no flash for youtube

13 years ago

That's because IE9 is still it's Beta phase. Once it has thoroughly Beta tested, they will probably release a Pre-Release or perhaps straight into Final mode. It sounds to me like IE9 Beta hasn't implemented flash player yet, or it is a bug. Personally I avoid using Beta software for the fact that it could completely crash your system and you could lose data.

The only other thing I have to say is, why are you still using IE as a browser? IE is still a dinosaur compared to browsers like Firefox and Chrome.

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3057759].message }}

scortillion

13 years ago

Originally Posted by mikescos

That's because IE9 is still it's Beta phase. Once it has thoroughly Beta tested, they will probably release a Pre-Release or perhaps straight into Final mode. It sounds to me like IE9 Beta hasn't implemented flash player yet, or it is a bug. Personally I avoid using Beta software for the fact that it could completely crash your system and you could lose data.

The only other thing I have to say is, why are you still using IE as a browser? IE is still a dinosaur compared to browsers like Firefox and Chrome.

I have to use IE at work and I've use it at home so everything I do is from the same reference point. Besides I've been using it for so long I preferre it over the others.

Thanks

Signature

Read Our Articles

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3057807].message }}

CDarklock

13 years ago

Originally Posted by mikescos

why are you still using IE as a browser?

Because IE is currently more reliable and standards-compliant than any other browser.

See, when the reports of IE doing stupid crappy things that didn't make any sense stopped, everybody assumed it was because nobody was using IE anymore.

But the reality is that IE got a whole hell of a lot better, and everything else stayed just as stupid and crappy as ever.

Which is why I've switched back to IE repeatedly after trying really, really hard to become a Firefox, Chrome, or Opera user.

[ 2 ] Thanks
2 replies

Signature

"The Golden Town is the Golden Town no longer. They have sold their pillars for brass and their temples for money, they have made coins out of their golden doors. It is become a dark town full of trouble, there is no ease in its streets, beauty has left it and the old songs are gone." - Lord Dunsany, The Messengers

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3058964].message }}

CDarklock 13 years ago

Originally Posted by Chris Kent

People slate IE but it is no longer that bad at all.

According to everything I've seen so far, Firefox, Chrome, Opera, and IE are just about equally reliable/unreliable.

But what cracks me up is watching Firefox do all the same things that Netscape said were going to destroy the internet; I reviewed a template package for someone the other day which had navigation menus that were almost comically broken. When I PM'ed him about the issue, he responded that it worked fine in Firefox.

But being someone who learned HTML and CSS from the raw standards because it was all we had at the time, I could identify about a dozen different violations of those standards in the code as written.

I could also easily identify what exactly the developer was trying to do, but doing what the developer wants is bad. You're supposed to do what the standard says, to force that developer into learning how to follow the standards.

Whenever IE does what the user means (like allowing "RGB(127,50%,127)" to work at all, when it's clearly not allowed in the standard), the Firefox crowd is quick to jump up and raise hell about how awful and wrong it is, explaining over and over that this is why IE sucks.

But then hideously broken code like that works in Firefox, and if you say anything about it they puff up and insist "you are not the internet police, and we are only doing what our users want."

Which is why the Firefox crowd can eat my entire arse.
- [ 1 ] Thanks
Signature

"The Golden Town is the Golden Town no longer. They have sold their pillars for brass and their temples for money, they have made coins out of their golden doors. It is become a dark town full of trouble, there is no ease in its streets, beauty has left it and the old songs are gone." - Lord Dunsany, The Messengers
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3059035].message }}

Mike Baker

13 years ago

Originally Posted by CDarklock

Because IE is currently more reliable and standards-compliant than any other browser.

The browser has nothing to do with being compliant with the W3C standards. It's the underlying code of each web page. If a web page does meet the W3C standards then it is not standards compliant, so it all comes down to the person/company coding the pages not the browser the end user decides to use.

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3059113].message }}

Dan C. Rinnert

13 years ago

Originally Posted by mikescos

The browser has nothing to do with being compliant with the W3C standards. It's the underlying code of each web page. If a web page does meet the W3C standards then it is not standards compliant, so it all comes down to the person/company coding the pages not the browser the end user decides to use.

Huh? If I code something to be bold and the browser decides to display it in italics, that's not a problem with my code not being compliant, that's a problem with the browser not being compliant.

Thanks

Signature

Dan's content is irregularly read by handfuls of people. Join the elite few by reading his blog: dcrBlogs.com, following him on Twitter: dcrTweets.com or reading his fiction: dcrWrites.com but NOT by Clicking Here!

Dan also writes content for hire, but you can't afford him anyway.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3059182].message }}

CDarklock 13 years ago

Originally Posted by mikescos

The browser has nothing to do with being compliant with the W3C standards.

The W3C standards very clearly specify what a user agent MUST, SHOULD, and MAY do.

A browser is a user agent.

As far as writing "more code" to make things display "correctly" in the browser, the browser is allowed to make certain choices about how things are displayed.

For example, the default font for web pages... is not defined. Every user agent may choose for itself which font, if any, it will use for web pages that do not specify a particular font.

