Defective Menu Navigation on Pale Moon Website

[ascii_elite]

The navigation on the Pale Moon website appears to not work properly.

The "Pale Moon >" sub menu appears truncated when expanded. The selection of version to download is wherefore complicated.

I have tested this with Internet Explorer 6 with SP1 on Windows 2000 Professional with Service Pack 4 and Internet Explorer 6 with SP2 on Windows XP Professional with SP2.

The problem does not manifest with Pale Moon 3.6.29 on Windows 2000 Professional with Service Pack 4 or Windows XP Professional with Service Pack 2.

Please address the issue described herein.

[lyceus]

I think that is can be a trouble of MISE 6. I recall that even Microsoft expects that you upgrade to MISE 7 at least. I have windows XP and more and more several sites refuse to work with MISE 6, so I was forced to upgrade.

[Moonchild]

Update your version of MSIE to something that's not over a decade old. It is considered a high-priority Windows Update for a reason

MSIE6 is terribly broken in many ways and I won't provide support for its quirks. You can still download Pale Moon by clicking the "Pale Moon >" main menu entry as well as using the web installer offered on the main homepage.

[ascii_elite]

Update your version of MSIE to something that's not over a decade old.

Internet Explorer 6 with SP1 is actually less than a decade old (by about 7 months). The official updates for Internet Explorer 6 with SP1 (which includes updated MSHTML.DLL) are applied (discontinued after October 2006).

It is considered a high-priority Windows Update for a reason

The reason for such, if true, would seem to be political-economical, favoring the Microsoft Corporation (to promote adopting of newer Microsoft software/technologies, for example), rather than for user/collective benefit.

I believe that Windows Genuine Advantage Notification is/was also considered high-priority by Microsoft Corporation yet it provides no benefit to the user and actually provides a disservice to the user or collective.

MSIE6 is terribly broken in many ways and I won't provide support for its quirks.

Regardless of whether Microsoft Internet Explorer 6 (any variant) is quirky, users of the browser still might want to visit and examine your Pale Moon web site. This would often be for good reason, such as to become informed about Pale Moon and to test and examine it. If the obvious paths to the download pages of Pale Moon, via site navigation, appear broken or defective, doubt may be generated about the Pale Moon software product in the mind of a user or collective.

Further, a good, well-function website, including on Internet Explorer 6 (with SP1 or greater), conveys to a user or collective an attention to detail and quality.

The only notable quirk with the Pale Moon website I have found is the menu navigation to the Pale Moon downloads. Considering that the Pale Moon website and forums function quite well on Internet Explorer 6 (any variant) it may be wise (benefit would exceed cost) to correct/adjust the website to function correctly on Internet Explorer 6.

[Moonchild]

You obviously have no idea through what hoops I'd have to jump to get a working menu on MSIE6. I already made special arrangements for IE so it even works at all, to begin with.

And if I do that, why not make something that works on IE5 just in case some Windows NT users want to check out the page? Or Netscape 3? Or some non-mainstream browser that doesn't know how to render standards-compliant HTML and/or CSS? ...

Also, if you are using MSIE6 with the "latest" patch on it, you are using a browser that has not been updated, even for security fixes if nothing else, for almost 6 years. It's not safe to use for anything, and you can expect sites to not render properly. A decade (and who cares about 7 months in that light - especially since I doubt that the core functionality has been majorly changed in SP1) is a very long time for a program of any kind, and even more so one that deals with something as dynamic as the Internet and constantly evolving standards.
Just because some other arbitrary program is labeled high priority (even if potentially political-economical, WGA notifications is high-priority because you would want to know asap if your copy of Windows isn't genuine or properly licensed while you think it is, unwittingly breaking the law by using it) it doesn't mean you can generalize all other updates labeled as such to be of debatable value.

I'm sorry but there simply is no easy way to fix it for archaic browser use. And like I said, if people are interested in checking out the page, they can do so since all the main menu entries work fine, and they can download it from the web installer and even with a broken sub menu can still get to the download pages as well.

Also, I have no idea why you mention benefit vs. cost. The "cost" for me would be pretty much making a special version of the entire site for MSIE6. The "benefit" would be naught. It's a free product. I don't get more "revenue" by catering to the convenient download navigation of a marginally small potential user base using MSIE6, i.e. who haven't had the presence of mind to use Windows Updates for who knows how long.
A different point of perspective: It could even be argued that not catering to it is attention to detail: Not jumping on the bandwagon of trying to cater to everyone under the sun but requesting a little bit of awareness from the visitors about their own system. It may even help them realize their browser is horribly outdated.

