IE 9 stinks...

[PZ]

I discovered through trial and error that IE9 renders the iframe pages according to the specifications of the parent frame rather than the page within the iframe.  While this does not affect anything at OWG, it is something to be aware of when surfing other pages.  For instance, I encountered an iframe page which had an RSS feed as part of the page - none of the items rendered.  You could see the cursor change when you hovered the invisible links, but literally nothing was visible on the page.  Other compliant browsers displayed the page fine.

Another example of Microsoft doing things in a non-standard, non-compliant way.

[deadman1]

That´s why I switched to Firefox a long time ago.  :)

[Binnatics]

I tried to switch to firefox twice, the last time Art convinced me. But nothing is working properly when I use firefox :(
Didn't have problems so far with IE. Bit I don't know what iframes are :-\\

[PZ]

... Bit I don't know what iframes are :-\\

Nothing that the end-user needs worry about unless you experience problems with missing parts of a page.

An iframe page is one that displays other pages within it.  For example, in a frames page, there could be two iframes, one at the top and one at the bottom.  The top iframe can be displaying the contents of some other page, and the bottom frame displays yet another.

We actually have an iframe page here at OWG - when you see the top dark menu with orange font that contains many links, that is a narrow iframe and the bottom of the page displays the PWG forum index page.

[Binnatics]

Art told me about the menubar - the upper iframe. That's what always loads first in my window. Prior to the rest of the page. It must have some sort of benefit to have an iframe instead of making it part of the main frame, right?
Can't find the bottom iframe... the PWG thing.

[PZ]

Art told me about the menubar - the upper iframe. That's what always loads first in my window. Prior to the rest of the page...

The menu bar is cached on your computer so your computer typically does not have to download it each time.  In tat sense it is of benefit, but in reality, the top menu bar is not really necessary any longer so it is possible to break out of the frames page by going directly to the main forum index.  To do this, right-click the button that reads OWG home or click this link and open it in a new tab.  You'll see that the dark menu bar is now gone.

[Binnatics]

Art allready showed me to bann that menubar ^-^
I still have it. Don't know why I never changed it, it sort of fits fine in there :-D

[Art Blade]

the bottom of the page displays the PWG forum index page.

the PWG thing.

You guys made me chuckle there.  ^-^ Binnatics, it's a typo. It should have been "OWG"  :-()

By the way, I'd love this topic if the subject didn't contain the version number at all.  >:D

[PZ]

Is that anything like "pwned"?  ????

[Art Blade]

Actually, yes. Rumour has it that a guy misspelled "owned." Like you, he hit P rather than O.  :)

[PZ]

I'd just about be willing to bet money that's what happened.  the "p" is just too close to the "o" for that to be a coincidence.  :-()

I'm sure everyone got a good laugh when they read "you have been pwned"

[Art Blade]

The immediate neighbourhood of O and P is the obvious reason for typos of that sort, indeed. :)

And yes, I reckon "the good laugh" is what made "pwned" so popular. From my point of view, it isn't popular any more. It was funny some 10 years ago, same with all that "leet speak" (leet from elite, spelling involved numerals replacing letters, as in "1337" for "leet"). Anyone using that stuff today is either late or stuck.  :-()

[Binnatics]

Urhmmm, shouldn't that be 7331 then? ????

[PZ]

hmmm... sounds like a boar pilot to me...

[Art Blade]

1 as a lower-case "L" and 7 as an upper-case "T"  ;) However, all rubbish  :-()

[Dweller_Benthos]

TEH is still may favorite, it must be, because I type it that way all the time.   ^+-+

On the subject of IE9, I have it on the new machine, never noticed any problems with it as far as iframes go, but then again, if they don't appear, and you're not familiar with the site, you never know it's not working, right? I tried both Firefox and Chrome and was underwhelmed, but then again I'm not very picky when it comes to browsers, I only judge by speed and Firefox especially always ran slow for me. Chrome I didn't use much and now that I'm reinstalling everything on the new system again, I doubt I'll install either of them.

