MREMag website down

Looks like MREMag is down. Anyone got any news on what might have happened?

Ian J.

In message <4673c233$0$8721$ed2619ec@ptn-nntp-reader02.plus.net>, Ian J.
<leftfield42@hotmail.com> writes
>Looks like MREMag is down. Anyone got any news on what might have happened?

Demon are having problems with their homepages. Engineers are
investigating.

>
>Ian J.
>
>

--
Jane
British OO, American and Australian HO, and DCC in the garden
http://www.yddraiggoch.demon.co.uk/railway/railway.html

>
> Works fine on Windows/IE7 ;-)
>

The "gauge" selector on the left doesn't work with my XP Pro and
Firefox.

Gordon
(customer of Beamends, not that that's relevant here!)

"Ian J." wrote

> I've never had any major (or minor, come to think of it) problems with
> IE7.

Doesn't seem to offer much (if any) more than IE6, but I reluctantly
accepted it when my machine was reformated a little while ago. Have to say
I've not had any real problems with it, but one little niggle does irk:-

When 'Favourites' are selected and 'pinned' in position (my usual selection)
each time it loads the silly little icons for each bookmark take a second or
two to load, and often I click the site I want to access before they're
loaded and it means I select the wrong site. I'm sure there must be a way
to disable the icons, but I've not found it yet.

John.

John.

"John Turner" <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote in message
news:137lijs77b0rf57@news.supernews.com...
>
> "Ian J." wrote
>
>> I've never had any major (or minor, come to think of it) problems with
>> IE7.
>
> Doesn't seem to offer much (if any) more than IE6, but I reluctantly
> accepted it when my machine was reformated a little while ago. Have to
> say I've not had any real problems with it, but one little niggle does
> irk:-
>
> When 'Favourites' are selected and 'pinned' in position (my usual
> selection) each time it loads the silly little icons for each bookmark
> take a second or two to load, and often I click the site I want to access
> before they're loaded and it means I select the wrong site. I'm sure
> there must be a way to disable the icons, but I've not found it yet.
>
> John.
>
> John.
>

For the refresh to be that slow, you must either have a pretty slow PC, or
rather a lot of favourites in one place. If you haven't done so already,
maybe it's worth splitting the favourites out so that there are fewer in any
one favourites folder?

I thought there was a simple setting for this, but now can't find it, which
probably means there wasn't one to begin with (I might have been thinking of
icons next to favourites in Office applications).

Ian J.

"Ian J." wrote

> For the refresh to be that slow, you must either have a pretty slow PC, or
> rather a lot of favourites in one place. If you haven't done so already,
> maybe it's worth splitting the favourites out so that there are fewer in
> any one favourites folder?

The PC is fairly fast - Athlon 64 Processor 3000+ 1.81GHz, and the machine
is virus (etc) free, but yes I've got a lot of 'favourites' and many are
already split into a number of folder.

> I thought there was a simple setting for this, but now can't find it,
> which probably means there wasn't one to begin with (I might have been
> thinking of icons next to favourites in Office applications).

Ah well, it was worth asking.

John.

"Ian J." <leftfield42@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:4673c233$0$8721$ed2619ec@ptn-nntp-reader02.plus.net...
> Looks like MREMag is down. Anyone got any news on what might have
> happened?
>
> Ian J.
>

I note that this afternoon MREMag is back up and running.

Ian J.

Craig Douglas wrote:
> Actually, I think it's a shame that the firefox team haven't got there act
> together and produced a browser that's compatible with tower model's
> website....
>
> I mean, what's the point of firefox? a browser that doesn't display 20% of
> the worlds websites properly? No wonder hardly anyone uses it!!!!

The main problem here is the reliance on certain sites of features which are
simply not compatible with the world standards. Microsoft should be required
by law to ensure that their products comply with international standards, but
at present they just pay backhanders to the US legal system to let them off.
If a site fails to verify against W3 tests then *IT* is in the wrong, and
simply directing people to a broken browser is not a solution.