[lyceus]

Update your version of MSIE to something that's not over a decade old. It is considered a high-priority Windows Update for a reason

Well the trouble with MSIE is that always check for the WGA patch, and even in new products with a valid serial like a notebook with XP SP3; Windows Update download a pacth for MISE them see it's a Windows XP SP3 serial and deletes the patch (??) The next time you run Windows update it puts again. All links to download MISE from Microsoft in a windows XP machine points to you to a big "WHY YOU DON'T UPGRADE TO WINDOWS 7 FELLA?" sign

Just more reasons to stick with Palemoon!

[lyceus]

Considering that the Pale Moon website and forums function quite well on Internet Explorer 6 (any variant) it may be wise (benefit would exceed cost) to correct/adjust the website to function correctly on Internet Explorer 6.

As I said I only have MSIE for stubborn sites that don't work on modern browsers. Also I downloaded MSIE 8 and several sites already complain that is *old* (Google, Yahoo mail, Deviantart, etc.) but way less than the native MISE 6. Checking the website with an old browser always will made troubles and really you are the first dude that have windows 2000 so far I know. Also it supposed that MISE 6 is deprecated even by Microsoft and they have a counter for the end of MISE 6 http://www.ie6countdown.com/ (as for JAN 2012 just 7.7% of windows users still use it) also several people made a funeral for MISE 6 http://ie6funeral.com/.

I don't know the reason for keep a windows 2000 machine alive, but really really really you need to start to look for an alternative, the sooner the best. Everybody wants MISE 6 dead. :/

[Moonchild]

the end of MISE 6 http://www.ie6countdown.com/

I see, the People's Republic of China has 25% using MSIE 6 (accounting for half the global use of MSIE6) -- Now I know how they can be so completely infected with zombie bots, spambots, botnets, malware, worms, etc.

[ascii_elite]

You obviously have no idea through what hoops I'd have to jump to get a working menu on MSIE6.

This is correct.
Though from what I remember from some web development I worked on about 11 years ago (during the time the Macromedia company still existed), it was not that difficult to do, but required the use of a Cascading Style Sheet or other method to apply styles.

And if I do that, why not make something that works on IE5 just in case some Windows NT users want to check out the page? Or Netscape 3? Or some non-mainstream browser that doesn't know how to render standards-compliant HTML and/or CSS?

You could, but considering that Windows NT users can run Internet Explorer 6 with SP1 (and may prefer to), such effort may not be necessary. The user interface and feature set that a user is able to manipulate had not changed very much over the last few versions. Internet Explorer 6 retains the familiarity of user interface as its predecessor. I did not realize Netscape still had a user base. Did/Does Netscape have/use a different rendering engine than the system rendering engine or Gecko?

Also, if you are using MSIE6 with the "latest" patch on it, you are using a browser that has not been updated, even for security fixes if nothing else, for almost 6 years.

With the exception of Internet Explorer 6 with SP2 and Intenet Explorer 6 RTM, Internet Explorer 6 (any variant) can be updated to resolve security issues. Except for Internet Explorer 6 with SP3, the patches are unofficial and provided by MDGx and are available at http://www.mdgx.com/ietoy.htm.

...and even more so one that deals with something as dynamic as the Internet and constantly evolving standards.

in my opinion they are evolving too quickly.

Just because some other arbitrary program is labeled high priority (even if potentially political-economical, WGA notifications is high-priority because you would want to know asap if your copy of Windows isn't genuine or properly licensed while you think it is, unwittingly breaking the law by using it)

This is a rationalization. The information as to whether an instance of Windows is Genuine is not usually located on the computer the WGA software validates (the information is usually documented in receipts of purchase or other physical or soft documentation). The software, therefore, cannot possibly be reliable for such purpose. The software does, however, collect much information, calls home with it, and may take adverse action against a system or user. The software might be considered high priority, but it is important to consider who's high-priority (in this case Microsoft Corporation)

The "benefit" would be naught. It's a free product. I don't get more "revenue"

There would be some benefit (utility), though it need not be monetary. Otherwise, you would not be doing what you are doing.

There does also seem to be an option to donate funds. Donated funds would be considered revenue.

...by catering to the convenient download navigation of a marginally small potential user base using MSIE6, i.e. who haven't had the presence of mind to use Windows Updates for who knows how long.

You should also consider that the potential user base could (and is) also businesses (in which cas one user can represent a large user base). Many businesses also do not use Windows Update.

A different point of perspective: It could even be argued that not catering to it is attention to detail: Not jumping on the bandwagon of trying to cater to everyone under the sun but requesting a little bit of awareness from the visitors about their own system. It may even help them realize their browser is horribly outdated.

It might be a strerch (or rather a strerch to call it a stretch). In general, the user will not care about what a site designer has to go through to present content to him/her/it. Only what he/she/it can selfishly can get out of it.

