What are your users using? IE vs FF and everyone else

Kind readers,

The first cut of this was originally posted in
comp.infosystems.www.authoring.stylesheets

I was dismissed as being off topic.

The reason for posting in 'stylesheets' was I felt
this group would be the most sensitive to the differences
between the browsers and what their respective audiences
were using.

So I repost again, this time with more specific information.
I may or may not have a point here, depending on how you read
this, and your general temperament.

============================================================ ====

IE is losing market share because it is an inferior product. A number
of news articles (from google news) regarding the demise of the Netscape
browser cited FireFox as having 16% of market share.

I think that number is low. I provided a link to a site that more than
doubles that figure.

http://www.w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_stats.asp

I'm not saying these numbers are the final authority. It's
just one sample.

I manage 2 sites, one personal, the other commercial. Both are low
traffic. Here are their numbers for Dec, produced by AWSTATS:

Personal Comm
FireFox (all versions) 57% 68.5%
IE 39.2 24.4
Others 2.9 6.9

Granted, this is a very small sample, a selective audience, yada,
yada, yada, but I trust these numbers.

I was wondering what other are experiencing on their 100K
visitors/month website.

I imagine that the FF usage in Europe is MUCH higher that 16%.

FWIW, another twist to all of this is that Microsoft is using the
demise of Netscape an an argument in court that an extension of its
'anti-trust oversight' should NOT be extended. The original reasons
for this oversight have disappeared (NS is gone).

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/01/03/microsoft_scoffs_ant itrust_extention_seekers/

My recent experience in buying computers in the retail market in
Calgary, Canada, is that Microsoft Vista is the ONLY windows OS
on offer and IE is the only browser installed on these whiz bang
machines that do everything with almost everything pre-installed
(including stuff you don't want).

You have to pull strings to get XP, for instance, and download FF
yourself. Right? Please tell me I'm wrong.

It's not the Adam Smith 'invisible hand' that is guiding the market
here, it's the invisible hand of Bill Gates.

One last link, by John Dovorak, says it better than I ever can.

http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2704,2246368,00.asp


Cheers
-Dio

Re: What are your users using? IE vs FF and everyone else

Diogenes wrote:
> Kind readers,
>
> The first cut of this was originally posted in
> comp.infosystems.www.authoring.stylesheets
>
> I was dismissed as being off topic.
>
> The reason for posting in 'stylesheets' was I felt
> this group would be the most sensitive to the differences
> between the browsers and what their respective audiences
> were using.
>
> So I repost again, this time with more specific information.
> I may or may not have a point here, depending on how you read
> this, and your general temperament.
>
> ============================================================ ====
>
> IE is losing market share because it is an inferior product. A number
> of news articles (from google news) regarding the demise of the Netscape
> browser cited FireFox as having 16% of market share.
>
> I think that number is low. I provided a link to a site that more than
> doubles that figure.
>
> http://www.w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_stats.asp
>
> I'm not saying these numbers are the final authority. It's
> just one sample.
>
> I manage 2 sites, one personal, the other commercial. Both are low
> traffic. Here are their numbers for Dec, produced by AWSTATS:
>
> Personal Comm
> FireFox (all versions) 57% 68.5%
> IE 39.2 24.4
> Others 2.9 6.9
>
> Granted, this is a very small sample, a selective audience, yada,
> yada, yada, but I trust these numbers.
>

I can't offer data,but can offer a view.

I think that powerusers who surf a lot tend to use Firefox to do it.

Whereas the people who just buy a computer and give it to their kids to
get seduced by paedophiles,.will tend to leave it just the way it came
out of the box.

I suspect if you went to google, my tube or facebook, the stats would be
very different.



> I was wondering what other are experiencing on their 100K
> visitors/month website.
>
> I imagine that the FF usage in Europe is MUCH higher that 16%.
>
> FWIW, another twist to all of this is that Microsoft is using the
> demise of Netscape an an argument in court that an extension of its
> 'anti-trust oversight' should NOT be extended. The original reasons
> for this oversight have disappeared (NS is gone).
>

As will MS in a few more years..