They are trying to do the same thing now with the open document standard. We
have an agreed standard for documents - why should Microsoft be allowed to
'add' their own closed functions to that standard and require people to use
their software. Simply saying THEY are the standard does not make it so

--
Lester Caine - G8HFL
-----------------------------
Contact - http://home.lsces.co.uk/lsces/wiki/?page=contact
L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://home.lsces.co.uk
MEDW - http://home.lsces.co.uk/ModelEngineersDigitalWorkshop/
Firebird - http://www.firebirdsql.org/index.php

On Thu, 12 Jul 2007 00:11:22 +0100, Craig Douglas put finger to
keyboard and typed:

>Actually, I think it's a shame that the firefox team haven't got there act
>together and produced a browser that's compatible with tower model's
>website....

On the assumption that this is a genuine question and not a troll (and
even if it is a troll, it's one that deserves putting to bed), the
problem isn't with Firefox, the problem is with the web designers who
have chosen to use features that are the commercial property of
Microsoft and hence only exist in Microsoft's browsers. Even if the
Firefox team wanted to emulate them, they couldn't, as that would be
an infringement of MS's copyright.

The fact that this makes some websites inaccessible to Firefox is,
from Microsoft's perspective, the whole point - the aim is to fill the
web with proprietory content that can only be accessed with
Microsoft's products, thus maintaining Microsoft's market share.

>I mean, what's the point of firefox? a browser that doesn't display 20% of
>the worlds websites properly? No wonder hardly anyone uses it!!!!

Firefox displays considerably more than that - despite MS's best
efforts, the number of "IE only" websites is actually very small. And
it's the site operators who lose out in such cases, not the end user.

Mark
--
Blog: http://Mark.Goodge.co.uk Photos: http://www.goodge.co.uk
"Work came and made us free"

"Mark Goodge" wrote

> On the assumption that this is a genuine question and not a troll (and
> even if it is a troll, it's one that deserves putting to bed), the
> problem isn't with Firefox, the problem is with the web designers who
> have chosen to use features that are the commercial property of
> Microsoft and hence only exist in Microsoft's browsers.

That seems rather silly approach in my opinion. Or are you saying that
these web designers are not aware of these features, or could it be these
features actually have some browsing advantages?

John.

In message <139bmvnbphipt37@news.supernews.com>
"John Turner" <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:

>
> "Mark Goodge" wrote
>
> > On the assumption that this is a genuine question and not a troll (and
> > even if it is a troll, it's one that deserves putting to bed), the
> > problem isn't with Firefox, the problem is with the web designers who
> > have chosen to use features that are the commercial property of
> > Microsoft and hence only exist in Microsoft's browsers.
>
> That seems rather silly approach in my opinion. Or are you saying that
> these web designers are not aware of these features, or could it be these
> features actually have some browsing advantages?
>

It says a lot about web designers technical understanding! And
explains a lot of the unusable sites that exist (unusable as in
completely uncomprehesible - nice pictures and no content!).

> John.
>

Richard

>

--
www.beamends-lrspares.co.uk sales@beamends-lrspares.co.uk
I have become... comfortably numb

John Turner wrote:
> "Mark Goodge" wrote
>
>> On the assumption that this is a genuine question and not a troll (and
>> even if it is a troll, it's one that deserves putting to bed), the
>> problem isn't with Firefox, the problem is with the web designers who
>> have chosen to use features that are the commercial property of
>> Microsoft and hence only exist in Microsoft's browsers.
>
> That seems rather silly approach in my opinion. Or are you saying that
> these web designers are not aware of these features, or could it be these
> features actually have some browsing advantages?

If web site developers are only using Microsoft tools to design then they have
no idea WHAT is being put into the pages, and it is in Microsoft's interest to
make sure that proprietary code is included to that they are in control and
can track USE of Microsoft software.

--
Lester Caine - G8HFL
-----------------------------
Contact - http://home.lsces.co.uk/lsces/wiki/?page=contact
L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://home.lsces.co.uk
MEDW - http://home.lsces.co.uk/ModelEngineersDigitalWorkshop/
Firebird - http://www.firebirdsql.org/index.php

On Thu, 12 Jul 2007 08:44:58 +0100, "John Turner"
<nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:

John,

>That seems rather silly approach in my opinion. Or are you saying that
>these web designers are not aware of these features, or could it be these
>features actually have some browsing advantages?

It might just be laziness on the part of the designers - i.e. not
checking their web pages on all the browsers that might be used. I
can remember some years ago, when I was interested in web design. I
subscribed to Compuserve forums which dealt with it, and the major
message to everyone was to test your design on as many browsers that
you could. At that time, the major source of incompatibility was
between Netscape and Internet Explorer, both browsers having their
own peculiar deviations from the standard.

