I have upgraded to IE 10 yesterday and found that the message editor is not working probably. The "Enter key" no longer works and I there is no way I can write message in different lines and paragraphs. Is there any way to bypass the problem?
Just click first icon - 'Switch Editor to Source Mode' - to get your "Enter key" back. WYSWIG is always plain evil.
Are you kidding me, The reason I don't use I.E on Windows is because its bulky, it has to many issues and I see a noticeable speed increase with chrome. Now with this info taken with in a 4 years time I feel my statement is just. But, yah I'd rather smack myself with my spine than use a terrible problematic browser like I.E.
Not to mention Chrome sync, which is an infinitely useful and helpful feature. 1 reason never to use I.E- Bing. Bing is a life-sucking thing that M$ is keeping alive for no reason what-so-ever. Nobody honestly likes it! Sure you can switch it, but it being there as an option is bad enough.
IE is fine. To each their own. I used 6 until it was finally discontinued. Then I used 7, and now Chrome. I might check out 10 just to poke around.
Chrome, Firefox, and opera stick to strict W3C html standards, Chrome being the most strict. Chrome also supports more HTML 5 code than any other browser. You find that many people will have to add logic on their server side web applications to see if the user is using IE and run specified IE code because it does not follow the html standards. Here's a good example. When you're programming for IE in visual studio 2012, visual studio will highlight all of the IE specific code and tell you it's wrong, because IE is so fucked up that even Microsoft's own development software doesn't support it.
Whats this??? There's An I.E. 10???? I'm still using I.E. 5! Oh... Wait... No I'm not. I'm using Firefox 19.0.2. Each to their own, maybe the7thchild is using a work computer or something that's restricted to Internet explorer. i had to do that while working for a bank, it was horrible i felt so dirty after.
As an actual web developer: that's horse shit. Nowadays IE doesn't support the "most" standards, but what it does support, it does with by far the least bugs. And what it doesn't support is usually just a draft, not a candidate recommendation (read: it is not yet an actual standard). Or not even an official W3C spec (WebGL). It has been doing that for a good while now, and it is surprisingly solid: as long as you keep in mind the feature level disparity between IE9/10, you can code a site with Firebug and it'll look the same in IE. Not Chrome mind you. Chrome, and webkit in general, just adds in whatever new stuff it can, and then leaves the implementation buggy for years. I had to recode a site I made just a week ago to use -webkit- prefixes and dynamic javascript based rem values because Chrome and Safari just couldn't scale viewport units properly. Even during development, rock solid code that looked and behaved the same in IE and FF had to be changed around if not totally rewritten because Chrome had some retarded bug in it, like, not computing the width properly for two floated, inline blocks with viewport unit widths, or floating one of them off the screen, or calculating percentages based on an entirely different parent or something silly like that. And because of it being so widespread, people are now coding around Chromes shitty standards nowadays - there are talks of other browsers implementing -webkit- prefixes because so many people built their sites around that, instead of actual standards. Firefox is inbetween the two, for better and worse. It adds stuff slower than Webkit, but is less buggy than Chrome.
As an actual web developer: I'm going to respectfully disagree. I haven't had a chance to look at IE 10 yet, mostly because i don't use it, but IE 8 and 9 couldn't do a lot of newer CSS3 functions such as transparency. you had to come up with some IE specific code to do it and I find that just messy. Back when i used IE for all of my testing, i couldn't even tell you how many times I've had customers call me saying "this doesn't work on your site, or i can't click this button" every time they were using chrome, Firefox safari, etc... I just started using chrome for all of my testing and then do a final test in IE to add in a bunch of IE specific code. Rather than having to fix a bunch of IE code where parts of it work in chrome, other parts work in firefox, etc. It becomes a huge mess. More windows users use chrome because it is simply faster than IE and I'm going to code for what most people are using because it saves me a bunch of headaches later on. Whether one is technically better than the other doesn't really matter, it's what the your users are using the matters.
Apologies but if you are unaware of the feature sets of a major browsers version, you aren't a really experienced web developer. IE was the most well known offender in that, but with completely half-assed implementations of webkit forming a browser monoculture on mobile devices, we are already in for a hell much worse than IE ever managed to create. In fact IE is now the least worst problem, partially because you can easily keep track of its problems: - IE8 needs extra css for opacity and 2d transforms, and can't do border radius, unless you use the infamous css border tricks. No canvas or SVG (I think it supports an older version of what later became SVG, but you might want to consider it unsupported to avoid headaches). - IE9 needs extra css for gradients, but they are unsupported legacy stuff at that point so they can be buggy. They don't combine with border-radius well for example; so you might want to stick to image backgrounds if absolutely necessary. Also, it uses vm instead of vmin, and transforms use a prefix. Also, no text shadow, but it doesn't really need it because it has awesome font rendering (I've mainly used font-shadow in ff/chrome to hide the fact that non-web-safe custom fonts look like ass unless you use cufon or sifr). Most everything else works though. For IE7 support (which you should charge double for, at the very least!), you have to stick to using floated blocks for positioning since it can't do display:table or inline-block. Note that some things like opacity are automatically applied in a IE8-friendly format if you use jQuery, so that cuts down on a lot of hassle, especially with animation. These are the major pitfalls I keep in head when asking the minimum supported browser for a project. Now, for Chrome, FF, Opera and Safari support, you need 5-6 lines of CSS to do gradients and transitions to this very day! And you have 15 to 25 versions to keep track of, because new ones come out every two weeks or so. And users just don't update. If you think IE had problems, then you haven't known the joy of developing sites so they look fine on iPhone, which of course means a jailbroken iPhone using iOS 5, meaning Safari 5, meaning you have to use an extra -webkit- css entry for every css3 line IF it is even supported, and on top of that use old syntaxes rather than newer ones. Unsupported features in Internet Explorer? You can easily keep those in your head and go around them during initial planning. Bugs in any other browser? Have fun browsing caniuse.com for hours. Those issues sound so silly that I'm questioning if you've even used a doctype on those pages, or if they have valid html code in them.
I don't see much of a point in arguing anymore, we disagree we should leave it at that. We develop for different clients. I work for a title agency and spend most of my time writing ASP.net web applications, i take it that you most likely build website for multiple clients and probably don't use ASP.net. ASP.net only officially supports one doctype when writing html, while you can use others and it may accomplish what you need it too, it's not the official MS way of doing it and i don't like seeing errors when i'm compiling. ASP.net also had issues with firefox where firefox would handle post data differently than ASP.net was expecting, resulting in upload buttons being hit or miss. I also use Ruby when i'm not using a windows platform, but i haven't had any major issues with it yet. All i can tell you is that i have had more issues using IE as a target than using any other browser.
Those are problems in ASP.net, not IE In fact they screw up on many other browsers too. I've seen plenty of sites built in it with odd bugs... forms losing data upon sending if you took more than a minute to fill them out, or you being prevented from using "open in another window" functions. The latter may have been intentional with javascript though.
i hate that with a passion, anyone building that into an open website needs punched in the face repeatedly also same with the disabled right clicking
IE is horrible but this wasn't meant to turn into an IE vs Firefox/Chrome/Opera/Safari. However, IE doesn't conform to certain "standards" and is probably the issue here, not the site, but obviously IE users are important and can't be excluded. Let Assembler deal with this, we can have an IE war in off-topic.
Assembler, add this to the headerinclude for each theme on the site: <meta http-equiv="X-UA-Compatible" content="IE=9"> It will force IE10 to render the site in the IE9 engine, the WYSIWYG issue is a known bug with vBulletin and IE10.