August 20, 2007
Good morning everyone. Say I’d like to hear from you guys who are working with ZonesDark Orange. You’re a quiet bunch. How’s that theme looking? Any problems?
Second, I’m starting to convert Aerolite Red and Aerolite Sage. You should see both of those today.
Third, I am getting so much email right now that it’s hard to keep pace. Please don’t be offended if I don’t get back to you within a 2-3 days. I’m just one person (for the moment) and as you know, it’s more important to get these themes converted than to teach people how to edit XML or answer general iWeb questions. Remember, the best source of information about how to use and troubleshoot iWeb is the Apple iWeb forums. Many of my good iWeb friends are the anchors of that forum and if they can’t answer your question, no one can.
Fourth, I haven’t had a chance to keep up with the news at that forum but some of you write and tell me about some of the issues with iWeb 2.0. My guitar-slinging friend John wrote today to elaborate on the issue that iWeb 2.0 apparently does not produce code that hides Internet Explorer 6′s problems. In a way, it irritates me to hear that people are beating on Apple about this. It’s very tedious and time-consuming for a human to create code that hides IE’s problems, but let’s not forget that even Apple’s browsers and Firefox too, have issues that do not comply with the W3C standards. Firefox and Flock have really poor implementation for small fonts. Firefox fails to acknowledge the overflow:hidden CSS property (!!!) Safari doesn’t know how to handle inline-block propeties and the problem got worse in their new Safari 3 beta. Internet Explore 6 is just plain disastrous.
Now for anyone to get cranky when a human has a hard time dealing with all this is one thing; we can actually insert clever hacks into website HTML and CSS to hide these problems. But hacking code is not a solution, it’s a bandage that has to be monitored. As soon as the browser gets a fix, suddenly the web site is broken again. It’s not ideal, but that’s the way life is when you write HTML and CSS.
For an application like iWeb, the problem becomes a nightmare. No software developer is going to include hacks in their application to accommodate poor browser implementation by some other company. Whenever the browsers change, then Apple has to go in and rewrite the hacks in the application and rerelease it again. It’s unrealistic and inappropriate to expect Apple to accommodate anything other than the accepted W3C standards for HTML and CSS. Otherwise any yahoo can write non-W3C-compliant browser software and then critize Apple for not creating web sites that work in his browser. The notion is ridiculous.
Now obviously that doesn’t solve your problem – you just want a site that people can view no matter how they get there. Well folks, the only way you can guarantee that is if you have someone hand-code your HTML and your CSS to hide each browser’s individual short-comings. You just cannot use an application like iWeb and expect it to produce those kinds of bandages, particularly if you’re demanding new and advanced features of that same application.
Apple is going to have to start using more HTML and CSS to provide the features you want – the navigation bar is one such “widget” that went that way in 2.0. And when Apple has to use that method simply to provide a feature you demand, then the concession is, they have to produce code that conforms to the W3C standards – it’s the baseline by which all web-based viewers are judged. If a browser out there does not conform to those standards, it’s the browsers fault, not iWeb’s.
I included a validation link on all the pages in my Aerolite demo to illustrate how Apple’s iWeb code conforms to the W3C standards. Click the link on each page. It’s in the upper right corner on all of pages. The W3C will review the code and respond with a validation page that either indicates you pass or you fail. If you fail, it tells you exactly why and how the page fails. Not one page failed validation so if anything, Apple has done a perfect job here and should be thanked for such work, not chastised for failing to bandage Microsoft’s disasters.
I have always said, people will change when you deny them what they want, so it’s in everyone’s best interest to stop pandering to Internet Explorer. Get your viewers to install and use Firefox – help them if they need help, but don’t ask anyone to provide another crutch for IE anymore. Time to die.
About This Article
This entry was posted by Suzanne on Monday, August 20th, 2007 at 10:05 AM and was filed in the FYI category using the tags: browser, css, html, iweb, update. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.