Nowadays, it's a lot easier to check things out since a lot of web
design software will let you use commercial browsers to check out your
work and it is quite easy to swap between IE, Firefox, Opera, etc., to
see if things are working OK.

Jim.

> If web site developers are only using Microsoft tools
> to design then they have no idea WHAT is being put
> into the pages, and it is in Microsoft's interest to
> make sure that proprietary code is included to that
> they are in control and can track USE of Microsoft software.

The Tower Models site doesn't use Microsoft software.

It's using a free toggle script from a Swedish site: http://www.fridsten.se/script/

IE and Opera manage to handle it. Firefox is more fussy and doesn't.
On balance, I prefer a browser which is fussy about what it's prepared
to display.

Martin.

Martin Wynne wrote:
> > If web site developers are only using Microsoft tools
> > to design then they have no idea WHAT is being put
> > into the pages, and it is in Microsoft's interest to
> > make sure that proprietary code is included to that
> > they are in control and can track USE of Microsoft software.
>
> The Tower Models site doesn't use Microsoft software.
>
> It's using a free toggle script from a Swedish site: http://www.fridsten.se/script/

The script test site works fine in SeaMonkey - but the Tower Models code is
not actually using the same script, and gives multiple errors in the error
console.

> IE and Opera manage to handle it. Firefox is more fussy and doesn't.
> On balance, I prefer a browser which is fussy about what it's prepared
> to display.

Since I never jumped ship TO IE .......

--
Lester Caine - G8HFL
-----------------------------
Contact - http://home.lsces.co.uk/lsces/wiki/?page=contact
L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://home.lsces.co.uk
MEDW - http://home.lsces.co.uk/ModelEngineersDigitalWorkshop/
Firebird - http://www.firebirdsql.org/index.php

"beamendsltd" wrote

> Non-IE browsers account for about 15% [1] of web users and rising
> (there's an awful lot of different browsers out there, not just IE
> and FireFox) - can anyone ignore 15% of potential customers?
> Particularly when there is no need to!

I don't see how their market share is increasing at the moment. Virtually
all new computers are pre-loaded with M$ Windows software (including IE) and
these new customers must outpace any switch to other browsers.

Out of the 20 or so people I know who run pcs, all use IE, and do so without
problems. If it ain't broke, I don't see the need to fix it.

John.

In message <139c8n5911u4v29@news.supernews.com>
"John Turner" <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:

>
> "beamendsltd" wrote
>
> > Non-IE browsers account for about 15% [1] of web users and rising
> > (there's an awful lot of different browsers out there, not just IE
> > and FireFox) - can anyone ignore 15% of potential customers?
> > Particularly when there is no need to!
>
> I don't see how their market share is increasing at the moment. Virtually
> all new computers are pre-loaded with M$ Windows software (including IE) and
> these new customers must outpace any switch to other browsers.

Linux is catching on - it's converted me! Even Dell are selling
Linux machines now. With instiutions like the EU embracing it, non-IE
browsing is on something of a roll. I've also always used FireFox on
the PC as does the Mem - it's much easier on the eye than IE, and
doesn't come complete with security holes (well, nothing like to the
extent of IE). On secutrity alone, IE is very broke, so does need
fixing! From what I read on news groups, the latest version of IE
is also causing major problems forcing users to down-grade, but on
that I can't comment.

Of course, everyone is free to use what they want, but should be
aware of the alternatives now MickSofts naughty business tricks
have finaly been exposed and restricted.

>
> Out of the 20 or so people I know who run pcs, all use IE, and do so without
> problems. If it ain't broke, I don't see the need to fix it.
>
> John.
>

Richard

>

--
www.beamends-lrspares.co.uk sales@beamends-lrspares.co.uk
I have become... comfortably numb

Jim Guthrie wrote:
> On Thu, 12 Jul 2007 08:44:58 +0100, "John Turner"
> <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:
>
> John,
>
>> That seems rather silly approach in my opinion. Or are you saying that
>> these web designers are not aware of these features, or could it be these
>> features actually have some browsing advantages?
>
> It might just be laziness on the part of the designers - i.e. not
> checking their web pages on all the browsers that might be used. I

No-one can check with *all* browsers - for as start, few people are
going to have Windows, Mac and Unix systems all to hand for testing. And
don't forget things which aren't browsers, such as search engines
crawling through your site to index it. In many ways being read by
Google is more important than being read by someone using an out of the
box PC.

