Options

IE7 Post Display Weirdness (take note)

PupatorPupator Registered Users Posts: 2,322 Major grins
edited January 25, 2007 in Dgrin Forum Support
In Andy's excellent post about Chapter 2 of the Professional Photoshop book (http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=50319) he displays two images side-by-side with text wrapped on the left.

This does display correctly in FF, but does not display correctly in IE7. Just FYI!

120751276-L.jpg
«1

Comments

  • Options
    AndyAndy Registered Users Posts: 50,016 Major grins
    edited January 3, 2007
    Working fine for me:
    120751597-L.jpg

    What resolution are you on?

    IE Sucks in so many ways though, this doesn't surprise me.
  • Options
    PupatorPupator Registered Users Posts: 2,322 Major grins
    edited January 3, 2007
    Andy wrote:
    IE Sucks in so many ways though, this doesn't surprise me.

    There's a lot I love about IE. Things like this aren't in that category.

    It is a resolution issue for sure. Shrink your IE window from right to left and you can watch it happen.
  • Options
    AndyAndy Registered Users Posts: 50,016 Major grins
    edited January 3, 2007
    Pupator wrote:

    It is a resolution issue for sure. Shrink your IE window from right to left and you can watch it happen.
    Right. Because IE is dum and FF, Safari, and other browsers are not.

    Bummer, sorry that it sucks in IE7.
  • Options
    AndyAndy Registered Users Posts: 50,016 Major grins
    edited January 3, 2007
    Pupator wrote:
    There's a lot I love about IE.

    ear.gif
  • Options
    bwgbwg Registered Users, Retired Mod Posts: 2,119 SmugMug Employee
    edited January 3, 2007
    Andy wrote:
    Right. Because IE is dum and FF, Safari, and other browsers are not.

    Bummer, sorry that it sucks in IE7.
    Not to let IE completely off the hook here, but it's actually vBulletin that is dumb. It's using a depreciated html property for aligning the images. According to the w3 spec, User Agents (browsers) may vary in the interpretation of the align property.

    If vBulletin used css floats instead of align, everything would be gravy.
    Pedal faster
  • Options
    AndyAndy Registered Users Posts: 50,016 Major grins
    edited January 3, 2007
    bigwebguy wrote:
    Not to let IE completely off the hook here, but it's actually vBulletin that is dumb. It's using a depreciated html property for aligning the images. According to the w3 spec, User Agents (browsers) may vary in the interpretation of the align property.

    If vBulletin used css floats instead of align, everything would be gravy.
    Sure, way to burst the bubble.

    Seems to work fine in FF though. So why is IE off the hook?
  • Options
    bwgbwg Registered Users, Retired Mod Posts: 2,119 SmugMug Employee
    edited January 3, 2007
    Andy wrote:
    Sure, way to burst the bubble.

    Seems to work fine in FF though. So why is IE off the hook?
    Because the w3 spec for align doesnt have any specific rules on how to float text around an image, in fact it specifically states that different browsers may vary in how they handle the thing.

    The w3 spec for css floats has very specific instructions on how a browser should behave.

    Is IE being dumb about the way it is displaying things? Sure. But it's because vBulletin is being dumber.
    Pedal faster
  • Options
    jsedlakjsedlak Registered Users Posts: 487 Major grins
    edited January 3, 2007
    *sigh*

    Try explaining that to a FF guy.

    This should probably be locked before the fight gets out of hand...
  • Options
    bwgbwg Registered Users, Retired Mod Posts: 2,119 SmugMug Employee
    edited January 3, 2007
    jsedlak wrote:
    *sigh*

    Try explaining that to a FF guy.

