Browser Wars

--On December 16, 2006 12:31:20 PM -0800 David Vereschagin
<tidbitsquadrat.com> wrote:

> Just where can I find these postings that you've been reading? I'd
> like to peruse them myself. I am experiencing extremely annoying
> slowdowns on DNS lookups with my cable-based ISP. I'm still trying
> to figure out if the problem is with my local network or with my ISP.

Try changing your DNS settings to use OpenDNS instead of your ISP.

<http://www.opendns.com/start/mac_os_x.php>

Not sure how effective OpenDNS is but they claim to reduce phishing attacks
by removing known phishing sites from the DNS results. Plus they claim to
be faster than most ISP DNS servers. And they attempt to do spelling
correction (their example is craigslist.og will be correctly changed to
craigslist.org. That seems exploitable in some sort of phishing attack, but
you would have to know the target is using OpenDNS.)

<http://www.opendns.com/what/>

The service is free.

Kevin

On 16-Dec-2006, at 13:31, David Vereschagin wrote:
> I am experiencing extremely annoying slowdowns on DNS lookups with
> my cable-based ISP.

Have you tried using OpenDNS instead of your ISPs DNS?

<www.opendns.com/start>

     * 208.67.222.222
     * 208.67.220.220

IE has not been available for download since the beginning of the
year (actually Dec 31, 2005). Interestingly the MS website suggests
using Safari or more recent "web browsing technologies." The relevant link is:

<http://www.microsoft.com/mac/products/internetexplorer/internetexplorer.aspx?pid=internetexplorer>

Unfortunately I do have to use IE for some sites which are
increasingly becoming problematic. I normally send a politely
worded email to the webmaster suggesting they allow other browsers.
Sometimes I even get a response though often not nearly as polite.

Jean

I now have 'CrossOver Mac' ß3 and have downloaded & installed Win IE6 on
that system which runs "Win calls" in UNIX "WINE 'Bottles.' "
Advantages are that I don't have to buy a Win licence; Win malware runs
into a UNIX swamp and drowns there, so far; a lot of the usual software
runs quite well. Eg. One Win friendly site now speaks to me whereas it
had been silent during all visits using Mac Browsers.

Disadvantages: you have to get a patch for printing and other exotic
demands like using USB ports may not yet be supported. There is a
reasonable user community and CrossOver is advancing. Some Win programs
essential to you may not run the functions necessary to you, personally,
yet.

I'm happy to be able to dodge around some of the battles in the warz in
this way. I hope it gets better as time goes by and believe that it
will with the competition between 'Parallels; WINE; CrossOver &
BootCamp.'

George

Many thanks to all who responded with wise words to my query.

My friend has an Intel Mac so he could have Internet Explorer on his
Parallels system and I was amazed that IE was so much faster at downloading
pages from the Net than either Safari or Firefox, even though it was working
through a virtual desktop. We tried all the remedies suggested by
contributors but with little positive effect on speeds with Safari and
Firefox.

My friend will download the Japanese Browser Shiira and try it out soon

Thanks again for your help,

Paul

On 23/12/2006, at 1:09 PM, Paul Atroshenko wrote:

> My friend will download the Japanese Browser Shiira and try it out
> soon

        If you're looking at trying other browsers give Camino a whirl.

http://www.caminobrowser.org/

It's developed by the Mozilla project but specifically for OS X. I
find Firefox and even Safari clunky by comparison.

Jason

On 31-Dec-2006, at 01:53, Jason Campbell wrote:
> If you're looking at trying other browsers give Camino a whirl.

Unless Camino has changed a lot I find it rather pointless. None of
the advantages of Firefox (extensions, themes, etc) and nothing in
particular to recommend it over Safari. Now, if it used FF
extensions as well as the OS X keychain, then it would be the only
browser I used.

I find Camino slower and less stable than Firefox, plus it doesn't
support Firefox extensions, which I consider essential. I find Firefox
to be the fastest, most stable, and most useful browser. I don't care
if it doesn't look and act Mac-like.

One extension I consider essential is Google Browser Sync, which goes
beyond .Mac sync with Safari; it also sync open windows & tabs,
cookies, etc.

On 1/3/07 at 6:00 AM, mike3kgmail.com (mike cohen) wrote:

> I find Camino slower and less stable than Firefox, plus it doesn't
> support Firefox extensions, which I consider essential. I find Firefox
> to be the fastest, most stable, and most useful browser. I don't care
> if it doesn't look and act Mac-like.

But if you don't care if it looks and acts like a Mac application, why
use a Mac in the first place? That sums up my attitude in a nutshell.

I do find the Gecko rendering engine useful in some cases where the
Safari/KHTML engine doesn't work, so I like to keep Camino around for
those websites. And I do keep Firefox around - but solely as a test
platform and something I can point to when I'm trying to deal with
clueless webmasters. (It doesn't work on the second-most-popular browser
on Windows, the problem is *not* that I'm using a Mac. <grrr>)

The name recognition is about the only asset Firefox has for me on a
Mac; I don't have any particular interest in Firefox extensions (and I
would be curious to see how many 'average' Firefox users actually
install them; everyone I know who uses them shades far to the 'tech
guru' end of the spectrum).

