And you're just as wrong now as you were when you said that the first time. I really do not understand this. The only possible explanation is that you didn't read The Fucking Article [opera.com], or you didn't know what I [slashdot.org] meant by TFA.
I ran my *own* tests. I don't assume that just because Opera's techies are whining about being oppressed by Microsoft that they're right. I actually - unlike you - used my brain. I did this little thing called research instead of just reading an article.
Never just read the article. Always dig deeper. Or do you enjoy being spoonfed, you braindead, gullible freak?
I think the majority of Slashdotters are "web developers". People speak more about things they think they are knowledgeable about, whether that knowledge is justified or not. For example, I prattle on far too much whenever there's an XFree86 article. I suspect the high proportion of idiots responding to this article just proves how many ill-justified jobs were created by the dot-COM boom.
Good for you. However, I actually went to the trouble of testing MSN in Opera 7, Amaya, Netscape 4.7, Mozilla 1.3, IE 6.0, and through simple TELNET, and the results I got lead me to believe that they were simply treating Opera as an unknown browser, and passing it the Netscape stylesheet by default.
Also, no, I'm not a web developer. Right now, I develop embedded systems software for scientific instruments -- and before that, I wrote image manipulation and genealogy software for Sierra. Before that, I worked on the.NET framework. Before that? Mainframe capacity planning simulation software.
So please, don't be such an arrogant condescending twat.
You started out by claiming that I said it was a typo in the stylesheet. So YOU started by misrepresenting my position. Don't be surprised if I act condescending towards you if you don't even read what I write before replying to it.
It's ridiculous to think this was a typo: that would imply a level of incompetence that nobody - not even the most rabid anti-Microsoft fanatic - could possibly believe. This is an international website with millions of customers. If it runs without staging and review and browser tests at least against the latest browsers then I'm a monkey's uncle.
I'm not claiming a typo. I'm claiming that Opera 6 (and originally, Opera 7) get served the version of the site designed for Netscape 4.7.
Learn about browscaps.ini. Also, Opera still isn't all that popular compared with the earlier Netscapes, so it doesn't get special treatment. It just gets the default.
You can blame most of it on the stupid browser ID tags that Netscape came up with. Rather than reporting user agent capabilities, they reported user-agent names and versions. Kind of lame. Kind of stupid. Not something anyone in their right mind should have come up with. But hey, you've probably never seen a browscaps.ini file in your life, so you don't have any idea what has to be put up with these days.
While that may be true, did you check to see if Opera is sedning out screwy.CSS to sabotage NS 4.7 or is the problem that Netscape 4.7 is a festering pile of lizard excrement? Given the lack of propper.CSS support in Netscape 4.7 (the bane of my existance when I was doing web page developement) and has a LOT of issues with W3C standard HTML, I'm inclined to go with option 2.
It's still a more popular browser than Opera though. You'd think they'd support it if they cared about their readers. But they obviously don't. Worse than MSN in fact - they're excluding a larger potential demographic.
That is not true. Opera 6 renders the page just fine, as described here [opera.com]. It is just typical of Microsoft to resort to dirty tactics as posting anonymously with such false information.
No, it doesn't. The bullets are aligned right, rather than being center-aligned within the space to the left of the list items.
Maybe you should spend more attention on fine detail. Then you wouldn't be in such a mess.
This is untrue. Opera6 displays the page which is sent to MSIE6 just fine.
No, it doesn't. Bulleted list marker alignment is wrong on that page's screenshots.
Now, the other thing you should consider is that site.css is designed to be handed to Netscape 4.7 browsers - a much more popular browser than Opera - which need the extra help.
Besides, if Opera 6 did everything you claimed correctly, you wouldn't be touting 7 as having "Improved standards support" on your download page.
IIRC the source of the problem was a single incorrect figure in the style sheet. NO possiblity whatsoever of a typo there then.
