Tyssen

Your Wordpress installation comes with a 404 page with this in it:

<?php get_header(); ?>Content<?php get_footer(); ?>

Those includes are going to look for headers and footers within the WP content structure, so you must be able to get it to work for the paths that I've specified.

And you need to pay attention to my post before telling me I'm wrong.

If you'll notice the word IF in the statement regarding the 99% IE usage.

 

Come on, mate. Don't try and pull that one. The way your sentence is worded implies that you think 99% of people are using IE. It's like if I say: "If you're gonna be argumentative, I'm not gonna talk to you" - it clearly implies that I think the person is being argumentative.

 

Well, if you are designing webpages that IE can't display properly cause IE is "broke" then what does that do to the web experience for 61% of the internet users (using your number).  You are gonna crap on me for dismissing 2% of users when you are willing to dismiss 61% of users because "they are stupid for using IE"...  That makes sense.

I'm clearly not saying that am I. I say something and then you twist it around to come to the complete opposite conclusion. I'm not talking about designing pages that IE can't display; I'm talking about designing pages that all browsers can display.

 

You obviously don't know anything about business.  2% of users is not a 2% market share... And the effort to create a 100% or even a 99% compatible website COST MONEY.  It isn't free to develop websites...  In case you didn't know, developers for websites cost anywhere from 30-100$ an hour.  You're telling me that you are willing to spend thousands of development time so that some loser with a MAC can properly view your website?  Get real, the MAC user will see what all people using crappy browsers will see... some dumb down page that is crap.

Well actually I do know a little a bit about business and in fact, internet business as I've worked for several internet companies in the past. So I do know that companies DO spend money on getting their sites working for as many browsers as possible, including those using Macs. Not every company can afford to do it, but it doesn't mean that no-one does it. By your logic people wouldn't even bother developing browsers (or any applications for that matter) for Macs cos not many people use them.

 

Hey... good for the government.  Have you actually seen government sites????  They are some of the simpliest (in terms of layout design) websites on the net... WHY?  because that way people will be able to see it properly across platforms.  You think a government website is gonna be designed to look good?  NO.  They can't because people will not be able to see it properly AND because it is a WASTE of money.  Just like you would WASTE your money designing a nice site for the loser that is running Konquerer (or however that browser is spelled).

Just cos a site has a simple layout doesn't mean it isn't designed well. And what's with calling Mac users 'losers' all the time. Did one steal your girlfriend or something?

 

If 61% of people on the road are using horse and carriage... do you think that the roads will be suitable for your fancy modern car?  Do you think there would even be traffic lights?  None of that would exist if the majority of people are still on horse and carriage.  Your fancy car would be USELESS.

 

Do you think if everyone had the same attitude as you there would even be cars today? Or the Internet? "Why should we build roads for cars? No-one drives any; they all use horses and carriage."

It's called progress, but if you wanna live in the past, go ahead.

 

Even if it IS compliant, it will STILL look different across browsers.  If you don't agree with this statement, you don't know what you are talking about.

No, I think it's you who don't really know what you're talking about. And that's why you're arguing the point so vehemently cos you don't really understand how to design for cross-browser compatibility.

If you design your site right, it'll look almost identical in most browsers. About the only thing that should look different is how the browsers display fonts and if you've done your designing right you can minimise how much that affects the overall look. It certainly shouldn't affect the layout itself.

He was nearly there - I think it actually is Tahoma.

Does it matter where in .htaccess it goes cos mine is full of WordPress stuff and I've put it after AuthName http://forums.xisto.com/no_longer_exists/ /home/username/public_html/_vti_pvt/service.pwdAuthGroupFile /home/username/public_html/_vti_pvt/service.grpbut it doesn't appear to be working.Also, should it be/public_html/wp-content/themes/custom/404.phpor/home/username/public_html/wp-content/themes/custom/404.php?

If your application is accepted one of two things will happen: they'll give you the job straight away, or they'll give you an interview. Some jobs may have 2 or 3 interviews (unlikely for Dunkin' Donuts).

There's a couple of different shopping carts in the add-ons in your cPanel (along with all the forum, gallery, CMS stuff etc.). To get an https URL, you need to contact your ISP and get them to issue you a secure certificate which I'm pretty certain you'll have to pay for.Depending on which shopping cart you use, you may not need to have SSL on your site, you could have the credit card processing handled by a 3rd party like PayPal or Verisign (you'll still have to pay a percentage to them though).

The browser you should "test" your site in is basically the browser that your visitors use.  If 99% of them are on IE, why would you design using Opera??  It doesn't make sense.  When I design pages, I make sure it is perfect in IE (90% of visitors) and I make sure it is 99% fine in Firefox (8% of visitors).  For the other 2% of my visitors, I could care less what they see (example: MAC users).

 

You need to check your stats, they're out of date. W3Schools shows that IE's market share is at 61% to FF's 28% and falling all the time.

As for the standards being 'BS', imagine if every other industry held such an attitude, like car manufacturers for instance. The standards are there to ensure that everyone regardless of device, operating system, browser or whether they are disabled, can enjoy the same Internet experience.

You say you design for 98% of users which means you're disregarding the needs of the other 2% - well that may be fine for you but people who make money from their sites won't be happy with a potential 2% loss in market share. And governments worldwide are increasingly introducing legislation to make it compulsory for government websites to adhere strictly to the web standards to ensure that no users are being discriminated against.

Also, designing for IE5/6, which are fairly antiquated browsers now as it stands, is like still driving around in a horse & cart when there are cars available. Sure, you still get to where you want to go with a horse, but you're not taking advantage of the latest technology.

