1. Advertising
    y u no do it?

    Advertising (learn more)

    Advertise virtually anything here, with CPM banner ads, CPM email ads and CPC contextual links. You can target relevant areas of the site and show ads based on geographical location of the user if you wish.

    Starts at just $1 per CPM or $0.10 per CPC.

Best viewed with Firefox.

Discussion in 'HTML & Website Design' started by Chopster, Dec 14, 2005.

  1. #1
    Not sure if anyone else has come across these type of sites, where they tell you that the site can not be viewed with IE and you must download Firefox.
    SEMrush
    Just gotta say that this is the dumbest trend I've ever seen. Turning away 75 to 90% of your website traffic?
     
    Chopster, Dec 14, 2005 IP
    dotcommakers likes this.
    SEMrush
  2. Skinny

    Skinny Peon

    Messages:
    1,865
    Likes Received:
    93
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #2
    I agree. That is the worst form of web design.

    That's like telling people you can't go into a store without having red socks.

    Webmasters need to know that sites have to be built so that multiple browsers can view them properly.

    IMO it's either lazy webmasters or new webmasters who do this.

    (If you are new (not you Chopster) then get help . . .there are plenty of resources)

    The time and effort certainly pays off.

    Skinny
     
    Skinny, Dec 14, 2005 IP
  3. Sham

    Sham Peon

    Messages:
    136
    Likes Received:
    1
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #3
    I have a feeling it has something to do with the fact that Firefox pay webmasters $1 each time a user downloads and installs Firefox using the link from their site!
     
    Sham, Dec 14, 2005 IP
  4. minstrel

    minstrel Illustrious Member

    Messages:
    15,082
    Likes Received:
    1,243
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    480
    #4
    There's a difference, of course, between saying (1) "This site is best viewed with Firefox" and (2) "This site requires Firefox" or "This site cannot be viewed without Firefox".

    #1 is just a simple statement saying "designed with Firefox in mind".

    #2 is, as noted, shooting yourself in the foot with an anti-tank missile.

    A while back, when I got tired of trying to make sites look the same in IE and various versions of Netscape in pre-Firefox days, I had a footer for one site that said, "This page optimized for viewing in Internet Explorer. It may not display as intended in other browsers." That was when I was using Netscape 4.7x as my worst-case-scneario browser and there were some things I just could not get to look right in NS. In the end, I gave it up, made sure the siote was readable and navigable in NS, and added that footer.
     
    minstrel, Dec 14, 2005 IP
  5. Chopster

    Chopster Peon

    Messages:
    628
    Likes Received:
    44
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #5
    Option #2 is exactly what I mean. The site I visited "required" Firefox and wouldn't load unless I was using it. I can't remember the url to the page now, but I do remember it saying something about not letting the Evil Empire Microsoft dominate the browser market.

    Maybe you agree with this philosophy, maybe not, but throwing away that many visitors based on this principal, in my opinion...is lame.
     
    Chopster, Dec 15, 2005 IP
  6. minstrel

    minstrel Illustrious Member

    Messages:
    15,082
    Likes Received:
    1,243
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    480
    #6
    I absolutely think that is lame. And completely dumb.
     
    minstrel, Dec 15, 2005 IP
  7. Skinny

    Skinny Peon

    Messages:
    1,865
    Likes Received:
    93
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #7
    I think it's just a little too late.

    But yes it is dumb. You eliminate visitors . . .and people aren't going to switch over to another browser to view your page. There are more than 8 billion websites. They will go elsewhere.

    Skinny
     
    Skinny, Dec 15, 2005 IP
  8. Djohn

    Djohn Peon

    Messages:
    75
    Likes Received:
    2
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #8
    That was my first thought too.

    Chopster: did they provide one of those 'get firefox with Google toolbar' banners?
     
    Djohn, Dec 15, 2005 IP
  9. clancey

    clancey Peon

    Messages:
    1,100
    Likes Received:
    63
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #9
    As far as I know, there is no Firefox specific mark up for pages. Firefox is supposedly designed to work from the actual specification, with no added, special tags. Where the problem is, as with all browsers, is in its ability to render CSS.
    The point is the website is just turning people away based on the user-agent string. I don';t think it is smart, but I want to attract people to my work.
    That suggests the site's content is smug and is probably just another website, which is hostile toward ordinary folk. Including those who use Firefox, but don't know the difference between RAM and ROM.
     
    clancey, Dec 15, 2005 IP
  10. toolblast

    toolblast Banned

    Messages:
    166
    Likes Received:
    3
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #10
    I agree. ANY SITE THAT IS VIEWABLE ON FIREFOX IS VIEWABLE IN IE6. lol.

    Its just stupidity and a marketing scam.

    I now see websites that have annoying floating layers on them that appear when you use IE that says things like "YOUR BROWSER IS UNSECURE! DOWNLOAD FIREFOX".