Okay, let me get this straight. You develop a completely seperate css file to work against the user agent string sent by Opera browsers, despite the fact that Opera can easily handle the default stylesheet. So your characterization of a single incorrect figure is incorrect:
diff site.css site-win-ie6.css |wc -m 2627 My research indicates that you are off by two thousand six hundred twenty six characters. In this completely fucking seperate stylesheet, you copy shared values by hand rather than copy/paste and place -30px (a value which, in the css universe, is insane) rather than 23px for the standard production stylesheet. This is a typo in your universe?
They get delivered the stylesheet written for Netscape 4.7 - a much more popular browser than either Mozilla or Opera.
MS is intentionally sending a crippled page to Opera. It's not a typo. When they changed the user string to "Oprah", the correct page was sent (the IE one) and rendered fine. The server is scanning the user agent string for "Opera" and sending it a crippled page purposely.
Learn how browscaps.ini browser identification works.
You mean you think it's ironic that people would be using the software that they hate that's more or less been forced on them? Especially if they are currently at work?
Yeahhh.... I was wondering how the guys at Pixar were doing running Linux these days...
Hmm... So then why did the fictional Oprah 7.0 browser (Not IE6 or NS6) return non-broken CSS?
browscaps.ini files, and the algorithm they use to determine the browser name.
Opera 7.0 reports as an older version of Opera (it contains the word "Opera" and so defaults to the last version in the browscaps.ini file); Oprah isn't listed at all, so it goes off the compatibility list exclusively.
You might be interested to know that the average browscaps.ini file contains over 1000 different browser versions. It's a mess.
Not only did I read the article, I ran my own tests.
If you download the page and style-sheet (using wget) while identifying yourself as IE or any other browser than Opera, you set sent a web page and style sheet that renders properly in IE, and in Netscape, and in Opera.
Wrong.
If you READ the article, you would see that Opera gets a stylesheet called site.css, Navigator 6 and above (eg. Mozilla) get one called site-nav6.css, and IE6 and above get one called site-win-ie6.css.
By performing (and this is what gets most Slashdot denizens who believe everything they read) my own tests, including downloading the pages in Navigator 4.7, Opera 7, Mozilla 1.3, IE 6, Amaya and using Telnet by passing the string "GET / HTTP/1.0[CR][LF][CR][LF]", I found that by default, the site.css page is returned.
The differences between the different *HTML* pages are caused by the fact that different CSS stylesheets are linked to for different browsers (as noted above), the menus are generated dynamically, and the adverts are generated dynamically. That's the ONLY difference.
If you download the page (using wget) identifying yourself as Opera7, you get a page that looks broken not just in Opera, but in every other browser too, including IE because the style sheet says to render it in a way that looks 'broken'.
No, you get a page which works perfectly fine in Navigator 4.7, if you identify yourself as anything other than IE6 and above, or Netscape 6 and above.
Next time, actually read the article (it's obvious you didn't), actually read the post (it's obvious you didn't do that either), and actually perform your own tests (which it's quite plain you didn't, because if you had, you'd have seen exactly what I did).
If you send "Opear" instead of "Opera" in the browser identifier then different HTML is produced. Your inference that only NS6 and IE6 checks are made is wrong.
Then presumably you won't have a problem in producing the diffs to show it?
Amaya and Netscape Nav 4.7 both get fed the same stylesheet that Opera gets. Indicating that the site checks for Netscape 6 and above, and IE 6 and above only, providing a default style sheet to all other browsers.
2nd piece of evidence:
Mozilla gets the Netscape 6 stylesheet, which has the SAME bug that the default (passed to Opera) stylesheet has. The same -30px margin is passed to it, but Mozilla renders it correctly (latest build).
3rd piece of evidence:
Netscape Navigator 4.7 MANGLES the front page of MSN if you set the margin-left property to 0px instead of -30px. Here's NS4.7 showing the page with a modified site.css stylesheet: http://home.earthlink.net/~simoncooke /ns47.png
Whereas here is Netscape Navigator 4.7 using the unmodified stylesheet (the same one passed to Opera):
http://home.earthlink.net/~simoncooke/ns47orig.p ng
Now, if you take a look at most sites, you will see that the most popular browsers are IE, followed by Netscape Navigator 4.7, followed by Netscape 6.x (including Mozilla), and finally trailed VERY FAR BEHIND by Opera.