Aerolite Ice for iWeb 2.0 BETA Released
Aerolite Ice for iWeb 2.0 Updated
i want to add this whole entire post as a pop up to every site i do when ever it detects IE. Down with IE! LOL
Amen brother… a free template for you just for reading all the way through! Contact me about that ;-)
Suzanne,
While I broadly agree with you, I think the Mac geek take on IE is simply not realistic. Either iWeb is just a glorified blog to be shared around fellow family members to show photos of junior or it is a genuine web creation tool. I, like many others, happily made my website using iWeb and the spent more time tweaking it for IE than I spent in its’ creation after discovering it wouldn’t render. Why? Because it’s a small business site and the aim of it is to reach as many people as possible. Now Mac evangelists are always pointing out that the market share of IE is NOT 90%, but that is NOT the issue. The issue is that 90% of non-geeks are using it and that is the audience of the majority of people when they build a site,
If rapidweaver and other 3rd party ware can be tested to work with IE then why not iWeb? This issue is not going to go away and I’m sure that finally many of us will abandon iWeb alltogether. I’m looking into sandvox or dreamweaver and I’m sure many more convinced apple lovers will be jumping ship.
Come on geeks and join the real world. IE is not going to go away and I for one am not interested in alienating my potential readers by trying to get them to change their browers to look at my page. We all have enough problems to attract visitors in the first place. I just want to keep those visitors reading my page and if that means sellling out to the evil empire then so be it.
Either iWeb is just a glorified blog to be shared around fellow family members to show photos of junior or it is a genuine web creation tool.
Boy that’s a black and white statement. iWeb was not designed as a web design application for the masses. It was designed to complete the iLife circuit… simply, to distribute your iPhoto albums and iMovie movies to the web. One cannot ignore its intended purpose and then argue its merits against personal needs. I understand that desire to a certain extent. It’s a fun application and it allows a level of creativity and freedom no other application does. It’s not unexpected to wish it did more than it was intended. But the fact is, its core function is to distribute iLife projects to the web and the requirements that surround that single goal have everything to do with why it is what it is and why it does what it does.
If rapidweaver and other 3rd party ware can be tested to work with IE then why not iWeb?
This is a common misconception, that the application actually has awareness of IE or any other browser that does not follow W3C standards. No application has this kind of awareness. It’s impossible to know at any given point in time, which browser is still broken, which are not and of those that are, which issues still exist. That information is dynamic. Applications follow W3C standards for any code they produce. If your site works in IE, it’s because either the theme designer, or you or some knowledge-base provided a hack to counteract a known problem in a given browser. So to imply that any application has been tested to work with IE would be… odd. That statement could only be made if the application had some kind of mechanism for knowing current bugs in every browser and could dynamically apply hacks to counteract them on the fly. That would be amazing, but you’ll never see that.
So the first thing here is to understand, no application produces code that works in IE. All applications produce code that minds the W3C standards. Hacks are applied by those who know the current bugs of all browsers. That might be the theme designer, that might be you, but it’s not the application you use.
Now regarding why iWeb is different from the rest in terms of generating published code…
All of the applications you mention Chris share a common, open-code framework that puts the responsibility of compliant sites in the lap of the theme developer or the end user, not the application itself. The theme developer creates not only the HTML structure of the site pages, but also provides the entire set of styles in a CSS stylesheet. Hacks are almost always configured in the CSS as you probably know. This approach works well for those applications, because their target audience includes theme designers and savvy users capable of understanding and writing the code and hacks themselves. It provides that insurance that anything you build can ultimately be adapted to any browser… a luxury that unfortunately limits the design environment to the boxy, linear, unintuitive assembly process that drove many to iWeb.
iWeb showed up on the scene with a revolutionary change in the way you assemble a page. The approach was brilliant. First we need to remember though, that iWeb was not created as a web design tool for the masses. It was designed as the last piece of the circuit for iLife… the distribution method for iLife projects to the web. That’s its job. You can try to use it for things beyond that intended job, but that’s the job it was designed to do.