    This should probably be locked before the fight gets out of hand...
    I am a FF guy.

    fighting? headscratch.gif
    Pedal faster
  • Options
    jsedlakjsedlak Registered Users Posts: 487 Major grins
    edited January 3, 2007
    bigwebguy wrote:
    I am a FF guy.

    fighting? headscratch.gif

    Well... on every other forum I belong to, this topic would quickly turn into a big FF vs. IE fight... ne_nau.gif
  • Options
    AndyAndy Registered Users Posts: 50,016 Major grins
    edited January 3, 2007
    jsedlak wrote:
    Well... on every other forum I belong to, this topic would quickly turn into a big FF vs. IE fight... ne_nau.gif
    Hah. There's no possible amount of handicap you can give to IE (6 or 7) that makes it a fair fight lol3.gif
  • Options
    DJKennedyDJKennedy Registered Users Posts: 555 Major grins
    edited January 8, 2007
    Andy wrote:
    Hah. There's no possible amount of handicap you can give to IE (6 or 7) that makes it a fair fight lol3.gif

    I stopped using IE when Bill Gates said something to the effect of " I don't see how users benifit from using someone else programs " back when the anti trust suits started and the browser wars. We win using a browser that actually WORKS BILLY!!!!!
    http://www.djkennedy.com

    What did Cinderella say when she left the photo shop? "One day my prints will come."

  • Options
    dogwooddogwood Registered Users Posts: 2,572 Major grins
    edited January 8, 2007
    jsedlak wrote:
    Well... on every other forum I belong to, this topic would quickly turn into a big FF vs. IE fight... ne_nau.gif

    Well on this forum, the smart people realize Camino and Seamonkey are the best browsers. Thus no fighting about FF or IE. :D

    Portland, Oregon Photographer Pete Springer
    website blog instagram facebook g+

  • Options
    SystemSystem Registered Users Posts: 8,186 moderator
    edited January 9, 2007
    well, I guess I'll be using ff for dg-

    have to use it for daily photos to use the thumbs up/down feature-

    doesn't show in ie7-



    everyone is familiar with the bill gates keyboard, right-



    three keys only--





    ctl alt del
  • Options
    ivarivar Registered Users Posts: 8,395 Major grins
    edited January 10, 2007
    dogwood wrote:
    Well on this forum, the smart people realize Camino and Seamonkey are the best browsers. Thus no fighting about FF or IE. :D
    So you are one of the 2 people using Camino.... Or maybe one, if you upgraded lol3.gif
  • Options
    dogwooddogwood Registered Users Posts: 2,572 Major grins
    edited January 10, 2007
    ivar wrote:
    So you are one of the 2 people using Camino.... Or maybe one, if you upgraded lol3.gif

    There's that many? Sounds like we need a seperate Camino users support forum here! mwink.gif

    Seriously, I only use a mac when I get paid to use a mac (the ol' day job) and for some reason Camino works much smoother and crashes less than FF for me. But... that could be the way the ol' IT dept has this mac set-up-- they have it all locked down and only 512 RAM and it's a real slug in general and I can't add or change anything-- so all you folks who love Macs, well, I bet you haven't tried to use one set-up by the IT folks I work with!

    Portland, Oregon Photographer Pete Springer
    website blog instagram facebook g+

  • Options
    bwgbwg Registered Users, Retired Mod Posts: 2,119 SmugMug Employee
    edited January 10, 2007
    dogwood wrote:
    There's that many? Sounds like we need a seperate Camino users support forum here! mwink.gif

    Seriously, I only use a mac when I get paid to use a mac (the ol' day job) and for some reason Camino works much smoother and crashes less than FF for me. But... that could be the way the ol' IT dept has this mac set-up-- they have it all locked down and only 512 RAM and it's a real slug in general and I can't add or change anything-- so all you folks who love Macs, well, I bet you haven't tried to use one set-up by the IT folks I work with!
    Firefox on the Mac sucks very much, especially with javascript. I just cant live without my extensions though.
    Pedal faster
  • Options
    DavidTODavidTO Registered Users, Retired Mod Posts: 19,160 Major grins
    edited January 10, 2007
    I just can't believe that Andy put Safari in the "not dum" group. Unlike him.
    Moderator Emeritus
    Dgrin FAQ | Me | Workshops
  • Options
    bwgbwg Registered Users, Retired Mod Posts: 2,119 SmugMug Employee
    edited January 10, 2007
    DavidTO wrote:
    I just can't believe that Andy put Safari in the "not dum" group. Unlike him.
    I'll speak for Andy in his absence.

    safari = dum.

    new webkit however, soooo not dum. We'll have to wait for Leopard though :-(
    Pedal faster
  • Options
    DavidTODavidTO Registered Users, Retired Mod Posts: 19,160 Major grins
    edited January 10, 2007
    Andy wrote:
    Right. Because IE is dum and FF, Safari, and other browsers are not.


