who have no idea what windows update is. Not as surprising but most have no idea what a browser is. So, sadly enough, millions out there are still using default installs of windows 95, 98 and ME.
Heres my tips for designing a web site that is compatable.
Keep default installs of windows 95-xp. Don't upgrade them. Have one machine with the latest version of IE, Moz, NN, Opera and Lynx. People that use non-ie browsers are more than likely to know what a browser is and keep it updated. So coding for Opera 6 is probably a waste of time.
Next, design your site in the latest version of xhtml (or html 4.01). You'll thank yourself later. Also, try and validate your css. Now run your site through the above browsers and tweak it.
I have 2 computers. One which has all the latest versions and one with a removable hard drive. I keep all my os's on different hard drives.
Once again, just my opinion :)