To produce a design environment like the one iWeb has requires certain rules. It’s no coincidence no other web design application can do what iWeb does. They all use the open-code framework. As a result, everything has to fit in a box and line up properly. It’s terribly limiting in terms of design. With iWeb you know that’s not the case. You can slap anything on the page, in any position. The reasons are geeky complex, but it’s these two diverse approaches to the design process that create the resulting access or lack there of to the code. The square, restrictive design environment allows user control over the code. The highly intuitive environment can’t because there’s really no structure there, except for the most basic, underneath it. The exception would be the stylesheet. There’s no reason you won’t see greater access to the stylesheet in coming versions of iWeb. The exposure of the hyperlink colors was an example in this latest release.
So iWeb is no different than any other web design application. Every single one of them, if it produces any code, produces code that is W3C compliant. There are small exceptions which are still held generally acceptable. None of them have dynamic awareness of any browser’s non-compliance and none of them insert hacks for you as a result. Because of the open-code framework that most applications use, compliance is nearly always attended to by the theme designer or the end user. That’s all by design, but that approach limits the design environment. iWeb’s closed-code system enables the rich visual design environment, but limits access to the code as part of the price. Ultimately any site, created with any of these tools, appears correct in any browser because some “one” attended to the problems and applied a hack to cover it up. There’s no other way to ensure your site will work.
Ultimately people need to choose the right tool for the job, but educate yourself in this respect. You’re either getting accessibility to the code or you’re getting an intuitive canvas from which to design. Your requirements dictate which solution will provide the best results, but it would be a false assumption to say any of them are aware of bad browsers and fix those problems for you.
Thanks Suzanne,
That really clarified a lot of things – in fact I’ve posted your answer on the Apple iWeb forum so it can hopefully do the same for others. I agree with you that the fantastic thing about iWeb is it’s ability to move everything around – as I have done magazine layout I find that so useful as opposed to rapidweaver etc. In fact I bought rw, but just can’t use because I can’t see what I’m doing on the page – for this reason I’m looking at sandvox.
I don’t know what to do after your reply, now I understand it better maybe I’ll just stick with iWeb, in which case I’ll be buying your mystics template if I finally get the courage to install ’08.
One thing is for sure, although you are not making money at the moment, you have really shown with this change to 2.0 that your customer service & value for money are 2nd to none and your growing legion of fans and users will be with you (and buying your excellent products) for the long haul.
Cheers,
Chris
You know like everything, there are always trade-offs. I think the only perfect thing I’ve ever purchased was my Fender American Deluxe V-Neck Strat – now that’s perfect! :D But I digress.
I quit my corporate job as a director of software development about 18 months ago now. After 12 years of web development and the sluggishness of corporate productivity, I was ready to lighten up and discover something new. I threw out all the rules.
I wasn’t looking to start a new career mind you, just take some time off and reset my vision. Then comes iWeb, February 2006. When I opened that application, I think I giggled :-O The silliness was out of hand. Twelve years of box-like thinking, bound creativity… washed away in an instant. Frankly I almost couldn’t believe what I was seeing.
iWeb has this effect on people – even the square developer-types can look at this approach and appreciate it. It allows you to get to the point right from the start. What it enables though, is something far greater than is easy to describe. It sounds almost cheesey to say it, but it releases a creative part of each person and once you start working from that mindset, you never want give up that luxury. You’re working from the source of your creativity without having to mind structure or rules or some other highly technical aspect that just gets in the way of the point.
That’s an amazing feat. I don’t work for Apple and likely never will, but as a technology professional, I can admire the thought and even care that went in to creating applications like iLife and iWork. Apple is trying to remove the complexity for you to get you into that creative place, a place you can’t achieve if you’re having to manage structure and other rules. What an enormous goal. Believe me, from a geek point of view, we like the structure and the rules – it’s easier and faster to create software when those are involved. But Apple decides to remove those from the user view entirely! Oooo it would be a definite challenge to be an Apple iLife or iWork developer – there’s no cheating when that’s your goal.
So is iWeb perfect? The world of the web is still too chaotic for any application to cover all the issues, but what it does in relationship to what we’ve seen in the past and where we’re going, is ground-breaking. All this from an application geared-toward people who barely know much about their computers.
