You've gotta be kidding me. IE6 and IE7 were horrible when it comes to
standards support. If a site is developed and passes W3C compatibility
then you're not going to have a problem with any browser. So, if they
haven't make the html W3C compatible then they haven't done all they can
do. I don't know what the exact issue is, but I'm guessing that firefox
now handles something properly according to standards that magically
worked by accident before. My guess is that the HTML is only slightly
off. And me thinks, that someone could look at the stie in Firebug and
figure out the malformation pretty quickly. Like I said, I don't need
this or have access to it.
This is 2011, if you're going to write something for the web, and it
breaks, its probably not the fault of the browser vendor (alone). The
fact is that they are being neglectful on keeping their stuff up to date.
How friggin hard is it to run your web stuff through the latest browsers?
Even one that has been out for over 2 years (IE 8 - much better than IE
7).
Thanks
Bryce Martin
Programmer/Analyst I
570-546-4777
CRPence <CRPbottle@xxxxxxxxx>
Sent by: midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx
05/06/2011 04:13 PM
Please respond to
Midrange Systems Technical Discussion <midrange-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
To
midrange-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx
cc
Subject
Re: Warning - Firefox v4 not compatible with HMC 7.7.1
On Fri 05-May-2011 12:24 , Bryce Martin wrote:
I think that it is ridiculous that IBM creates software that is
stomped by a browser upgrade.... even IE 8... which has been out
since when? March 19, 2009. That is right... OVER 2 YEARS AGO!!!!!
It's sloppy at best, but negligent of its customers and products at
worst. How do you not fix something browser based in over 2 years?
My mind boggles when I see this crap from them... they are better
than this, or at least they should be. Thank goodness I don't need
to use an HMC, or might really be mad :D
As described... Seems to me that the browser would be considered to
be the problem since their upgraded code is no longer able to process
what apparently was being processed previously without any difficulty
before the upgrade.? That is to say, when a browser is upgraded and
then directed to the same link which is accessing\performing the same
un-upgraded code\actions that existed since before the browser was
upgraded, then how would the fault be the unchanged versus the changed
feature? Why would IBM be expected to ensure that every browser upgrade
was still properly rendering their code\output since a level already
verified to be supported? Should IBM ensure every release upgrade to a
5250 emulator should remain compatible with their previous version of
that non-IBM 5250 emulator?
While I suggested Rob should get a DCR or APAR to track, that is only
because the IBM response suggested they had submitted a "request to
development to get this repaired". I figured that response implied both
that IBM admitted some culpability and that a resolution to the request
could be tracked [since code changes would come only from one of those
two features, both of which have tracking identifiers].
Regards, Chuck
midrange.com
