Google hates IE... proof!



  • so, i open up IE just now (i know, but a certain few things still don't quite work right in firefox)... anyway, google is my homepage (as it is on every computer i touch, lol). and this is what shows up:

     

     

     

    yes, in an IE window, the google page recommends upgrading to the "safer firefox"... this amused me to no end, so i felt i must share... discuss. 



  • Yahoo was advertising "New IE7, optimized for yahoo!" earlier.



  • El Goog has written a lot of stuff that looks a lot spiffier in Firefox than in IE, so I can't really blame them. Good example: Use the mouse wheel when you're using google maps. Nifty, eh?



  • Yes; it's just as nifty as it is in Internet Explorer  :)



  • But Firefox is 'safer' than IE. Of course, if that's fast changing - it's certainly got it's share of security holes - but it's hard not to be better than IE.





  • You are aware that Google basically owns Firefox, right? It's no coincidence that Firefox is filled with Google search options by default - Google have been pouring money into it for a long time. A lot of the development work on Firefox, and most of the advertising, is funded by Google. It's as close as they can get to owning the project without just employing all the developers.

    I think it's a combination of advertising (anybody who's just installed Firefox finds themselves looking at a Google search box) and an attempt to counteract the IE stranglehold on the web ("nice search engine you got there, be a shame if it suddenly stopped working in the next automatic update" - it would be a gross breach of antitrust law for MS to do that, but they've been convicted of antitrust violations several times and got away with it anyway, so Google have good reason to want to break the browser monopoly).

    This is the only reason why Microsoft restarted development on IE (which was shut down entirely after IE6), and produced IE7. The second round of the browser wars is just starting... IE7 tries to cram "Live Search" (live.com) down your throat.



  • This seems a bit petty of Google really.

    I'm all for people switching to Firefox though. I don't buy into it being significantly safer/faster etc. and IE7 has (finally) included a bunch of good features that alternative browsers have had for years. However, at least Firefox renders webpages correctly.

    Seriously, there are hideous 'bugs' in the IE CSS implementation. They probably won't fix them because I suspect that people who have (stupidly) been designing pages to work with IE only, will probably be relying on things working this way, not realising that it goes against the CSS spec.

    This makes it really annoying trying to convince people to switch to Firefox, because my only real argument is that if more people do, it'll be easier for me to make webpages.
     



  • same here... we go through and design a site based on these things called "standards." then we go back through and see how much is broken in IE and hack the hell out of the code to get it to look quasi-right there.



  • asuffield:

     

    You make it seem as if google just gives them money.

     
    Firefox starts with google as defaults because they get paid for each search someone makes from either the firefox google homepage or the firefox quicksearch. The same way (almost, they have an agreement with a set percent most likely, etc) any site can add a search box to their site and get paid when people search from it.


     



  • [quote user="SpoonMeiser"]

    This seems a bit petty of Google really.

    I'm all for people switching to Firefox though. I don't buy into it being significantly safer/faster etc. and IE7 has (finally) included a bunch of good features that alternative browsers have had for years. However, at least Firefox renders webpages correctly.

    Seriously, there are hideous 'bugs' in the IE CSS implementation. They probably won't fix them because I suspect that people who have (stupidly) been designing pages to work with IE only, will probably be relying on things working this way, not realising that it goes against the CSS spec.

    This makes it really annoying trying to convince people to switch to Firefox, because my only real argument is that if more people do, it'll be easier for me to make webpages.
     

    [/quote]

     

    Well, it is all about you, isn't it?

    Easier route: design for IE first, then port to FF. 



  • To be fair, you are using IE 6 which has been proven to be much less safer than FireFox or even IE 7. But one of the other posters is right. A new installation of IE 7 will try to show Windows Live search down your throat, pants or wherever else it can.