> can remember some years ago, when I was interested in web design. I
> subscribed to Compuserve forums which dealt with it, and the major
> message to everyone was to test your design on as many browsers that
> you could. At that time, the major source of incompatibility was
> between Netscape and Internet Explorer, both browsers having their
> own peculiar deviations from the standard.
>
> Nowadays, it's a lot easier to check things out since a lot of web
> design software will let you use commercial browsers to check out your
> work and it is quite easy to swap between IE, Firefox, Opera, etc., to
> see if things are working OK.

Design to the standards. Much easier, and future-proof (which is the bit
that got management to start to listen to me. My department wasn't
asking for a redesign budget every time IE was updated). It is a bit
like writing in English - there is no legal obligation to follow the
"rules" of spulling n grama, but in general you need a good reason not to.

Having done some professional web work, the problems I've seen have
mostly been down to low-to-middle mangers not have a clue about the web,
combined with people who went on a one-day HTML 3.2 course in the late
1990s and so "know about IT". People think IE *is* the internet. They
are probably the people who wouldn't buy a Bachmann train because they
think model=Hornby. [1]

I'm sure this will change once people who grew up with the web start
filtering into positions of power. Or the rest of us gang up and put the
people who spew forth IE-only sites up against the wall...

[1] Last weekend a woman walked out of my local model shop empty-handed
after the best efforts of the staff couldn't convince her than the
products of Revell et al are the same concept as the "Airfix" she wanted.

--
Arthur Figgis Surrey, UK

Mark Goodge <usenet@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk> wrote:
> Craig Douglas typed:
>
>>Actually, I think it's a shame that the firefox team haven't got there
>>act together and produced a browser that's compatible with tower
>>model's website....
>
> On the assumption that this is a genuine question and not a troll (and
> even if it is a troll, it's one that deserves putting to bed), the
> problem isn't with Firefox, the problem is with the web designers who
> have chosen to use features that are the commercial property of
> Microsoft and hence only exist in Microsoft's browsers. Even if the
> Firefox team wanted to emulate them, they couldn't, as that would be
> an infringement of MS's copyright.
>
> The fact that this makes some websites inaccessible to Firefox is,
> from Microsoft's perspective, the whole point - the aim is to fill the
> web with proprietory content that can only be accessed with
> Microsoft's products, thus maintaining Microsoft's market share.
>
>>I mean, what's the point of firefox? a browser that doesn't display
>>20% of the worlds websites properly? No wonder hardly anyone uses
>>it!!!!
>
> Firefox displays considerably more than that - despite MS's best
> efforts, the number of "IE only" websites is actually very small. And
> it's the site operators who lose out in such cases, not the end user.

http://www.keen-systems.com/ (close-coupling systems for 00 gauge)
doesn't work properly with Mozilla browsers. I told the owner about it
several years ago, but it's still the same.

--
Martin S.

	#1
Ian J.	MREMag website down Looks like MREMag is down. Anyone got any news on what might have happened? Ian J.

	#2
Jane Sullivan	Re: MREMag website down In message <4673c233$0$8721$ed2619ec@ptn-nntp-reader02.plus.net>, Ian J. <leftfield42@hotmail.com> writes >Looks like MREMag is down. Anyone got any news on what might have happened? Demon are having problems with their homepages. Engineers are investigating. > >Ian J. > > -- Jane British OO, American and Australian HO, and DCC in the garden http://www.yddraiggoch.demon.co.uk/railway/railway.html

	#3
gbubb@drytecltd.com	Re: MREMag website down > > Works fine on Windows/IE7 ;-) > The "gauge" selector on the left doesn't work with my XP Pro and Firefox. Gordon (customer of Beamends, not that that's relevant here!)

