New WYSIWYG not showing up on Mac IE5.1

[bigmattyh]

Is that by design, or is it a problem on my end? I'm running IE 5.1 on Mac OSX. I thought that IE 5.1 for Mac could handle something like a WYSIWYG editor.

[Jake Bunce]

same problem here. never tried it on my mac before.

[bigmattyh]

I discovered in another post that it requires a Windows DLL to work right.

:shrugs:

[Jake Bunce]

Originally posted by bigmattyh
I discovered in another post that it requires a Windows DLL to work right.

lame. windows proprietary features shouldn't be included.

[bigmattyh]

Originally posted by Jakeman
lame. windows proprietary features shouldn't be included. Right! :) Isn't one of the hallmarks of vB the fact that it's truly platform-independent? I've heard the devs say that they wouldn't do cron jobs because that would make it require linux...

Anyway, there's got to be a way to make it Mac-compatible.

[Freddie Bingham]

Originally posted by bigmattyh
Right! :) Isn't one of the hallmarks of vB the fact that it's truly platform-independent? I've heard the devs say that they wouldn't do cron jobs because that would make it require linux...

Anyway, there's got to be a way to make it Mac-compatible. Yeah, if you use the current javascript version.

[bigmattyh]

Originally posted by freddie
Yeah, if you use the current javascript version. Then I must not be understanding you correctly.... Didn't you post that the toolbar requires a Windows .dll? And if it were just a JavaScript problem, why would the toolbar be completely missing from the page? Tell me where I'm missing something.

[The Prohacker]

Originally posted by bigmattyh
[B]I've heard the devs say that they wouldn't do cron jobs because that would make it require linux.

Windows Task Scheduler :D

[Kier]

Originally posted by bigmattyh
Then I must not be understanding you correctly.... Didn't you post that the toolbar requires a Windows .dll? And if it were just a JavaScript problem, why would the toolbar be completely missing from the page? Tell me where I'm missing something. The WYSIWYG toolbar requires MSHTML, which is mshtml.dll in Windows, and probably exists on the Mac too in some disguise, as it's the core of Internet Explorer.

The WYSIWYG editor will not work under Netscape, Opera or older versions of Internet Explorer, those browsers will be served up a slightly improved version of the vB2-style toolbar as you see on these forums.

I don't have a Mac to test with, so I will have to liase with Jakeman to make sure that vB WYSIWYG runs on appropriate versions of IE on the Mac if possible.

[Wayne Luke]

Actually, I don't think an equivalent to MSHTML exists on the Macintosh. Otherwise Macintoshes would be able to use ActiveX and other features that are built-in to Internet Explorer.

[DVD Plaza]

You won't get it working on the Mac, MS only provide those crap services with their Windows version of IE (which I am pleased about, keep your proprietary crap on your own OS MS).

Regardless Mac users are wising up and ditching IE anyway (it's a piece of crap on OSX) and moving to Chimera or Mozilla or Netscape or Opera or whatever (all faster, all better, and all support open standards which MS can never seem to implement properly). Mind you most people I know have done likewise on Windows as well (once you've tried Mozilla (or one of the many browsers based upon it) there's just no going back, it's fast as hell).

[bigmattyh]

What I'm saying is that there probably ought to be a way to control the WYSIWYG editor via standard javascript (without any additional dll's). Cross-browser compatible.

[Kier]

Originally posted by DVD Plaza
...Chimera or Mozilla or Netscape or Opera or whatever (all faster, all better, and all support open standards which MS can never seem to implement properly).
IE 6 has the most strict, best standards support of any browser today. Bar none. Fact.
once you've tried Mozilla (or one of the many browsers based upon it) there's just no going back, it's fast as hell). I tried Mozilla for a week. After that week I was so happy to go back to a browser with not just theoretical standards support, but actual, working standard support, plus a rendering engine that can draw nested HTML tables without cracking borders of having <td> elements whose contents spill outside the borders of the cell.

I'm sorry, but I don't rate Mozilla as a worthy competitor to IE at all. It's not even close. Sure it's got tabbed browsing and all those gimicks, but what I want in a browser is flawless rendering of HTML and decent standards support. IE gives me that and Mozilla does not.

I'd love to say that Mozilla was great, and that Microsoft's days of browser domination are coming to an end, but until Mozilla actually comes up with a product that is better than IE, I won't be switching.

Now back to vB3.

[Kier]

Originally posted by bigmattyh
What I'm saying is that there probably ought to be a way to control the WYSIWYG editor via standard javascript (without any additional dll's). Cross-browser compatible. I'd love that to be possible, but it really isn't. Be my guest to prove me wrong - that would be great.

[Wayne Luke]

www.editize.com.... Of course it was never pursued but I am sure a reasonable deal could have been achieved.

[tubedogg]

Yeah, but that's a Java applet.

[DVD Plaza]

Originally posted by Kier
IE 6 has the most strict, best standards support of any browser today. Bar none. Fact.Actually IE is the most UNstrict browser there is - no matter how crap/illegal someone codes a page IE will still render it perfectly whilst most other browsers will render either a messed up page or a BLANK page. Regarding IE having THE best standards support, when did that suddenly change - last I heard MS were still being blasted for having the worst implementation of CSS around.

