Forum Moderators: open
I know that "you've gotta do it" - and I will - but I'd just like to field some advice about which ones are the most important to test against...Particulary when my pages have an XHTML - Strict doctype and a pure css/css-p presentation and layout structure.
Appreciate all advice, as I'm on a VERY slow dialup line and downloading any other legacy browsers than those deemed absolutely necessary by the pros here burns a hole in my pre-paid internet card account - as well as my patience.
Neophyte
P.S. IE6 and Moz are the two primary browsers. Based on recent statistics, those two have a good portion of the market. Opera is in the mix too but Moz is surpassing them by a large margin.
Since they don't like URLs in the forum you'll have to Google for TopStyle's home page.
I'm still using the 20 free opens of the demo version and like what I see.
<That's a KHTML browser>
What's a KHTML browser?...boy, that's a new one on me. Reading through the forums, I've heard of Konqueror but don't know anything about it.
Does it - and Safari - use some kind of different flavor of HTML (arg!)?
BrowserCam - Cross Platform Testing [browsercam.com]
Check out the features page, it will blow your mind...
Why?
Because it's text-only.
Which means ...?
That it's what spiders prefer to see, what browsers see before adding their own interpretations of the code, and what text-only potential customers will be able to see. If you like money, and/or the dissemination of ideas, then you don't want to impede the participation of those members of our community that are limited by technology, preference or requirement. Lynx will show you what a text-reader will have available to it. Your text (content) is the key to communication in so many ways, and to view it in its pure form is so educational.
An intuitive, friendly text-only perspective is a strong foundation to build on.
What's a KHTML browser?...boy, that's a new one on me. Reading through the forums, I've heard of Konqueror but don't know anything about it.Does it - and Safari - use some kind of different flavor of HTML (arg!)?
See the Wikipedia list of web browsers [en.wikipedia.org] -- there are several engines which are used by many browsers. That isn't to say that these browsers are the same, they're just built upon common code. Different browsers are more updated than others and have better support, etc. This is evident in the comparison of web browsers [en.wikipedia.org]... note that browsers that are built upon common engines tend to be similar, yet often have minor differences in support, etc.
On a side note, I love BrowserCam and would gladly bear its children, were that anatomically possible.
I would also like it known that Netscape 6.2 gets my vote for the worst browser version ever.
What I normally do is test back to NN6.2 and IE5, then test in one browser with CSS disabled. Since browsers older than those two get an unstyled page, I don't feel I need to test in more than one of them since it should be the same for all of them.
Marry a man who is a computer nerd :o)
Between the two of us have 6 computers covering most every OS and browser available.
1) IE 6.0 (dug)
2) Firefox Windows
3) Finefox OSX
4) Safari
5) Mozilla Windows (not much different, but just to check)
6) OmniWeb for OSX (too cool for skool)
7) Opera (Paid, hey I make money on the web)
8) Camino OSX
BZ
The trade off is if it is worth investing development time to address issues for a specific browser or is my time better served working on enhancements for the two main browser (IE & FF). It is sort of like spending a dollar to get an additional dimes worth of business.
Another way to look at it is if a browser with very little share of the market does not display CSS (that is designed for the two main browsers IE & FF) then those users have experienced many a site that appears 'quirky' in their browser. After all just a quick perusal of this thread indicates that most designers target the main browsers.
First, thank you all for your valuable insights. If I had the means, I'd go with BrowserCam as PageOneResults mentioned in a previous post.
Unfortunately, I'm currently hosed when it comes to finances or access to a credit card, soooooo: I've decided to download and test against IE5, IE6, NS6.x, NS7, Opera 7 and Firefox (all windows). I've got a friend with a Mac so I guess I'll also be making repeated trips to his home to check against whatever he's got on his OS9 - he never upgraded to X.
I suppose I should also alert future clientele that the development I do targets these browsers specifically and hope that will be okay for them - or that those browsers are what their target market is likely to use.
God, saying that to a client seems so unprofessional to me! But, since these are the options I currently have at my disposal, I guess that's the way I'll go until the prosperity-princess provides me access to a wider array of testing options (or a credit card for Browser Cam).
Thanks again for everyone's help and advise.
Neophyte.
Rather than tell a client what browsers you are able to design for why not explain to them the realities of designing for all of the browser. They'll be interested in the percentage breakdown for the popularity of the different browsers for the target that they are shooting for. Let them know that designing for all browsers will add to your billable time.
If you are building a site for a small commercial establishment they may already know that all of their friends and business associates use IE or Firefox and for them that is all they need the site to be designed for. If the client has a need to satisfy every browser on the market, then build the cost into your fee.
a) unless your market demands it (and I highly doubt it does) then I personally don't think there's much point in testing in NS6.
b) Instead of telling your client you design for x browsers, I'd tell you you design to standards. Throw in a couple of mentions of 'best practices in industry' and then if they ask about browser testing send them your preprepared testing matrix (along with stats directly from comparable sites)