(Firefox *is* very valuable to me when I'm forced to use Windows, as my
reaction to WinIE is 'stay the heck away unless I absolutely have to.'
Our St. Louis office has a cheap Windows box set up solely to run the
UPS shipping software, but more than once I've had to run major spyware
cleanups on it because the only person there would keep using it for
general web browsing. When I finally accepted that she would keep using
it if I wasn't looking over her shoulder, I put Firefox on it; I haven't
had to deal with a spyware problem since.)

Travis Butler
tbutlermac.com

On Jan 4, 2007, at 8:36 AM, Travis Butler wrote:
> On 1/3/07 at 6:00 AM, mike3kgmail.com (mike cohen) wrote:
> The name recognition is about the only asset Firefox has for me on a
> Mac; I don't have any particular interest in Firefox extensions (and I
> would be curious to see how many 'average' Firefox users actually
> install them; everyone I know who uses them shades far to the 'tech
> guru' end of the spectrum).

I agree about the Windoze-like attitude of Firefox, but on occasion I
have found FF's extensions to be invaluable, esp. the Web Developer's
Toolbar. It adds a very helpful menu bar is a great aid in debugging
or analyzing stylesheets and CSS layouts (not that I'm a fan of CSS-p
as the solution to the world's problems either). You can edit style
sheets from a sidebar with the page still visible; when you close the
sidebar, the changes are visible.:

http://chrispederick.com/work/webdeveloper/

It comes in very handy when I don't happen to have my Powerbook with
me and need to look at, or tinker with, the structure of a web page
and GoLive or Dreamweaver are not handy. It will also let you view
cookies or disable them for a page.

I prefer Camino, which is a little more Mac-like than Firefox, when I
need to use an alternate browser. And speaking of recipe software, if
you copy and paste from Safari, it maintains the formatting from the
web page, so if I want to save a recipe, I'll need to reformat it in
Filemaker Pro if I want my database to have a consistent look. Camino
or Firefox don't do this.

Marilyn

On 1/5/07 at 12:43 PM, mmattynyc.rr.com (Marilyn Matty) wrote:

> On Jan 4, 2007, at 8:36 AM, Travis Butler wrote:
> > On 1/3/07 at 6:00 AM, mike3kgmail.com (mike cohen) wrote:
> > The name recognition is about the only asset Firefox has for me on a
> > Mac; I don't have any particular interest in Firefox extensions (and
I
> > would be curious to see how many 'average' Firefox users actually
> > install them; everyone I know who uses them shades far to the 'tech
> > guru' end of the spectrum).
>
> I agree about the Windoze-like attitude of Firefox, but on occasion I
> have found FF's extensions to be invaluable, esp. the Web Developer's
> Toolbar. It adds a very helpful menu bar is a great aid in debugging
> or analyzing stylesheets and CSS layouts (not that I'm a fan of CSS-p
> as the solution to the world's problems either). You can edit style
> sheets from a sidebar with the page still visible; when you close the
> sidebar, the changes are visible.:

That's exactly the kind of thing I was thinking of; it's a technical
tool that's very useful to gurus (and I'd count web developers as gurus
in this context), but not of interest to ordinary users.

> I prefer Camino, which is a little more Mac-like than Firefox, when I
> need to use an alternate browser. And speaking of recipe software, if
> you copy and paste from Safari, it maintains the formatting from the
> web page, so if I want to save a recipe, I'll need to reformat it in
> Filemaker Pro if I want my database to have a consistent look. Camino
> or Firefox don't do this.

Mixed feelings here. I've been bitten by this many times myself, so I
know how annoying it is; OTOH, preserving styled text is arguably the
Right Thing to Do (as simply discarding original attributes is losing
information, which is a Bad Thing), so it's hard to knock either program
for doing so.

Travis Butler
tbutlermac.com

I'm using Safari as my default web browser. One problem is that after a recent "make over" of my bank's web site, I can log into my account but can't do pretty much anything else, like making a payment. The beneficiaries are hidden behind the account info. Emails to the bank/web master were so far fruitless. I read about the other browsers and tried Omniweb which works fine for banking, but I'd like to stick to just one browser. OK, I can dump Safari and use something else... but I got used to it.

[I find that it's useful to have a copy of Firefox around for this sort of situation, but I suspect you could use some utility software for Safari to make it masquerade as another browser, which is often all that's required. OmniWeb is awfully good at that too, since it can do it on a site-by-site basis and remember the setting. -Adam]

From: lvrooy <lvrooyiafrica.com>
> I'm using Safari as my default web browser. One problem is that after a recent
> "make over" of my bank's web site, I can log into my account but can't do pretty
> much anything else, like making a payment. The beneficiaries are hidden behind
> the account info. Emails to the bank/web master were so far fruitless. I read
> about the other browsers and tried Omniweb which works fine for banking, but I'd
> like to stick to just one browser. OK, I can dump Safari and use something
> else... but I got used to it.

