Upgrade to a version 4 or higher browser



  • I know, router configuration interfaces aren't exactly known for great code. But today I came across this:

    	<noframes>
    <body>
    <p>Please upgrade to a version 4 or higher browser so that you can use this setup tool (and see lots of great sites on the Internet!)
    </body>
    </noframes>
     

    To build an interface that only works with frames enabled is bad enough. But seriously, "version 4 or higher browser"? I suddenly regret buying a router from a company who doesn't realize the problem with that.

     


    I will note that it works perfectly in Firefox 3.5 and 3.6.




  •  Bob: ...so I click on the internet buttons-

    Tom: The what?

    Bob: The internet buttons. You know back, forward and the rest. They make the internet move.

    Tom: Bob, that's not the internet, that's the browser. You need to learn some things.

    Bob. Oh

    Tom: so what version do you have? Your browser looks kinda odd.

    Bob: Hold on, my son showed me where it is... let's see... fire-something 3.6

    Tom: 3.6? No wonder it looks funny. I have 8, Bob. You have to upgrade the browser. Seriously, get on with the times.

     



  • @scgtrp said:

    version 4 or higher

    Well, they couldn't tell you to use anything higher, since IE 8 still claims to be using version 4 of Netscape 4's Mozilla engine:

    Mozilla/4.0 ([snip])

    Firefox 3.6, Safari 4 and Chrome 5 all claim to be version 5:

    Mozilla/5.0 ([snip])

    For similar reasons Opera 10.50 claims to be version 9.80:

    Opera/9.80 ([snip])

    Remember that the important version number you're supposed to quote to user is the one the browser sends as a User-Agent header, not the one that the user can see in the "about" dialog. The more you can confuse users by telling them meaningless numbers, the more exciting life will be.



  • @TarquinWJ said:

    @scgtrp said:
    version 4 or higher

    Well, they couldn't tell you to use anything higher, since IE 8 still claims to be using version 4 of Netscape 4's Mozilla engine:

    Mozilla/4.0 ([snip])

    Firefox 3.6, Safari 4 and Chrome 5 all claim to be version 5:

    Mozilla/5.0 ([snip])

    For similar reasons Opera 10.50 claims to be version 9.80:

    Opera/9.80 ([snip])

    Remember that the important version number you're supposed to quote to user is the one the browser sends as a User-Agent header, not the one that the user can see in the "about" dialog. The more you can confuse users by telling them meaningless numbers, the more exciting life will be.

    What a comphrensive explanation has been writ here. I had a vague enough understanding of this that I might have turned an unhelpful quip had this not been penned; but this is a most pleasant and refreshing find on a sidebar article. If 'twas in my power to bestow the honour of plus one Internet points for the raising of the tone of this forum then you good TarquinWJ would certainly be considered.

    Please do forgive my nitpickery for I can not help but want to elaborate upon your explanation because it seems inevitable (otherwise) that we shall see remarks from those who will not recognise this as a term from a bygone era. For it was during the great browser wars of century last that this relic did come to be accepted into the parlance of the day.

    What may be considered as excuse for the preservation of this term in the context quoted though is that the content is contained solely within markup that should prevent a casual (or n00b-prone) observer from discovering it and becoming concerned. It is well worth considering that within the population of such users, such a vast majority will be using browsers with frames supported and enabled, that it really is unsurprising that the fallback message could reconsidered.

    If this is the most notable and glaring flaw of the routing device, then it would please me to discover its identity.



  • @nat42 said:

    What a comphrensive explanation has been writ here. I had a vague enough understanding of this that I might have turned an unhelpful quip had this not been penned; but this is a most pleasant and refreshing find on a sidebar article. If 'twas in my power to bestow the honour of plus one Internet points for the raising of the tone of this forum then you good TarquinWJ would certainly be considered.

    Please do forgive my nitpickery for I can not help but want to elaborate upon your explanation because it seems inevitable (otherwise) that we shall see remarks from those who will not recognise this as a term from a bygone era. For it was during the great browser wars of century last that this relic did come to be accepted into the parlance of the day.

    What may be considered as excuse for the preservation of this term in the context quoted though is that the content is contained solely within markup that should prevent a casual (or n00b-prone) observer from discovering it and becoming concerned. It is well worth considering that within the population of such users, such a vast majority will be using browsers with frames supported and enabled, that it really is unsurprising that the fallback message could reconsidered.