	#4
John Turner	Re: MREMag website down "Ian J." wrote > I've never had any major (or minor, come to think of it) problems with > IE7. Doesn't seem to offer much (if any) more than IE6, but I reluctantly accepted it when my machine was reformated a little while ago. Have to say I've not had any real problems with it, but one little niggle does irk:- When 'Favourites' are selected and 'pinned' in position (my usual selection) each time it loads the silly little icons for each bookmark take a second or two to load, and often I click the site I want to access before they're loaded and it means I select the wrong site. I'm sure there must be a way to disable the icons, but I've not found it yet. John. John.

	#5
Ian J.	Re: MREMag website down "John Turner" <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote in message news:137lijs77b0rf57@news.supernews.com... > > "Ian J." wrote > >> I've never had any major (or minor, come to think of it) problems with >> IE7. > > Doesn't seem to offer much (if any) more than IE6, but I reluctantly > accepted it when my machine was reformated a little while ago. Have to > say I've not had any real problems with it, but one little niggle does > irk:- > > When 'Favourites' are selected and 'pinned' in position (my usual > selection) each time it loads the silly little icons for each bookmark > take a second or two to load, and often I click the site I want to access > before they're loaded and it means I select the wrong site. I'm sure > there must be a way to disable the icons, but I've not found it yet. > > John. > > John. > For the refresh to be that slow, you must either have a pretty slow PC, or rather a lot of favourites in one place. If you haven't done so already, maybe it's worth splitting the favourites out so that there are fewer in any one favourites folder? I thought there was a simple setting for this, but now can't find it, which probably means there wasn't one to begin with (I might have been thinking of icons next to favourites in Office applications). Ian J.

	#7
Ian J.	Re: MREMag website down "Ian J." <leftfield42@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:4673c233$0$8721$ed2619ec@ptn-nntp-reader02.plus.net... > Looks like MREMag is down. Anyone got any news on what might have > happened? > > Ian J. > I note that this afternoon MREMag is back up and running. Ian J.

	#8
Lester Caine	Re: MREMag website down Craig Douglas wrote: > Actually, I think it's a shame that the firefox team haven't got there act > together and produced a browser that's compatible with tower model's > website.... > > I mean, what's the point of firefox? a browser that doesn't display 20% of > the worlds websites properly? No wonder hardly anyone uses it!!!! The main problem here is the reliance on certain sites of features which are simply not compatible with the world standards. Microsoft should be required by law to ensure that their products comply with international standards, but at present they just pay backhanders to the US legal system to let them off. If a site fails to verify against W3 tests then IT is in the wrong, and simply directing people to a broken browser is not a solution. They are trying to do the same thing now with the open document standard. We have an agreed standard for documents - why should Microsoft be allowed to 'add' their own closed functions to that standard and require people to use their software. Simply saying THEY are the standard does not make it so -- Lester Caine - G8HFL ----------------------------- Contact - http://home.lsces.co.uk/lsces/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://home.lsces.co.uk MEDW - http://home.lsces.co.uk/ModelEngineersDigitalWorkshop/ Firebird - http://www.firebirdsql.org/index.php

	#9
Mark Goodge	Re: MREMag website down On Thu, 12 Jul 2007 00:11:22 +0100, Craig Douglas put finger to keyboard and typed: >Actually, I think it's a shame that the firefox team haven't got there act >together and produced a browser that's compatible with tower model's >website.... On the assumption that this is a genuine question and not a troll (and even if it is a troll, it's one that deserves putting to bed), the problem isn't with Firefox, the problem is with the web designers who have chosen to use features that are the commercial property of Microsoft and hence only exist in Microsoft's browsers. Even if the Firefox team wanted to emulate them, they couldn't, as that would be an infringement of MS's copyright. The fact that this makes some websites inaccessible to Firefox is, from Microsoft's perspective, the whole point - the aim is to fill the web with proprietory content that can only be accessed with Microsoft's products, thus maintaining Microsoft's market share. >I mean, what's the point of firefox? a browser that doesn't display 20% of >the worlds websites properly? No wonder hardly anyone uses it!!!! Firefox displays considerably more than that - despite MS's best efforts, the number of "IE only" websites is actually very small. And it's the site operators who lose out in such cases, not the end user. Mark -- Blog: http://Mark.Goodge.co.uk Photos: http://www.goodge.co.uk "Work came and made us free"

	#10
John Turner	Re: MREMag website down "Mark Goodge" wrote > On the assumption that this is a genuine question and not a troll (and > even if it is a troll, it's one that deserves putting to bed), the > problem isn't with Firefox, the problem is with the web designers who > have chosen to use features that are the commercial property of > Microsoft and hence only exist in Microsoft's browsers. That seems rather silly approach in my opinion. Or are you saying that these web designers are not aware of these features, or could it be these features actually have some browsing advantages? John.

