I don't want to initiate a Browser compatibility flame war. But is it necessity to bother all zope.org visitors with that zopelogo.png ? Please have a look at your User Agent statistic. There are many users who are using Netscape 4.x. This browser is unable to render transparent png images in proper style. -- _______________________________________________________________________ Andreas Heckel andreas@easyleading.org LINUX is like a wigwam...no gates...no windows and an apache inside ;-)
If you are on a Windows platform use IE, if you don't want IE, use Opera 5.x both support png format and are compliant with CSS and the W3C standards. Linux users can use Opera, I have not tested it on Linux, however if it works like it does on Windows, you're golden. If you use Netscape because of some deep seeded hatred for IE/Microsoft/Bill Gates or are just unwilling to change, well then suffer. Not using superior tools when you can is your fault. To users of UNIX on platforms such as Sun, SGI, etc.: Netscape is still part of the "browser wars" because of you! Put pressure on these people to pressure Netscape into adding support for the latest technologies. The HTML 4 spec is 4 years old! How long has CSS1 and png been around? I feel for you, I really do. My guess is that most of you would change if you could. My big problem is that somewhere a line has to be drawn between specs, ease of development and who can see your stuff or how they can see it at least. I hope that I did not offend anyone, it was not my intention. -- Jeffrey D. Peterson Webmaster/Web & Web Applications Engineer Range TV Cable & Broadband 1818 E. 3rd Ave. Hibbing, MN 55746 jpeterso@rangebroadband.com
-----Original Message----- From: zope-admin@zope.org [mailto:zope-admin@zope.org]On Behalf Of Andreas Heckel Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2001 10:32 AM To: zope@zope.org Subject: [Zope] zopelogo nerves
I don't want to initiate a Browser compatibility flame war. But is it necessity to bother all zope.org visitors with that zopelogo.png ? Please have a look at your User Agent statistic. There are many users who are using Netscape 4.x. This browser is unable to render transparent png images in proper style.
-- _______________________________________________________________________ Andreas Heckel andreas@easyleading.org LINUX is like a wigwam...no gates...no windows and an apache inside ;-)
_______________________________________________ Zope maillist - Zope@zope.org http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev )
From: "Jeff Peterson" <jpeterso@the-bridge.net>
If you are on a Windows platform use IE, if you don't want IE, use Opera 5.x both support png format and are compliant with CSS and the W3C standards.
Opera 5 (at least, the mac version I have) doesn't support browser file uploads, therefore it's useless for managing zope. Also, it doesn't support plugins (like flash, etc.). While it's faster than the other browsers, it's not much faster than NS 4.77 or IE5, and I suspect that once they put in a full feature set, it'll bog down.
Linux users can use Opera, I have not tested it on Linux, however if it works like it does on Windows, you're golden. If you use Netscape because of some deep seeded hatred for IE/Microsoft/Bill Gates or are just unwilling to change, well then suffer. Not using superior tools when you can is your fault.
IE5 on the PC also has problems rendering transparent PNGs. PNG support just isn't that great in general unfortunately. Because PNG24 is great, you get transparency the way it SHOULD look. just MY $0.002
On Tue, 22 May 2001, you wrote: </snip> Not using superior tools when you can is your fault. </snip> What arrogance as if every once can afford the hardware the band width or the license fees to have the latest and greatest. Web authoring that does not take this into account is just bad authoring. Zope org especially should be aware that a large number of its users will be using Linux Unix tools how hard would it be to detect browser and exclude or switch or the image.(or just use it in the first place). <snip> I hope that I did not offend anyone, it was not my intention. </snip> You certainly offended me. I don't have the time to explain to you why some of us love freedom and community , and use linux not only because we are convinced in real ways it is technically superior to some other operating systems but that it is morally superior as well.
I don't want to initiate a Browser compatibility flame war. But is it necessity to bother all zope.org visitors with that zopelogo.png ? Please have a look at your User Agent statistic. There are many users who are using Netscape 4.x. This browser is unable to render transparent png images in proper style.
-- Alan Truesdale TrueChem Limited 616 Charon Montreal Quebec tel 514 937 4589 fax 514 938 8652 http://www.truechem.ca
-----Original Message----- From: alan truesdale [mailto:alan@mlug.ca] Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2001 12:38 PM To: jpeterso@the-bridge.net Subject: RE: [Zope] zopelogo nerves
On Tue, 22 May 2001, you wrote:
</snip> Not using superior tools when you can is your fault. </snip> What arrogance as if every once can afford the hardware the band width or the license fees to have the latest and greatest.
Browsers are free my friend, even Opera. Opera is also available for Linux (http://www.opera.com/download/). My superior tools comment applied to Linux and Windows where superior tools are available (at least superior to Netscape, IMO).
<snip> I hope that I did not offend anyone, it was not my intention. </snip> You certainly offended me. I don't have the time to explain to you why some of us love freedom and community , and use linux not only because we are convinced in real ways it is technically superior to some other operating systems but that it is morally superior as well.
