Re: field validation (was Re: COBOL/DB2 Date edit question)



"Howard Brazee" <howard@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1k26c3lntms024jrmj85omqui0ii5a1n91@xxxxxxxxxx
On Wed, 15 Aug 2007 11:45:45 +1200, "Pete Dashwood"
<dashwood@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

I would add that if you think the use of a web page is stupid, most Web
Masters would be pleased to have your input (I like it when people
complain
about my pages because I fix them and the complaints diminish... Then the
next site I build, I have all that user experience :-))

I have complained to Web masters, and the evidence is overwhelming
that your attitude is rare.

I'm sorry to hear that, Howard. Obviously, I talk to people who are like
me... :-)

For instance, the way most common response to bugs found is that they
won't support anything except I.E.

Ah, now that's not quite the same thing.

I don't think people who don't build web sites realise how REALLY hard it is
to make everything work across Browsers.

It is getting better with the advent of more server based code and dynamic
generation of pages (servers are getting smart enough to generate the right
code for whatever the Client Browser (given some encouragement from web
developers)), but it is still a huge amount of work.

I'm currently working on a major site (although it's had to move to the
"pending" queue while I complete the database migration tools I'm doing for
a client.)

I was pretty thrilled with it, as it is the most ambitious thing I've done
with web programming, so far. It is all ASP.NET and C# with themed headers
and footers, alternate dynamic master pages and almost no JavaScript
(everything is coded in C# on code-behind pages that run on the server. It
looks pretty cool (I'm biased, of course...:-)) but imagine my horror when I
found it rendered completely differently, not just on different Browsers,
but on different versions of IE as well!

The "experience" on IE7 was a dream; on IE6, it was the occasional snore,
IE5 it was more like restless sleep, and on Firefox it was a nightmare :-).
I never would have known if I hadn't got people to try testing it, and they
sent me some screen shots that showed themes not rendered, pages misaligned,
text fonts that were simply ugly, colors not rendering correctly, and some
minor logic bugs in processes for using the Web Service and various
downloads.

I resolved to fix it (it isn't live yet, so it was more the challenge of it
than any particular desire to meet customer demand...:-)) I spent three full
days just finding out what I COULD do and getting it is close as possible
across Browsers. I have tested it with FireFox, Netscape and IE5 thru IE7
and it is much better (although it is still definitely best when seen with
IE7). But this was several days of intensive work over long hours, and for
very little real gain. It still looks exactly the same in IE7 as it did
before; I might just as well have done nothing... :-)

Now, if someone was paying me to develop this site I simply couldn't spend
that amount of time on the "Cross Browser" problem.. Server stats showed
that for the brief time I let people access it, 93% were using IE. (Previous
sites I've done have reported over 85%). It just isn't viable to develop for
anything other than IE. It's a pity, and I wish it weren't so, but that is
the reality of it. As long as the page renders in other Browsers, that's the
best I can do...(If you see flat, lifeless, buttons and scraggly fonts in
odd colours, and input fields that don't tab correctly, as long as the page
is aligned correctly and is visible, that's all I can guarantee...)

They keep track, and people who
use their web page are overwhelming I.E. (Because nothing else works,
and many browsers lie anyway). Besides, more customers mean more
work.

Yes, IE has the market place pretty tied up. To be fair, it is much better
than it was, but it is also more resource hungry (I'm running a 2GB notebook
and I've seen IE7 using over 250MB...sometimes it freezes, although it has
never crashed the system (so far...).

So, the bottom line is, Howard, that complaints about problems in other
Browsers are just relegated to the bottom of the heap, unless they are
really drastic; things like windows not floating properly, animations not
activating, sound files refusing, video timing out, are all not going to get
fixed because it just isn't economic. In three days I could add new, revenue
generating, functionality that at least 85% of the traffic can enjoy without
problem... the people who would be paying me want maximum bang for their
buck.

I am using software and platforms that cost serious money and it STILL isn't
easy to get Cross Browser compatibility. Between Visual Studio and
Dreamweaver it is possible to emulate every type of Browser and screen size.
I've done it. It makes no difference. Looks fine in emulation, look at it
with the real thing, and it isn't...

So now I'm only guaranteeing support for IE...

And that was where we came in... :-)

Pete.
--
"I used to write COBOL...now I can do anything."


.

Quantcast