Originally posted by Kier
I'm sorry, but I don't rate Mozilla as a worthy competitor to IE at all. It's not even close.I assume you are referring STRICTLY to Windows since IE5 for the Mac is a chronicsubset of the Windows version, and that which it does have barely works. Granted IE6 for the Mac will theoretically be an exact match of IE6 for Windows, but that's rumour only - for now IE on the Mac is THE most screwed up browser you could possibly get (IE is just as screwed and lacking on all platforms actually, all bar Windows), it'd hardly even rank as usable even when it does manage to display a page.

[Jake Bunce]

yeah, IE for mac isn't as good as IE for win. fyi, all my software is up to date on my mac (OS X 10.1.5 with IE 5.1.4).

did you guys change something since this morning? now when i load the posting screen on my mac i get the "old" vB Code stuff (which does work on the mac). on my pc i get the WYSIWYG buttons. that's a good solution.

[Wayne Luke]

See I have read the opposite. I have read that IE 5.5 on the Macintosh platform was the most standards compliant browser in the world. This is from little known companies like Cnet, ZDNet and PCMagazine. Maybe that has changed.

Also IE 6.0 for Windows works in two modes. If you specify a DOCTYPE in your pages, then it simply won't render every error. It switches into a strict mode and will only render validated HTML properly.

What I have a problem with is validated HTML (4.01 transitional here) that validates according to the W3C specification but doesn't render properly in browsers like Opera because it doesn't recognize less well known attributes like "align" and "width" properly especially when used in tables. Now Mozilla now that it is finally out of Beta is starting to look good. Still not a replacement for me personally since it is so clunky and takes up so many resources and takes a long time to load but it is coming along. And even though it is owned by Netscape, I will use it every so often. However I won't use any Netscape branded program. I am also sorry I installed Opera every time I use it but it is a necessary evil until all browsers support the standards 100%, of which a single one does not at this time.

[Jake Bunce]

IE is at version 5.5 for OS 9 ("classic" mac OS) but in OS X it's only at version 5.1.4

//edit: my dumb, 5.2.1 just came out today it looks like.

[Wayne Luke]

Originally posted by Jakeman
IE is at version 5.5 for OS 9 ("classic" mac OS) but in OS X it's only at version 5.1.4

//edit: my dumb, 5.2.1 just came out today it looks like.

See, I wouldn't know that because version numbers for Macintosh software really hold no importance to me. However if they ever get a G4 Macintosh with 256 megabytes of RAM and at least a 40 gigabyte hard drive under $1000, I will consider looking into them more seriously.

[Jake Bunce]

Originally posted by wluke


See, I wouldn't know that because version numbers for Macintosh software really hold no importance to me. However if they ever get a G4 Macintosh with 256 megabytes of RAM and at least a 40 gigabyte hard drive under $1000, I will consider looking into them more seriously.

while i agree with you that macs are overpriced, that isn't what we're talking about here ;) :D

[Wayne Luke]

I agree however, you can't expect everyone to know what version of software is available for the Macintosh.

I personally would like a cross-browser, cross-platform editor. However they chose to go the route they did.

[DVD Plaza]

Originally posted by Jakeman
5.2.1 just came out today it looks like. Actually it came out a month ago :)

[leadZERO]

Originally posted by bigmattyh
Right! :) Isn't one of the hallmarks of vB the fact that it's truly platform-independent? I've heard the devs say that they wouldn't do cron jobs because that would make it require linux...

Anyway, there's got to be a way to make it Mac-compatible.

FYI... Crond is not linux only. I don't remember exactly but I think it was a UNIX tool before it was available for Linux.

FREEBSD FOREVER!

[Jake Bunce]

Originally posted by DVD Plaza
Actually it came out a month ago :)

oh yeah, it said 7/5/2002 and i though august :p

[dabean]

Originally posted by leadZERO


FYI... Crond is not linux only. I don't remember exactly but I think it was a UNIX tool before it was available for Linux.

FREEBSD FOREVER!

"Cron" predates linux by about a decade and a half. POSIX/AT&T cron is cerca 1992. The really hardcore will argue POSIX/AT&T cron is broken in comparision to the historic BSD cron of old (not current *BSD cron). So even cron isn't 100% the same across different unixes.

[leadZERO]

Originally posted by dabean


"Cron" predates linux by about a decade and a half. POSIX/AT&T cron is cerca 1992. The really hardcore will argue POSIX/AT&T cron is broken in comparision to the historic BSD cron of old (not current *BSD cron). So even cron isn't 100% the same across different unixes.

Yah, I only started using and developing intensely on UNIX/Linux in the mid 90's. Which was why I added the "I think." I've only been coding on UNIX for about the past 6-7 years.

Thanks for clarifying the point though. :)

[Mind]

FYI the target milestone for the support of contenteditable under Mozilla is Mozilla 1.2 beta (planned for october 2002). There is no definitive release date for this feature however. It could perfectly be sooner or more likely... later.

The bugzilla entry about contenteditable support can be found at http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=97284.

Hopefully Mozilla will support contenteditable (and execCommand) before the release of vB3.