I’m glad I was able to spit that out in a way that helped clarify things. That was a challenge! But you were not alone in your sentiments – you voiced concerns that thousands of people have. Every time I see that, it reminds me that someone has to explain this stuff or we’ll continue to argue points that aren’t even relevant, and frankly, unproductive. If you want to know why software companies never respond to you, this is why – it’s just very difficult to explain how architecture impacts the end result. And if the listener doesn’t follow well, you’re criticized for their lack of understanding or criticized for not communicating well enough or criticized for something else they dream up out of frustration.
It’s very hard to be a user. It’s very hard to be a software developer. Sometimes users have to take a leap of faith and allow the software developer to grow the idea. Sometimes software developers need to take a leap of faith and explain how things work. Either way, both sides need to be more “team” minded.
I appreciate your comments about the way I manage my little business. I suppose since it is my only means of income, one would label it a business, but I perfer to see this more as a collabrative effort to empower each other. The best part of all this, still, is to get emails from people all over the world showing me how happy they are with a site they built with one of my themes. Sometimes it isn’t even my theme – they just used information I provided to create something. Empowering people is my extreme sport ;-)
P.S. Remind me in a few weeks, after I’ve converted all my themes, to readdress the IE compatibility issues. If there are specific problems that are repeatable in every iWeb-produced site, I can write a hack that you can insert to fix it. The problem has to be the result of W3C code produced by iWeb though – it can’t be an issue that’s produced by someone inserting HTML via an HTML widget that breaks things. There are things you can do on any page that you probably shouldn’t. In those cases – don’t do that! :) In other cases, you have no choice. I don’t know what those are, but later, I can write up how to easily fix them. Just remind me.
Wow! I am a newbie at website design. I’ve always enjoyed making things work on the computer, eg using Excel, etc. When I retired about 3 years ago, the thought of being able to learn website design was there. Then as you said, iWeb appeared! I really, really appreciated your explanations about how things work!! I don’t know that I will ever get to the point of learning HTML but at least now I have some sort of concept of how things work – or not. As someone else said, your hard work and dedicated support to your customers has not gone unnoticed. I know I will be shopping at your store in the near future! Thanks again.
I can’t believe that Fender can make the perfect instrument but I love that moment when you pick up a guitar and it just feels right. As a fellow musician I can get into that analogy and as a recent converter this Mac thing is like plugging into your Marshall stack for the first time and turning it up to 11. I have a friend who wanted me to play on his record that was recorded onto a roland mixer with a hard-drive. He said I didn’t need my amp as the roland had a marshall stack simulation. I tried to explain that it wasn’t the sound but the air that smacks you in the back and vibrates you, but he’s a folkie and couldn’t get it.
In music as you know there is that moment that happens just sometimes when you’re no longer playing, and the band is no longer playing – there’s just this organic sound. And I’m not a mystic but I’ve had this experience just a few imes when playing. As you say, your suddenly given this HUGE canvas to play with on your computer and you can be Kandinsky or whoever and then you’re brought down to earth. Your stuff is inspiring people to get out and create – nowadays I don’t listen to much music as I just want to strap the guitar on again and that’s dangerous. I think that few things in this life are as worthwile as inspiring others to do something.
Well you’re most welcome. See… that’s THE BEST part of doing anything… someone else has been empowered. :)
Amen to that Chris – I have not experienced what you describe there after you stop playing, but I know exactly what you’re talking about. The energy is still there with you, echoing in the ethers. It’s like charging a solar lamp… remove the light of day and the lamp continues to glow for a while. A wonder of physics that translates far beyond solar lamps.
Got my first tube amp just the other day, a Crate class A palamino v16. An emulator might trick the untrained ear, but it can never reproduce the same vibration that physical tubes create. Ahhhhhh….. (sounds of angelic choirs echoing through the cosmos ;-)
Can’t agree more – inspiring others is such a high.
That’s some serious tubes…
BTW I was referring to the moment when you are playing together an it’s like there’s no longer any musicians, only the music – it doesn’t happen very often in my experience. I also wanted to say that you are excellent at explaining things free of geek-speak; very eloquent.
I’ve enjoyed conversing with you.
Cheers,
Chris