    If this is the most notable and glaring flaw of the routing device, then it would please me to discover its identity.

    I think you should consider to take a day's worth of training at the SwampShack.



  • yo nat42 i dont get what the f*** u on a bout, dog



  • @TarquinWJ said:

    For similar reasons Opera 10.50 claims to be version 9.80

    This is to avoid the problem caused by buggy browser version detection scripts that only support a single-digit version number; a similar problem occurred when Flash 10 was released and several sites (including the BBC's) thought that it was version 1 or version 0 and so prompted you to upgrade.



  • @benryves said:

    @TarquinWJ said:
    For similar reasons Opera 10.50 claims to be version 9.80
    This is to avoid the problem caused by buggy browser version detection scripts that only support a single-digit version number; a similar problem occurred when Flash 10 was released and several sites (including the BBC's) thought that it was version 1 or version 0 and so prompted you to upgrade.
     

    Everybody knows version A should come after version 9...



  • @Evo said:

    @benryves said:

    @TarquinWJ said:
    For similar reasons Opera 10.50 claims to be version 9.80
    This is to avoid the problem caused by buggy browser version detection scripts that only support a single-digit version number; a similar problem occurred when Flash 10 was released and several sites (including the BBC's) thought that it was version 1 or version 0 and so prompted you to upgrade.
     

    Everybody knows version A should come after version 9...


    Although Canadian software companies have standardized on version "eh"



  • "Version 4 browser" refers to Netscape 4 or IE 4; "or higher" refers to any browser newer than that which supports standard technologies.  It does not refer to the literal version of your browser.  I suppose it could be a bit confusing for an end-user, but I figured people on this site were experienced enough to have come across this.



  • @morbiuswilters said:

    "Version 4 browser" refers to Netscape 4 or IE 4; "or higher" refers to any browser newer than that which supports standard technologies.  It does not refer to the literal version of your browser.  I suppose it could be a bit confusing for an end-user, but I figured people on this site were experienced enough to have come across this.

    That was a reasonable answer. What got into you?



  • @Zecc said:

    That was a reasonable answer. What got into you?

    Morbs hates misinformation.



  • @Lingerance said:

    @Zecc said:
    That was a reasonable answer. What got into you?
    Morbs hates misinformation that isn't from him.

    FTFY



  • Here's another one. Note the complete ignorance of the JS split() function.

    function load4(Mydata,ip1,ip2,ip3,ip4) {
    var len; var ad; var temp;
    var Myall;
    Myall=Mydata.value; //ip1
    len=Myall.length;
    temp=Myall.indexOf(".");
    ad=Myall.substring(0,temp);
    ip1.value=ad;
    //ip2
    Myall=Myall.substring(temp+1,len);
    len=Myall.length;
    temp=Myall.indexOf(".");
    ad=Myall.substring(0,temp);
    ip2.value=ad;
    //ip3
    Myall=Myall.substring(temp+1,len);
    len=Myall.length;
    temp=Myall.indexOf(".");
    ad=Myall.substring(0,temp);
    ip3.value=ad;
    //ip4
    Myall=Myall.substring(temp+1,len);
    ad=Myall; ip4.value=ad;
    }

    Minor stuff, I know, but it still shows that someone over at Netgear doesn't know what they're doing. (Also, the logout page is wrapped in a <form> tag with absolutely no form elements in it.)



  • @DescentJS said:

    @Lingerance said:

    @Zecc said:
    That was a reasonable answer. What got into you?
    Morbs hates misinformation that isn't from him.

    FTFY

    What can I say, I'm a jealous lover.  Just as with BTK's penis, I cannot stand to see misinformation coming from a mouth other than mine.



  • If I remember correctly, IE4 and Netscape 4 both were out around the same time, and it was common for sites to ask for "version 4 or later." The answer to the question "Which browser?" was simply "Either one." At the time, people understood what you meant by it. Now, it just shows that you haven't updated your web site since the mid-90s



  • @morbiuswilters said:

    Just as with BTK's penis, I cannot stand to see misinformation coming from a mouth other than mine.

    That's what she said.

    Wait, what?



