I have just completed a new Shopify website and used mainly Mozilla Firefox to put this together. I have been told by the client that the site doesn't show up properly in Chrome and Safari but when I have checked this on my 13" laptop they both appear fine on there and I was just wondering if anyone can give me any tips on how I can ensure that the site is working on all common browsers without having any issues.
Would appreciate any tips as I know there are paid websites to do this but just wondering if there is anything else that I can do to get this fixed.
If you to the safari developers "dropdown" in the status bar the is an option called "User agent" (the second one) from there you can "change" the browser.
Disclaimer: never actually used this function.
I believe that the best way to handle this would be to download and install all browsers to test.
There is a free service from the Microsoft dev site that gives you screenshots from a couple of different browsers and versions. Here is the link -> https://developer.microsoft.com/en-us/microsoft-edge/tools/screenshots/
It's not as good as installing all browsers to fully test everything but it can give you a rough idea if there's something wrong with css or something like that.
Your issue might be related to different browser versions. Double check to make sure that you are on the same version to see if you can reproduce the issue.
What would be the process for ensuring that the code works as expected across multiple browsers. What would be the best answer?
Be XHTML compliant (w3.org validator)
Be CSS compliant (w3.org validator)
Use a JavaScript library that is cross-browser compatible (less direct call to JavaScript as possible)
Test, test, test during development. Not at the end!
Avoid bleeding edge code.
Yeah, I know, many of you will hate that answer. And if you've never worked in a large enterprise environment, you'll think I'm a Luddite. However, I can't tell you how many times the requirements I've been given have specifically listed "No HTML5" or "No CSS3" elements simply because the client was paranoid about IE6 working exactly as the others did.
The obvious overall answer is testing, but I'd go one step further. If you're worried about 100% operation in all browsers, you have to define your standards. For example, if you have to code back to IE6, do you have to worry about mimicking rounded corners, which is always a hack on IE6 and below? Or, will the client accept progressive enhancement such as square corners for those on browers from the dark ages and rounded for the rest of us? Does the client specify fonts that can't be told apart when pulling the page up side-by-side, or do they understand that browsers use different font rendering engines? Is it ok to work just in IE6, or do you have to also support quirks mode? What about rendering with a screen reader (accessibility) or without CSS or Javascript. How about mobile devices? All these were valid and measurable issues with my last major corporate client.
I like Adobe's Browser Labs as my first line of defense for testing. However, it's just one of many steps I take including multiple physical computers on multiple OS's connecting via multiple connections through different network proxies. You just can't test enough....and even then expect to find an error as the site is launched and matures.
Take each browser and test :D
You can use websites like browsershots.org to see how it looks on different browsers and platforms.
The most comprehensive way of doing that is to actually test in different browsers. A simple solution would be to create a virtual machine hosting server, set up multiple VMs, and then install a different browser version to different VMs to fully test your application.
Absent that, there are tools that can emulate (but not fully) browsers and you can test through those.
The best measures to adopt are:
Use a CSS Reset (read about it at the link, implement it however you like)
Use a Javascript Framework like jQuery (This will abstract a lot of cross browser quirks)
Validate your HTML and CSS. Make sure you are specifying a Doctype
You can test most browsers via Chrome, Firefox and IE8. IE8 has an IE7 mode that can be used to test for IE7. Press F12 in IE8 to get the developer window to debug and solve issues. Make sure you are prompting for all JS errors. IE6 is a tough one, but there are a number of resources available that you can probably find to help you with this.
Hope this helps. Good luck.
http://browsershots.org/
thats the site you looking for. You need to put in the url of your website, select the browsers that you want to check and click submit. It will return screenshots of the your website based on the browsers that you have selected.
There is no one way to test the app's compatibility for web browsers. First thing to keep in mind is understand the standards set for the app, define the number of browsers and versions to support. Once we know what we need to support we can keep the following points to ensure compatibility:
Test during development. Not at the end.
Avoid bleeding edge code. New functions that come with ES5 or ES6 standards would only be supported by modern browsers, hence would need polyfills in older browsers. Therefore use the most native form of Javascript wherever possible.
Use jQuery functions if it's included in the project. It helps take care of most javascript cross browser issues. If not included, use just bring its particular function in your project that you might need.
For CSS, try to use the traditional methods of layout and styling instead of the latest CSS3 one's which might not be supported by old browsers(like transform property).
Tools like Browserstack can be used to see the screenshots of how the CSS turned out on different machines.
Actually test on different machines and browsers. Although chrome provides a superb emulator but when code actually runs on that particular OS and ecosystem, then it may misbehave. So the best way to ensure is actually test them in every ecosystem.
Use Tools like VirtualBox to be able to test old browsers and different OS.
There is no way to ensure it aside from testing testing testing :-)
I'll try to be short and clean. I did website for friend, although she says some people complain about pink quote field to cover the text area, I've tried this on different PCs, browsers but haven't seen this kind of issue. So I was thinking maybe that old IE or something?
Here's websites link: http://www.zlobekbambino.pl
Thanks in advance
I would try using a service such as Adobe's Browser Lab or Browser Shots to test the site in various browsers to see which is causing problems. You can then try to work out how to fix it.
Assuming you have a Windows PC, you can test with all versions of IE by installing IETester. It's a very usefull program that allows you to run all versions of IE in tabs in the same window.
Obviously though, it only works on a Windows PC, so if you're on a Mac you won't be able to use it. In that case, http://www.browsershots.org allows you to download screenshots from virtually any browser ever released. The downside of that is that you only get a static screenshot, so not much use for testing dynamic content, but still a useful tool.
I want to generate a thumbnail of a web page in the browser, so I can have multiple scaled down iFrames within a single page.