> http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/01/03/microsoft_scoffs_ant itrust_extention_seekers/
>
>
> My recent experience in buying computers in the retail market in
> Calgary, Canada, is that Microsoft Vista is the ONLY windows OS
> on offer and IE is the only browser installed on these whiz bang
> machines that do everything with almost everything pre-installed
> (including stuff you don't want).
>

Yup. The world is full of users who want XP or even 2000, and can't get it.

> You have to pull strings to get XP, for instance, and download FF
> yourself. Right? Please tell me I'm wrong.
>
> It's not the Adam Smith 'invisible hand' that is guiding the market
> here, it's the invisible hand of Bill Gates.
>
It was always the marketing arm. Bill is actually not a bad guy, he just
listened to too many corporate bullshit artists.


> One last link, by John Dovorak, says it better than I ever can.
>
> http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2704,2246368,00.asp
>
>
> Cheers
> -Dio
>

Re: What are your users using? IE vs FF and everyone else

_q_u_a_m_i_s's said:

> Yeah, it is, but when doing lots of js and css... you just wanna
> redirect IE users to get a real browser and let on FF users see your
> page. You need to do too muck code-hacking to that all browsers would
> be happy.
>

There really isn't all that much 'code-hacking' required. Conscientious
coding is much better than hacking and as far as Javascript goes, it is
not difficult at all to find the common threads and use them
appropriately so that code works in Safari, Opera, IE, and FireFox.

> Ever tried the same page in IE, FF, Opera and Safari? I mean a "web
> 2.0" page..with lots of js & css in it.
>

Yes, and I've written quite a few as well. With only minor CSS hacks
most things work out just fine, and using object detection in Javascript
means never having to say you're sorry.


> Not trying to say that IE is the "bad one" in this area(even if i
> really think so) but when IE was 99% of all browsers visiting a web-
> site you just needed to program that page for IE, with all its hacks,
> and workarounds.... now you need to make the same thing for at least 2
> browsers. So right now (or until IE dissapears, or becomes a real
> browser) you need to make the same page for 2 different browsers, and
> when a change is required you have to make the same change twice...
> this means a lot of code to handle, and a lot of opportunities for
> bugs appearing (you can never know all the quirks of a browser,
> especially in the case of IE where IE5 behaves different than IE6, and
> IE6 different than IE7).

No, no, IE is the bad one. :)

All the best,
~A!


--
anthony at my pet programmer dot com

Re: What are your users using? IE vs FF and everyone else

The Natural Philosopher writes:

> I can't offer data,but can offer a view.
>
> I think that powerusers who surf a lot tend to use Firefox to do it.
>
> Whereas the people who just buy a computer and give it to their kids
> to get seduced by paedophiles,.will tend to leave it just the way it
> came out of the box.
>
> I suspect if you went to google, my tube or facebook, the stats would
> be very different.

I suspect you're right. It's all about your audience.

sherm--

--
My blog: http://shermspace.blogspot.com
Cocoa programming in Perl: http://camelbones.sourceforge.net

Re: What are your users using? IE vs FF and everyone else

Travis Newbury said:
> On Jan 9, 6:48 am, "_q_u_a_m_i_s's" wrote:
>> Yeah, it is, but when doing lots of js and css... you just wanna
>> redirect IE users to get a real browser and let on FF users see your
>> page.
[snip]
> Your visitor will think: "Since ever site I normally go to works just
> fine with my browser, I can only assume that it is YOUR site that is
> broken and NOT my browser. Bye bye now..."
>
> Just a thought.
>

And I personally think the user who would say that would be 100%
correct. It is really not that difficult to make sites that are
cross-compatible these days.

~A!