  • @smxlong said:

    If I remember correctly, IE4 and Netscape 4 both were out around the same time, and it was common for sites to ask for "version 4 or later." The answer to the question "Which browser?" was simply "Either one." At the time, people understood what you meant by it. Now, it just shows that you haven't updated your web site since the mid-90s
     

    While I do not explicitly refer to "version 4 or later", I still explicitly have a <NOFRAMES> section if I use frames, just because I know people that use frameless browsers, like Lynx or screenreaders for the blind.

    I often have a link in them to some sitemap page.



  • @derula said:

    You can now help me balance
    the tag cloud
    .

    I'd just like to say how much I love this script.  It's like a clips episode of a sitcom, except with tags; some of your all-time favorite tags in one convenient post, plus some you may have forgotten!  Also, you were inspired by my TagException script, which feeds my bloated ego.



  • @morbiuswilters said:

    Also, you were inspired by my TagException script, which feeds my bloated ego.

    Better than feeding your bloated mother.  Not because her heart is so overtaxed trying to pump blood to her vast extremities through those compacted tubes of bacon grease and chocolate pudding she calls arteries that it's likely to go off like a bomb and take out any unfortunate bystanders in a shockwave of cellutite and bone-fragment shrapnel the next time she gets a midnight craving for a honey-baked ham with a gallon tub of mayonaisse on the side, but because it's just so utterly revolting to watch her cram an entire deep-fried meatlover's pizza smothered in butterscotch frosting down her gullet without bothering to chew, unhinging her jaw and working it down like a snake, that I'd rather, all things considered, find myself drowning in her endless seas of lard, clutching wildly at her sweaty skin as her rolls of fat envelope me, unable to get a firm handhold due to the thick layer of grime and tallow.



  • @morbiuswilters said:

    Just as with BTK's penis, I cannot stand

    You know, there's medication for that.



  • @Zecc said:

    You know, there's medication for that.
     

    And an app, most likely.



  • @bstorer said:

    revolting
     

    +1 gruesome prose



  • @bstorer said:

    @morbiuswilters said:

    Also, you were inspired by my TagException script, which feeds my bloated ego.
    Better than feeding your bloated mother.  Not because her heart is so overtaxed trying to pump blood to her vast extremities through those compacted tubes of bacon grease and chocolate pudding she calls arteries that it's likely to go off like a bomb and take out any unfortunate bystanders in a shockwave of cellutite and bone-fragment shrapnel the next time she gets a midnight craving for a honey-baked ham with a gallon tub of mayonaisse on the side, but because it's just so utterly revolting to watch her cram an entire deep-fried meatlover's pizza smothered in butterscotch frosting down her gullet without bothering to chew, unhinging her jaw and working it down like a snake, that I'd rather, all things considered, find myself drowning in her endless seas of lard, clutching wildly at her sweaty skin as her rolls of fat envelope me, unable to get a firm handhold due to the thick layer of grime and tallow.

     

    Good Lord.



  • @Someone You Know said:

    Good Lord.
     

    Extras.patrick stewart / funny / startrek fantasy very funny – [03:40..04:07] 04:07
    — pokeraladin

    "You're not married, you haven't got a girlfriend, and you've never watched Star Trek?"

    "No..."

    "Good lord."



  • @dhromed said:

    yo nat42 i dont get what the f*** u on a bout, dog

    I do believe that our esteemed interlocutor has adjudicated it apposite to employ the florid and logorrheic rhetorical technique that is known in circles not unacquainted with such memes as "The verbose style".



  • @DaveK said:

    I do believe that our esteemed interlocutor has adjudicated it apposite to employ the florid and logorrheic rhetorical technique that is known in circles not unacquainted with such memes as "The verbose style".
     

    ok



  • @dhromed said:

    Filed under: fruit

    Mm, fruit.  One's stomach is labouring under the misapprehension that one's oesophagus has been severed.

     



  • @blakeyrat said:

    "You're not married, you haven't got a girlfriend, and you've never watched Star Trek?"

    "No..."

    "Good lord."

    Hey, no talking about me behind me back!



  • @dhromed said:

    @DaveK said:

    I do believe that our esteemed interlocutor has adjudicated it apposite to employ the florid and logorrheic rhetorical technique that is known in circles not unacquainted with such memes as "The verbose style".
     

    ok

    There is a clever answer to that.  But unfortunately this margin is too narrow to contain it.


Log in to reply

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