Archive for myfreeforum.org Before posting please check the "stickies" in the support forums.
Please ask questions in real English and not "txt". You will get a better response.
Please do not ask support questions via PMs.
 

The free forums are now under new ownership, a full announcement will be made shortly

       myfreeforum.org Forum Index -> Off Topic
Myles

Opera 11.10

I know only 3 adults, 1 kid and an elephant called Peanuts are the only beings in the world that actually use this browser on their desktop, but anyway the latest version 11.10 supports linear gradients now.

Top to bottom
Code:
        background-image: -o-linear-gradient(#000000, #FFFFFF);
myff admin

and I wonder how fast that is?

My experience of forums using background stuff is that the browser performance sucks!
Myles

Seems slower in FF and Safari, a bit quicker in Chrome and quickest in Opera.
IE8 filter isn't as bad as i thought. Haven't checked IE9.

I don't use any fancy stuff on my forum because i want the speed as priority over design, and hopefully then the content makes it successful.

Just mentioning it anyway just as an fyi for any developer/designer here.

I'm making a website with the fancy bells and whistles at the moment so just came across it.
Zudane

Personally I prefer using W3C compliant CSS.  Primarily because I want it to look the same in IE, FF, Opera and Safari, not tailor each one to make them look the same.
Nick(NR)

Sorry for a shameless plug, but I run http://blaze-gaming.com/

and I've used linear gradients for ff and safari(and chrome, yay webkit), but with opera 10, I had to use box shadow to obtain the same look, I don't believe you'll notice much difference, the css definitions actually take up less space kb wise than using an actual image, I also use border radius as well, which gives nice results, again smaller in css size than a transparent png which can be upwards of 50kb.

What I have noticed in recent browser releases however is that the linear gradient in moz and webkit has has massive improvements in rendering it smoothly and quickly, go back to when firefox first included css3 in it's setup the gradients would end up looking like a gif with the gradient in sectioned blocks as opposed to a proper fade like a jpg.
Zudane

I can't argue, I use them as well, though I do try to stick with CSS compliant.  I just wish these things that were so useful were actually CSS standards.
Nick(NR)

Zudane wrote:
I can't argue, I use them as well, though I do try to stick with CSS compliant.  I just wish these things that were so useful were actually CSS standards.


Hopefully once css3 is final and official, we'll only have one set for border radius instead of three, where the browser chooses it's method of rendering.
Myles

Zudane wrote:
Personally I prefer using W3C compliant CSS.  Primarily because I want it to look the same in IE, FF, Opera and Safari, not tailor each one to make them look the same.


I find there are the odd compliant css that look slightly different in some browsers depending on the quality of the rendering.

I'd guess (i don't actually know) staying css compliant is beneficial to the designers that are contracted working to deadlines, whereas maybe the developers/designers who just do sites for themselves as a labour of love probably tailor each one to make them look the same.

I'm pissed off with MS for not giving IE9 to XP or a new IE8.x version with the css3 because if that happened, and along with the recent updates of the other browsers, then there would be no need for filters, sprites and browser specific stylesheets, then pages would load quicker, less bandwidth for the host and more efficient for designers. All it takes is an updated IE8.x and all those problems go away.
Myles

Myles wrote:
Seems slower in FF and Safari, a bit quicker in Chrome and quickest in Opera.
IE8 filter isn't as bad as i thought. Haven't checked IE9.


Actually scrap all that, as i haven't been on the newest versions of those browsers long enough to really make a call on how quick they render gradients, shadows, etc. The above is more of an indication of the previous versions of all those browsers (except Opera obviously).
Myles

Nick(NR) wrote:
Sorry for a shameless plug, but I run http://blaze-gaming.com/

I notice you use the sprite http://blaze-gaming.com/styles/DVGFX/theme/images/menubuttons/bans.png for all browsers, is the image file size smaller than the code?

I'd reckon the same css code could be used for each of those menu links could be smaller than the size of all the sprites put together, then maybe have a separate stylesheet for IE. Though i know that creates another http request so i might be wrong.
Also, if each menu link was the same width then only one sprite (as a background, link titles over the background)  would work for all i think, that would definitely save bandwidth & load quicker, but i acknowledge you may not want to have them all the same width too and bandwidth might not be an issue for you either.
Nick(NR)

I have about a week back reworked those buttons to run css3 with radial gradients, but I'm yet to add it to the site and while it may reduce the code for them, the total it drops by isn't the same amount as keeping the images, so there is very little gain on the occasion, hence the choice to stick with and image that has it's background move position on hover.
judy

Myles wrote:
Zudane wrote:
Personally I prefer using W3C compliant CSS.  Primarily because I want it to look the same in IE, FF, Opera and Safari, not tailor each one to make them look the same.


I find there are the odd compliant css that look slightly different in some browsers depending on the quality of the rendering.

I'd guess (i don't actually know) staying css compliant is beneficial to the designers that are contracted working to deadlines, whereas maybe the developers/designers who just do sites for themselves as a labour of love probably tailor each one to make them look the same.

I'm pissed off with MS for not giving IE9 to XP or a new IE8.x version with the css3 because if that happened, and along with the recent updates of the other browsers, then there would be no need for filters, sprites and browser specific stylesheets, then pages would load quicker, less bandwidth for the host and more efficient for designers. All it takes is an updated IE8.x and all those problems go away.