--
anthony at my pet programmer dot com

Re: What are your users using? IE vs FF and everyone else

Travis Newbury writes:

> On Jan 9, 3:00 am, Diogenes wrote:
>> I was dismissed as being off topic.
>
> My question again is why does it matter to the site what browser
> someone visits with? Isn't the mantra "be browser independent?"

In theory yes, but in practice we're often forced to use strange hacks
to work around a certain browser's broken behavior.

The need for "body { font-size:100%; }" for instance, which IIRC is a
workaround for a bug in IE. Here's a hack that's perfectly standards-
compliant, but used only for the benefit of that one browser.

Whether a browser has 70%+ or 5% market share is an important factor in
one's planning. The fact that IE has such a large market share means
that web developers should be aware of it and test their sites against
it - preferably with all of the recent versions of it. And when new
versions of popular browsers are released, we need to stay informed
about whatever new bugs they add to the mix...

Ideally, all this following and testing against this browser or that
wouldn't be necessary, but browser bugs are an annoying reality. We
can't just cover our ears and chant "standards" until the bugs go
away, if we want to attract and keep and audience.

Fortunately, virtualization like Parallels, VMWare, and VirtualPC has
made it easy to test against a variety of IE/Windows versions without
having to build a whole computer lab.

If IE had a hypothetical market share of 5%, then I wouldn't consider
it worth the time to worry about its bugs. In fact, on my CamelBones
site I *don't* bother with testing against IE. CB is a tool for Mac
developers, and all IE/Windows readers are going to quickly realize
that these aren't the droids they're looking for. My logs show IE/Win
numbers that are practically nil.

sherm--

--
My blog: http://shermspace.blogspot.com
Cocoa programming in Perl: http://camelbones.sourceforge.net

Re: What are your users using? IE vs FF and everyone else

Anthony Levensalor writes:

> There really isn't all that much 'code-hacking'
> required. Conscientious coding is much better than hacking and as far
> as Javascript goes, it is not difficult at all to find the common
> threads and use them appropriately so that code works in Safari,
> Opera, IE, and FireFox.

And even then, you won't need to constantly write that kind of code.

There are plenty of free libraries that encapsulate all that browser-
checking and other standard code into a simple function call. And if
you don't like those, it's not hard to write your own.

sherm--

--
My blog: http://shermspace.blogspot.com
Cocoa programming in Perl: http://camelbones.sourceforge.net

Re: What are your users using? IE vs FF and everyone else

Sherman Pendley said:
> Anthony Levensalor writes:
>
>> There really isn't all that much 'code-hacking'
>> required. Conscientious coding is much better than hacking and as far
>> as Javascript goes, it is not difficult at all to find the common
>> threads and use them appropriately so that code works in Safari,
>> Opera, IE, and FireFox.
>
> And even then, you won't need to constantly write that kind of code.
>
> There are plenty of free libraries that encapsulate all that browser-
> checking and other standard code into a simple function call. And if
> you don't like those, it's not hard to write your own.
>
> sherm--
>

Yeah, but browser checking sucks, and it's not a good move. There will
be more browsers than the ones we have now, and the ones we have now
will eventually go away. Why try to keep up?

Not only that, but there are a great deal more browsers than there are
scripts that include them all. Object/Function/Array/Collection
detection on an as-needed basis works the best, and you don't have to
have 80kb of Javascript code, 79kb of which you'lll never use, to do it.
It's a beautiful thing. :)

~A!

--
anthony at my pet programmer dot com

Re: What are your users using? IE vs FF and everyone else

Sherman Pendley meinte:

> There are plenty of free libraries that encapsulate all that browser-
> checking and other standard code into a simple function call. And if
> you don't like those, it's not hard to write your own.

Libraries that do *browser*-checking are - at best - useless. Most of
the time they'll be the source of errors.

