Post your "in the wild" siting of PunBB here. (Page 4 of 4)

I'm not a Mac user but I don't care much about IE6 either.

I think we've reached a point in alternative browser penetration that IE has become less important. Yes, I look at my Apache logs and on some sites IE is in the lead, by a small percentage, but on other sites, it trails badly.

If I check a site against W3C and it contains no errors and it looks good in Firefox and Opera and Safari and Konqueror, well then, that's all I need to know. The IE users just need to upgrade to a compliant browser, welcome to the World Wide Web.

So we only ever use and browse from one machine running one O.S, do we? Remind me never to browse the BSD sites from a windoze machine again then, if your methodology applies to all.

Try telling that to your corporate IT department sometime if you are in some huge business or govt agency

There are more than just individual end users out there to worry about.

I also still believe good web developers should provide a good experience to most web users based on a coherant design philosophy. I like approaches like Yahoo's UI Guidelines to this:

http://developer.yahoo.com/yui/articles/gbs/

IE6 is still certainly there....

Even if the site progressively and elegantly degraded to drop off some FF or Opera or mac specific fanciness that would be OK and I'd consider that 'support for IE6'.

But big chunks of the forum in question just plain break in IE6 - like the ad images going walkabout up into the forum header.

This suggests to me that they have written some in-elegant CSS or jscript somewhere, rather than the problems (except for the PNG transparency issue perhaps) being IE6 specific.

There are LOTS of CSS etc heavy sites that look as beautiful on IE6 as any other modish browser. I can spend all day browsing the CSS Garden examples with nary a problem cropping up in IE6, for example.

That was merely one example. There are many more conditions. There are many reasons why people may be running older setups, either through preference or literally through no choice of their own, but exist they do. If designing to cater for them meant screwing things up for everyone else, then yes, I could see the methodology behind not supporting them. That isn't the case, however. You can easily serve a basic stylesheet specifically for them, if your normal stylesheet causes problems with older/non-compliant browsers.

It's poor form, pure and simple. Design for all or design for none. There are caveats that have no workaround in some cases, but there is still no excuse to make it look a bag of crap unless they're using one of *your* preferred browsers.

MattF & sirena,

Let's agree to disagree.

Life is not fair; get used to it.
Bill Gates

Yes. We were drifting a bit off topic.

Don't know if anyone posted this yet: http://www.quommunication.com/forum/

Modded a bit, and it looks like they removed the copyright/credit

Nice, really nice.

As for the copyright, Rickard had already stated a while back that it was fine to remove it and PunBB 1.2.19 does not contain the line in a default install.

http://www.quickpar.org.uk/forum/

Plain vanilla Oxygen style, about 5000 members. Registration page features reCAPTCHA integration.

QuickPar is a handy utility for creating Parity Volumes using the Reed Solomon algorithm. Parity Volumes may be used to verify that a set of files have not been corrupted, or to reconstruct damaged files (providing that you have a sufficient quantity of Parity Volumes to match the missing or damaged files).

Posted by Anatoly on a different topic: http://forum.developers.facebook.com/