    Ughh... its annoying.
     
    toolblast, Dec 24, 2005 IP
  11. dotcommakers

    dotcommakers Active Member

    Messages:
    286
    Likes Received:
    4
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    60
    #11
    generally there should be this statement

    "best viewed in firefox" etc..

    following absolutly wrong but it should be above sentence

    "where they tell you that the site can not be viewed with IE and you must download Firefox."
     
    dotcommakers, Dec 24, 2005 IP
  12. Zenith

    Zenith Peon

    Messages:
    23
    Likes Received:
    1
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #12
    Surely it's entirely up to the individual creating the site if they want to exclude a particular sector of the browing public e.g. IE. While the vast majority wouldn't want to I don't see as it's anyone else's business to be honest. Stating that a site "requires firefox" is not deceptive if the site is checking the user agent and blocking access based on that... in that case it's perfectly true... the site does require Firefox to be viewed.
     
    Zenith, Dec 27, 2005 IP
  13. minstrel

    minstrel Illustrious Member

    Messages:
    15,082
    Likes Received:
    1,243
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    480
    #13
    Missing the point, Zenith. The question is not whether the site owner has a right to do it or whether it's accurate or inaccurate. The question is why anyone would be foolish enough to do it.
     
    minstrel, Dec 27, 2005 IP
    dotcommakers likes this.
  14. Zenith

    Zenith Peon

    Messages:
    23
    Likes Received:
    1
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #14
    Not all sites are built with the purpose of maximising traffic. You can't just say they're dumb without any knowledge of the content of the site or the motivation of the webmaster. It may not be "foolish" to them, and it's their site.
     
    Zenith, Dec 28, 2005 IP
    Chopster likes this.
  15. Chopster

    Chopster Peon

    Messages:
    628
    Likes Received:
    44
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #15
    I agree with Minstrel. It's foolish.
     
    Chopster, Dec 28, 2005 IP
  16. allthewhile

    allthewhile Peon

    Messages:
    118
    Likes Received:
    8
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #16
    It may not be foolish if they have all the traffic they want. Not everyone is in the business to make money.

    Besides, they may be getting a buttload of money off of affiliates.
     
    allthewhile, Dec 28, 2005 IP
  17. jimrthy

    jimrthy Guest

    Messages:
    283
    Likes Received:
    13
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #17
    Or maybe their entire goal is to convince people to use a safer browser?

    How many sites exist solely to try to convince people to switch from Windows to Linux/BSD?

    I don't imagine there's much money in it (except for, say, Red Hat, but I'd say their site(s) have a different slant). But some people have different motivations.

    BTW, I've actually run across the site that's probably behind all this. They offer complete step-by-step directions about how to do add this 'feature' to your site. As far as I can tell, it's a complete non-profit. Can't remember the URL now, but there does seem to be a central organization behind the whole thing.

    It takes all kinds, right? <shrug>
     
    jimrthy, Dec 28, 2005 IP
  18. the_pm

    the_pm Peon

    Messages:
    332
    Likes Received:
    33
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #18
    We have a habit of adding a little note on the credits/About This Site page of our sites:

    "To ensure the most enjoyable viewing experience of this site and others on the Web, we recommend downloading and installing one of the following free browsers:"

    Followed by links to Mozilla, Firefox, K-Meleon and Opera, just to give a range of choices. IE works just fine for us...it's simply a recommendation ;) It's our little way of spreading the word about other browsers without making it such that something other than most people's default browser is necessary.

    Designing for one particular browser is foolish, regardless of whether it's a nearly six-year-old dinosaur or one of today's upstarts.
     
    the_pm, Dec 28, 2005 IP
  19. mdvaldosta

    mdvaldosta Peon

    Messages:
    4,079
    Likes Received:
    362
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #19
    Whats ghey is those websites who submit articles to social bookmarking sites and do the whole "block IE, download FF" thing. All so they can get their referrral.
     
    mdvaldosta, Dec 28, 2005 IP
  20. Chopster

    Chopster Peon

    Messages:
    628
    Likes Received:
    44
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #20
    If the site is getting a buttload of traffic, then they are only getting the small percentage of some odd traffic from Firefox users. If they were to allow IE to access the site, then their "buttload of traffic" would suddenly skyrocket to an obscene amount of traffic.

    So, the question is...are they trying to make money? If so, then they are foolish to exclude all the potential customers that are using IE.

    If their incentive is not to make money, then the only other option I can think of is that they are trying to get across a message to the world. And excluding IE users from receiving that message is...again...foolish.

    Then of course, what if their message is that Microsoft is an evil empire and you should be using Firefox. If that's the case, then that's a lame message.

    Does anyone know of any features in Firefox in default mode that IE doesn't do in default mode? I mean, in regards to navigating and viewing a website.
     
    Chopster, Dec 29, 2005 IP