Sorry, it wasn't meant to. I don't need explaining to, if you'd have read it more closely you'd have seen that no where did I suggest one OS over another. In fact, I spoke of browsers exclusively. Linux is a fine OS, the open source movement is badly needed and I agree in part that it is technically superior, I may debate you on where morals come in but you are entitled to your opinion too. BTW, here at Range we use SGI IRIX(5), RHL 6.2(4), SUN OS(1) and Windows 2000(2) so I do have some basis for comparison. -- Jeffrey D. Peterson Webmaster/Web & Web Applications Engineer Range TV Cable & Broadband 1818 E. 3rd Ave. Hibbing, MN 55746 jpeterso@rangebroadband.com
Jeff Peterson wrote:
If you are on a Windows platform use IE, if you don't want IE, use Opera 5.x both support png format and are compliant with CSS and the W3C standards. Linux users can use Opera, I have not tested it on Linux, however if it works like it does on Windows, you're golden.
Seems to me that you do not know what you are speaking about.
If you use Netscape because of some deep seeded hatred for IE/Microsoft/Bill Gates or are just unwilling to change, well then suffer.
IMHO there are some more reasons not to change from Linux to Windows. BTW ... Did you noticed that there is no IE 4 Linux ?
Not using superior tools when you can is your fault.
MOST people on earth are not able to pay the price for that "superior tools" ! Of course they can just copy M$Windows. Is that the solution you kept in mind ? -- _______________________________________________________________________ Andreas Heckel andreas@easyleading.org LINUX is like a wigwam...no gates...no windows and an apache inside ;-)
I thought I was fairly clear...I guess not.
IMHO there are some more reasons not to change from Linux to Windows. BTW ... Did you noticed that there is no IE 4 Linux ?
Yes I did...that is why I suggested using Opera 5.x which you can get for FREE - legally with some minor inconveniences (there is a standard banner add built into mine).
MOST people on earth are not able to pay the price for that "superior tools" ! Of course they can just copy M$Windows. Is that the solution you kept in mind ?
I never suggested switching to windows or any other OS. I said, and I think without question, that in the case of Linux and Windows there were Netscape alternatives and for other flavors of UNIX to put pressure on both the OS manufacturer and Netscape/other browser developers to conform to the spec.
-- _______________________________________________________________________ Andreas Heckel andreas@easyleading.org LINUX is like a wigwam...no gates...no windows and an apache inside ;-)
_______________________________________________ Zope maillist - Zope@zope.org http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev )
You might want to consider a few things. There are many areas that IE is far more broken then Netscape and many still use Netscape becuase it has far fewer security exploits then IE does. For example IE seems to ignore the entire HTTP/1.1 spec caching directivs. IE can redraw fast because it does not rehit the web server which is requried by spec with the headers I have used. IE ignores mime types in many cases. IE returns an incorrect HTTP_ACCEPT string in the REQUEST. As far as rendering goes IE may be better in some areas but as far as working with them server side IE is a royal pain in the ass and Netscape works far better. Designing the webpages of tomorrow http://webme-eng.com Designing the MMORPGS of tomorrow http://worldforge.org On Tue, 22 May 2001, Jeff Peterson wrote:
If you are on a Windows platform use IE, if you don't want IE, use Opera 5.x both support png format and are compliant with CSS and the W3C standards. Linux users can use Opera, I have not tested it on Linux, however if it works like it does on Windows, you're golden. If you use Netscape because of some deep seeded hatred for IE/Microsoft/Bill Gates or are just unwilling to change, well then suffer. Not using superior tools when you can is your fault.
To users of UNIX on platforms such as Sun, SGI, etc.: Netscape is still part of the "browser wars" because of you! Put pressure on these people to pressure Netscape into adding support for the latest technologies. The HTML 4 spec is 4 years old! How long has CSS1 and png been around? I feel for you, I really do. My guess is that most of you would change if you could. My big problem is that somewhere a line has to be drawn between specs, ease of development and who can see your stuff or how they can see it at least.
I hope that I did not offend anyone, it was not my intention.
-- Jeffrey D. Peterson Webmaster/Web & Web Applications Engineer Range TV Cable & Broadband 1818 E. 3rd Ave. Hibbing, MN 55746 jpeterso@rangebroadband.com
-----Original Message----- From: zope-admin@zope.org [mailto:zope-admin@zope.org]On Behalf Of Andreas Heckel Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2001 10:32 AM To: zope@zope.org Subject: [Zope] zopelogo nerves
I don't want to initiate a Browser compatibility flame war. But is it necessity to bother all zope.org visitors with that zopelogo.png ? Please have a look at your User Agent statistic. There are many users who are using Netscape 4.x. This browser is unable to render transparent png images in proper style.
