|
||||||
|
Views:
12,250,072 |
   
Main
| FAQ
| IRC chat
| Memberlist
| Active users
| Latest posts
| Stats
| Ranks
| Online users
| Search
|
04-03-25 09:29 PM |
||||
| Guest: Register | Login | ||||||
| 0 users currently in msg db 'Computer Address',0xa | 5 bots |
| Main - msg db 'Computer Address',0xa - This thread best viewed with Netscape 4.0 at 800x600 (1) |
| Kiyoshi |
| ||
|
Normal User
HEY HEY HEY STAY OUTTA MAH SHED Level: 65    
Posts: 524/1016 EXP: 2252997 Next: 82631 Since: 01-02-12 Last post: 4727 days Last view: 4698 days |
Posted by Green-KirbyIt's about the same thing actually, in the nineties it was Netscape versus IE, both trying to redefine HTML4. I remember a news article from 1998 saying market shares were 50/50. And sites were saying things like this thread's topic. Then Microsoft bundled IE for free with Windows 98, which started a lot of fuss. In 2004, Netscape fought back, after many iterations it had evolved into Firefox. Now there is Apple with its Webkit, who wants to redefine HTML5, with no respect to the open standards of the W3C and other browsers. ____________________ I don't give a flying feather |
| Ailure |
| ||
Retired Staff
 Buzzy Beetle Red pandas and stuff Level: 43
Posts: 113/398 EXP: 552447 Next: 12599 Since: 01-01-12 Last post: 2829 days Last view: 1031 days |
It's tempting to use vendor specific CSS features when W3C is taking their time with putting things into their standard. I played around with them before, but never used them seriously.
Active Desktop wasn't very useful, it was more there to convince governments that IE was part of Windows now. It seems to have been fully removed post Win XP. ____________________ AIM: gamefreak1337, MSN: Emil_sim@spray.se, XMPP: ailure@xmpp.kafuka.org, YouTube
|
| Kawa |
| ||
Retired Staff
 Not okay Prophet of Celestia Level: 94
Posts: 639/2423 EXP: 8298455 Next: 58202 Since: 01-01-12 From: The Netherlands Last post: 2371 days Last view: 686 days |
Posted by AilureWhat kind of features would that be? |
| Ailure |
| ||
|
Retired Staff
Buzzy Beetle Red pandas and stuff Level: 43
Posts: 116/398 EXP: 552447 Next: 12599 Since: 01-01-12 Last post: 2829 days Last view: 1031 days |
IIRC it was -moz-border-radius. For a time if you wanted rounded corners you had to use the browser specfic tags for it.
Nowadays just border-radius should work though (just put it in my layout for fun  ), so it's moot now.____________________ AIM: gamefreak1337, MSN: Emil_sim@spray.se, XMPP: ailure@xmpp.kafuka.org, YouTube
|
| Kawa |
| ||
|
Retired Staff
Not okay Prophet of Celestia Level: 94
Posts: 640/2423 EXP: 8298455 Next: 58202 Since: 01-01-12 From: The Netherlands Last post: 2371 days Last view: 686 days |
Past tense. Do you have any present day examples? |
| Ailure |
| ||
|
Retired Staff
Buzzy Beetle Red pandas and stuff Level: 43
Posts: 117/398 EXP: 552447 Next: 12599 Since: 01-01-12 Last post: 2829 days Last view: 1031 days |
Unfortunately no.
Rounded corners were something I stumbled upon as I thought it was part of the CSS standard back then (rounded corners are a Web 2.0 cliché), but it wasn't. Most sites were using image hacks rather than using browser specific tags though (might be what I did for the website back then). Otherwise there hadn't been any other browser-specfic tags that I needed to use. ____________________ AIM: gamefreak1337, MSN: Emil_sim@spray.se, XMPP: ailure@xmpp.kafuka.org, YouTube
|
| Main - msg db 'Computer Address',0xa - This thread best viewed with Netscape 4.0 at 800x600 (1) |
 Acmlmboard v2.5.6 (06/11/2024) © 2005-2025 Acmlm, Emuz, et al. |
|
MySQL - queries: 101, rows: 504/538, time: 0.930 seconds. |
