The Little Guy Posted August 28, 2012 Share Posted August 28, 2012 I feel that this site is low on content, but I am not sure what else to add to it. I am not going to say what the site is for, because if you can figure it out, then there isn't enough content. It is a very simple site, so please give me any feed back on what I can do to improve it! http://www.newzstand.us/ Thanks! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adam Posted September 4, 2012 Share Posted September 4, 2012 Few issues to fix before anything else: * It doesn't work in <= IE8 * You're loading jQuery from your own site instead of a well-established CDN (i.e. Google) * You're making multiple requests for files of the same type, instead of building them into one and minifying * Your "get the code" snippet is linking to a script that returns a 301 redirect Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mahngiel Posted September 4, 2012 Share Posted September 4, 2012 Few issues to fix before anything else: * It doesn't work in <= IE8 I don't see this as a problem. I for one, congratulate you on your abandonment of it. :thumb-up: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jessica Posted September 4, 2012 Share Posted September 4, 2012 IE8 is fairly new, I don't know anyone using 9. You should support IE8 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adam Posted September 4, 2012 Share Posted September 4, 2012 I don't see this as a problem. Given this is a plug-in shared across the net that people include on their own websites, it should either be made cross-browser compatible or state clearly which browsers are supported. As jesirose says, IE8 is still in use. I can understand IE6, and maybe at a push IE7, so long as there was a message stating so. You're using jQuery though, so there's no need for IE6/7/8 not working in terms of JS. Also I've just noticed that you've provided protocol-less URLs for the script, but your site doesn't support SSL. Not supporting SSL is a problem in itself. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
floridaflatlander Posted September 4, 2012 Share Posted September 4, 2012 I see a difference, I think the div that has sharing, increases and trending should be clear both. In ie8 it's look like it's in the right column, in 9 & firebox it's across the bottom. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mahngiel Posted September 4, 2012 Share Posted September 4, 2012 IE8 is fairly new, I don't know anyone using 9. That's an absurd statement. IE9 has as much, if not more of a share than IE8. IE8 was released 3 years ago and IE9 over a year ago. Both are ancient by today's standards. http://www.w3counter.com/globalstats.php http://www.statowl.com/web_browser_usage_by_version.php?timeframe=last_6&interval=month&chart_id=4&limit[]=ie&fltr_os=&fltr_se=&fltr_cn= Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jessica Posted September 4, 2012 Share Posted September 4, 2012 Ancient huh? So what version of IE do you consider current? So, the site you linked to lists Safari as less usage than IE8 or IE9. Guess you consider that one out of date too? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mahngiel Posted September 4, 2012 Share Posted September 4, 2012 how are you deciding usage equates to current spec standardization? And yes, according to html5test safari 5 is less html compliant than IE8, but that is not so for safari6 and ie9. Ancient huh? So what version of IE do you consider current? When they roll out IE10 with silent updates, i'll consider it current. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adam Posted September 4, 2012 Share Posted September 4, 2012 how are you deciding usage equates to current spec standardization? And yes, according to html5test safari 5 is less standards compliant than IE8, but that is not so for safari6 and ie9. Mahngiel, this isn't a debate about standards support, it's about current usage and what browsers should be supported by a plug-in like this. Let's focus on the OP.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jessica Posted September 4, 2012 Share Posted September 4, 2012 IE9 has as much, if not more of a share than IE8 http://www.w3counter.com/globalstats.php You're the one who brought "usage" and "share" into the question. You didn't answer my question about which version of IE you consider current. I also can't find anything that states on that website exactly where they're getting these numbers. And to re-iterate Adam's point: Given this is a plug-in shared across the net that people include on their own websites, it should either be made cross-browser compatible or state clearly which browsers are supported. ... You're using jQuery though, so there's no need for IE6/7/8 not working in terms of JS. I think you have a different understanding of the words "ancient" and "current". IE 10 is a beta, and by your own admission not the current version, yet you consider IE 9 to be ancient. You don't see a problem with that? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mahngiel Posted September 4, 2012 Share Posted September 4, 2012 Mahngiel, this isn't a debate about standards support, it's about current usage and what browsers should be supported by a plug-in like this. Let's focus on the OP.. You (fairly) brought up IE8 to which i commended OP's disregard for it. Jesi stated nobody uses the more "current" IE9, and out of fairness for the OP, I rebutted. You're the one who brought "usage" and "share" into the question. Share != compliance, your comparison was moot. I also can't find anything that states on that website exactly where they're getting these numbers. Bottom of the page: This report was generated 08/31/2012 based on the last 15,000 page views to each website tracked by W3Counter. W3Counter's sample currently includes 59,508 websites. The browser market share graph includes data from all versions of the named browser families, not only the top 10 as listed below. I think you have a different understanding of the words "ancient" and "current". IE 10 is a beta, and by your own admission not the current version, yet you consider IE 9 to be ancient. You don't see a problem with that? IE9 lacks major parts of html5 and css. IE10 has been in beta for how long now? Over a year? I think chrome and FF been through at least 10 versions since then. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jessica Posted September 4, 2012 Share Posted September 4, 2012 Mahngiel, this isn't a debate about standards support, it's about current usage and what browsers should be supported by a plug-in like this. Let's focus on the OP.. You (fairly) brought up IE8 to which i commended OP's disregard for it. Jesi stated nobody uses the more "current" IE9, and out of fairness for the OP, I rebutted. Nobody *I* know. You quoted it, did you read it? I don't consider random people on the internet to be people I know. I also can't find anything that states on that website exactly where they're getting these numbers. Bottom of the page: This report was generated 08/31/2012 based on the last 15,000 page views to each website tracked by W3Counter. W3Counter's sample currently includes 59,508 websites. The browser market share graph includes data from all versions of the named browser families, not only the top 10 as listed below. And those websites ARE? My point is that those statistics could be skewed. 60k websites is not a large sample of the web. I think you have a different understanding of the words "ancient" and "current". IE 10 is a beta, and by your own admission not the current version, yet you consider IE 9 to be ancient. You don't see a problem with that? IE9 lacks major parts of html5 and css. IE10 has been in beta for how long now? Over a year? I think chrome and FF been through at least 10 versions since then. You're still not seeing the point. You think that "current" means "meets HTML5 standards". Current means CURRENT VERSION. If you go download IE, you will get IE9 unless you know to look for a beta. Just like if you go download Fx you'll get version 15. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mahngiel Posted September 4, 2012 Share Posted September 4, 2012 Me: both are ancient by today's standards Jesi: what do you consider current "current" was contextually defined as abiding to specification, not "available as a download" @OP. Digging the project. Fuck IE8 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jessica Posted September 4, 2012 Share Posted September 4, 2012 Which was my point, you are saying the version that is available for download is ancient. It's not, it's the current version. Just because it doesn't support HTML5 doesn't make it NOT the current version. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adam Posted September 4, 2012 Share Posted September 4, 2012 @OP. Digging the project. Fuck IE8 ... Which brings us back to the original point, for something like this IE8 support is essential. Based on your own source of statistics, it's still used just as much as IE9. This thread has derailed enough, let's just wait for The Little Guy to actually give his own input. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Little Guy Posted September 4, 2012 Author Share Posted September 4, 2012 - It now works in IE7+ (IDK if it works in IE6, I have no way to test that ATM). - I merged the CSS files. - The redirect is fixed Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkuar Posted September 6, 2012 Share Posted September 6, 2012 I just clicked on a news ticker called: "Hey I am Ryan I am a php developer!" then it wnet to to: http://ryannaddy.com/thing.php which showed: a;dfashdflajhdlkfjhsldkfj a;dfashdflajhdlkfjhsldkfj a;dfashdflajhdlkfjhsldkfj a;dfashdflajhdlkfjhsldkfj a;dfashdflajhdlkfjhsldkfj a;dfashdflajhdlkfjhsldkfj a;dfashdflajhdlkfjhsldkfj a;dfashdflajhdlkfjhsldkfj a;dfashdflajhdlkfjhsldkfj a;dfashdflajhdlkfjhsldkfj a;dfashdflajhdlkfjhsldkfj a;dfashdflajhdlkfjhsldkfj a;dfashdflajhdlkfjhsldkfj a;dfashdflajhdlkfjhsldkfj a;dfashdflajhdlkfjhsldkfj a;dfashdflajhdlkfjhsldkfj a;dfashdflajhdlkfjhsldkfj a;dfashdflajhdlkfjhsldkfj a;dfashdflajhdlkfjhsldkfj a;dfashdflajhdlkfjhsldkfj a;dfashdflajhdlkfjhsldkfj a;dfashdflajhdlkfjhsldkfj a;dfashdflajhdlkfjhsldkfj a;dfashdflajhdlkfjhsldkfj a;dfashdflajhdlkfjhsldkfj a;dfashdflajhdlkfjhsldkfj a;dfashdflajhdlkfjhsldkfj a;dfashdflajhdlkfjhsldkfj a;dfashdflajhdlkfjhsldkfj a;dfashdflajhdlkfjhsldkfj a;dfashdflajhdlkfjhsldkfj a;dfashdflajhdlkfjhsldkfj a;dfashdflajhdlkfjhsldkfj a;dfashdflajhdlkfjhsldkfj a;dfashdflajhdlkfjhsldkfj a;dfashdflajhdlkfjhsldkfj a;dfashdflajhdlkfjhsldkfj a;dfashdflajhdlkfjhsldkfj a;dfashdflajhdlkfjhsldkfj a;dfashdflajhdlkfjhsldkfj a;dfashdflajhdlkfjhsldkfj a;dfashdflajhdlkfjhsldkfj a;dfashdflajhdlkfjhsldkfj a;dfashdflajhdlkfjhsldkfj Yeah, great news! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Little Guy Posted September 6, 2012 Author Share Posted September 6, 2012 That is one of my test pages for the ticker. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.