Gregor


--
http://photo.gregorkofler.at ::: Landschafts- und Reisefotografie
http://web.gregorkofler.com ::: meine JS-Spielwiese
http://www.image2d.com ::: Bildagentur für den alpinen Raum

Re: What are your users using? IE vs FF and everyone else

Diogenes said the following on 1/9/2008 3:00 AM:
> Kind readers,
>
> The first cut of this was originally posted in
> comp.infosystems.www.authoring.stylesheets
>
> I was dismissed as being off topic.

Your anti-MS rants are just as off topic in comp.lang.javascript as they
are in ciwas.

You reply and tell me what it has to do with Javascript and I will be
happy to debunk the many myths in your post.



--
Randy
Chance Favors The Prepared Mind
comp.lang.javascript FAQ - http://jibbering.com/faq/index.html
Javascript Best Practices - http://www.JavascriptToolbox.com/bestpractices/

Re: What are your users using? IE vs FF and everyone else

Anthony Levensalor wrote:
> Travis Newbury said:
>> On Jan 9, 6:48 am, "_q_u_a_m_i_s's" wrote:
>>> Yeah, it is, but when doing lots of js and css... you just wanna
>>> redirect IE users to get a real browser and let on FF users see your
>>> page.
> [snip]
>> Your visitor will think: "Since ever site I normally go to works just
>> fine with my browser, I can only assume that it is YOUR site that is
>> broken and NOT my browser. Bye bye now..."
>>
>> Just a thought.
>>
>
> And I personally think the user who would say that would be 100%
> correct. It is really not that difficult to make sites that are
> cross-compatible these days.
>
> ~A!
>

Quamis's was just making a tongue-in-cheek remark. You guys really
need to lighten up.

Re: What are your users using? IE vs FF and everyone else

*** Diogenes *** wrote a whole bunch of nifty stuff On 1/9/2008 9:02 PM:
> Anthony Levensalor wrote:
>> Travis Newbury said:
>>> On Jan 9, 6:48 am, "_q_u_a_m_i_s's" wrote:
>>>> Yeah, it is, but when doing lots of js and css... you just wanna
>>>> redirect IE users to get a real browser and let on FF users see your
>>>> page.
>> [snip]
>>> Your visitor will think: "Since ever site I normally go to works just
>>> fine with my browser, I can only assume that it is YOUR site that is
>>> broken and NOT my browser. Bye bye now..."
>>>
>>> Just a thought.
>>>
>>
>> And I personally think the user who would say that would be 100%
>> correct. It is really not that difficult to make sites that are
>> cross-compatible these days.
>>
>> ~A!
>>
>
> Quamis's was just making a tongue-in-cheek remark. You guys really
> need to lighten up.

Hah! We don't have to do anything, thank you very much. IE rants in
comp.lang.javascript deserve whatever they get, thanks for coming by.

~A!

--
anthony at my pet programmer dot com

Re: What are your users using? IE vs FF and everyone else

Anthony Levensalor wrote:
>> Quamis's was just making a tongue-in-cheek remark. You guys really
>> need to lighten up.
>
> Hah! We don't have to do anything, thank you very much. IE rants in
> comp.lang.javascript deserve whatever they get, thanks for coming by.
>
> ~A!
>

As I was saying...

Re: What are your users using? IE vs FF and everyone else

Randy Webb wrote:
> Your anti-MS rants are just as off topic in comp.lang.javascript as they
> are in ciwas.
>
> You reply and tell me what it has to do with Javascript and I will be
> happy to debunk the many myths in your post.
>

Javascript is client side programming that will work, for the most
part, with all modern browsers without resorting to special
code that targets a specific browser.

Exceptions to this include embedded sound and video objects and
code that employs programming colliquisms such as 'document.all'.

Over to you RANDY WEBB ... yes, the many myths? I'll be satisfied
if you offer 3.