  • [quote user="mrprogguy"]Easier route: design for IE first, then port to FF.[/quote]

    Never again. Best route is: design layout for Lynx / screenreaders / GoogleBot, CSS for FF / Safari / Opera, wrap styles in @media all to kill off IE5.2/Mac, call in via <link media="screen"/> to kill off Netscape 4 (it's still out there) and bung all the "fix IE" stuff in Holly hack lines, possibly with "escaped" chars to separate between 5.5 and 6 ( * html selector { property: value; p\roperty: value; } )



  • [quote user="batasrki"]To be fair, you are using IE 6 which has been proven to be much less safer than FireFox or even IE 7. But one of the other posters is right. A new installation of IE 7 will try to show Windows Live search down your throat, pants or wherever else it can.
    [/quote]Uh, I don't normally use IE, but as far as I can see, Google is my default search in IE7 - in fact, the only search I have available in it, and I never tried changing any search settings (I only use IE for Windows update).



  • [quote user="bob the dingo"]same here... we go through and design a site based on these things called "standards." then we go back through and see how much is broken in IE and hack the hell out of the code to get it to look quasi-right there.
    [/quote]

    and then you find out that things like <img usemap="idname"> and <col align="center"> are broken in Firefox, but not IE or Opera.



  • [quote user="Volmarias"]El Goog has written a lot of stuff that looks a lot spiffier in Firefox than in IE, so I can't really blame them. Good example: Use the mouse wheel when you're using google maps. Nifty, eh?[/quote]

    Uh, the mousewheel does the same thing in IE6.



  • [quote user="powerlord"][quote user="bob the dingo"]same here... we go through and design a site based on these things called "standards." then we go back through and see how much is broken in IE and hack the hell out of the code to get it to look quasi-right there.
    [/quote]

    and then you find out that things like <img usemap="idname"> and <col align="center"> are broken in Firefox, but not IE or Opera.
    [/quote]

    OK, so IE is totally broken in fundamental ways, but that's OK because Firefox has minor niggles on a couple of extremely rare features with trivial workarounds?  Ri-i-i-ight, I'm like really seeing your logic there, know what I mean?

    (The usemap one is ludicrous to cite as a Firefox shortcoming.  The standards-compliant XHTML 1.0 code is <img usemap="#idname">.  <img usemap="idname"> is XHTML 1.1, and works fine when you serve the content as XHTML... but you can't do that because Internet Explorer is broken.  I'll grant you that Firefox's handling of <col> is a genuine issue, but I'm hard pressed to see it as a big problem, largely because I've never wanted to use <col> in my life.)



  • Not that imagemaps should be used these days anyway when you can have semantic markup and a spot of CSS to do the same thing and everybody gets to play, even those on screenreaders. Try explaining to 508 compliance testers why you absolutely have to have an imagemap and see how far you get.



  • IE 6 can't handle even the FUNDAMENTAL and TRIVIAL task of centering! I CAN'T use the proper way: div#some_id { margin: 0 auto; width: 60% }. I can't use <div align="center" width="60%"> either! The only thing I can do is make YET ANOTHER TABLE... The handling of tables is the only thing that is "nearly correct" (as in: you sometimes have to use 1-pixel transparent gifs to get complicated layouts right, but at least there is some way to get it working), as opposed to nearly everything else, which is "almost working" (which means not working at all or horribly broken).

    I think the fact that IE is so widely used makes up at least 40% of the expenses that have to be paid in order to set up a large commercial web site (because of the extra time the developers need to spend to hack around IE).

    PS: It's wrong to write for IE and then port to FF, because when you work with FF from the start, you may actually make a decent page and then somehow manage to port it to IE using various hacks. If you work with IE, you'll get tired half way through it and settle on a much simpler design. :P
     



  • In other news...

    Yahoo favours Internet Explorer! 



  • [quote user="Tweenk"]IE 6 can't handle even the FUNDAMENTAL and TRIVIAL task of centering! I CAN'T use the proper way: div#some_id { margin: 0 auto; width: 60% }. I can't use <div align="center" width="60%"> either! The only thing I can do is make YET ANOTHER TABLE...[/quote]

    What you need to do, is add a proper DTD to your XHTML. IE6+ will then switch into a mode that lies somewhat closer to standards, and support margin:auto; as per standards.


Log in to reply
 

Looks like your connection to What the Daily WTF? was lost, please wait while we try to reconnect.