If two browsers have chosen different fonts as their defaults, one of them will need to have the other's default font specified before it will display the page "correctly" in that font. That requires more code, but both browsers are standards compliant.
- Thanks
Signature

"The Golden Town is the Golden Town no longer. They have sold their pillars for brass and their temples for money, they have made coins out of their golden doors. It is become a dark town full of trouble, there is no ease in its streets, beauty has left it and the old songs are gone." - Lord Dunsany, The Messengers
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3059417].message }}

rackverse

13 years ago

Originally Posted by seobro

Most people still use IE9 on the internet now. This will affect many of my consumers.

I'm sure very few of your consumers are using IE9. Most are probably in IE7 or IE8. Like Mikescos said, stay away from beta software. All you're doing is letting yourself be the guinea pig that has to complain about bugs. Let someone else do that and use software that is tested and works.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Automatically Respond to Craigslist Ads!

$13,610 in 8 hours -- See How I DID IT!

Earn $3000-$8000/month and be Bill Gates

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3057839].message }}

marketanalyzer 13 years ago

Originally Posted by rackverse

stay away from beta software. All you're doing is letting yourself be the guinea pig that has to complain about bugs.

this is very true. Do not try beta releases until you get the final one. do some internet research before installing something new in your PC
- Thanks
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3058805].message }}

Mike Baker

13 years ago

So where you work, they have implemented a company wide Beta version of IE9?

Bad business practice in my opinion.

I know what you mean about "using it for so long...." as I was a beloved user of IE until I discovered Firefox a few years ago, and I can tell you it is far better than IE. If you have to use it at work, fine. But at home I suggest just to give either Firefox or Chrome a try and you won't look back.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3057848].message }}

Dan C. Rinnert 13 years ago

As of November 2010, 0.4 % of people were using IE9, according to W3Schools.com. In no way is 0.4% "most people."
- Thanks
Signature

Dan's content is irregularly read by handfuls of people. Join the elite few by reading his blog: dcrBlogs.com, following him on Twitter: dcrTweets.com or reading his fiction: dcrWrites.com but NOT by Clicking Here!

Dan also writes content for hire, but you can't afford him anyway.
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3057877].message }}

MikeLiving

13 years ago

When I first read your post I was like... "well thats what happens when you use Internet Explorer!" The Beta issue is probably whats causing a problem with ol Youtube.

It's different strokes for different folks I know, but you should really check out Chrome. It is simply the best browser I have ever used.

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3057902].message }}

Thomas Michal

13 years ago

People still use IE?

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3057927].message }}

Mike Baker

13 years ago

That means there is a bug in the underlying code in the browser itself.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3059214].message }}

Dan C. Rinnert 13 years ago

Originally Posted by mikescos

That means there is a bug in the underlying code in the browser itself.

Maybe it's not a bug but that the browser developer decided they wanted to do things their own way.
- Thanks
Signature

Dan's content is irregularly read by handfuls of people. Join the elite few by reading his blog: dcrBlogs.com, following him on Twitter: dcrTweets.com or reading his fiction: dcrWrites.com but NOT by Clicking Here!

Dan also writes content for hire, but you can't afford him anyway.
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3059226].message }}

Mike Baker

13 years ago

There are certain html/css codes that will overwrite any code from the browser.

Going back to the IE thing, why is that most browsers will display the code correctly, but when using IE the developer has to add more code to make it display correctly. That to me is not a standard compliant browser.

Thanks

Signature

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3059294].message }}

Mike Baker

13 years ago

Yes I understand that both browsers are standards compliant, but my point is that IE is not the more compliant of them as you stated earlier.

Take embedded video for example. You can easily take the embed code from YouTube and add it to a web page and it will display correctly and act as it should, but if you do the same thing in IE you need to rectify the code for it to work and act correctly. That's just one example that IE is not more compliant than Firefox or other browsers.

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3059542].message }}

Dan C. Rinnert

13 years ago

Originally Posted by mikescos

The browser has nothing to do with being compliant with the W3C standards. It's the underlying code of each web page. If a web page does meet the W3C standards then it is not standards compliant, so it all comes down to the person/company coding the pages not the browser the end user decides to use.

Originally Posted by mikescos

Yes I understand that both browsers are standards compliant, but my point is that IE is not the more compliant of them as you stated earlier.

Take embedded video for example. You can easily take the embed code from YouTube and add it to a web page and it will display correctly and act as it should, but if you do the same thing in IE you need to rectify the code for it to work and act correctly. That's just one example that IE is not more compliant than Firefox or other browsers.

So, is it the website or the browser that isn't compliant?

Thanks

Signature

Dan's content is irregularly read by handfuls of people. Join the elite few by reading his blog: dcrBlogs.com, following him on Twitter: dcrTweets.com or reading his fiction: dcrWrites.com but NOT by Clicking Here!

Dan also writes content for hire, but you can't afford him anyway.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3059559].message }}

CDarklock 13 years ago

Originally Posted by mikescos

Take embedded video for example. You can easily take the embed code from YouTube

Hold it right there.