Many of those that use Internet Explorer 6 (any variant) use it because it is usually functional, simple, and easy to use with a nicely organized, familiar (segregated UI elements), and intuitive User Interface. Windows Internet Explorer, Opera, Chromium (and its derivatives), and Safari lack in these areas (especially Chromium). Firefox and many of its derivatives (like Pale Moon) is somewhere in between. It can be functional and have a nice, easy to use interface (it is very customizable), but it does not have it by default; it requires much customization (which is laborious and not so intuitive), and quite especially for the version series after the 3.6 series. The customizations to achieve a simple, convienient, intuative and easy to use user interface often have to be done via extensions and using userChrome.css and prefs.js.

Anyways, the purpose of this thread was to provide awareness about a problem with the website of to propose its correction. The problem did seem minor, yet important.

[ascii_elite]

Everybody wants MISE 6 dead. :/

This isn't quite true. It is the web developers , and tech groupies (that go along with whatever technicalish information, regardless of its merit), that distastes Internet Explorer 6 so. The distaste has some merit as it would mean that they spend much more time testing a site.

In actuality, the distaste is misplaced. What the web developers really do not like are the limitations and constrains of the rendering engine Internet Explorer uses by default.

If Internet Explorer were to use newer Gecko, newer Trident rendering engine, or newer WebKit, I do not believe that there would have great objection to Internet Explorer. There is a plugin by Google that allows the use of WebKit in Internet Explorer ("Google Chrome Frame"). The plugin however comes with the drawback that modern Google applications have (they call home user information).

[ascii_elite]

...Just more reasons to stick with Palemoon!

Pale Moon is a decent browser, but comes with many of the limitations and problems of Firefox (shoddy printing being a big one).

Not being able to resolve the problems, I have not been able to migrate completely to Pale Moon; I use it in combination with Internet Explorer 6 (any variant).

[Moonchild]

Try visiting this page with IE6: http://www.crashie.com/

Or instant hard crash of IE6 (but not later): http://youtu.be/ulYYtMyaNoc
(A short video of the crash that happens when you type ms-its:%F0: into an Internet Explorer 6 window.)

[lyceus]

This isn't quite true. It is the web developers , and tech groupies (that go along with whatever technicalish information, regardless of its merit), that distastes Internet Explorer 6 so. The distaste has some merit as it would mean that they spend much more time testing a site.

Actually the link comes from Microsoft itself not from web developers. They want that you to use a newer browser. Hey even for the MISE 6 funeral, Microsoft send roses in an approbation move! One thing is that you want to use vintage programs for some reason, an another that the world keep supporting that browser.

[lyceus]

...Just more reasons to stick with Palemoon!

Pale Moon is a decent browser, but comes with many of the limitations and problems of Firefox (shoddy printing being a big one).

Not being able to resolve the problems, I have not been able to migrate completely to Pale Moon; I use it in combination with Internet Explorer 6 (any variant).

I wrote: "I use MISE for websites that still rely on that old browser like government and banks sites" = cheap weasels that brought a pre-made system made for MISE6+ASP and want to use until 2014 (when windows XP will end to get patches) or maybe beyond. Palemoon have several flaws I'm aware of it but it's a free program so we made our best working for free. We never market it as "the only browser you will need".

[lyceus]

Well we have a medieval conversation here that will goes to nowhere, don't you believe it?

Summary of conclusions:

1. We don't say that Palemoon is the only browser you need, as several of us use it as the main one but leave another as backup (call it FireFox, Opera, any MSIE flavor, Safari, etc.).

2. It's sad that Microsoft will stop support to Windows 2000 and MISE 6. We can't fix that, MISE 6 will die when support to Windows XP ends around 2014. Palemoon will support Windows 2000 as best we can. (Hint: Serious Beta testers on Windows 2000 would be very valuable here).

3. If the website looks bad in old browsers, we made our best but we can't cover all the cases of people as those browsers can't support newer features. We need to focus in solve deeper troubles than a bad CSS (print anyone?).

Anything missing? So far is the points that I can get as valuable for the community.

[Moonchild]

ad. 3. It's not bad CSS on the site, it's proper CSS. IE6 simply makes a mess of it.

[Moonchild]

Just one more remark here:
I have nothing against IE, but I do have something against asking a web developer to cater to a browser that has been superseded for many years already, is depreciated by its own developers, and would require a disproportionate amount of coding and effort to cater to. This doesn't have anything to do with testing but actually having to rewrite the menu CSS just for MSIE6 (most likely needing javascript, etc. and not pure CSS like now).
It has nothing to do with distaste. And no amount of arguing about it is going to make me reconsider the way the navigation menu is set up since it works well in all current and somewhat less current (but not archaic) browsers.