But surely you'll still have to allow for the fact that most people don't use the latest version of their browser?
Myles

judy wrote:
Myles wrote:
Zudane wrote:
Personally I prefer using W3C compliant CSS.  Primarily because I want it to look the same in IE, FF, Opera and Safari, not tailor each one to make them look the same.


I find there are the odd compliant css that look slightly different in some browsers depending on the quality of the rendering.

I'd guess (i don't actually know) staying css compliant is beneficial to the designers that are contracted working to deadlines, whereas maybe the developers/designers who just do sites for themselves as a labour of love probably tailor each one to make them look the same.

I'm pissed off with MS for not giving IE9 to XP or a new IE8.x version with the css3 because if that happened, and along with the recent updates of the other browsers, then there would be no need for filters, sprites and browser specific stylesheets, then pages would load quicker, less bandwidth for the host and more efficient for designers. All it takes is an updated IE8.x and all those problems go away.

But surely you'll still have to allow for the fact that most people don't use the latest version of their browser?


Of course if you are creating a website for yourself why not, but i'd say a contractor would just code for the latest versions because the client wouldn't want to pay the contractor to spend time coding for all the different versions, plus the spend on extra bandwidth, but that would depend on the contractor's client i suppose, but i'd say in about 6 months the vast majority of FF, Safari, Chrome and Opera users will have updated their 'home' computers to the latest versions of those browsers so likewise could be said for IE users had there being an 8.x update with css3. Except for maybe large organisations who can be slower to upgrade their browsers and still contribute to the majority of the 7.4% still on IE6/7. A css3 update for IE8 would mean much quicker time coding for 90+% of browser users and forget the rest, why spend time making extra stylesheets and sprites for a few percent that are too lazy to upgrade or are on IE6/7 in their job so can't spend time spending money on your website anyway, i imagine this is the commercial point of view because i acknowledge you may want to go to the trouble for a hobby like a forum so as not to leave out any of your current regular members which is fair enough.
judy

It depends who your website is targetted at I suppose. A commercial website wouldn't be giving a very good impression to potential corporate customers if things don't look right.

Of course it also depends on what doesn't look right. I'm doing a revamp  of my website at the moment (not the forum) and I've put in some rounded corners. I'm not going to faff around with graphics just for IE when it still looks perfectly OK with square corners.
Myles

judy wrote:
It depends who your website is targetted at I suppose. A commercial website wouldn't be giving a very good impression to potential corporate customers if things don't look right.

Of course it also depends on what doesn't look right. I'm doing a revamp  of my website at the moment (not the forum) and I've put in some rounded corners. I'm not going to faff around with graphics just for IE when it still looks perfectly OK with square corners.


Css3 browsers render your website's border radius but they're square in IE8, there would be no harm in having an update for IE8 to render border radius though instead of using the htc file that isn't compatible with anything else i.e. gradients
judy

Myles wrote:
Css3 browsers render your website's border radius but they're square in IE8

Yes, that's what I meant! I used the border radius, but had forgotten the terminology when I posted  Wink

I started this website about 3 years ago,  learning html as I went along   I'm now trying to improve it so that (a) it looks more modern, (b) it looks the same in all browsers, (c) it uses SSI includes instead of frames and (d) using more css and less html. A huge learning curve for me and around 200 pages to update  

Oh and I quite like Opera! I previously only used IE but have now downloaded all the major browsers and can't understand why so many people think firefox is wonderful.....
Myles

Yeah i like the latest version of Opera too actually.

IE9 is missing some css3 like gradients plus the tabs can't be moved below the menu bar (File, Edit, View, etc.), what's that about Mr Gates?!

The 'Web Developer Toolbar' addon for FF is a must-have as it lets you mess around with the css in realtime without having to edit the stylesheet and refresh each time, saving a huge amount of time.

When you have it installed, you go to: View >> Toolbars >> Web Developer Toolbar
Then you'll see a menu under the address bar, click: CSS dropdown button >> View  Stylesheet Information
Then click on any element and it will bring up a window at the bottom of your tab where you can see the css (loaded in chronological order) for that element.
If you want to edit it then click: CSS dropdown button >> Edit CSS
This will bring up a tab within that lower window from which you can mess around with the css temporarily and see what happens on your webpage without actually hardcoding it, then when you get the css the way you like it you can do the same in the hardcode stylesheet file.

That might all sound a bit long-winded in type, but in practice it's much quicker.

Trust me, it's well worth having that addon.
judy

I haven't dared to download IE9 yet.....
Nick(NR)

I have and I still haven't used it yet.
Myles

It's definitely faster but like i said the tabs are above the menu bar which is ridiculous from a user point of view.

From a developer/designer point at least it render some css3 (if not all) so hopefully getting closer (albeit slowly) to the day where one line of css works on all the main browsers without the need for vendor prefixes, filters, image sprites or extra http requests for separate stylesheets, meaning smaller files and quicker downloading of webpages.

       myfreeforum.org Forum Index -> Off Topic
Page 1 of 1
Create your own free forum | Buy a domain to use with your forum