    Too late, Andy already spoke for himself!
    Moderator Emeritus
    Dgrin FAQ | Me | Workshops
  • Options
    jsedlakjsedlak Registered Users Posts: 487 Major grins
    edited January 19, 2007
    Am I the only hardcore XP/Vista/IE7/Office07/WMP11/etc guy around here? :cry
  • Options
    DJKennedyDJKennedy Registered Users Posts: 555 Major grins
    edited January 19, 2007
    jsedlak wrote:
    Am I the only hardcore XP/Vista/IE7/Office07/WMP11/etc guy around here? :cry

    VISTA??? eek7.gif

    Over priced OS. I'll wait for Vista revision 2 or 3 before I even think about using it. AND if the cut the price in half.
    http://www.djkennedy.com

    What did Cinderella say when she left the photo shop? "One day my prints will come."

  • Options
    jsedlakjsedlak Registered Users Posts: 487 Major grins
    edited January 19, 2007
    DJKennedy wrote:
    VISTA??? <img src="https://us.v-cdn.net/6029383/emoji/eek7.gif&quot; border="0" alt="" >

    Over priced OS. I'll wait for Vista revision 2 or 3 before I even think about using it. AND if the cut the price in half.

    Yeah, Vista. The funny thing is, when compared to single software packages, (Photoshop, Rhinoceros, 3DS Max, etc) operating systems are insanely cheap. And I know OSX costs $100 less, blah blah blah...

    I <3 Vista! <img src="https://us.v-cdn.net/6029383/emoji/wings.gif&quot; border="0" alt="" >
  • Options
    DJKennedyDJKennedy Registered Users Posts: 555 Major grins
    edited January 19, 2007
    jsedlak wrote:
    Yeah, Vista. The funny thing is, when compared to single software packages, (Photoshop, Rhinoceros, 3DS Max, etc) operating systems are insanely cheap. And I know OSX costs $100 less, blah blah blah...

    I <3 Vista! <img src="https://us.v-cdn.net/6029383/emoji/wings.gif&quot; border="0" alt="" >

    Problem is, their OS's get more expensive, more bloated, and more buggy with each new OS.
    http://www.djkennedy.com

    What did Cinderella say when she left the photo shop? "One day my prints will come."

  • Options
    PupatorPupator Registered Users Posts: 2,322 Major grins
    edited January 20, 2007
    DJKennedy wrote:
    Problem is, their OS's get more expensive, more bloated, and more buggy with each new OS.

    Not true, and I don't think you mean that. Are you really saying that Windows XP is more expensive, bloated, and buggy than WindowsME? If so, you've never used either. I have a feeling you're just speaking in hyperbole.

    Also, I think price is a difficult case to make. Sure, my copy of Vista is $100 more than OSX (I'm just trusting the earlier post on this), but my p4 Core Duo with 2 gigs of RAM was built for ~$600. It would have cost hundreds or even $1000 more to get a MAC with those specs. I think we need to consider the total package when talking about price.

    XP really has been the greatest OS of MS's making. It is very, very stable. People who claim otherwise are almost always dealing with: 1) illegal copies with reg hacks 2) lousy 3rd party software that messes stuff up 3) so much spyware and adware on the their computer their registry can't even remember what it was like to be healthy.

    Admittedly, MS's shortcomings are in the area of security - and those shortcomings are great. There is no excuse for this, but I can at least recognize that they have a bullseye on their back that no one else wears. Still, that should make them all the better at being secure.

    To answer you jsedlak:

    I've been using Vista for a long time (on a secondary computer) and like it a lot. I won't have any heartburn about switching to it on my primary in a few weeks. I like IE7 a lot. I haven't used Office 07 enough to know if I like it and I probably won't. I can't justify paying for office software when OpenOffice is as good as it is. I don't think WMP11 is as user friendly as iTunes - I've used both, but will stick with iTunes and/or winamp for all my media needs.
  • Options
    DJKennedyDJKennedy Registered Users Posts: 555 Major grins
    edited January 20, 2007
    Pupator wrote:
    Not true, and I don't think you mean that. Are you really saying that Windows XP is more expensive, bloated, and buggy than WindowsME? If so, you've never used either. I have a feeling you're just speaking in hyperbole.