[mandru]

I've resisted switching over to IE away from my preferred Firefox.  I keep IE updated and on my computer but rarely ever use it.  Recently I've had some trouble with Firefox becoming a bloody CPU hog and maxing out one of the processor threads.  :-(

With my i7 processor there are 8 parallel threads that when I examine the processor loads to see what's going on when I get a warning that Firefox is causing trouble it's always the same.  Seven of the threads will be purring along well below 10 or 15% and one of the threads is slamming it at 90% plus.   ????

To add to that there's an MMORP(?) I play that is Java based and for some reason FIrefox insists on stacking the Java processing load on top of the same processor thread that Firefox is already draining instead of shifting the load over to one of the other unburdened threads .    :D

I've had a Firefox update that has been trying to load for a couple weeks now but I keep denying it because they keep releasing in undeclared Beta and it always take a while for them to follow up with updates and patches to get it stable.  So I wait.

I've become tired of testing the water for them but still prefer Firefox over IE or Chrome.  Just barely.   >:((

[Binnatics]

I allways stayed with IE. 2 times people convinced me using firefox, the second is only months ago by Art. I was totally collapsed, and installed firefox. But for some reason it just didn't w@&k properly (again!).
I couldn't load webpages logged in allready. Like now I have OWG as one of my homepages, and it instantly loads as logged in, because I set the parameter to "always stay logged in".
I've tried a million things but with firefox it just didn't w@&k. It didn't even remember my passwords. Art and I hjave run through the entire settings menu, but nothing changed. At the end I was so fed up I decided to delete it, and stick with IE. Don't have troubles with it.
I know I don't have access to the security warnings firefox is providing, so I'll keep 'safe surfing'  ^-^

[deadman1]

I've resisted switching over to IE away from my preferred Firefox.  I keep IE updated and on my computer but rarely ever use it.  Recently I've had some trouble with Firefox becoming a bloody CPU hog and maxing out one of the processor threads.  :-(

With my i7 processor there are 8 parallel threads that when I examine the processor loads to see what's going on when I get a warning that Firefox is causing trouble it's always the same.  Seven of the threads will be purring along well below 10 or 15% and one of the threads is slamming it at 90% plus.   ????

To add to that there's an MMORP(?) I play that is Java based and for some reason FIrefox insists on stacking the Java processing load on top of the same processor thread that Firefox is already draining instead of shifting the load over to one of the other unburdened threads .    :D

I've had a Firefox update that has been trying to load for a couple weeks now but I keep denying it because they keep releasing in undeclared Beta and it always take a while for them to follow up with updates and patches to get it stable.  So I wait.

I've become tired of testing the water for them but still prefer Firefox over IE or Chrome.  Just barely.   >:((

I have been using the latest version of FF (6) for a while now and must say that it runs just fine in my system. If I remember correctly the latest version of FF was geared to making the CPU load a lot less than before so you might want to let FF update itself.

[mandru]

deadman1, if the menu bar for Firefox "Help> About" (where you look to see what your current version information is) had a link that offered the option to revert to previous Ff version "just in case this new release really screws you up" I'd be there in a second.

When FF first went from version 4 to V.5 it completely cut me out of being able to access that MMORP I mentioned and FF had intentionally cut the links on their "previous version" page to be able to restore V.4 to force people to stay with V.5.

It took me almost three hours of digging through their help forums to find a backdoor link they'd missed that allowed me to revert.  V.5 eventually came up to speed and began to play nice with Java but I don't want to go through that again.

Right now I know I'm using V.5.?? but when I look at that click path I mentioned above "Help>About" instead of telling me what version I'm currently using it has changed over to a button that says FF 6.0 "Apply now" which strikes me as being iron fisted and inflexible.

Ask any merc in FC2. I don't like to be pushed around.   :-D

[PZ]

...Ask any merc in FC2. I don't like to be pushed around.   :-D

^+-+ :-X

[Art Blade]

Deadman is right. FF v<6 had a known issue with abundant CPU load. They fixed that with v6 (current).