Now if you were to realistically act as a site designer, you would go out of your way support IE, Netscape 6.x and company, and Netscape 4.7 -- which is the 2nd most used browser in the world.
And guess which browser needs a bugfix so that it doesn't crash when you pass it a stylesheet it doesn't understand, and so that it doesn't screw up the layout?
Yep, that's right, Netscape 4.7. Our 2nd place winner, and the one that this "horrible, Opera breaking stylesheet" was *actually* written for.
You know, a little research and a little critical thinking might not have set you down this path in the first place.
The problem is not all browsers apply margin and padding the same to elements; for example, Mozilla and IE give the body tag a margin, Opera gives it padding (as recommended by the W3C and common sense).
I don't know about that; given that margins collapse and padding doesn't, I'd expect to have a margin for a BODY tag, so that
tags don't end up with an extra line above them before the start of the page.
Margin:
TOP MARGIN (size is MAX(Body Margin, P margin))
P TAG CONTENT
BOTTOM MARGIN (size: MAX (Body Margin, P Margin))
PADDING:
BODY PADDING
P TAG MARGIN
P TAG CONTENT
P TAG MARGIN
BODY PADDING
Having worked for both companies, I'd have to say a threat to Microsoft.
Basically, what would happen is this: Vivendi's management would end up dragging down a portion of Microsoft with them, and in the process increase Microsoft's debt load and lay off 90% of their staff. The ex-Vivendi products would have any sense of individuality drained out of them, having been playtested to death by a broad spectrum of people, thus missing the point, and turning the products into bland, flavorless creations (see: Zoo Tycoon, Midtown Madness).
Ultimately though, I think the threat is to Microsoft.
Um, I suppose you didn't read Opera's take on this; MSN's webserver(s) uses a special broken CSS for Opera. When using the stylesheet intended for IE6, Opera displays the page just fine.
Hmmm... although the thing is, the item in the stylesheet which they claim is broken (ul tag style) is the same in the Nav6 stylesheet.
Mozilla renders the page perfectly, and it gets the nav6 stylesheet with that very same ul {} declaration... here's all three listed together:
Both your examples work great with the current Microsoft compiler. Especially the for-loop issue, which actually causes more problems than it solves if you're at all trying to optimize things, but hey. At least you can turn it on/off with a switch.
While I am certainly no vegetarian, I seen nothing wrong with eating food from the vegetable realm. And much of what has been passed off in the past as a substitute for 'meat' has been pretty unpalatable. Even food that was not passed off that way sometimes isn't very great, tofu for instance.
But one good use for this taste altering method might be to make a veggie burger actually taste decent. Add that to getting the texture right, and some of these products might actually take off.
Portobello mushrooms. Balsamic vinegar. A little olive oil or butter to sautee in. Black pepper.
Put it on a bun.
Guess what? Mushrooms are not meat... but they taste meaty!
When Microsoft releases a security patch, they also include code to fix visual effects they noticed went a bit wrong with some companion software, some tweaks to various settings that users have been complaining about, and I've even seen a couple that included a new feature or two. I wouldn't put added Easter eggs past them. Basically, Microsoft, like many companies, issues security patches that patch a lot more than security.
You're mixing up Security Patch with Service Pack. Learn the difference.
Slashdot Mirror
Opera gets the same stylesheet as netscape:
FALSE
Of course it didn't -- I claimed it got the same stylesheet as Netscape 4.7 -- AND HAVE DONE ALL ALONG -- and you tested with Netscape 7.01.
Are you just fucking braindead or what?
Certainly. But note that you're still replying.
Not when it's used for effect.
And you're just as wrong now as you were when you said that the first time. I really do not understand this. The only possible explanation is that you didn't read The Fucking Article [opera.com], or you didn't know what I [slashdot.org] meant by TFA.
I ran my *own* tests. I don't assume that just because Opera's techies are whining about being oppressed by Microsoft that they're right. I actually - unlike you - used my brain. I did this little thing called research instead of just reading an article.
