pouët.net

http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.angeltowns.com%2Ftown%2Fpoise%2F

The page looks as fucked up (which isn't much) in 1152*864 both on mozilla 1.5 and IE 5.

looks fine on both when the resolution is 1024*768.

I wonder how people can fail on doing sites not compatible to Mozilla, without knowing they use some known-not-supported shit. Even my scripts and shit tend to work perfectly with both Mozilla,Opera,IE and Konquere(thereby also Safari)...

And never had any problems with layout shit..

I guess iam just better than you lamers, oh well, i knew that from before =)

well i thought i`d solved the problem, but obviously i hadn`t..

just looking more into it, played about with different resolutions/window sizes and browsers.. and it appears i`ve sorted FINALLY sorted it. (i`ll upload the fixed version shortly..)

anyone tested it on aweb, voyager or ibrowse? :)

Shifter: It buggers up good CSS 2 and DIV support all the time and gets confused between inline and linked style sheets when mixed. My sites work on IE, netscape, Opera, Safari.... but not Mozilla. So Mozilla is the only browser that works? I beg to differ.

Patrick: maybe, but we're *really* straining the confines of the original thread here (poor old darkus never knew what would hit him when he went "Let's see how they like this over at pouet").

Show me this unsurmountable crapness. I like being proven wrong -as this happens rarely (cough) ;)

That said: yes, Mozilla lucks out in a few bits of CSS2, but that's a shy sight of the gaping goatse holes IE has in CSS2 *or* CSS1. Shame you happen to venture into them. I never had significant problems with it.

www.scenerep.org .... nuff said.

My experience is that whatever the standards define, atleast ONE of ie, mozilla and opera fucks up whatever webpage you are doing. I have found many bugs in mozilla, even more in opera. IE is far from perfect in many aspects, but it is currently the most tolerant web-browser around. This makes it a nice browser to use when you wish to view the content that the creators INTENDED to show you. After all, thats why you visit a website, isn't it? I agree however that webdesigners should test the webpages (or even design the entire webpages) with other browsers, IE simply accepts too much for design-purposes.

Oh, and webdesign isn't rocketscience, Patrick. It is however a very boring and tiresome job. If something isn't widely supported on the browser-side, why are you using it then?

I guess I should say "but it is currently the most tolerant widely used web-browser around", since I haven't tested all the obscure 0p3ns0ur3-00berl33t-l33n00x-browsers etc.

you could have just said "currently the only widely used browser around" as well. though i must admit that for demoscene-oriented sites supporting the l33to zealotwares might be useful too.

btw, question for the enlightened: if i make a site and it works in some netscape 7 installation that i have installed, does that mean it will most probably run on other mozillas as well?

so much fuzz about one damn website

Oh, and webdesign isn't rocketscience, Patrick. It is however a very boring and tiresome job. If something isn't widely supported on the browser-side, why are you using it then?

For fucks sakes! I said my designs work on everything BUT mozilla. Don't preach to me what web design is >=\

Richard you should still test it, but if you're concerned mostly from a CSS point of view as long as you want IE/NetScape/Opera compatibility it should be fine. Don't expect it to work in Netscape 4 however. If you're concerned about Mozilla issues don't mix inline and linked styles/stylesheets (and generally stay away from the awesomeness of CSS 2).

Nice looking site there (Thoughi had to change res to see it)

Patric what is the fuzz about mozilla? i changed to Mozilla a few weeks ago, and im never going back to IE. It blocks everything that i dont want to be there,and i have no problems with viewing pages.
Comfortable is the word id describe moz with, simply because it does a lot of things, so i dont need extra software.

I agree that Mozilla's major features are in what it can do besides browse, which is why it considered the "1337" browser. However I don't really feel the need to continue bantering on about what it can't do in terms of rendering a CSS 2 styled website.

I'll put this to you. When I used to sell fax machines people would consider all-in-ones which would do that and print/scan/and copy. However when I asked them if faxing was the main reason why they wanted the product they would usually say yes. Therefore I made the point that if the fax feature breaks it could take all the other features with it making it next to useless. I sold less all in ones and more fax machines acompained by printers that way.

However the main point is, the more you pack into one piece of software the more vunerable it becomes if one if its parts malfunctions. Take the Windows OS for example. So many parts rely on one another and what happens when something corrupts?

I suggest you do not look for all-in-one solutions but rather use specific tools that allow you to do specific things which they are good at.

url updated:

http://www.poiserecords.com

Congrats on getting your new domain.

6 new releases so far this month, let me know what you all think.

i think you're spamming thats what i think.
but thats just me :P

i also think you should consider mailing simon to get your releases also on archive.org :) (auto-creativecommons license is nice)