Slashdot Mirror
Yahoo Pledges Full Firefox Support
homerj79 writes "News.com.com is reporting that Yahoo! has pledged full support of Firefox across its entire site. Despite its search bar for Firefox, which was launched in February, users still had to revert back to IE for certain features of Yahoo, like customizing your Yahoo Messenger avatar via the web. A specific date has not been set, but the company did say it would not launch any new services until all existing one supported Firefox." Update: 03/18 18:24 GMT by Z : GraffitiKnight (among many others) wrote in to mention that the claim has been retracted by the Yahoo! central office.
What about launchcast? There's no mention of it in the article, but hopefully that's included. It's one of the few things keeping my wife from using firefox.
"I drank what?" -Socrates
Well, that is a great step but, I would like them to support games like Bejewelled 2 and other, that are ActiveX only...
They should make all they games with Java. And, I experience some problems with the calendar also... well, they say, the devil is in the details
Ubuntu is an African word meaning 'I can't configure Debian'
From ZD Net UK:
Yahoo said on Friday afternoon that a statement from the company's Australian office on Tuesday, which claimed that all future products would be compatible with both the Firefox and Internet Explorer (IE) browsers, was inaccurate.
In February, Yahoo launched a search toolbar for Firefox, but users of the open source browser were forced to switch back to IE when accessing some Yahoo services. Following communications between Yahoo and ZDNet UK sister site ZDNet Australia , Yahoo issued a statement saying the company would not launch any new products or services in the future without ensuring they work on both IE and Firefox.
However, on Friday, a Yahoo representative from the US admitted that the original statement was 'factually incorrect' because, although Yahoo realises that Firefox-compatibility is important, it is not in a position to promise all future products would be both Internet Explorer and Firefox compatible.
Who cares. I love the irony of all the standards fanboys posting about how great standards are on a site that can't even spell standard and viewing said pearls of wisdom in a browser that may or may not render them correctly depending on some random quirk. Gotta love it.
Do not try to read the dupe, thats impossible. Instead, only try to realize the truth
What truth?
There is no dupe
It's easy to support all browsers except IE, which is where the problem lies.
I was very disappointed to find that LaunchCast does not work in Firefox(or any mac browser for that matter).
The error message displayed is:
'Sorry, we are unable to support Netscape 6.0+ at this time.'
I wonder if this covers partnerships Yahoo! has with other companies.
Being from Canada, Yahoo! has partenered with Rogers to incorporate features like LaunchCast into high speed internet service bundles. I know this is the only thing I currently use IE for as LaunchCast won't support anything but IE... boo-urns.
I am most annoyed that the main search bar at yahoo.com grabs focus when you start typing no matter where you click on the page. This breaks type to find ("begin finding when you begin typing" in options) and I always have to do a find on their page since it is so busy.
It's not nesting tables (that's not really bad in my book, it just slowed down old Netscapes) that is the big problem.
a shdot.org%2F
It is the fact the Slashdot pages are invalid HTML.
And rather than fix it, or at least address the criticism, Slashdot gives a 403 Forbidden error when trying to use validator.w3.org.
As if that will make us have confidence in the HTML being valid, making it so we can't even see the errors. It would be like buying a car with a sheet over it, and not being allowed to look under the sheet before purchase.
http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http%3A%2F%2Fsl
Just because it CAN be done, doesn't mean it should!
The biggest problem is Slashdot's, they're the ones paying for the bandwidth on this bloated code.
The page works in all browsers(at least the 4 I have). As i understand it the issue with firefox is a bug in the browser.
That, of course, is not what the original article ever said. What Firefox does is support world-wide web standards better than the leading browser. Standards compliant pages will run better on Firefox than IE. Therefore Yahoo is moving towards world-wide web standards by making pages that render and function correctly on Firefox.
Now was that so hard?
"It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
While it looks this story is incorrect, it still should be pointed out that the problem is not designing websites to work with specific browsers, it is getting them to comply to existing standards. If major sites like Yahoo started coding for W3C standards it would push developers of compliance-challenged browsers <cough>Microsoft</cough> to fix their software. Then, in the Utopia that would develop, web developers would know that their compliant code would display the same in whatever browser was used. Kind of the whole idea for standards, you know? Oh, and then monkeys would fly out of my butt.
Some sites won't accept mail from my yahoo account claiming it's not RFC compliant. Heck if I know but it'd be nice get on it if not...
http://www.rfc-ignorant.org/
Who are these guys anyway???
I think they are talking about dynamic content which used activex and other stuff on IE previously and didn't work on other browsers. And streaming media and other things which aren't completely standardised and which are not consistent on all browsers. Most of the static pages look fine on FireFox to me and they did say it was about 'services' so...
Yes, it is with mixed emotions that I look forward to this new capability. It will only increase the amount of HTML mail that I get, the vast majority of which uses NONE of HTML's capabilities except in the signature block, but still uses 4 times the disk storage. On the other hand, it probably won't increase such email much; IE users who decide to migrate after this change would be using the HTML already, if they were so inclined. Probably not many people who are already using Firefox will start using the HTML feature once Yahoo[ungrammatical punctuation omitted] turns it on.
In days of old, Yahoo[u.p.o] would let you hand-code your own HTML if you checked a box saying "Allow HTML" or something like that. I guess enough people were scared by the notion of having that much control that they decided to take it away, but I miss that feature from time to time.
one hundred twenty
is just enough characters
to write a haiku