|
|
| Author |
Message |
remmers
|
|
Browsers
| 
Feb 13 22:39 UTC 2007 |
The best-known web client is the browser. What browser or browsers do you
use? What are the reasons for your choices?
|
| 32 responses total. |
cross
|
|
response 1 of 32:
|
Feb 14 06:04 UTC 2007 |
Firefox, Camino and Safari; Firefox on the Mac and my Linux desktop at work.
Camino and Safari on the Mac.
|
other
|
|
response 2 of 32:
|
Feb 15 02:05 UTC 2007 |
I use Camino primarily, and Shiira for some things (as a second browser
with different settings). Once in a while I'll use Mozilla or Safari.
I keep a copy of MSIE just in case I have to do something really stupid.
|
nharmon
|
|
response 3 of 32:
|
Feb 15 15:13 UTC 2007 |
My primary web browser is Mozilla Firefox. It is installed on my Linux
workstation, Windows laptop, and Powermac. However I use other browsers
to see how certain web pages will look in them.
|
kingjon
|
|
response 4 of 32:
|
Feb 16 00:18 UTC 2007 |
Lynx and links2. For things that are inconsiderate enough to not work with
those, I use Konqueror or, if a site runs into its missing features, Firefox.
|
twenex
|
|
response 5 of 32:
|
Feb 18 13:25 UTC 2007 |
Konqueror, or Firefox. If a site only works with IE, it's not worth bothering
with.
|
cmcgee
|
|
response 6 of 32:
|
Feb 19 13:41 UTC 2007 |
Firefox. Cause all you smart Unix guys said so.
|
remmers
|
|
response 7 of 32:
|
Mar 1 00:19 UTC 2007 |
Being a good citizen of AppleLand and an OS X user, my default web
browser is Safari!
Seriously, several different browsers do an excellent job of rendering
(Safari, Firefox, Camino, Opera), so that's not really the issue. I use
Safari because it's fast, standards-conforming (mostly), and for a
couple of other reasons that some folks might consider trivial but which
matter to me. For example, the zoom button (the green '+' button in the
upper left-hand corner of the window) does the right thing when you
click on it - which is NOT to go full-screen. There are some
annoyances, like the limited options in the GUI preferences menu (not
being able to select default link colors or opt for non-underlined
links), but there are ways around those.
I use Firefox with appropriate extensions when doing serious web
development. The "web developer" and "DOM inspector" add-ons are really
nice. And thanks to the Quicksilver program, when I'm viewing a page in
Safari, I can bring up the same page in Firefox using a simple keystroke
(option-cmd-O).
|
easlern
|
|
response 8 of 32:
|
Mar 1 19:04 UTC 2007 |
I use Firefox, unless I'm on a crappy work computer, in which case I use IE
because it usually takes less RAM.
|
rcurl
|
|
response 9 of 32:
|
Mar 2 04:24 UTC 2007 |
Re #7: I know Firefox has a "web developer". but I don't understand it. Can
it be used like the Netscape Composer, to create web pages without knowing
HTML?
|
remmers
|
|
response 10 of 32:
|
Mar 2 15:05 UTC 2007 |
No, the Firefox web developer add-on is intended for a different audience,
people who are already web developers familiar with web publishing
technologies like HTML and CSS, or who want to learn more about those
technologies. It provides a toolbar interface for display and editing of
HTML and CSS, but to use it effectively, you have to have some familiarity
with those formats. For students, it provides a nice sandbox for
experimentation.
|
cmcgee
|
|
response 11 of 32:
|
Mar 2 20:22 UTC 2007 |
Rane, Dreamweaver is the HTML-creator for people who don't want to learn HTML.
It is easy to learn, and you can create webpages without ever learning HTML.
It even cleans up the HTML created by the Word-to-Web save feature.
That said, I find even dreamweaver benefits from looking at the code, and
creating good CSS folders.
|
nharmon
|
|
response 12 of 32:
|
Mar 2 21:35 UTC 2007 |
I like editing my HTML by hand instead of through some Wysiwyg editor.
