Message From YouTube About IE 6 Browser [Solved]

[BenoitRen]

You were making a moral evaluation on a piece of code. There not ugly or beautiful codes, nor good or bad.

Only codes that work and other that don't.

Wrong. There is good code and there is bad code. Every programmer and web developer worth their salt knows that.

True the W3C didn't bend but more exactely it was M$ finaly getting a look at the largely FireFox-based W3C recommandations as their browser market share shrank rapidly.

Wrong again. IE6 fixed IE's broken box model back in 2001, for one thing.

The W3C recommendations are not Firefox-based. I urge you once more to get educated. The W3C has existed for a long time; long before Firefox ever existed.

[Fredledingue]

I don't agreee with you about codes: Ok, codes can be beautiful when, for example it does a lot in a few lines and doesn't waste resources. Save for scripts, this rarely applies to html.

Bad codes are simply codes that don't work properly or waste resources. But they are not bad just because there is a supertition that says it's bad.

About the W3C, everybody thinks what it wants. It's a big, important and influencial organisation but it's still compoced of just about anyone who wishes to take part and that means a lot of poeple from the active FF community.

The W3C is not formulating their recommandations out of the blue.

It’s clear then that vendors in the market are the ones who deploy new technologies which improve the situation. The W3C has the authority to standardize things, but vendors have all the power when it comes to actually making those things available.link

Edited September 18, 2009 by Fredledingue

[BenoitRen]

I don't agreee with you about codes: Ok, codes can be beautiful when, for example it does a lot in a few lines and doesn't waste resources. Save for scripts, this rarely applies to html.

Not true. I can show you hundreds and thousands of examples of ugly HTML out there on the web.

Bad codes are simply codes that don't work properly or waste resources. But they are not bad just because there is a supertition that says it's bad.

There's such a thing as "best practices". It's not about superstition at all.

It's a big, important and influencial organisation but it's still compoced of just about anyone who wishes to take part and that means a lot of poeple from the active FF community.

A lot of people from the Mozilla/Firefox community? Yes. But mostly people from the Firefox community? No, not at all.

I'm not sure what your quote is doing there, as that's just how the process works. It doesn't mean that the vendors dictate the standards.

[Fredledingue]

I didn't say they dictate the standards.

I wanted to say that they are de facto setting the standards.

(well, if it was me the king of the internet I would dictate - LOL)

[BenoitRen]

You're still wrong, as they don't set the standards at all. The W3C does.

[Tripredacus]

I didn't say they dictate the standards.

I wanted to say that they are de facto setting the standards.

(well, if it was me the king of the internet I would dictate - LOL)

You're still wrong, as they don't set the standards at all. The W3C does.

You are both wrong, but you are both right. Standards are one thing, but the usage of those standard affects the revisions and adoption of them. Remember, Betamax was a instituted before VHS, but VHS won because more manufacturers adopted that design. Its the same with browsers. The only difference is that the W3C takes longer to update!

[PC_LOAD_LETTER]

http://code.google.com/chrome/chromeframe/

leave it to google to find a way to fix IE by essentially replacing its biggest flaw. too bad it requires the site owner to modify their site. might be cool if you could manually toggle the rendering mode in IE on the user side. though it says xp sp2 and up so i dont know if itll be much help to 9xers unless it just runs unofficially.

[BenoitRen]

Remember, Betamax was a instituted before VHS, but VHS won because more manufacturers adopted that design. Its the same with browsers.

No, it's not the same. Those were two competing standards. The W3C makes standards by committee.

I get your general drift, though.

[M()zart]

By the way, previously we talked about B and I tags in this topic. As I see, currently they are part of the HTML 5 standard. Look here http://www.w3.org/TR/html5/text-level-sema...l#the-b-element

[BenoitRen]

Obviously, I already knew that. They are not being deprecated. Instead, they are being given meaning. Use them wisely instead of as presentational elements.

[Offler]

Since days of first internet pages there still have been some differences between multiple browsers. thats why acid tests were developed, but i still dont understand why the support for IE6 have to end. I dont like the browser anymore but still most people have quite quick and easy access to it (even if they use it as a download tool for opera or firefox or whatever).

From times of IE5 i see a lot of progress in web creation (since i am stuck with very old version of HTML i can use ) but indeed the horror of incompatibility issues... If i imagine that the youtube will write a short message "sorry your browser is not supported"...

Only the possibility of this makes me sick. Just imagine that the only supported browser for some pages will be IE and all others whill be unusable.

The funny thing about it is that i was able to do so very simply many years ago. With one easy change in filename i was able to make web page displayable only by users of IE6, while other browsers get an error message, or tried to download the page.

If somebody sets the standards he also have to sanction those who will use their browser or pages for such economic goals.

[CharlesF]

For anyone having problems with YouTube or the like, here is a simple way to change the user agent sent by IE6, using only the registry.

Hi dencorso,

your reg's are working fine in Youtube ,

but they are doing nothing with all the sites using the script from

http://www.ie6nomore.com/

or from http://windower.net/ie6.html !

Is there another trick for those?

[dencorso]

Wow!!! We're back ontopic, at long last!!!

Sure! Here is a new version of a simple way to change the user agent and version vector sent by IE6, using only the registry. In the attached file there are three .reg files: if you merge regIE8Vi.reg to your registry, IE6 will tell all sites it is IE8, runing on Vista; if you, instead, merge regIE7XP.reg to your registry, IE6 will duly tell all sites it is IE7, runing on XP. Don't forget to reverse the change, afterwards, by merging regback.reg to your registry, to remove the spoof, as some sites (like Windows Updates, for instance) need to know your true settings to work right. Of course, it all can be automated by means of batch files. There is no need to reboot, all you have to do is close all IE6 windows, merge the appropriate .reg, then reopen IE6 for it to work. Please report how well it works.

UAVV.7z

[BenoitRen]

That won't work, as the provided code (that isn't even a script) doesn't depend on the sent user agent string. It uses IE conditional comments, which are interpreted by IE itself. In this case, IE will only parse the code if its version is less than 7.

You'd either need to disable IE's parsing of conditional comments, or make itself believe it is a higher version.

Edited November 10, 2009 by BenoitRen

[CharlesF]

Here is a new version of a simple way to change the user agent and version vector sent by IE6, using only the registry.

It works great with all the sites I try!

Thanks a lot, dencorso

By the way, I'd found another place for "User Agent" in my registry:

[HKEY_USERS\.DEFAULT\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Internet Settings]
"User Agent"="Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Win32)"

Is there any use to change it?