	#11
beamendsltd	Re: MREMag website down In message <139bmvnbphipt37@news.supernews.com> "John Turner" <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote: > > "Mark Goodge" wrote > > > On the assumption that this is a genuine question and not a troll (and > > even if it is a troll, it's one that deserves putting to bed), the > > problem isn't with Firefox, the problem is with the web designers who > > have chosen to use features that are the commercial property of > > Microsoft and hence only exist in Microsoft's browsers. > > That seems rather silly approach in my opinion. Or are you saying that > these web designers are not aware of these features, or could it be these > features actually have some browsing advantages? > It says a lot about web designers technical understanding! And explains a lot of the unusable sites that exist (unusable as in completely uncomprehesible - nice pictures and no content!). > John. > Richard > -- www.beamends-lrspares.co.uk sales@beamends-lrspares.co.uk I have become... comfortably numb

	#12
Lester Caine	Re: MREMag website down John Turner wrote: > "Mark Goodge" wrote > >> On the assumption that this is a genuine question and not a troll (and >> even if it is a troll, it's one that deserves putting to bed), the >> problem isn't with Firefox, the problem is with the web designers who >> have chosen to use features that are the commercial property of >> Microsoft and hence only exist in Microsoft's browsers. > > That seems rather silly approach in my opinion. Or are you saying that > these web designers are not aware of these features, or could it be these > features actually have some browsing advantages? If web site developers are only using Microsoft tools to design then they have no idea WHAT is being put into the pages, and it is in Microsoft's interest to make sure that proprietary code is included to that they are in control and can track USE of Microsoft software. -- Lester Caine - G8HFL ----------------------------- Contact - http://home.lsces.co.uk/lsces/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://home.lsces.co.uk MEDW - http://home.lsces.co.uk/ModelEngineersDigitalWorkshop/ Firebird - http://www.firebirdsql.org/index.php

	#13
Jim Guthrie	Re: MREMag website down On Thu, 12 Jul 2007 08:44:58 +0100, "John Turner" <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote: John, >That seems rather silly approach in my opinion. Or are you saying that >these web designers are not aware of these features, or could it be these >features actually have some browsing advantages? It might just be laziness on the part of the designers - i.e. not checking their web pages on all the browsers that might be used. I can remember some years ago, when I was interested in web design. I subscribed to Compuserve forums which dealt with it, and the major message to everyone was to test your design on as many browsers that you could. At that time, the major source of incompatibility was between Netscape and Internet Explorer, both browsers having their own peculiar deviations from the standard. Nowadays, it's a lot easier to check things out since a lot of web design software will let you use commercial browsers to check out your work and it is quite easy to swap between IE, Firefox, Opera, etc., to see if things are working OK. Jim.

	#14
Martin Wynne	Re: MREMag website down > If web site developers are only using Microsoft tools > to design then they have no idea WHAT is being put > into the pages, and it is in Microsoft's interest to > make sure that proprietary code is included to that > they are in control and can track USE of Microsoft software. The Tower Models site doesn't use Microsoft software. It's using a free toggle script from a Swedish site: http://www.fridsten.se/script/ IE and Opera manage to handle it. Firefox is more fussy and doesn't. On balance, I prefer a browser which is fussy about what it's prepared to display. Martin.

	#15
Lester Caine	Re: MREMag website down Martin Wynne wrote: > > If web site developers are only using Microsoft tools > > to design then they have no idea WHAT is being put > > into the pages, and it is in Microsoft's interest to > > make sure that proprietary code is included to that > > they are in control and can track USE of Microsoft software. > > The Tower Models site doesn't use Microsoft software. > > It's using a free toggle script from a Swedish site: http://www.fridsten.se/script/ The script test site works fine in SeaMonkey - but the Tower Models code is not actually using the same script, and gives multiple errors in the error console. > IE and Opera manage to handle it. Firefox is more fussy and doesn't. > On balance, I prefer a browser which is fussy about what it's prepared > to display. Since I never jumped ship TO IE ....... -- Lester Caine - G8HFL ----------------------------- Contact - http://home.lsces.co.uk/lsces/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://home.lsces.co.uk MEDW - http://home.lsces.co.uk/ModelEngineersDigitalWorkshop/ Firebird - http://www.firebirdsql.org/index.php