IE can do this using filters. Mozilla can do this inside a <canvas> with drawWindow() if you have Chrome privileges (like an installed plug-in).
Is there any way to do this in WebKit? Is there any generic cross browser way to do it?
I know you're looking for a client-side way to do this, but considering the spotty support across the board you may want to look into generating the thumbnails on the server.
khtml2png allows you to generate webpage images from the command line. It's not the prettiest solution, but with a little scripting it would allow you to generate thumbnails on the fly, and you wouldn't have to worry about browser compatibility.
WebKit's nightly build (41944 from March 24 2009) has support for transforming elements (including scaling) as well as other goodies like CSS gradients.
There is more information on the WebKit blog and here.
I'm guessing this features are also available in Safari 4 but I haven't checked.
edit: It looks like this is also making its way into Mozilla as -moz-transform.
Is anyone writing applications specifically to take advantage of google chrome?
Are there any enterprise users who are considering using it as the standard browser?
Yes, I have started to pay very good attention to Google Chrome for my applications. Recent analytics show that between 6%-15% of my users are accessing my applications (varies between 6 to 15 in different applications) on Chrome. And, this number looks on an upward trend.
Thus, I can't really ignore it for testing right now.
As far as taking it as a standard goes, thats a long way off. I still have to test for IE6! :( Though, we have been planning to start using features like Gears (inbuilt in Chrome - downloadable elsewhere) once Chrome crosses the 25% mark. Thats when I believe that we will be looking at Chrome to be our preferred browser. I hope that we have Chrome 1.0+ by then! ;)
I switched to Chrome and haven't looked back except for the occasional site which doesn't work properly, forcing me to load it in Firefox. All my existing web applications work fine on it, and I'm using it for primary testing on my current development project.
I'm not actually targeting chrome, but I have added chrome to my browsers to test sites on. I've found some odd quirks in this product where some plugins cause the browser to hang, or run really slow in some environments, but they are still in beta in active development. But I definately now make sure sites I work on render well in chrome, as well as firefox, latest versions of IE, safari, Konquerer and opera. I usually check out how it looks on lynx as well, that helps me catch "un-alternated text" in images. Yeah, I know that isn't a word, but some people will understand what I'm saying.
Because chrome uses the webkit to render HTML, you can be assured if it works in safari, it'll work under chrome, however it's rendering engine isn't up to scratch quite yet. I think writing applications that take advantage of it is similar to writing iPhone applications, remember chrome is expected to be adopted by android to make it similar to iPhone. That way it pretty much takes advantage of all those iPhone apps.
Would I install it as the browser of choice? not yet - but i'll certainly work on valid web pages that will render across all browsers.
One of our major customers has outlawed Chrome because it installs on the C drive without asking. They deploy a standard image with a small C drive and large D drive so they can easily re-clone the system part of the image on C without destroying the client's personal files on D. Most software allows you to choose the install directory. Anything that violates this is disallowed, and they're a big enough company to have some weight with most vendors.
We have enough headaches trying to support
Firefox
Two versions of IE which have their own iffy bugs
Safari
I'm not sure why we continue to support Safari. Most of our users (corporate) use IE6 or IE7. We try to make sure that things work in both of those.
Maybe not for programming purposes but Chrome w/ Google Reader makes for the most powerful RSS reader. Can handle up to 1500 feeds w/ performance still ok, managing subscriptions still functioning.
I'm using it on my work machine, but that's about it. It's been stable for me, and I like the barebones UI. I'll still switch to Firefox for the web developer extensions however.
I'm liking some of GoogleChrome- the Start page with your 9 most recent is the winner for me. The interface takes a little getting used to, but the speed is impressive, especially with Gmail.
However, it glitches with Java, which rules it out for serious work at the moment. I use FireFox mostly and have Chrome for the "other" websites at work.
I'm considering using GWT on an intranet project and considering suggesting to the users that use Chrome to take advantage of the enhanced Javascript performance. Any AJAX-heavy app would be a great candidate to target Chrome.
At my company, we're not targeting it, but we're definitely paying attention to it. My boss is using it as his primary browser, and I have implemented browser detection for it in our scripts in case we ever to need to target it for some reason.
Chrome has the .png opacity bug where the transparent parts of the .png are a solid color if you try to transition the opacity from 0 to 1. In IE7 the opaque parts are black, and in Chrome, they are white. Today, I decided to go ahead and account for this bug in my JavaScript. I don't really test sites on Chrome that often, but I am actually using it for almost all of my browsing.
I will target Chrome as soon as a stable Linux and OSX client is available.
Targeting Chrome/Chromium right now, I think is like targeting Konqueror web browser. It will get popular, but you should wait to a more stable beta, and/or some Linux and OS X client.
My website statistics shows 3.xx % visitors using Chrome which arrived just few weeks back. And Opera is only 4.xx % which has been around for several years.
Easily you can see that rate at which Chrome is picking up.
You can see how easily Google takes over all areas of your computing world and personal world too.
Since Chrome uses Webkit, it has the same rendering engine and DOM support as Safari (not necessarily the same revision of Webkit though). By testing in Safari, you can generally get by without worrying about Chrome. Any differences you find are probably just bugs that you should file on instead of work around.
However, because Chrome uses a different JS engine, there may be a few incompatibilities with Safari. So, if you're doing anything with JS, you might as well fire up Chrome and see if there's anything obviously wrong.
Generally though, you don't target browsers, you target rendering engines (with their associated DOM support and JS engines).
I am using Google Chrome, so far all the web apps I have work fine in it with no modifications.
No.
Why help Google further build an evil empire? In this particular case it is so obvious that they do not care about users but only obsessed with gathering usage info.
It's not any major player yet