Never just read the article. Always dig deeper. Or do you enjoy being spoonfed, you braindead, gullible freak?
Simon
I think the majority of Slashdotters are "web developers". People speak more about things they think they are knowledgeable about, whether that knowledge is justified or not. For example, I prattle on far too much whenever there's an XFree86 article. I suspect the high proportion of idiots responding to this article just proves how many ill-justified jobs were created by the dot-COM boom.
.NET framework. Before that? Mainframe capacity planning simulation software.
Good for you. However, I actually went to the trouble of testing MSN in Opera 7, Amaya, Netscape 4.7, Mozilla 1.3, IE 6.0, and through simple TELNET, and the results I got lead me to believe that they were simply treating Opera as an unknown browser, and passing it the Netscape stylesheet by default.
Also, no, I'm not a web developer. Right now, I develop embedded systems software for scientific instruments -- and before that, I wrote image manipulation and genealogy software for Sierra. Before that, I worked on the
So please, don't be such an arrogant condescending twat.
You started out by claiming that I said it was a typo in the stylesheet. So YOU started by misrepresenting my position. Don't be surprised if I act condescending towards you if you don't even read what I write before replying to it.
It's ridiculous to think this was a typo: that would imply a level of incompetence that nobody - not even the most rabid anti-Microsoft fanatic - could possibly believe. This is an international website with millions of customers. If it runs without staging and review and browser tests at least against the latest browsers then I'm a monkey's uncle.
I'm not claiming a typo. I'm claiming that Opera 6 (and originally, Opera 7) get served the version of the site designed for Netscape 4.7.
Learn about browscaps.ini. Also, Opera still isn't all that popular compared with the earlier Netscapes, so it doesn't get special treatment. It just gets the default.
You can blame most of it on the stupid browser ID tags that Netscape came up with. Rather than reporting user agent capabilities, they reported user-agent names and versions. Kind of lame. Kind of stupid. Not something anyone in their right mind should have come up with. But hey, you've probably never seen a browscaps.ini file in your life, so you don't have any idea what has to be put up with these days.
Simon
While that may be true, did you check to see if Opera is sedning out screwy .CSS to sabotage NS 4.7 or is the problem that Netscape 4.7 is a festering pile of lizard excrement? Given the lack of propper .CSS support in Netscape 4.7 (the bane of my existance when I was doing web page developement) and has a LOT of issues with W3C standard HTML, I'm inclined to go with option 2.
It's still a more popular browser than Opera though. You'd think they'd support it if they cared about their readers. But they obviously don't. Worse than MSN in fact - they're excluding a larger potential demographic.
That is not true. Opera 6 renders the page just fine, as described here [opera.com]. It is just typical of Microsoft to resort to dirty tactics as posting anonymously with such false information.
No, it doesn't. The bullets are aligned right, rather than being center-aligned within the space to the left of the list items.
Maybe you should spend more attention on fine detail. Then you wouldn't be in such a mess.
This is untrue. Opera6 displays the page which is sent to MSIE6 just fine.
No, it doesn't. Bulleted list marker alignment is wrong on that page's screenshots.
Now, the other thing you should consider is that site.css is designed to be handed to Netscape 4.7 browsers - a much more popular browser than Opera - which need the extra help.
Besides, if Opera 6 did everything you claimed correctly, you wouldn't be touting 7 as having "Improved standards support" on your download page.
Simon
IIRC the source of the problem was a single incorrect figure in the style sheet. NO possiblity whatsoever of a typo there then.
Okay, let me get this straight. You develop a completely seperate css file to work against the user agent string sent by Opera browsers, despite the fact that Opera can easily handle the default stylesheet. So your characterization of a single incorrect figure is incorrect:
diff site.css site-win-ie6.css |wc -m
2627
My research indicates that you are off by two thousand six hundred twenty six characters. In this completely fucking seperate stylesheet, you copy shared values by hand rather than copy/paste and place -30px (a value which, in the css universe, is insane) rather than 23px for the standard production stylesheet. This is a typo in your universe?