One thing I liked about Dreamweaver was it's code viewer which
highlighted things nicely and did autocompletes. However, I have found a
free program that does that. It's called jedit and is Java so it runs on
multiple platforms.
|
remmers
|
|
response 13 of 32:
|
Mar 2 23:11 UTC 2007 |
(I'll start a new item on tools for creating webpages...)
|
remmers
|
|
response 14 of 32:
|
Mar 2 23:17 UTC 2007 |
Okay, item:6 is for discussion of tools for creating and modifying web
pages.
|
mynxcat
|
|
response 15 of 32:
|
Mar 22 16:46 UTC 2007 |
I primarily use FireFox, though I haven't got the new update. How long does
it take? Because when I'm on my laptop, I don't want to have to wait 10
minutes while FireFox updates. And is there an advantage over the old version?
I keep IE on my laptop because unfortunately there are still websites out
there that conform only to IE and I have to use them (It seems that all the
lawfirms conform mostly to IE, very annoying). And I use IE at work because
it's the only thing installed. I use IE as rarely as possible.
|
remmers
|
|
response 16 of 32:
|
Mar 22 17:03 UTC 2007 |
As coincidence would have it, I started Firefox just now and was notified
that a new update was availble (2.0.0.3). Took about 5 seconds to
download and install. I was running 2.0.0.2 before.
You don't mention what version of FF you're running. If you're updating
from version 1 to version 2, it might take a bit longer.
|
mynxcat
|
|
response 17 of 32:
|
Mar 22 17:16 UTC 2007 |
I think I'm on 1. I know there was a big brouhah about an update that I didn't
install - that would be 2, I guess. Any advantages of 2 over 1?
|
remmers
|
|
response 18 of 32:
|
Mar 22 17:52 UTC 2007 |
You can find a detailed discussion of the major changes from version 1
to version 2 here: http://www.mozillazine.org/talkback.html?
article=20112 . These include improved security, enhancements to the
search feature, improvements to tabbed browsing, session restoring
(useful after a crash), and friendlier RSS support.
Firefox isn't my regular browser, but I've used it enough to notice that
version 2 feels faster than version 1 on my Mac. Tab handling is
significantly improved - you can drag tabs to new positions, each tab
has its own "close" button, and there's a tab menu that you can activate
that's very useful if you have a large number of tabs open. Firefox's
RSS handling via "Live Bookmarks" is still a little too primitive for my
taste, but in user preferences you can select a default newsreader to
invoke when you click on the RSS icon in the browser's address box.
I think it's a worthwhile upgrade.
|
remmers
|
|
response 19 of 32:
|
Mar 22 17:53 UTC 2007 |
Sorry the URL wrapped in the response above. Here it is again:
http://www.mozillazine.org/talkback.html?article=20112
|
cross
|
|
response 20 of 32:
|
Mar 23 13:09 UTC 2007 |
What is your regular browser, John?
|
remmers
|
|
response 21 of 32:
|
Mar 23 15:16 UTC 2007 |
Safari, as I indicated in resp:7.
|
fuzzball
|
|
response 22 of 32:
|
Mar 23 16:03 UTC 2007 |
i just use good old Internet Explorer (pauses) uh....
i dont know which version this is......
and on another pc i use firefox. but now that IE has tabbed browsing,
well IE does the job.
when doing serious web design ill use a pc that has ie, netscape,
opera, firefox, and a text based browser to make sure the images and
site looks ok to all users.
|
rcurl
|
|
response 23 of 32:
|
Mar 23 21:15 UTC 2007 |
I was using Firefox when it notified me that it had just downloaded the update
on its own and would install it the next time it was restarted. I wasn't sure
if I liked such presumptuousness or not.......it could have been something
nasty.
|
mynxcat
|
|
response 24 of 32:
|
Mar 23 21:21 UTC 2007 |
Hmmm - maybe you set some sort of automatic download default? I haven't
gotten any such updates.
|