[Cspace]

The thing is... For me, there's absolutely no point in buying any of them 'cept the italization, and methinks it looks bad. (No offense SpaceyC )

How doth we make them work for Firefoxeth?

Unfortunately, I don't think there is a way to have those effects work in Firefox until they release an update that enables them in the browser.

[CongressJon]

:\ I guess I'll just go with italization, despite its evilness.

[Cspace]

:\ I guess I'll just go with italization, despite its evilness.

Or you can save up your Mr. Saturns, because there will be more stuff available later.

[CongressJon]

Works for me. I think.

[Raktor]

I'm with Hyper...

You should've tested it with other browsers before just throwing it on, no point buying anything if only Italics works in FireFox. What percentage of users here use firefox anyway? You could probably post the WebDav results or something, but I'll start a poll since I highly doubt you will

[Cspace]

I'm with Hyper...

You should've tested it with other browsers before just throwing it on, no point buying anything if only Italics works in FireFox. What percentage of users here use firefox anyway? You could probably post the WebDav results or something, but I'll start a poll since I highly doubt you will

I knew that those effects would not work on Firefox well before I installed the shop, back when members were using them in signatures. Many sites use them in their shops because the majority of people use IE.

Since you seem interested, of all recent visitors using either IE or a Mozilla-based browser, 25.8986% use a Mozilla-based browser. That's a lot but not the majority, and technically speaking that is a much higher percentage than the general usage of browsers on the internet (there is a difference depending on age). Globally speaking, more than 95% of all users of the internet use Internet Explorer.

No one is required to get those effects, and there will be more stuff available later anyway. Just because Firefox does not see a large amount of dynamic scripts doesn't mean that you should blame it on the shop, lol.

[CongressJon]

I'll just blame it on either A) The people who made the effects, or B) The producers of Firefox.

[Raktor]

It isn't Firefox's fault, it's because IE doesn't stick to the W3 standards, and they're trying to make other browsers and websites conform to using ****ty code.

[Cspace]

I'll just blame it on either A) The people who made the effects, or B) The producers of Firefox.

There are quite a few things that don't work in Firefox that some may not notice. That's why there is the "View This Page IE" option. Certain Javascript and DHTML tags don't work in Firefox, for example, because of various reasons. Some others are also handled slightly differently which is why certain sites may appear differently in Firefox than they do in IE. An example of that in work is how vertical marquees load in Firefox. You see the entire page load before the marquee starts moving. Another example is how some often complain of greater lag in Runescape while in Firefox, as opposed to Internet Explorer. It just handles the scripts differently, and while some feel that Firefox is much better than Internet Explorer, there are many areas in which IE still has the edge.

(and I am not bashing Firefox, I use Firefox much more than IE, but I also use IE sometimes because of problems such as the above)

It isn't Firefox's fault, it's because IE doesn't stick to the W3 standards

As a Firefox user, to tell the truth, I am a little disappointed that they have not added compatibility for scripts such as these that have been around for years. The standards basically guarantee that a page will be accessible, but if code is developed that is only viewable in certain browsers such as these effects, it is often stuff considered "extra" and not stuff that will break a site. I don't have a problem with that, but if certain scripts are used frequently, it should be in the interest of a browser's developers to implement it in some way in their software.

[Phieta]

Actually, the "View in IE" option requires you to install the "IE View" extension. But it is quite handy.

As for who to blame, I say both. Microsoft (and maybe Netscape) for allowing the nonstandardized code to become popular; Mozilla for not supporting it even though it's widely used.

Also, for RuneScape... wouldn't that be Sun's fault; a problem with their port of the Java VM to Firefox?

[Cspace]

Actually, the "View in IE" option requires you to install the "IE View" extension. But it is quite handy.

Hmm, indeed, I have been corrected

Also, for RuneScape... wouldn't that be Sun's fault; a problem with their port of the Java VM to Firefox?

Hmm, not sure actually, but it could very likely be.

[Pendragon205]

:\ I guess I'll just go with italization, despite its evilness.

Or you can save up your Mr. Saturns, because there will be more stuff available later.

omg! didn't notice

[asyluman]

I can't see them in FF, but they're pretty cool in IE.

I'll just wait for different things.

[Pendragon205]

like the new cup?

[Raktor]

Topic 29657!