I finally got my site working under IE 6.66 again. I've been trying to make this work for at least three weeks. Mine is a pretty straightforward problem, too; I just want to use png files with transparancy in them. Instead of having to run a frame action over every jpg in Photoshop, I can make the frame once, have the picture area clear, and then use the actual jpeg as a background image.

What's the big deal, though ... IE 7 was a mandatory update, right? But it's also more than 100 MB to download before you can install it. The person I know who uses dialup told me my site is "blank" and when we figured out why, she laughed at the idea of even downloading 6 MB for FireFox. Plus, I have an old laptop that uses cable when it's plugged in, but auto-updates are disabled, and it still has IE 6 ( to test pages ). In fact, of the ~5K unique visitors I've had this month, half of the ones using IE are using IE 6.

Even worse, a lot of directories are starting to create thumbnails of a site's home page ... and at least some of them use IE 6 to render the pages.

Unfortunately, it still does make sense to keep a copy of IE 6 on hand. It may be quirky, and laugh in the face of web standards, but it's also a 500 gorilla.

IE 7 went out as a 'critical update', not mandatory though. I have not, as yet, let it load on my machine at home - I hate the thing and I still need to test with IE 6. Many people with automatic updates turned on did get IE 7, but there are plenty of people who do NOT allow MS to trudge all over their hard disk whenever the feel like it (like ME !), or don't know enough to have autoupdates enabled (when they should). The turnover in the corporate world is going to be slower too.

Soo.. sigh.. yes, we have to still deal with a lot of people using IE 6 and we designers need to continue to beat back it's bugs.

LadynRed, you're not missing anything. I mean, 7 is a giant leap forward from 6, and it's just about caught up with FireFox, but not quite. And I'm generally a fan of Microsoft.

I know I'm not missing anything. We have IE7 installed on a test machine at work and I really loathe the interface and I'm generally UNimpressed with it.

Originally Posted by LadynRed

I know I'm not missing anything. We have IE7 installed on a test machine at work and I really loathe the interface and I'm generally UNimpressed with it.

I'm with you 100% on that -- they can keep Exploder7 and all other versions!

I like how you can launch a new tab easily, by clicking on the empty one at the end. Um, I can't honestly think of anything else I like about 7 over FireFox 2. And I really don't understand how FireFox can be more featured at 5 MB than Internet Explorer at what, 120 MB? Something like that.

Easy - FF doesn't load the browser down with crap like Exploder7 does; their Developers were intelligent enough to place all of the features into Modules.

...slaps forehead...WOW; what a concept!

Originally Posted by Learning Newbie

And I really don't understand how FireFox can be more featured at 5 MB than Internet Explorer at what, 120 MB? Something like that.

File size isn't a good indication of how good a program is, you should know that...

To some extent file size is an indication of how good a program is. When was the last time you saw a great app weigh in at 16 kb? Every time I add code to one of my applications to make it smarter, more code translates to a larger set of binaries. But you're right in that it's only a rough indicator - there must be all kinds of custom and dealing with Windows code in there that's unnecessary. I guess a way to rewrite my question would be if FireFox is capable of everything I need at 5 MB, what on earth is the other 115 MB in Explorer doing?

Originally Posted by travelagent

Easy - FF doesn't load the browser down with crap like Exploder7 does; their Developers were intelligent enough to place all of the features into Modules.

...slaps forehead...WOW; what a concept!

Either you have access to the code base at Microsoft and Mozilla, or you're pulling this out of your belly button. Microsoft puts all their code into modules as well, see MSDN, and see how you can include IE in your applications by including two dll files - dynamic link libraries, or modules.

I know it's fashionable to hate Microsoft, and they've given us plenty of reason to, but it's kind of silly to spread disinformation about them and hate them for things they actually get right. Sort of takes away credibility ... wow, what a concept.

Originally Posted by Learning Newbie

I know it's fashionable to hate Microsoft, and they've given us plenty of reason to, but it's kind of silly to spread disinformation about them and hate them for things they actually get right. Sort of takes away credibility ... wow, what a concept.

It is wrong to spread misinformation but Microsoft and credibility is an oxymoron.

Originally Posted by Learning Newbie

Either you have access to the code base at Microsoft and Mozilla, or you're pulling this out of your belly button. Microsoft puts all their code into modules as well, see MSDN, and see how you can include IE in your applications by including two dll files - dynamic link libraries, or modules.

I know it's fashionable to hate Microsoft, and they've given us plenty of reason to, but it's kind of silly to spread disinformation about them and hate them for things they actually get right. Sort of takes away credibility ... wow, what a concept.

You'd be surprised at the items I have access to; but judging from your chest-thumping of how great you think you are, along with your arrogance and sarcasm, I believe we don't need to communicate any further ... have a nice day.