HTML 4 does not have an embed element.

There is no standards-compliant way to display it. You can do whatever you want.

But wait! There is an embed element in HTML5! IE should comply with the definition of the embed element there, just like Firefox and Chrome and Opera do!

Except HTML5 is not a standard. It is a working draft. It is inappropriate to implement support for a working draft prior to the call for implementation. It undermines and damages the standards process.

So let's sum up.

There is no way to implement standards-compliant support for the embed tag. Nothing which supports the embed tag in any way whatsoever can claim their support for it is standards-compliant.
- Thanks
Signature

"The Golden Town is the Golden Town no longer. They have sold their pillars for brass and their temples for money, they have made coins out of their golden doors. It is become a dark town full of trouble, there is no ease in its streets, beauty has left it and the old songs are gone." - Lord Dunsany, The Messengers
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3059768].message }}

Mike Baker

13 years ago

It can be both, or it can be either it depends on the code.

If I typed into a html page <a hfer="http://www.yourdomain.com">Your Domain</a> and it doesn't display correctly in the browser, it isn't the browsers fault but the developers who wrote the code.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3059602].message }}

CDarklock

13 years ago

Originally Posted by mikescos

If I typed into a html page <a hfer="http://www.yourdomain.com">Your Domain</a> and it doesn't display correctly in the browser, it isn't the browsers fault but the developers who wrote the code.

The standard, however, clearly defines what "display correctly" means.

If you do not display what the standard calls "correctly," it is not correct.

Thanks

Signature

"The Golden Town is the Golden Town no longer. They have sold their pillars for brass and their temples for money, they have made coins out of their golden doors. It is become a dark town full of trouble, there is no ease in its streets, beauty has left it and the old songs are gone." - Lord Dunsany, The Messengers

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3059828].message }}

jasonmorgan

13 years ago

CD kinda hit the nail on the head and it's something that most web designers don't get, which is...

CSS3 and HTML5 are not WC3 web standards. Run that stuff through the WC3 validation and you'll get errors.

Many browsers have jumped the gun and included support for some CSS3 and HTML5 elements (each in their own ways) and this stuff gives designers a giant web woody but you can't fault IE for not supporting something that is still under development.

I'm not even sure why microsoft bothers with developing their own browser. Save a couple of bucks and rebrand mozilla like everybody else does.

Personally, I've turned into a chrome user. I dig it's bare bones approach.

And yes, it does annoy me that I can't use CSS3 rounded corners and dropshadows with IE... I want my babies to look good on all browsers

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

I'm all about that bass.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3059862].message }}

CDarklock

13 years ago

Originally Posted by jasonmorgan

I'm not even sure why microsoft bothers with developing their own browser.

Internet Explorer is a reusable component of Windows. What most people see as just another browser is actually a collection of tiny embedded features that make it dead-simple for any and all developers to provide the features of IE in just a couple lines of code.

Early versions of Internet Explorer were crap because it was never intended to be used by actual rank-and-file users. It was there as a showcase of features for developers AND a reliable lowest-common-denominator browser for support personnel to use when they needed to consult web-based documentation. Nobody was really supposed to be using it without significant technical expertise.

Except that somehow it turned into something touted as a core feature of Windows 95. Every time they demonstrated that Windows 95 included components that made it easy to access the internet, the technically illiterate press thought IE was that component. They didn't understand that IE was really just a thin layer of UI chrome around a bunch of developer controls.

The funny part is that when you come right down to it, Internet Explorer really was a mistake... just not in the way people generally mean when they say that.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

"The Golden Town is the Golden Town no longer. They have sold their pillars for brass and their temples for money, they have made coins out of their golden doors. It is become a dark town full of trouble, there is no ease in its streets, beauty has left it and the old songs are gone." - Lord Dunsany, The Messengers

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3059922].message }}

MikeLiving

13 years ago

Originally Posted by CDarklock

Internet Explorer is a reusable component of Windows. What most people see as just another browser is actually a collection of tiny embedded features that make it dead-simple for any and all developers to provide the features of IE in just a couple lines of code.

Early versions of Internet Explorer were crap because it was never intended to be used by actual rank-and-file users. It was there as a showcase of features for developers AND a reliable lowest-common-denominator browser for support personnel to use when they needed to consult web-based documentation. Nobody was really supposed to be using it without significant technical expertise.

Except that somehow it turned into something touted as a core feature of Windows 95. Every time they demonstrated that Windows 95 included components that made it easy to access the internet, the technically illiterate press thought IE was that component. They didn't understand that IE was really just a thin layer of UI chrome around a bunch of developer controls.

The funny part is that when you come right down to it, Internet Explorer really was a mistake... just not in the way people generally mean when they say that.

Awesome insight man. I find stuff like this awfully interesting. Thanks for sharing.

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3059934].message }}

no flash for youtube

Trending Topics

Been a while! Any of you Old Timers here?

How much does the rebranding affect CR ?

Are billboards still effective in driving customers?

Boat and Jet Ski Rentals...... Door Hangers Effective?

A Very Strange Internet Problem