    I've used both. Windows ME was the worst OS I've ever used in my life. Wind 95 wasn't bad for me, sure it crashed once in a while. ME crashed at least once a day. ME was the worst OS M$ put out. The only time ME didn't crash on me is on those days I never turned on the computer.

    People still are saying that Win 98 SE was the best OS released - I can't say iether way because I've never used 98 SE.

    Not sure how long you've being into computers but personally I've being using computers for about 25 years. I've used M$ OS's since DOS days.

    Windos 3.1, Win 95, Win 98 , Win 98 SE, ME, XP Pro. They keep getting more expensive and more buggy. ME should have never being released it's so bad, Win 98 had to have a second edition to make it work. At least XP works. It's not as bad as others - but I get darn near daily updates it seems for security problems. They rushed it out too soon as usual.

    But needing to pay over 250$ for a new OS? Nah. I'll pass. A LOT of people would be forced to upgrade their systems costing them even MORE money. And quite frankly - why should they have to?

    M$ iether shoves out the OS without having it work properly, or take waaay too long to release it (Vista comes to mind). And you know what? It will still be buggy, it will still need numerous updates, it will still be full of security issues.

    I'll stick with what I have thanks.
    http://www.djkennedy.com

    What did Cinderella say when she left the photo shop? "One day my prints will come."

  • Options
    DavidTODavidTO Registered Users, Retired Mod Posts: 19,160 Major grins
    edited January 20, 2007
    Pupator wrote:
    my p4 Core Duo with 2 gigs of RAM was built for ~$600. It would have cost hundreds or even $1000 more to get a MAC with those specs. I think we need to consider the total package when talking about price.


    Not knowing what the specs are, I don't know the answer to your question about value, but I highly doubt your math. Sure, Apple doesn't make the cheap low end PCs that others make, but compare Apple's prices to any of their competitors (Dell, HP, etc.) and you'll be surprised how well Apple fares.
    Moderator Emeritus
    Dgrin FAQ | Me | Workshops
  • Options
    kygardenkygarden Registered Users Posts: 1,060 Major grins
    edited January 20, 2007
    Pupator wrote:
    People who claim otherwise are almost always dealing with: 1) illegal copies with reg hacks 2) lousy 3rd party software that messes stuff up 3) so much spyware and adware on the their computer their registry can't even remember what it was like to be healthy.

    I agree. I can't remember the last time any of the XP machines I use crashed. It is an extremely rare occurance.
  • Options
    kygardenkygarden Registered Users Posts: 1,060 Major grins
    edited January 20, 2007
    DJKennedy wrote:
    Windows ME was the worst OS I've ever used in my life. Wind 95 wasn't bad for me, sure it crashed once in a while. ME crashed at least once a day. ME was the worst OS M$ put out. The only time ME didn't crash on me is on those days I never turned on the computer.

    ME was indeed bad. It didn't take much to crash it. I never had much luck with it. Fortunately those were the days I didn't really have to use it....I stuck to Windows 2k
  • Options
    PupatorPupator Registered Users Posts: 2,322 Major grins
    edited January 20, 2007
    DavidTO wrote:
    Not knowing what the specs are, I don't know the answer to your question about value, but I highly doubt your math. Sure, Apple doesn't make the cheap low end PCs that others make, but compare Apple's prices to any of their competitors (Dell, HP, etc.) and you'll be surprised how well Apple fares.

    p4 Core Duo 1.7
    2GB DDR2 PC2 7200
    1 500GB SATA HDD
    2 120GB SATA HDD
    DVD+DL Burner w/lightscribe
    CDR/RW Burner
    13-in-1 media reader
    600W Power Supply
    256MB ATI All-in-Wonder Card

    $850 for everything listed above - when I said $600 earlier I had forgotten about one of the hard drives and the video card; my fault. I'd be happy to be shown otherwise, but I can't configure anything close to those specs at close to that price on Apple.com. Admittedly, there's not really an apples to apples comparison there. The closest I can come is building a really suped up mac-mini that comes to $1300.

    I'm not a windows fanboy - I use macs every now and then and there are several things about them I find appealing. In fact, a young lady in my office right now has a new (black) ibook (powerbook?) that is quite lovely. Still, I'm pretty sure there's a price discrepancy between the two.
Sign In or Register to comment.