UBB.Developers Forums General Discussion Chit Chat Find the least used UBB?

Click here for a board with 1 single post 13 months ago...and it's pretty cool looking actually.

See, I'd post there... But I haven't got a clue about the subject matter. o_O;;

But yeah, looks pretty cool

That's almost as bad as the community I setup for my extended family (it's behind a .htaccess password or I would have provided a link.)

It is close to a year old and has ZERO posts despite having over 400 family members pre-registered on it.

It appears to be a music-related site .
But that is a low post count - even my test forum has more than that :rolleyes:

[OFF-TOPIC]Something's seriously wrong with one of my proxies or Mozilla http://www.aagames.co.uk/viewimage.php?image=proxymessed.jpg [/OFF-TOPIC]

Ultimate Bulletin Board Version 5.45c

Heh

(@Dave: It's nice to know that my Sig image is one of the only images to be displayed correctly )

Seriously though, it's probably Moz. Tried using another browser?

I've been using Moz perfectly happily with none of this for about a year. I think it's my caching proxy (squid) getting confused.

Doesn't look half bad, but I'll have to find something older.

We have someone that rented a dedicated server for a UBB.x. For months now it has had one post.

"test"

My forum, which is on an intranet is notoriously slow

you need more clients like that

Use IE. We'll all thank you for it.

In what way?

From my perspective it seems that I have to work backwards to get the webpages to display properly in Mozilla/Netscape and some of the other browsers. I never had a compatibility issue using IE.

In that case you probably write MSHTML. I ignore Netscape 4 - that was one of the worst things to hit the internet . If you write valid code, Mozilla will deal with it most of the time. IE, however, decides to ignore a lot. Apparently to IE developers a normal, readable font size is "x-small". It doesn't support alpha transparency in PNGs, which is really annoying.
I blame Netscape for starting the "Our browser supports more than your browser" wars, they are annoying, but coding to good standards, IE just messes up often (e.g. background images in CSS it only seems to make a table as wide as the image if you specify no-repeat). Its CSS 2 support is lacking. It supports too much non-existant code.
Oh yes, and then there's the number of dodgy scripting exploits I've tried on myself and succeded with.

That's also like writing C with GCC-only extensions and saying you have to "work backwards to get it to work in MSVC".

Uhh... anyway, if you can work out what I'm saying, please send it on a postcard to...

[EDIT]Just seen what could be part of your problem
[code][/code]Pre FP 2K has always made dodgy code, it's getting better...[/EDIT]

I'm diggin my new web browser
http://www.apple.com/safari/

What, you mean KHTML?
I never really liked Konquereor, tho not because of the HTML "renderer".

Ah
Well, IE is giving me no end of troubles ATM. Valid XHTML 1.0 Transitional, valid CSS 2, every other browser I've tried shows it fine (Opera 6 has font sizes one-too-big, but that is because of IE doing that, I believe), just IE is being annoying. Really annoying.

Oh yeah, Vim 6.1 is my editor .

Ahh...You just love open source. To each his/her own I say...

Hmm...Mozilla doesn't support CSS scrollbar colors. Sigh...

Because it isn't valid CSS ?

Maybe...Then again lack of foresight of it's authors. In order to market any product effectively the first rule is to know your users. MS had the sense to come out with features people will gravitate towards...They set the standards.

Regardless of what is right and wrong if the people aren't buying it, the product will be left out in the cold.

I don't see how it is a lack of forsight on the part of the developers.


" In order to market any product effectively the first rule is to know your users."

Have you stopped to think maybe that their users are people that care about standards and they do know thier users?

"MS had the sense to come out with features people will gravitate towards...

No, Microsoft was able to put people in a position that thier features were ominpresent. This was because the people operating Netscape bungled and bungled big time, Microsoft didn't. Now AOL-Time Werner is an even bigger bungle. It has nothing to do with Microsoft or IE having better or more popular features, it has all to do with leverage on the market.

They set the standards"

No, they set their own standards, not the standards. They followed the standards when the felt like it, other times not. Netscape did the same in the 4 series; Microsoft is not the sole offender here, or even the bigger offender. Because Netscape, the business, bungled big time, Netscape, the browser, all but died the importance of the standards would be more important today.

Do you remember all of the "best viewed in x browser" notices on the bottom of every web page?

As more and more standards compliant browsers such as Mozilla and Safari appear there will be more and more push on other browser authors to become standards compliant. This can only be good for browser users. They will not have to have 2 or more browsers to surf the internet. It will be nice when or if the users will be able to chose browser not by how web pages look, but by what features the browser has , how usable is the interface, and how does it fit into the user's personality and style.

Valid points.

I agree except for the part about how web pages are displayed. I guess we'll see where the market shifts in the time to come...