 

If you tried to design your site for 100% of the browsers out there, you would never finish your pages.

 

I agree that 100% compatability is beyond the means of most individuals, but by conforming to the standards you can certainly get a lot closer to 100% than you can if you just design for IE.

Learning (or relearning) web design correctly may take a little longer but once you know how to do it, building standards-compliant websites takes no longer than it does to build a non-compliant one.

this happened to me once and i couldnt open the Xisto forums also.

That happened to me as well last week or the week before. I just assumed Xisto were having a temporary glitch cos it soon came back.

By the way, my name is snlildude87, not sunster13. I do agree, though, that Fast Reply is so much quicker than normal reply.

I didn't actually use fast reply. I quoted Milk first then copied his quote and copied in the text and name from Sunster and then copied again to do your quote except that I forgot to change the name. Sorry.

Saying FF is better than IE and IE suxors is stupid. I use firefox, and I have it crash on me. As the mainstream crackers start noticing more and more using firefox they will begin to target it more, and security breaches will be found.

I've never had Firefox crash on me. As for the hackers: experience has shown that FF can release updates within days of security flaws being exposed. How long do you reckon it takes MS to get around to that?
Firefox isn't new to this situation though: the same has been happening to Opera for a while now.

I checked my code....it was fine

I think you're missing the point: if it didn't show up properly in FF, then your code isn't fine, it's wrong.

If anyone wants to see a site that works with Internet Explorer but doesn't with Firefox, here's one that I came across.http://forums.xisto.com/no_longer_exists/

I wouldn't say the site doesn't work, just the menu on the left and probably because it's using javascript that hasn't been written properly to take account of all browsers.

There are two reasons why some websites don't show up correctly on Firefox. The first is that the website is coded in ASP (Active Server Pages). ASP belongs to Windows, so naturally, it will only show up as intended on Internet Explorer. This is NOT Firefox's fault. It's completely Microsoft's.

I don't think that's got anything to do with it as what is sent to the browser is HTML/XHTML, not ASP. But to follow your logic for a bit, if you're testing ASP pages in IE and there's something wrong, you'll often get a 500 Internal Server Error with no further explanation of the error. View the same page in Firefox and it'll point to the line in your code that is causing problems. Certainly doesn't sound like Firefox not handling ASP as well as IE.

hmmm.....=/ So that means that FireFox is limited to only certain/some websites? Lame.

No, what it means is that you haven't coded your site properly. IE isn't a web standards-compliant browser; Firefox is. So is Opera. You should go back & review your code. If you're having trouble you should check out tutorials etc online or post here and I'll see if you I can help you.
And just for the record, I've only ever come across 1 website that wouldn't 'work' in Firefox.

I watched the first three seasons, but then, it just takes too much time.

Yeah, I was getting a bored of it by the end of the third.

I'm probably the only guy who's gunna admit it, but I've cried in front of a girl

I'm sure you're not the only one. I've done it and know a few others who have as well. That whole 'guys don't cry' thing is just an outdated gender stereotype like 'women belong in the kitchen'.

1. Need Help On What To Do For Template (Tables ? Frames ? etc.)

Neither: as rvalkass said, I'd go for a purely XHTML/CSS approach. Frames are particularly bad - search engines don't like them.

Your links (FAQ Zoeken Gebruikerslijst Gebruikersgroepen Registreer Profiel Log in om je priv? berichten te bekijken Inloggen Fotosite Gastenboek Musicplayer) don't all fit within your navbar when viewed in Firefox. Musicplayer gets turned onto a new line.

Plus, it can be tacky sometimes as well.

Very. All those javascript/DHTML effects are deeply cheesy and should be avoided at all costs.

My website (see below in the sig.) in done in Publisher.

I hate to make an example of you Adrian, but to anyone considering using Publisher or any other Microsoft product to build websites, the code behind your site is THE perfect argument for NOT doing so. There's literally 100s of lines of unnecessary code on that first page.
Microsoft products make VERY BAD HTML. DON'T USE THEM!!!

Or check out this page for a totally CSS-based solution.

My family (apart from my wife), all live at least 3000km away. Makes Xmas easier.

I can't understand their logic on this one. They've already been stung once for stifling competition and now they want to take a path that helps promote internet piracy?

A reward of some sort would make things even more interesting (could be like increase in the number of hosting days every month, etc).

So Xisto's gonna offer a reward? What do they get out of it? I doubt they'd see any significant increase in people joining up cos you have to advertise competitions if you want them to attract new people so in effect, Xisto would be giving something away for no benefit to themselves.

My my my...thats a very cumbersome amount for someone to spend on a personal computer.

 

Doesn't say anything in there about being a personal computer and obviously no private citizen is ever gonna own one.

it normally like that your web host don't support jsp..

It does say though that JSP is one of the features offered under Xisto's free web hosting package (it's on the front page of the site).

Ok, download Bit Torrent from bittorrent.com (or .org not sure)

There are other clients as well like Azureus and ABC (Another BitTorrent Client). Azureus is the one I use.
One word of warning: setting up BitTorrent for me (and I know quite a few people are in the same boat) was quite a difficult process. Not difficult to get it working, but difficult to get decent d/l speeds.
That's one of the reasons I chose Azureus in the end cos I found a guide for installing & configuring it which was specific to Azureus and my ISP.
Once you have the client, then you have to find a website listing torrent files. You'll probably have to do a search to find links to those. It's generally considered bad form to link to Torrent sites in forums so I'm not gonna do that: you'll have to find your own.