All the more reason they should have written it to be W3C compliant ... oh wait ... then it wouldn't work under IE. ;')
-----Original Message----- From: Gerald Combs
... The more complex and dynamic a web page is, the more difficult it is to get things up and running under different browsers. Gmail appears to be _very_ complex and _very_ dynamic. I don't think their IPO took in enough money to get Gmail working under IE, Mozilla _and_ Opera. :)
I say that's for sure. I get so tired of having to remember which browser will work (or is required for) what site. It's bad enough at work when things are written to a particular tool - they at least have the 'right' to tell me what tool they have licensed for me to do my job, since they are paying the freight. But I'd be embarassed if the corporation's public face required any particular brand of browser....
Oh, well...it was worth asking if anyone had found a solution or not....
Chris.
On Thu, 9 Sep 2004 09:33:39 -0500, Brian Densmore [email protected] wrote:
All the more reason they should have written it to be W3C compliant ... oh wait ... then it wouldn't work under IE. ;')
-----Original Message----- From: Gerald Combs
... The more complex and dynamic a web page is, the more difficult it is to get things up and running under different browsers. Gmail appears to be _very_ complex and _very_ dynamic. I don't think their IPO took in enough money to get Gmail working under IE, Mozilla _and_ Opera. :)
Kclug mailing list [email protected] http://kclug.org/mailman/listinfo/kclug
-
Brian Densmore -
Chris Hoelscher