|
Welcome
Guest
|
Register
| Login
|
|
|
| Index | Recent Threads | Unanswered Threads | Who's Online | User List | Help |
Killersites.com Forum
Misc Forums
Open Forum.
Thread: Why test for multiple browsers?
|
| No member browsing this thread |
|
Thread Status: Active Total posts in this thread: 8
|
|
| Author |
|
davidmead
Advanced Member USA Joined: Jul 21, 2003 Post Count: 749 Status: Offline |
Interesting article here from Macromedia. It obviously touts the benefits of using Dreamweaver MX but the stats and practices mentioned in it should be part of your regime whether you use Macromedia products or not. Enjoy, Dave ---------------------------------------- Building quality, affordable web sites worldwide - DMWebsites.com |
||
|
|
aerodyn
Advanced Member USA Joined: Sep 9, 2003 Post Count: 125 Status: Offline |
Thanks for the link, Dave. I agree, this stuff should be independent of any kind of web building tool. As a Mac user, I find it more challenging than most as I have to (or at least, should) test for Windows platforms as well as Mac. It's amazing to see how different operating systems render the same web pages. I've toyed with the idea of picking up a second hand Windows machine just for testing, but there are also the issues of screen resolution and different browsers. I've also used Browsercam once to test, but I'm not sure how accurate the rendering is. Any suggestions as to which way is best? Ted PS. Way to go Pats!! ---------------------------------------- www.aero-dynamic-web.com ---------------------------------------- [Edit 1 times, last edit by aerodyn at Feb 1, 2004 11:45:52 PM] |
||
|
|
davidmead
Advanced Member USA Joined: Jul 21, 2003 Post Count: 749 Status: Offline |
If you have the money to spend on another computer that'd be good but you'd have to get all the browsers you want to live happily on one PC which may have it's own problems. Better spend that money on Browsercam if you are serious about cross-platform rendering. Browsercam's screen-shots are accurate as they are actually taken from the machines specified. If it says IE4 on a Win98 PC that is what you are seeing, so that's good. Dave ---------------------------------------- Building quality, affordable web sites worldwide - DMWebsites.com |
||
|
|
aerodyn
Advanced Member USA Joined: Sep 9, 2003 Post Count: 125 Status: Offline |
Dave, Good points. Do you (or anyone else here) use DreamWeaver MX 2004? I remember some discussion here when it first came out, but I'm wondering whether anyone's had a chance to really get into it. While I can't use 2004 now (my OS isn't up to snuff), I do use MX. Since I'm in the midst of converting to CSS and CSS-P, I was wondering whether the upgraded CSS that MacroMedia touts is as good as they claim it to be. Ted ---------------------------------------- www.aero-dynamic-web.com |
||
|
|
LSW
Advanced Member USA Joined: Nov 27, 2003 Post Count: 6285 Status: Offline |
I am enjoying using 2004. I still do my CSS in TopStyle, but DW 2004 will show me those properties in my external sheet from TS whenever I highlight a tag with CSS properties, I can even change them in the properties window and they will be changed on the external sheet. However I have not used this much as I still prefer my old TopStyle for CSS. In the DW MX 2004 by David under Product reviews, I posted about a tutorial in last months ComputerArts Magazine about using CSS in 2004. It may still be available at news stands, if not try ComputerArts and see if they still have back issues available. LSW |
||
|
|
aerodyn
Advanced Member USA Joined: Sep 9, 2003 Post Count: 125 Status: Offline |
Kyle, Thanks for the links. It seems as if there still are conflicting views as to whether DW MX 2004 handles CSS as well as other code generators. I think I'll keep learning CSS and applying it manually, as that's what helps me to learn it the best. Ted ---------------------------------------- www.aero-dynamic-web.com |
||
|
|
LSW
Advanced Member USA Joined: Nov 27, 2003 Post Count: 6285 Status: Offline |
I see it more this way. Dreamweaver is worth the upgrade to 2004, partly due to the CSS support. Dreamweaver 2004 CSS support is supperb to anything it had before! However like any other software it will never likely beat a dedicated app. like TopyStyle. You can do HTML in TopyStyle too.... but not as well as a dedicated HTML editor like DW. The view from DW 2004 is not perfect in checking CSS..... but it ok from a rough idea before trying it in a Browser. The view from Topstyle is much more acurate..... but it does not see your HTML so it does not really show your site either. I usually have both apps open at the same time, but you can cjange things quicker in Dreamweaver rather than bouncing back to TS for every small change. So I like DW 2004 (never cared for DW until MX) and the CSS job it does comes in handy..... I just prefer to work in TopStyle for CSS. But DW is worth the upgrade, I do not regret it. Kyle |
||
|
|
FatTony1037
Advanced Member USA/London Joined: Jan 18, 2004 Post Count: 197 Status: Offline |
Hi, Thanks...that is interesting!  Sincerely, Joe |
|||
|
||||
|
|
|
Current timezone is GMT Jun 19, 2013 5:11:57 AM |
