Date: Mon, 14 Feb 2005 18:58:02 -0700 From: Chad Leigh -- Shire.Net LLC <chad@shire.net> To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Instead of freebsd.com, why not... Message-ID: <06433BF9-7EF5-11D9-B134-000D933E3CEC@shire.net> In-Reply-To: <1497115560.20050215024836@wanadoo.fr> References: <20050213152331.2B00E16A4D1@hub.freebsd.org> <F64CC038-7EEE-11D9-B357-000D93C7878E@illusionart.com> <1722947768.20050215023424@wanadoo.fr> <BD1E0D37-7EF2-11D9-B134-000D933E3CEC@shire.net> <1497115560.20050215024836@wanadoo.fr>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Feb 14, 2005, at 6:48 PM, Anthony Atkielski wrote: > Chad Leigh -- Shire.Net LLC writes: > >> That is laughable. MS IE on Windows has one of the worst reputations >> around for following web standards. Go ask any professional designer. > > I did better. I actually ran the W3C conformance tests against MSIE, > and it passed. At the time, no other browser came close. > > Today, MSIE is not the only browser with good conformance, but it is > still one of the best. Firefox is young and has some security issues > that worry me, but we shall see. Opera has the disadvantage of not > being free, and you don't really get much in exchange for paying for it > that you wouldn't already get with Firefox or MSIE. > You can say all you want. Every professional designer I have ever talked with lamented the poor state of standards conformance of IE for Windows. And they could document it. MS only has compatibility with itself, and that is it. And since it is the 800lb gorilla, they think they can basically do whatever they want. People I highly respect have done lots of tests of browsers with the standard and conformance to the W3C standards suites and IE Windows does not do that well. Chad
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?06433BF9-7EF5-11D9-B134-000D933E3CEC>