-Dio

Re: What are your users using? IE vs FF and everyone else

Diogenes said the following on 1/9/2008 11:06 PM:
> Randy Webb wrote:
>> Your anti-MS rants are just as off topic in comp.lang.javascript as
>> they are in ciwas.
>>
>> You reply and tell me what it has to do with Javascript and I will be
>> happy to debunk the many myths in your post.
>>
>
> Javascript is client side programming that will work, for the most
> part, with all modern browsers without resorting to special
> code that targets a specific browser.

Nobody said any differently. And, nothing in your original post had
anything to do with javascript. It reads as the typical anti-MS rant
because some mythical voodoo statistics said so.

> Exceptions to this include embedded sound and video objects and
> code that employs programming colliquisms such as 'document.all'.

I don't use either. And, I don't go back to sites that try to force
music on me.

> Over to you RANDY WEBB ... yes, the many myths? I'll be satisfied
> if you offer 3.

Myth #1: That webstats, any of them, are worth the paper it would take
to print them. They are useless. Totally useless.

Myth #2: That you can't buy a retail PC with any Windows on it besides
Vista. We recently installed over 100 (109 to be exact) desktop units
that had Windows XP installed on them.

Myth #3: That anything that John Dovorak (whoever that may be) has to
say about Microsoft has anything to do with Javascript.

Nothing in your post had anything to do with Javascript. Perhaps you
should try reposting and at least try to ask about some JS slant to it.

As for market share, the only way you will *ever* get rid of IE is if
you get rid of Windows. And with the rate that PC's are bought, that
isn't happening any time soon.

Curious though. Are there any of the anti-MS crowd that want to bitch
and complain about the PC manufacturers that practically gave Bill Gates
the monopoly he has? Bill Gates saw an opportunity and he took it. The
PC manufacturers were beating at his door wanting a bulk discount. They
gave him a monopoly in return for that discount. It was about the money.

--
Randy
Chance Favors The Prepared Mind
comp.lang.javascript FAQ - http://jibbering.com/faq/index.html
Javascript Best Practices - http://www.JavascriptToolbox.com/bestpractices/

Re: What are your users using? IE vs FF and everyone else

* Diogenes wrote, on %m/1240588 /%y at %:%m:
> Randy Webb wrote:
>> Your anti-MS rants are just as off topic in comp.lang.javascript as
>> they are in ciwas.
>>
>> You reply and tell me what it has to do with Javascript and I will be
>> happy to debunk the many myths in your post.
>>
>
> Javascript is client side programming that will work, for the most
> part, with all modern browsers without resorting to special
> code that targets a specific browser.
>
> Exceptions to this include embedded sound and video objects and
> code that employs programming colliquisms such as 'document.all'.
>
> Over to you RANDY WEBB ... yes, the many myths? I'll be satisfied
> if you offer 3.
>
> -Dio

Myth #1:
That you have the ability to understand the basics of communication in
the English language.

Fact #1:
You were asked what this topic had to do with Javascript. You responded
by stating that Javascript runs in modern browsers. This still has
nothing to do with the topic of the thread, which is Browser Market
Share, not browser detection, or anything associated with Javascript.

Myth #2:
> Javascript is client side programming

Fact #2:
Javascript runs on both the client and the server

Myth #3:
that will work, for the most
> part, with all modern browsers without resorting to special
> code that targets a specific browser.

Fact #3:
Your myth implies that javascript requires no sort of checking to make
sure the features being used are supported in the currently running
environment. This is untrue, because object/feature/function detection
is a staple of modern Javascript coding practices, and as a technique is
a more elegant and far less error prone method for targeting a specific
browser.

Consider any function trying to get the source element of an event:

function eventHandler(e) {
// in some browsers, e will be undefined, IE is one.
// in Mozilla, e will be an event object
if (window.event) {
e = window.event;
}

var elm = e.srcElement; // IE
var elm = e.target; // Mozilla
}

There are countless other examples.
style.filter
style.opacity

Both work with the alpha opacity of an element. In IE, however, you
cannot change the opacity of an element that does not have a width and
height explicitly set.

