|
| |
|
|
d a v e
Posts: 4177
Joined: 7/24/2002
From: England (but live in Finland now)
Status: offline
 |
safari preview - 12/10/2005 17:19:51
just came across this http://snugtech.com/en/safaritest/ looks ok - can choose your width and screen capture in jpeg or png - and it gives the whole page (including the parts you would need to scroll to!)
_____________________________
David Prescott
Gekko web design
|
|
|
|
traveler98
Posts: 362
From: Dallas Tx USA
Status: offline
|
RE: safari preview - 12/11/2005 10:18:11
quote:
reply
Nice and easier than tracking down a Mac user and asking them how it looks.
| |
|
|
|
briesmith
Posts: 67
Joined: 2/6/2003
Status: offline
|
RE: safari preview - 12/14/2005 11:23:55
We actually had to buy an old Mac - running OS 9.0 and IE5 - to test our stuff against these systems.
Had best success with Netscape 7.0 on OS 9.0, MS IE 4 & 5 simply don't work. We thought that the latest Safari on OS X was OK but subsequent testing showed it wasn't.
What I don't understand is, if Apple still cannot bring to market a browser that works, why does anybody stay with them? I understand they are good at media world stuff but if there's every chance that a website you want to visit is rendered incorrectly - and the website in the link says they still support frames (hardly cutting-edge technology) only imperfectly - why doesn't the Apple world get on its hind legs and demand that Apple sort itself out?
It seems a bit thingy about wotsit to expect the entire non-Mac world to make extra effort to cover for Apple's shortcomings especially when there's so few of them, relatively speaking.
How many PC developers ensure their stuff works with Apples?
| |
|
|
|
Tailslide
Posts: 6292
Joined: 5/10/2005
From: Out here on the raggedy edge
Status: offline
|
RE: safari preview - 12/14/2005 11:28:18
Nothing wrong with Safari or FF for mac
Edit: or should I say that I've never found compatibility problems with the latest few versions of Safari or FF on the mac.
IE 5.2 mac was a buggy piece of rubbish that thankfully is now only used by about 0.5% of internet users.
< Message edited by Tailslide -- 12/14/2005 11:39:04 >
_____________________________
"My strategy is so simple an idiot could have devised it"
Little Blue Plane Web Design | Blood, Sweat & Rust - A Land Rover restoration project
| |
|
|
|
jackdaniels
Posts: 1
Joined: 12/14/2005
Status: offline
|
RE: safari preview - 12/14/2005 19:44:27
quote:
ORIGINAL: briesmith
What I don't understand is, if Apple still cannot bring to market a browser that works, why does anybody stay with them? I understand they are good at media world stuff but if there's every chance that a website you want to visit is rendered incorrectly - and the website in the link says they still support frames (hardly cutting-edge technology) only imperfectly - why doesn't the Apple world get on its hind legs and demand that Apple sort itself out?
I think you don't know what you are talking about.. Nobody said that Safari supports frames imperfectly, it's just my service, SafariTest, that is unable to handle correctly frames and client side redirections.
| |
|
|
|
briesmith
Posts: 67
Joined: 2/6/2003
Status: offline
|
RE: safari preview - 12/15/2005 7:02:20
Jackdaniels
Steady on, there really is no need or point to being abusive. I quoted your website "as is". If the rendering problems you refer to occur because of the way your site works then perhaps you could make that a little clearer.
As for your other remarks about not knowing what I'm talking about all I can do is repeat what I said. We actually bought an Apple so we could test our stuff (it is able to boot up and run OS 9 or X and all the browsers mentioned) and none of them work to the same degree of rendering accuracy that current versions of IE and FireFox do on PCs.
And after several weeks of expensive work that's a fact.
And it's not just on our websites that the problems occur. We have looked at many "big name" sites using our Apple set-up and rendering and other problems are commonplace.
It's also true that there just isn't the same volume of published fixes for Apple browser problems that you find in the PC world. Every error or problem encountered has to be resolved from first principles. And, I suppose, over and over again by everybody working on webs wanting to achieve accurate rendering on Apples as well as PCs.
We have concluded that the level and intractability of the problems is such that achieving satisfactory results on Apples isn't worth the candle. The costs of sorting out all the problems is too high and the user community so small as to be uneconomic.
I would be interested in hearing from other .asp developers as to how they approach the Apple browser problems they encounter.
| |
|
|
|
Tailslide
Posts: 6292
Joined: 5/10/2005
From: Out here on the raggedy edge
Status: offline
|
RE: safari preview - 12/15/2005 7:14:14
quote:
ORIGINAL: briesmith
And it's not just on our websites that the problems occur. We have looked at many "big name" sites using our Apple set-up and rendering and other problems are commonplace.
Using which browsers?
IE5.2 is a nightmare but that's not apple's fault surely...
(Many big name companies can't get their sites working properly in anything other than IE6 anyway - they really shouldn't be a benchmark for quality.)
Edit: I should point out that I'm not particularly an Apple advocate - I have one (and a PC) and haven't had any problems with it.
I understand that your line of business is Software Development rather than web design which may of course prove more problematical to design for multiple platforms.
< Message edited by Tailslide -- 12/15/2005 7:32:45 >
_____________________________
"My strategy is so simple an idiot could have devised it"
Little Blue Plane Web Design | Blood, Sweat & Rust - A Land Rover restoration project
| |
|
|
|
briesmith
Posts: 67
Joined: 2/6/2003
Status: offline
|
RE: safari preview - 12/15/2005 7:31:05
MAC IE 5.2 (and 4 before it) is just, frankly, impossible to work with and we gave up. I am assuming that Apple either OEMd the browser or paid Microsoft to do so. Regardless of what led to the existence of the software, Apple (and their users) depended on it and Apple should have led the charge towards fixing it? Instead good old MS, apparently, simply abandoned it leaving the web development community to deal with the fall-out, and costs, that ensued.