They get delivered the stylesheet written for Netscape 4.7 - a much more popular browser than either Mozilla or Opera.
MS is intentionally sending a crippled page to Opera. It's not a typo. When they changed the user string to "Oprah", the correct page was sent (the IE one) and rendered fine. The server is scanning the user agent string for "Opera" and sending it a crippled page purposely.
Learn how browscaps.ini browser identification works.
You mean you think it's ironic that people would be using the software that they hate that's more or less been forced on them? Especially if they are currently at work?
Yeahhh.... I was wondering how the guys at Pixar were doing running Linux these days...
Poor things...
Simon
No, can't say I have, Mr. "200,000 served and still counting".
Simon
Hmm... So then why did the fictional Oprah 7.0 browser (Not IE6 or NS6) return non-broken CSS?
browscaps.ini files, and the algorithm they use to determine the browser name.
Opera 7.0 reports as an older version of Opera (it contains the word "Opera" and so defaults to the last version in the browscaps.ini file); Oprah isn't listed at all, so it goes off the compatibility list exclusively.
You might be interested to know that the average browscaps.ini file contains over 1000 different browser versions. It's a mess.
Simon
Did you read the fucking article?
Not only did I read the article, I ran my own tests.
If you download the page and style-sheet (using wget) while identifying yourself as IE or any other browser than Opera, you set sent a web page and style sheet that renders properly in IE, and in Netscape, and in Opera.
Wrong.
If you READ the article, you would see that Opera gets a stylesheet called site.css, Navigator 6 and above (eg. Mozilla) get one called site-nav6.css, and IE6 and above get one called site-win-ie6.css.
By performing (and this is what gets most Slashdot denizens who believe everything they read) my own tests , including downloading the pages in Navigator 4.7, Opera 7, Mozilla 1.3, IE 6, Amaya and using Telnet by passing the string "GET / HTTP/1.0[CR][LF][CR][LF]", I found that by default, the site.css page is returned.
The differences between the different *HTML* pages are caused by the fact that different CSS stylesheets are linked to for different browsers (as noted above), the menus are generated dynamically, and the adverts are generated dynamically. That's the ONLY difference.
If you download the page (using wget) identifying yourself as Opera7, you get a page that looks broken not just in Opera, but in every other browser too, including IE because the style sheet says to render it in a way that looks 'broken'.
No, you get a page which works perfectly fine in Navigator 4.7, if you identify yourself as anything other than IE6 and above, or Netscape 6 and above.
Next time, actually read the article (it's obvious you didn't), actually read the post (it's obvious you didn't do that either), and actually perform your own tests (which it's quite plain you didn't, because if you had, you'd have seen exactly what I did).
Simon
If you send "Opear" instead of "Opera" in the browser identifier then different HTML is produced. Your inference that only NS6 and IE6 checks are made is wrong.
Then presumably you won't have a problem in producing the diffs to show it?
Simon
Microsoft didn't do anything of the kind.
e /ns47.png
p ng
2 /l astmonth_07_b.htm
1st piece of evidence:
Amaya and Netscape Nav 4.7 both get fed the same stylesheet that Opera gets. Indicating that the site checks for Netscape 6 and above, and IE 6 and above only, providing a default style sheet to all other browsers.
2nd piece of evidence:
Mozilla gets the Netscape 6 stylesheet, which has the SAME bug that the default (passed to Opera) stylesheet has. The same -30px margin is passed to it, but Mozilla renders it correctly (latest build).
3rd piece of evidence:
Netscape Navigator 4.7 MANGLES the front page of MSN if you set the margin-left property to 0px instead of -30px. Here's NS4.7 showing the page with a modified site.css stylesheet:
http://home.earthlink.net/~simoncook
Whereas here is Netscape Navigator 4.7 using the unmodified stylesheet (the same one passed to Opera):
http://home.earthlink.net/~simoncooke/ns47orig.