Myth #4:
> Exceptions to this include embedded sound and video objects and


Fact #4:
Since your initial premise was incorrect, your exceptions to that
premise are also incorrect by default.

The following works in IE, FireFox, Opera, and Safari for Windows:

src="11%20My%20Friend%20Of%20Misery.mp3" autostart="false" loop="false">

With no modification. It isn't even valid markup, and it has that kind
of compatibility.

Myth #5:
> code that employs programming colliquisms such as 'document.all'. (as
another exception)

Fact #5:
document.all _is_ code that targets specific browsers. That doesn't
require a workaround or special code, it requires a basic education in
DOM standards and script bindings.


~A!


--
anthony at my pet programmer dot com

Re: What are your users using? IE vs FF and everyone else

* David Mark wrote
[snip]
>> function eventHandler(e) {
>> // in some browsers, e will be undefined, IE is one.
>> // in Mozilla, e will be an event object
>> if (window.event) {
>> e = window.event;
>> }
>>
>> var elm = e.srcElement; // IE
>> var elm = e.target; // Mozilla
>>
>> }
>
> e = e || window.event;
> var elm = e.target || e.srcElement;
>

Aye, that was not meant to be running code. That is precisely how I do
it in my apps. :)

>> There are countless other examples.
>> style.filter
>> style.opacity
>>
>> Both work with the alpha opacity of an element. In IE, however, you
>> cannot change the opacity of an element that does not have a width and
>> height explicitly set.
>
> Specifically, IE will not set the opacity unless the element sets its
> proprietary "hasLayout" property. Here is one way to force it:
>
> if (el.currentStyle && !el.currentStyle.hasLayout) { el.style.zoom =
> 1; }
>

Good tip, I was not aware of that. Danke.

[snip]
>> The following works in IE, FireFox, Opera, and Safari for Windows:
>>
>> >> src="11%20My%20Friend%20Of%20Misery.mp3" autostart="false" loop="false">
>>
>> With no modification. It isn't even valid markup, and it has that kind
>> of compatibility.
>
> I'll take your word for it, but standard nested objects can work just
> as well these days.

Whole post took about three minutes to write up, I was kinda just
showing him the door on this one. I did test the embed, and netscape 9
was the only one that wanted to download a plugin and couldn't find it.

The Object->Param->Embed construct that works even better and is much
more useful was just too long to type for my purposes here. :)

~A!


--
anthony at my pet programmer dot com

Re: What are your users using? IE vs FF and everyone else

David Mark wrote:
....
> The solution is simple. See the FAQ entry on feature detection and
> write code once for all browsers.

Er ... what FAQ? Could somebody please
point me towards that. This thread is
spread across a number of newsgroups, so it
is not that obvious.

--
Many thanks,
Martin Leese
E-mail: please@see.Web.for.e-mail.INVALID
Web: http://members.tripod.com/martin_leese/

Re: What are your users using? IE vs FF and everyone else

Randy Webb wrote:
> Nobody said any differently. And, nothing in your original post had
> anything to do with javascript. It reads as the typical anti-MS rant
> because some mythical voodoo statistics said so.
>

Uh, my last post did have something about javascript and I did that
simply to satisfy your request to get 'on topic'.

This discussion extends to everyone who does HTML, Javascript, PHP,
ASP, SQL Server. MySQL, XML, whatever.

-Dio

Re: What are your users using? IE vs FF and everyone else

Anthony Levensalor wrote:
>
> Myth #2:
> > Javascript is client side programming
>
> Fact #2:
> Javascript runs on both the client and the server
>

Anthony,

This logic is so silly, that there is nothing more I can add.

You are having a hissy fit here. This is turning into
an interesting thread, owing, in part, to your efforts
to prevent it from becoming one.

You are not the thought police, you are not the government.