-- _______________________________________________________________________ Andreas Heckel andreas@easyleading.org LINUX is like a wigwam...no gates...no windows and an apache inside ;-)
_______________________________________________ Zope maillist - Zope@zope.org http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev )
_______________________________________________ Zope maillist - Zope@zope.org http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev )
Sorry it took so long, but here's how it went: The zope logo *was* a png without transparent background. Unfortunately, what is #6699cc in an image is not the same as #6699cc in a background when using windows, which is just brain damaged, period. Then it was a png with a transparent background. there's a number of clients that don't support this 1997-era technology. Now, it is a transparent .gif, which has issues with authoring tools because of unisys, and has only one layer of transparency. every-choice-sucks-ly yr's, -- -mindlace- zopatista community liason
Why has no one mentioned Mozilla? Standards compliant, free, supports everything that everyone has mentioned (CSS1, PNG, HTML4.) Mozilla is light years beyond any other web browser (with the exception of anything that uses Gecko.) There is also a wrapper for Netscape 4 plugins so things like Flash, etc. work. FWIW, I've had no problems seeing the Zope logo under Netscape 4/Solaris or Linux. And the fact that colors in Windows don't mean anything because what is #6699cc in IE is not the same #6699cc in Netscape or Mozilla or any other program. Well, maybe. But as someone else said, there are many more reasons not to use Windows then just color. -Chris -- -------------------------------------------------------------------- Christopher N. Deckard | Lead Web Systems Developer cnd@ecn.purdue.edu | Engineering Computer Network http://www.ecn.purdue.edu/ | Purdue University ---- zlib.decompress('x\234K\316Kq((-J)M\325KM)\005\000)"\005w') ---
Completely agree! Cannot be better said! On Wed, 23 May 2001, Christopher N. Deckard wrote:
Why has no one mentioned Mozilla? Standards compliant, free, supports everything that everyone has mentioned (CSS1, PNG, HTML4.) Mozilla is light years beyond any other web browser (with the exception of anything that uses Gecko.) There is also a wrapper for Netscape 4 plugins so things like Flash, etc. work.
FWIW, I've had no problems seeing the Zope logo under Netscape 4/Solaris or Linux. And the fact that colors in Windows don't mean anything because what is #6699cc in IE is not the same #6699cc in Netscape or Mozilla or any other program. Well, maybe. But as someone else said, there are many more reasons not to use Windows then just color.
Oleg. ---- Oleg Broytmann http://www.zope.org/Members/phd/ phd@phd.pp.ru Programmers don't die, they just GOSUB without RETURN.
From: "Christopher N. Deckard" <cnd@ecn.purdue.edu>
Why has no one mentioned Mozilla? Standards compliant, free,
Because version 0.7 for the mac crashes too often and it's too slow, so I try not to talk about it too much :) It seems to be exactly or almost exactly the same as netscape 6....
--On Wednesday, May 23, 2001 10:37:19 -0500 "Christopher N. Deckard" <cnd@ecn.purdue.edu> wrote:
Why has no one mentioned Mozilla? Standards compliant, free, supports everything that everyone has mentioned (CSS1, PNG, HTML4.) Mozilla is light years beyond any other web browser (with the exception of anything that uses Gecko.) There is also a wrapper for Netscape 4 plugins so things like Flash, etc. work.
Because it's brain damaged enough that "view source" always went back to the server, making tracebacks useless (until the .9 release). Now, with the .9 release, it sometimes says that it cannot view this content type when you do "view source". Ugh. Also, the back button hasn't played well with frames. I've gotten a few nightlies that did ok, but they almost always regress. Plus, on linux, at least, middle clicking in a text area means "insert my content at some random location". Copying text from anywhere in mozilla and pasting it means "strip all leading whitespace" which is quite charming when editing python methods. OTOH, .9 is blazing fast compared w/prior builds, even if libpr0n sometimes draws odd. Especially in mail/news, which used to be so slow i gave up, it is extremely fast. 0.9.1 looks like it will be "good enough for me" and, when(ever) 1.0 lands it will be the most solid 1.0 release in the history of software ... except maybe for enlightenment (on 0.16 and climbing). every-program-expands-until-it-has-it's-own-widget-set-ly y'rs -- ethan mindlace fremen zopatista community liason
On Tue, May 22, 2001 at 05:31:36PM +0200, Andreas Heckel wrote:
I don't want to initiate a Browser compatibility flame war. But is it necessity to bother all zope.org visitors with that zopelogo.png ? Please have a look at your User Agent statistic. There are many users who are using Netscape 4.x. This browser is unable to render transparent png images in proper style.
At first, the logo wasn't transparent when Ethan put it up, which looked bone ugly on my display. I then added transparency, but was silly enough not to test that on Netscape 4.x.. When I did later on, I saw that Netscape 4.x mangles the transparency, and I replaced it with a transparent GIF (using a licensed tool, bloody patents). So, I never ment to upset the Netscape 4.x users of our site, mea culpa! -- Martijn Pieters | Software Engineer mailto:mj@digicool.com | Digital Creations http://www.digicool.com/ | Creators of Zope http://www.zope.org/ ---------------------------------------------
participants (9)
-
320011178755-0001＠t-online.de -
alan truesdale -
Christopher N. Deckard -
ethan mindlace fremen -
Jeff Peterson -
kosh＠aesaeion.com -
marc lindahl -
Martijn Pieters -
Oleg Broytmann