Some sites require pop-up windows to function properly. Do you have pop-ups blocked in Safari?

John

On Mar 21, 2007, at 12:26 PM, lvrooy wrote:

> = Emails to the bank/web master were so far fruitless. I read about
> the other browsers and tried Omniweb which works fine for banking,
> but I'd like to stick to just one browser. OK, I can dump Safari
> and use something else... but I got used to it.

Would you rather change banks or change browsers? I doubt it is
realistic to think one can use just one browser, especially Safari,
for everything. I always keep Firefox and Opera in the Dock and
usually have at least 2 browsers open.

On 21-Mar-2007, at 13:26, lvrooy wrote:
> I'm using Safari as my default web browser. One problem is that
> after a recent "make over" of my bank's web site, I can log into my
> account but can't do pretty much anything else, like making a
> payment. The beneficiaries are hidden behind the account info.
> Emails to the bank/web master were so far fruitless.

This might not work for you, but it worked for me. I went into my
branch, asked to talk to the manager, and explained to him that I was
going to have to close my account after 23 years because there
website did not work with my Mac and did not comply to any
standards. I also presented a print-out of the validator.w3.org
output for their index page (a few hundred errors and warnings). I
also added that because of the poor coding, their site was likely in
violation of the ADA since it would be inaccessible to screen reader
software for their blind users.

Evidentially this all had some affect because slight changes (that
made the site mostly usable) were quick in coming and an entire site
redesign came through about 6 months later.

The site is still not compliant with the validator, but it works in
firefox and safari. Now I just need to get the clueless monkeys
managing the website to understand that '+' is a perfectly valid
character in an email address.

Some sites require pop-up windows to function properly. Do you have pop-ups blocked in Safari?

That did the trick! Thanks to all who replied.

Les

I have consistent trouble with keeping Safari open as the "server is unable to connect to internet". My internet connection is active. I shut off Safari, look on Web proxies in 'built in ethernet' and uncheck if necessary. Then I restart Safari to no avail. If I restart the computer this sometimes works. Is this a poltergeist at work or a solvable technical issue? Your advice is appreciated.

Google Kreme wrote:
> This might not work for you, but it worked for me. I went into my
> branch, asked to talk to the manager, and explained to him that I was
> going to have to close my account after 23 years because there
> website did not work with my Mac and did not comply to any
> standards. I also presented a print-out of the validator.w3.org
> output for their index page (a few hundred errors and warnings). I
> also added that because of the poor coding, their site was likely in
> violation of the ADA since it would be inaccessible to screen reader
> software for their blind users.
>
> Evidentially this all had some affect because slight changes (that
> made the site mostly usable) were quick in coming and an entire site
> redesign came through about 6 months later.
>
> The site is still not compliant with the validator, but it works in
> firefox and safari. Now I just need to get the clueless monkeys
> managing the website to understand that '+' is a perfectly valid
> character in an email address.

The ADA issue is the one that most likely worked. ADA compliance is a
real mess for companies. No hard and fast rules and huge liability
potential. ADA issues at most companies who service the public get a
very fast response these days.

On Mar 22, 2007, at 2:21 PM, Tom Gewecke wrote:

> On Mar 21, 2007, at 12:26 PM, lvrooy wrote:
>
>> = Emails to the bank/web master were so far fruitless. I read about
>> the other browsers and tried Omniweb which works fine for banking,
>> but I'd like to stick to just one browser. OK, I can dump Safari
>> and use something else... but I got used to it.
>
> Would you rather change banks or change browsers? I doubt it is
> realistic to think one can use just one browser, especially Safari,
> for everything. I always keep Firefox and Opera in the Dock and
> usually have at least 2 browsers open.

The most recent browser-specific problem warnings produced by either
of my two banks' online banking systems were about a problem with--
Internet Explorer 6.

That count is cheating a bit, as I think both banks outsource to the
same provider.

On the other hand, there are a couple of links on the pages reached
by <http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/traffic/hoodcanal/default.cfm> which do
not work in Safari (it's been reported to Apple). They work fine in
every other browser I've tried (which doesn't make them standards-
compliant). Hmmm...the page makes validator.w3c.org somewhat
unhappy, so Safari is off the hook.

(If you want to play the game, the small camera icons a little above
the Squamish Harbor caption and a little above the Kitsap Memorial
State Park caption should link one to cameras at the location of the
icons. At least in the opinion of Washington State DOT.) (Side
note: ah, ha! That's Squamish Harber--that explains why it can be
so far from the Suquamish group's area. ;-).)

   --John

One example of something that doesn't work well or at all with Safari is the Gmail that I'm using now (via Firefox).  On this G4 PowerBook, I can use my Netscape or Firefox browsers, at least, and get all the features, but Safari doesn't work at all.  In my office, I have a (newer) Mac Mini, on which Safari does produce Gmail, but without the bells and whistles, such as colors and italics.  If someone were only interested in Text mode, Safari would be fine.  I use Firefox.  Still, Safari has some indefinable advantages for everyday use.  I wonder why, with so much memory, anyone would decide to only use one browser.

Cheers,
Greg