You have to lighten up son. I can say that because I'm old
enough to be your father. ;-)

-Dio

Re: What are your users using? IE vs FF and everyone else

On 1/10/2008 4:01 AM, Diogenes wrote:
> Anthony Levensalor wrote:
>>
>> Myth #2:
>> > Javascript is client side programming
>>
>> Fact #2:
>> Javascript runs on both the client and the server
>>
>
> Anthony,
>
> This logic is so silly, that there is nothing more I can add.
>

Is it, now? Well, what if I could give you a bit of explanation before
your arrogance blinds you completely.

SSJS is called so because the language was /originally/ limited to th
client side.

However when Netscape released LiveWire in 1996, it carried over to the
server side.

Golly gee, let's see, could there be any credible projects or
applications using such a silly thing as SSJS?

What about ASP, JSP, AppJet, jsext, firecat, Junction, Zimki, Whitebeam,
mod_js (you know, the Apache module?)

Oh, and Veracart.

Go tell Microsoft, Sun, and the Apache Foundation how silly it is to use
Javascript on the server side.


Long rant short, there is nothing silly about calling you out on that. I
corrected a misconception that far too many people have about Javascript.

That's my case. I assume after having made such a bold and incredibly
wrong comment in so arrogant a manner you will have a rebuttal.


> You are having a hissy fit here. This is turning into
> an interesting thread, owing, in part, to your efforts
> to prevent it from becoming one.
>

hehe, this was a non-thread from the moment it started, Dio. It's
off-topic, and hence doesn't really have anything to do with javascript
at all. Posting it in a serious javascript user group like this, you're
lucky every post coming from our side wasn't a flame job. We actually
have real work we like to do here.

> You are not the thought police, you are not the government.

Ok, and your gift for relevance got delivered next door.


> You have to lighten up son. I can say that because I'm old
> enough to be your father. ;-)
>

Do I know you? You don't have a real email address, or a real name, and
now you seem to have grown some kind of weird father fetish for me. I'm
cute, but damn.

Careful you don't break a hip.

~A!


--
anthony at my pet programmer dot com

Re: What are your users using? IE vs FF and everyone else

Anthony Levensalor wrote:
>>> Myth #2:
>>> > Javascript is client side programming
>>>
>>> Fact #2:
>>> Javascript runs on both the client and the server
>>>

If follows from your 'FACT #2' that ...

1)Javascript is a client side programming language
2)Javascript is a server side programming language

even for those of us who are mythically challenged
with the "basics of communication in the English language"
(A.L. Myth #1)

So your 'Myth #2, by extension of your own 'logic', is FALSE.

FWIW, I think you're both an intelligent and a gifted programmer,
but this discussion has gone beyond silly. I leave you with this...

A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject.
-- Winston Churchill

Always forgive your enemies - nothing annoys them so much.
-- Oscar Wilde

-Dio ;-)

Re: What are your users using? IE vs FF and everyone else

..oO(Diogenes)

>Anthony Levensalor wrote:
>>>> Myth #2:
>>>> > Javascript is client side programming
>>>>
>>>> Fact #2:
>>>> Javascript runs on both the client and the server
>>>>
>
>If follows from your 'FACT #2' that ...
>
>1)Javascript is a client side programming language
>2)Javascript is a server side programming language

Correct. And where's the problem? No programming language is bound to a
particular environment or "side" of something. This not only applies to
JS, but also to PHP and Python for example. Both languages are mainly
used on servers, but can also be used on a client for various purposes.

Micha

Re: What are your users using? IE vs FF and everyone else

Diogenes wrote in
news:46606$47873628$5351029d$24237@cache120.multikabel.net:


> A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the
> subject. -- Winston Churchill
>
> Always forgive your enemies - nothing annoys them so much.
> -- Oscar Wilde


Great quotes!

Re: What are your users using? IE vs FF and everyone else

Solomon and the King are spoken of in the second book of Chronicles as if
they were two different persons. I will say that they were two.