	#16
John Turner	Re: MREMag website down "beamendsltd" wrote > Non-IE browsers account for about 15% [1] of web users and rising > (there's an awful lot of different browsers out there, not just IE > and FireFox) - can anyone ignore 15% of potential customers? > Particularly when there is no need to! I don't see how their market share is increasing at the moment. Virtually all new computers are pre-loaded with M$ Windows software (including IE) and these new customers must outpace any switch to other browsers. Out of the 20 or so people I know who run pcs, all use IE, and do so without problems. If it ain't broke, I don't see the need to fix it. John.

	#18
Arthur Figgis	Re: MREMag website down Jim Guthrie wrote: > On Thu, 12 Jul 2007 08:44:58 +0100, "John Turner" > <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote: > > John, > >> That seems rather silly approach in my opinion. Or are you saying that >> these web designers are not aware of these features, or could it be these >> features actually have some browsing advantages? > > It might just be laziness on the part of the designers - i.e. not > checking their web pages on all the browsers that might be used. I No-one can check with all browsers - for as start, few people are going to have Windows, Mac and Unix systems all to hand for testing. And don't forget things which aren't browsers, such as search engines crawling through your site to index it. In many ways being read by Google is more important than being read by someone using an out of the box PC. > can remember some years ago, when I was interested in web design. I > subscribed to Compuserve forums which dealt with it, and the major > message to everyone was to test your design on as many browsers that > you could. At that time, the major source of incompatibility was > between Netscape and Internet Explorer, both browsers having their > own peculiar deviations from the standard. > > Nowadays, it's a lot easier to check things out since a lot of web > design software will let you use commercial browsers to check out your > work and it is quite easy to swap between IE, Firefox, Opera, etc., to > see if things are working OK. Design to the standards. Much easier, and future-proof (which is the bit that got management to start to listen to me. My department wasn't asking for a redesign budget every time IE was updated). It is a bit like writing in English - there is no legal obligation to follow the "rules" of spulling n grama, but in general you need a good reason not to. Having done some professional web work, the problems I've seen have mostly been down to low-to-middle mangers not have a clue about the web, combined with people who went on a one-day HTML 3.2 course in the late 1990s and so "know about IT". People think IE is the internet. They are probably the people who wouldn't buy a Bachmann train because they think model=Hornby. [1] I'm sure this will change once people who grew up with the web start filtering into positions of power. Or the rest of us gang up and put the people who spew forth IE-only sites up against the wall... [1] Last weekend a woman walked out of my local model shop empty-handed after the best efforts of the staff couldn't convince her than the products of Revell et al are the same concept as the "Airfix" she wanted. -- Arthur Figgis Surrey, UK

	#19
MartinS	Re: MREMag website down Mark Goodge <usenet@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk> wrote: > Craig Douglas typed: > >>Actually, I think it's a shame that the firefox team haven't got there >>act together and produced a browser that's compatible with tower >>model's website.... > > On the assumption that this is a genuine question and not a troll (and > even if it is a troll, it's one that deserves putting to bed), the > problem isn't with Firefox, the problem is with the web designers who > have chosen to use features that are the commercial property of > Microsoft and hence only exist in Microsoft's browsers. Even if the > Firefox team wanted to emulate them, they couldn't, as that would be > an infringement of MS's copyright. > > The fact that this makes some websites inaccessible to Firefox is, > from Microsoft's perspective, the whole point - the aim is to fill the > web with proprietory content that can only be accessed with > Microsoft's products, thus maintaining Microsoft's market share. > >>I mean, what's the point of firefox? a browser that doesn't display >>20% of the worlds websites properly? No wonder hardly anyone uses >>it!!!! > > Firefox displays considerably more than that - despite MS's best > efforts, the number of "IE only" websites is actually very small. And > it's the site operators who lose out in such cases, not the end user. http://www.keen-systems.com/ (close-coupling systems for 00 gauge) doesn't work properly with Mozilla browsers. I told the owner about it several years ago, but it's still the same. -- Martin S.