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 Update: 03/18 18:24 GMT by Z : GraffitiKnight (among many others) wrote in to mention that the claim has been retracted by the Yahoo!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.
(Heard Wednesday at SDWest) Even ASP.NET 2.0/VS 2005 will have (better) support for Firefox. It sure perked up my ears. What's their plan?
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
Wow! News at 11.
"It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
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, this is certainly a cause for celebration.
What word could we yell in exultation?
Something short and perhaps cowboy-based?
Yeeeha!
You can't talk about Wikipedia's flaws on Wikipedia
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.
Once again, it looks like competition is good. I've been bugging Yahoo! for years about supporting non-IE browsers, but only getting automated replies. I guess Google, and its cozyness with the Firefox creators, is enough of a threat that they felt some real heat. I hope this announcement also means that maybe Google will start supporting Firefox and other non-IE browsers when they roll out new toys like desktop search. If Yahoo! and Google keep going at it like this, it can only mean good things for the end user!
To the making of books there is no end, so let's get started
"...but the company did say it would not launch any new services until all existing one supported Firefox"
No, they didn't say that. They said they wouldn't launch any new services until making sure they worked with Firefox. They don't have a timeline for when they get all existing services supported on Firefox and, not surprisingly, don't want to hold off on launching new services for an arbitrary period of time.
sigs are a waste of space
A quick fix is hitting Ctrl + and then Ctrl -
If this is true, It is a great step for Yahoo. I have tried to move everyone I know to firefox, including my mom. The only thing that was holding my mom back from completely using firefox was yahoo's online streaming music radio. Maby finally she can dump IE once and for all!
I actually think this is a dumb statement by Yahoo, and I use firefox daily.
Yahoo should not pledge firefox support, it should pledge STANDARDS support. If all their pages validate, and contain the proper doctypes, then Yahoo becomes stardards supporting, and all good browsers that obey standards will render them correctly. They'll also gracefully degrade per platform/browser.
Reason, free market capitalism, and individualism
Yeah, it used to do that for me. But nightly builds solve the problem just fine. The Moox 1.0 build also works fine. If you don't like those solutions though, there's also the slashfix extension.
Uhhh...last time I checked, Yahoo!'s primary source of revenue BY FAR was still advertising (like higher than 80%). I imagine it will be a cold day in hell when they officially support a product that erodes that revenue source.
This just comes up again and again, doesn't it? Let's recap:
I love how people complain incessantly about slashdot standards support.
1) Slashdot was coded years ago, when the accepted way to do things was to nest tables. It may not have been right, but it did the job at a time when CSS had even less support than it does now. Also at that time IE was a leader in the adaption of CSS (remember when NS 4 didn't even support external stylesheets without a hack) and its implementation was still poor. Developers had little choice.
2) Last i checked slashcode was open source. Recode it to standards and submit it as a patch.
3) Why has complaining about slashdot standards support become an exercise in growing your karma, all these redundant posts are always modded interesting in any discussion regarding the web.
That would suggest an issue with your filter set, not with Yahoo.
I don't use yahoo, but in about 15 seconds, I came up with this:
http://us.a1.yimg.com/*/promotions/*
Turned it on and didn't see any more ads come up. It may need tweaking after ad rotations.
Hope that helps.
Yeah, way to go.
:)
Let's go back to Lynx.
Nah, let's go back to Gopher!
Or let's just ditch the Internet, and bring back the BBS!
Just because it CAN be done, doesn't mean it should!
use the ctrl + and ctrl - shortcuts to increase the text size, then reduce it back to normal. This will re-render the page properly. Why this works, I have no idea.
There are some people that if they don't know, you can't tell 'em.
Yeah, and then you can upgrade from Firefox to a good browser like Safari.
If I wanted to go on a Safari, I would have.
I'd rather twirl Fire with the Foxes.
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
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!
Well, maybe that, but it's probably more that Google has started officialy supporting Firefox in most things (there's even a rumor about a GBrowser based on Firefox), so Yahoo couldn't be left behind on that.
Treehugger? Treehugger... Treehugger!
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.
Big hint.
Laws are for people with no friends.
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."
I wish Yahoo had worded it like that. Instead they make false statements like:
The reality is exactly as you say, and Firefox/Mozilla/Netscape all share a rendering engine that is NOT new technology, but has been in use for a very long time now.