652. Particular Types.--A double law, double tables of the law, a double
temple, a double captivity.

653. Types.--The prophets prophesied by symbols of a girdle, a beard, and
burnt hair, etc.

654. Difference between dinner and supper.

In God the word does not differ from the intention, for He is true; nor the
word from the effect, for He is powerful; nor the means from the effect, for
He is wise. St. Bernard, Ultimo Sermo in Missam.

St. Augustine, City of God, v. 10. This rule is general. God can do
everything, except those things which, if He could do, He would not be
almighty, as dying, being deceived, lying, etc.

Several Evangelists for the confirmation of the truth; their difference
useful.

The Eucharist after Lord's Supper. Truth after the type.

The ruin of Jerusalem, a type of the ruin of the world, forty years after
the death of Jesus. "I know not," as a man, or as an ambassador (Mark 13:32;
Matthew 24:36.)

Jesus condemned by the Jews and the Gentiles.

The Jews and the Gentiles typified by the two sons. St. Augustine City of
God, xx. 29.

655. The six ages, the six Fathers of the six ages, the six wonders at the
beginning of the six ages, the six mornings at the beginning of the six
ages.

656. Adam forma futuri.117 The six days to form the one, the six ages to
form the other. The six days, which Moses represents for the formation of
Adam, are only the picture of the six ages to form Jesus Christ and the
Church. If Adam had not sinned, and Jesus Christ had not come, there had
been only one covenant, only one age of men, and the creation would have
been represented as accomplished at

Re: What are your users using? IE vs FF and everyone else

knowledge, I wish that,
before entering on deeper researches into nature, he would consider her both
seriously and at leisure, that he would reflect upon himself also, and
knowing what proportion there is... Let man then contemplate the whole of
nature in her full and grand majesty, and turn his vision from the low
objects which surround him. Let him gaze on that brilliant light, set like
an eternal lamp to illumine the universe; let the earth appear to him a
point in comparison with the vast circle described by the sun; and let him
wonder at the fact that this vast circle is itself but a very fine point in
comparison with that described by the stars in their revolution round the
firmament. But if our view be arrested there, let our imagination pass
beyond; it will sooner exhaust the power of conception than nature that of
supplying material for conception. The whole visible world is only an
imperceptible atom in the ample bosom of nature. No idea approaches it. We
may enlarge our conceptions beyond an imaginable space; we only produce
atoms in comparison with the reality of things. It is an infinite sphere,
the centre of which is everywhere, the circumference nowhere. In short, it
is the greatest sensible mark of the almighty power of God that imagination
loses itself in that thought.

Returning to himself, let man consider what he is in comparison with all
existence; let him regard himself as lost in this remote corner of nature;
and from the little cell in which he finds himself lodged, I mean the
universe, let him estimate at their true value the earth, kingdoms, cities,
and himself. What is a man in the Infinite?

But to show him another prodigy equally astonishing, let him examine the
most delicate things he knows. Let a mite be given him, with its minute body
and parts incomparably more minute,

Re: What are your users using? IE vs FF and everyone else

Andy Dingley *DID NOT* write:
> without circumcision, it was not necessary.


How *really* despicable! Not only spam, but masquerade with other's ID!

--
Take care,

Jonathan
-------------------
LITTLE WORKS STUDIO
http://www.LittleWorksStudio.com

Re: What are your users using? IE vs FF and everyone else

"Diogenes" wrote in message
news:2426c$47847f0c$5351029d$26256@cache120.multikabel.net.. .

> My recent experience in buying computers in the retail market in
> Calgary, Canada, is that Microsoft Vista is the ONLY windows OS
> on offer and IE is the only browser installed on these whiz bang
> machines that do everything with almost everything pre-installed
> (including stuff you don't want).

Ya, does that not SUCK!!! Canada does need some anti-trust laws, and better
yet show the US-DoJ how to enforce them. I am NOT anti-American, but do
believe the DoJ in the US has side stepped justice for Microsoft Monopoly.

I wish one government had the balls to simple outlaw bundling. Once it
happens, M$ will fall fast.