Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Browser Version Testing

  • 19-02-2008 1:44pm
    #1
    axer
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,517 ✭✭✭


    When it comes to testing on web browsers - how far back version wise should a website be expected to look right?

    When I check the current stats on the old development of a website I am working on, the breakdown goes as follows:
    IE7: 41.25%
    IE6: 39.85%
    FF2: 11.65%
    FF1: 3.22%
    Safari: 1.92%
    Opera 9.x: 0.66%
    Others: 1.45%

    Would it be right in thinking that if a website validates, is semantically layed out and looks fine in IE7, IE6, FF2, FF1, Safari and Opera 9 then that would be enough bases covered?

    Or do people out there still ensure a website looks ok in IE5.5- and netscape etc?

    Thanks for any help/advice,
    Noel


Comments

  • #2
    Goodshape
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,488 ✭✭✭Goodshape


    axer wrote: »
    Would it be right in thinking that if a website validates, is semantically layed out and looks fine in IE7, IE6, FF2, FF1, Safari and Opera 9 then that would be enough bases covered?
    That works for me.


  • #3
    Ph3n0m
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,655 ✭✭✭Ph3n0m


    axer wrote: »
    Would it be right in thinking that if a website validates, is semantically layed out and looks fine in IE7, IE6, FF2, FF1, Safari and Opera 9 then that would be enough bases covered?

    Yup for me thats standard, anything else is customer specific requests and would time/costs for extra testing


  • #4
    DJB
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 706 ✭✭✭DJB


    If you can get it working in that list (IE7, IE6, FF2, FF1, Safari and Opera 9), you should be fine.

    I never test for IE5.5 anymore - waste of time for so little users.


  • #5
    Axwell
    Moderators, Computer Games Moderators Posts: 10,462 Mod ✭✭✭✭Axwell


    On a similar vain but not trying to hijack your thread, what do you guys use to compare the site in the different browsers? Like i know you can install them in various machines etc but is there any interesting software to show you how it appears via diff browsers. I know Dave you had something like that in your blog for diff versions of IE


  • #6
    Goodshape
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,488 ✭✭✭Goodshape


    Download and install all the browsers that you can normally, and then Multiple IEs and/or Browsershots.org for the rest.


  • Advertisement
  • #7
    Ph3n0m
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,655 ✭✭✭Ph3n0m


    I dont trust multiple ie for anything more then a visual check - as I find that it has a tendency to b0rk when you test any decent scripting on it.

    Functionally I get people with different version to have a look, and I test what I can locally


  • #8
    axer
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,517 ✭✭✭axer


    Goodshape wrote: »
    Download and install all the browsers that you can normally, and then Multiple IEs and/or Browsershots.org for the rest.
    Also you can install FF1, 2 and 3 by using a different profile for each.

    For IE do as Goodshape says.

    For Opera just install the latest version.

    For safari just install the safari for windows beta version - from what I know it renders the same way as the mac version (anyone confirm?)


Advertisement