[Saab_c900] saab tool page updated

Ah, so if I ever "productize" my brake piston turning tool that doesn't suck, would that be appropriate to list on there? I wouldn't be looking to make a fortune, more of a "Here, this is less of a hassle" kind of thing.

Far as that goes - 93/95/96/97 rear brakedrum adjustment tool wouldn't be tough to fab, that oddball V4 tranny drainplug tool again wouldn't be tough...is there demand for such things?

Have a look at

Thanks Tom. Unfortunately most of that site won't load properly in Firefox. Probably because it's asp-based site. Found another one the other day with the same sort of problem.

I'm sure the site itself is fine, but it's probably built using a native Windows HTML generator which is expecting everyone to use IE to view created content... grrr. But I did get some of it to load - pretty extensive.

Craig.

Well, .asp isn't the problem specifically, but, the w3c validator:

Way I look at it, if a developer wants to limit their audience, I'm happy to pass on viewing their content.

I'm sure most of my website content (I've written LOTS of it - not just the Saab stuff!) would fail the validation tests too. I hand-write all my HTML.

But you're right in that if a site is written with really bad coding, it won't display properly in clients which are 'non-denominational' (ie. devoted to one particular operating system). Windows IE is very definitely written with one OS in mind and so it will support all the Microsoft-specific extensions, but most other clients don't or won't.

Craig.

Well, I write my html with vi, the way nature intended it as well. But I just learned about this sourceforge project called 'html tidy'. tidy.sourceforge.net I'm guessing. Cleans it up, keeps it looking the same, and open-source.

Yup. And websites who develop and test only with IE on Windows need to wake up and realize that they're sacrificing usability for "cutesy bullshit".

I've found Firefox pretty crappy; especially in its ability to cope with the worst of the IE only pages but Opera can deal with most.

Whilst not wanting to get into a browser spat I agree with the view that if a commercial organisation limits their audience by being browser specific then that's their loss but a lot of the information stuff I miss is /my/ loss.

I also think it's less of the "cutesy bullshit" and more of the "it's easier" to take an IE only line.

So, Firefox is "pretty crappy", because it can't render broken webpages as well as Opera? Wow. Way to lose focus on the problem there sparky.

(shrug) most of the stuff that isn't compliant is someone's special effects rather than actual content.

Great. As long as you're happy, that's all that matters. Don't forget your security updates.

Adblock is the reason I'll put up with any flaws with Firefox. I absolutely hate banner ads and popups, obnoxious animated signatures, etc. Adblock lets me nuke all that stuff and clean up the net.

"I deny myself access to information to maintain my idealogical purity".

It's almost Sovietesque ...

Blimey, you're now sounding all 1997 ...

You're also wrong. It's not special effects or cutesy bullshit it's simply easier and quicker, unfortunately, for web designers to take the easy option (time is money and all that) and only cater for 80% of the browser market; so I have to work round them.

Opera does this slickly Firefox doesn't. Both are free. One is better: simple really.

As I said if its commercial that's their loss but the vast majority of the stuff I want to look at isn't and most of the big players work with any browser (which explains why they may be big players).

As you can see we're broadly agreeing but without the self righteous "Firefox or Death!" approach.

I think you may be blinded by both your Linux OS (I see you use Slrn) and your idealogical purity here.

Linux is many good things but a desktop OS is not one of them - Incidentally IME of both Suse and Red Hat the security updates came thick and fast for them too.

As good a reason as any. Worth noting Opera also has adblocking, popup controls etc.

"Firefox: It's got no clothes on!"

You've once again missed the point completetly. Almost like it's intentional; a parody of someone being remarkably dense.

That's great. If you want to inflict an inferior tool upon yourself so you can visit some webpage made by a lazy braindeaded developer who can't be bothered to test his site properly, go for it. The fact is, you have to go out of your way to make something _not_ work in browsers other than IE. It's no longer a case of "Oh, I didn't know there were others" (always a lie, just more so now), it's a case of willful disregard of that market or audience segment.

OK, great. I use Opera when I'm testing encryption settings on webservers. Not real fond of it otherwise, for reasons I'm not going to bother to go into because of course you'll tell me I've got that wrong too somehow.

I honestly can't think of the last time I tried to do something with firefox and it didn't work. Maybe you just need help with plugins or something.

You're using quote marks there, which implies that it's a quote. That's why they're called quote marks, you see. I never made such a statement, so kindly refrain from trying to be my spokesman. Thanks.

I think you may be making a boatload of assumptions. The system I use for an internet gateway, is a linux box. My desk at home has a mac. In the workshop I've got a few sun and SGI boxes. At work I admin ~500 systems with a team, and in the last week I've worked on, let's see...hpux, aix, sco, solaris, suse, redhat, ...um, I think that's all.

This has nothing to do with your "idealogical purity" theory, it's simply a matter of functionality. I can get to everything I need to with firefox, and I see no reason to inflict IE and it's inherent security problems, usability problems, and so on, upon myself. I just don't need it for everyday web browsing. If you can't get something to work with firefox, perhaps you're doing something wrong. Or maybe we just go to entirely different sites, who knows.

Of course. Is this the point where we need to talk about exposure, risk, and magnitude of security releases, or can we just stipulate that Windows is a screen door when it comes to security, because of it's inherent design flaws?

The '86 c900 is leaking oil. They all do that. That's how you know it's got oil in the engine.

I don't use IE, never said I did; now who's being deliberately dim?

I'd actually be interested why as you're not the only person who's said they don't get on with it. I always liked it and have paid for it from version 5.

It's a quote but not necessarilly yours.

Firefox is a good alternative and makes migrating from IE very easy and unthreatening for the average user but I always found it clunky looking and just, well, crappy. It's one of those subjective things. That and back to the original point of it balking on more websites than was helpful.

The installation process isn't the problem. It took *two* *weeks* and several builds to get Unreal Tournament running on Suse; Mandrake (as was) was just as awkward for installing third party stuff - I started wanting to commit penguicide after that.

It's very good for specific jobs but as an average user after an average users desktop OS it was a PITA. Which was a shame as it really appealed to me.

Mine doesn't ... No, honestly.

What does that have to do with badly written webpages? My point stands regardless of what's on your desktop. Bad web developers are the problem, not how a standards-compliant browser renders them.

I paid a while ago too, maybe 2 years ago or so, because I was using it for those encryption tests and I figured I should thank them with money. But it just never turned into a daily-driver for me, so to speak.

Riiiiight. So word games then. Loverly.

(shrug) I just don't see enough differentiating factors with Opera to bother switching to it.

Sounds like two problems. First, you're quite possibly using the wrong tool for the job. If you want to play Unreal Tournament, why not keep a windows install around for gaming? The mandrake installation issues, well, sounds like a training issue.

(shrug) Doesn't matter to me. There are at least two popular window managers to choose from, perhaps if you cared you could try whichever one you didn't. (Note: if you're now about to explain that technically, gnome and KDE aren't 'window managers' but are instead something subtly different that acts like, but technically isn't a 'window manager', save yourself some time and don't bother.)

You'd better check to make sure there's oil in there. Seriously. At the very least the valve cover gasket should be leaking.

Would you like a car with wheels that bend very easily when hitting potholes?

Sure, I wouldn't mind having a Viggen. Of course, I'd install better wheels that aren't so prone to damage, even if 1% of the people who saw them would tell me my wheels weren't original Saab wheels.

Hm, almost an exact metaphor for a crappy browser being replaced by a better one.