However, we got reasonable results with Netscape 7 under OS 9. This is available as a free download and works quite well in most situations.
We were optimistic about Safari - especially the latest upgrade - and starting telling people to move to it (if budgets etc allowed) but then complaints started to come in.
We now try and detect all Apple visitors and warn them that our sites don't work very well for them.
You're right: most big commercial sites do use IE 6.0 results as their benchmark - and this is a sensible decision from a commercial perspective, I suppose - which, happily, allows FireFox users a good experience as well.
As for Apple; given the costs of their systems, the difficulty and inflexibility experienced when adding peripherals/after market add-ons, the fact that you are at odds with 99% of the personal computing world, and the browser doesn't work, I repeat my initial question, why bother?
I can't believe that Apple's kit, OS and software apps are so much better than an equivalent PC set-up - and they're definitely not cheaper - as to justify all the pain.
| |
|
|
|
Tailslide
Posts: 6292
Joined: 5/10/2005
From: Out here on the raggedy edge
Status: offline
|
RE: safari preview - 12/15/2005 7:37:02
quote:
ORIGINAL: briesmith
most big commercial sites do use IE 6.0 ....which, happily, allows FireFox users a good experience as well.
Alas, I wish that were the case (*remembering the Odeon uk site*).
_____________________________
"My strategy is so simple an idiot could have devised it"
Little Blue Plane Web Design | Blood, Sweat & Rust - A Land Rover restoration project
| |
|
|
|
briesmith
Posts: 67
Joined: 2/6/2003
Status: offline
|
RE: safari preview - 12/15/2005 7:41:55
As I remember the odeon site is extremely "clever" with lots of film noir looking Flash stuff.
It is still a shame that they don't check for FireFox compliance though as we found getting stuff to work with FF didn't involve a huge amount of work and there is a large number of published comment and fixes re the differences between the two browsers to make problem solving relatively cheap to do.
I imagine in their next contract Odeon will probably tighten up on the clauses dealing with cross-browser compatibility? Putting things right after the event is always more problematic and expensive than building it in from the outset.
| |
|
|
|
Tailslide
Posts: 6292
Joined: 5/10/2005
From: Out here on the raggedy edge
Status: offline
|
RE: safari preview - 12/15/2005 7:49:02
quote:
ORIGINAL: briesmith
I imagine in their next contract Odeon will probably tighten up on the clauses dealing with cross-browser compatibility? Putting things right after the event is always more problematic and expensive than building it in from the outset.
Oh I think they learnt they're lesson! The old site was withdrawn earlier in the year.
You would hope that these large design companies would try to build "better" sites for their clients and not just sites that look pretty...
Then again I'm guessing that if IE7 comes out all nice 'n' compliant that there'll be some problems with backwards compatibility for many "IE" orientated sites - so that'll be more money these large firms can earn redoing their clients' sites for them (yes sir, a site that works in IE7 too.... that'll be £50k please).
_____________________________
"My strategy is so simple an idiot could have devised it"
Little Blue Plane Web Design | Blood, Sweat & Rust - A Land Rover restoration project
| |
|
|
|
briesmith
Posts: 67
Joined: 2/6/2003
Status: offline
|
RE: safari preview - 12/15/2005 7:50:08
£50k? You wish!
| |
|
|
|
Mango Himself
Posts: 1906
Joined: 11/28/2005
Status: offline
|
Mac? PC? the old debate continues - 12/15/2005 17:51:51
Fellows
once again we are all falling into one of the oldest cyberdiscussions: Mac vs PC.
All I wish to add is that I love Mac. Its design is gorgeous, its graphics impecable. Unfortunately, most software is being developed for PC so we are forced sometimes to use PC instead.
Apple is the last stand against MS world domination. If only they made them more affordable, they would have a shot at staying in the game. I, personally think Apple is on a loosing battle. As much as I like Apple I must accept that it will fade out eventually
| |
|
|
|
briesmith
Posts: 67
Joined: 2/6/2003
Status: offline
|
RE: Mac? PC? the old debate continues - 12/16/2005 5:53:17
I wasn't joining in the PC v Mac better or worse debate at all; I know its pointless. I am happy to concede that it is a better computing solution, if that's what its fans believe.
What I was asking was whether the Mac was sufficiently better than the PC that all the difficulties inherent in being a Mac user became worthwhile. I think an Apple Mac would have to be probably 30% better all round than an equivalent PC to justify a) its price premium, b) its imcompatability with the rest of the world (and all the usabaliity/training issues that raises), c) its lack of software and upgradability and d ) its inherent unreliability and flakiness in many areas not least its browser fit.
As for the PC and Microsoft; computing is a utility service like the phone, water, electricity and gas. How much time do we spend worrying about them, who supplies them, where they are taking us, and so on?
Forget Intel, Microsoft, world domination; just turn it on and type.
| |
|
 New Messages |
 No New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/ New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/o New Messages |
 Locked w/ New Messages |
 Locked w/o New Messages |
|
Post New Thread
Reply to Message
Post New Poll
Submit Vote
Delete My Own Post
Delete My Own Thread
Rate Posts
|
|
|
Printable Version 
Good find Dave!