Now, if you take a look at most sites, you will see that the most popular browsers are IE, followed by Netscape Navigator 4.7, followed by Netscape 6.x (including Mozilla), and finally trailed VERY FAR BEHIND by Opera.
http://www.sla.org/stats/conf2003/conf2003_sep0
Now if you were to realistically act as a site designer, you would go out of your way support IE, Netscape 6.x and company, and Netscape 4.7 -- which is the 2nd most used browser in the world.
And guess which browser needs a bugfix so that it doesn't crash when you pass it a stylesheet it doesn't understand, and so that it doesn't screw up the layout?
Yep, that's right, Netscape 4.7. Our 2nd place winner, and the one that this "horrible, Opera breaking stylesheet" was *actually* written for.
You know, a little research and a little critical thinking might not have set you down this path in the first place.
Simon
I don't know about that; given that margins collapse and padding doesn't, I'd expect to have a margin for a BODY tag, so that
tags don't end up with an extra line above them before the start of the page.
Margin:
TOP MARGIN (size is MAX(Body Margin, P margin))
P TAG CONTENT
BOTTOM MARGIN (size: MAX (Body Margin, P Margin))
PADDING:
BODY PADDING
P TAG MARGIN
P TAG CONTENT
P TAG MARGIN
BODY PADDING
But hey, that's just me.
Simon
Threat to whom? Vivendi or Microsoft?
Having worked for both companies, I'd have to say a threat to Microsoft.
Basically, what would happen is this: Vivendi's management would end up dragging down a portion of Microsoft with them, and in the process increase Microsoft's debt load and lay off 90% of their staff. The ex-Vivendi products would have any sense of individuality drained out of them, having been playtested to death by a broad spectrum of people, thus missing the point, and turning the products into bland, flavorless creations (see: Zoo Tycoon, Midtown Madness).
Ultimately though, I think the threat is to Microsoft.
Simon
Um, I suppose you didn't read Opera's take on this; MSN's webserver(s) uses a special broken CSS for Opera. When using the stylesheet intended for IE6, Opera displays the page just fine.
Hmmm... although the thing is, the item in the stylesheet which they claim is broken (ul tag style) is the same in the Nav6 stylesheet.
Mozilla renders the page perfectly, and it gets the nav6 stylesheet with that very same ul {} declaration... here's all three listed together:
Opera: ul {list-style-position: outside; margin: -2px 0px 0px -30px; list-style-image: url(http://msimg.com/m/8/bullet-black.gif);}
Nav 6: ul {list-style-position: outside; margin: -2px 0px 0px -30px; list-style-image: url(http://msimg.com/m/8/bullet-black.gif);}
IE6: ul {list-style-position: outside; margin: -2px 0px 0px 8px; list-style-image: url(http://msimg.com/m/8/bullet-black.gif);}
Looks like human error to me.
Simon
All Visual Studio C++ programmers, advance yourselves onto a professional platform with a quality API.
Don't you mean "onto a platform with thousands of variable quality APIs for the same thing"?
Simon
Both your examples work great with the current Microsoft compiler. Especially the for-loop issue, which actually causes more problems than it solves if you're at all trying to optimize things, but hey. At least you can turn it on/off with a switch.
Simon
While I am certainly no vegetarian, I seen nothing wrong with eating food from the vegetable realm.
And much of what has been passed off in the past as a substitute for 'meat' has been pretty unpalatable. Even food that was not passed off that way sometimes isn't very great, tofu for instance.
But one good use for this taste altering method might be to make a veggie burger actually taste decent. Add that to getting the texture right, and some of these products might actually take off.
Portobello mushrooms. Balsamic vinegar. A little olive oil or butter to sautee in. Black pepper.
Put it on a bun.
Guess what? Mushrooms are not meat... but they taste meaty!
Simon
When Microsoft releases a security patch, they also include code to fix visual effects they noticed went a bit wrong with some companion software, some tweaks to various settings that users have been complaining about, and I've even seen a couple that included a new feature or two. I wouldn't put added Easter eggs past them. Basically, Microsoft, like many companies, issues security patches that patch a lot more than security.
You're mixing up Security Patch with Service Pack. Learn the difference.
Simon