Preview in other browsers?

Gernot Frisch wrote:

If you really want to find out what bropwsers people are using when
accessing your site, ask them. Put up an interactive quiz, and ask
them
what browser they use, what version, what screen resolution, and
what size
viewport. While you are at it, ask them for their thoughts on your
site.
After that, you will have a good idea what browsers are being used,
what
colours they like to see, and whatever other information you may
want ready
for the next release of your site.

Why didn't I come to this idea... Thank you, I'll do that.

Before you do, please read Spartanicus' reply and my additional reply.

Thanks, Carolyn
--
Carolyn Marenger

"Carolyn Marenger" <cajunk (AT) marenger (DOT) com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:b8514$44242c99$cf701c97$14685 (AT) PRIMUS (DOT) CA...

Spartanicus wrote:

Carolyn Marenger <cajunk (AT) marenger (DOT) com> wrote:

If you really want to find out what bropwsers people are using when
accessing your site, ask them. Put up an interactive quiz, and ask
them
what browser they use, what version,

Unlikely that this would yield a representative result, people for
who'm
a site works are less likely to fill in such a questionnaire, same
for
certain personality types (certain personality types may gravitate
towards certain browsers).

This is a factor to take into account when deciding wether or not to
use a
survey. Another is how to word it and implement it so that it
catches an
honest answer, not a biased one. However, it may give him an
indication of
what some of the users are interested in.

what screen resolution,

Which has no relevance to a web author.

Yes, that I am aware of.

and what size viewport.

The typical user doesn't know what a viewport is, not it's width.
Also,
viewport width is likely to vary for a given user.

You are correct here too. In designing a survey, I need to know
what I want
to learn, and for that using the correct terminology is beneficial.
When
actually wording the survey, I convert the technical into layman's
terms,
such as, when browsing does your browser window take up the whole
screen,
half the screen, or a quarter of the screen. Then in conjunction
with the
screen resolution, I might have an idea as to what size windows my
viewers
typically use, and also what the smallest ones are.

Being a newsgroup with a technical focus, I used the technical
terminology
in the original posting. Maybe I should have elaborated more the
first
time. Thanks for pointing it out, so as to hopefully remove any
confusion
for anyone who may read this posting.

I could use php to get the browser name they view the index.php site
with. Although, some browsers allow to be identified as
InternetExploder. Pretty stupid if you ask me.

On Mon, 27 Mar 2006 10:10:13 +0200, "Gernot Frisch" <Me (AT) Privacy (DOT) net>
wrote:

Although, some browsers allow to be identified as
InternetExploder. Pretty stupid if you ask me.

Very stupid. But I trust you are aware that the stupidity lies not with
the makers of the browsers, but with the makers of sites which implement
browser sniffing? Specifically those who refuse access to any browser
not calling itself Internet Explorer?

--
Stephen Poley

http://www.xs4all.nl/~sbpoley/webmatters/

"Stephen Poley" <sbpoleySpicedHamTrap (AT) xs4all (DOT) nl> schrieb im
Newsbeitrag news:dtcf225sqklmlndlnchaed6knegbea0b6n (AT) 4ax (DOT) com...

On Mon, 27 Mar 2006 10:10:13 +0200, "Gernot Frisch" <Me (AT) Privacy (DOT) net
wrote:

Although, some browsers allow to be identified as
InternetExploder. Pretty stupid if you ask me.

Very stupid. But I trust you are aware that the stupidity lies not
with
the makers of the browsers, but with the makers of sites which
implement
browser sniffing? Specifically those who refuse access to any
browser
not calling itself Internet Explorer?

Who would be so dumb as to lock out potential customners because they
don't have your taste of flavour? I can even browse mircosoft.com with
any browser.

On Mon, 27 Mar 2006 14:37:07 +0200, "Gernot Frisch" <Me (AT) Privacy (DOT) net>
wrote:

"Stephen Poley" <sbpoleySpicedHamTrap (AT) xs4all (DOT) nl> schrieb im
Newsbeitrag news:dtcf225sqklmlndlnchaed6knegbea0b6n (AT) 4ax (DOT) com...
On Mon, 27 Mar 2006 10:10:13 +0200, "Gernot Frisch" <Me (AT) Privacy (DOT) net
wrote:

Although, some browsers allow to be identified as
InternetExploder. Pretty stupid if you ask me.

Very stupid. But I trust you are aware that the stupidity lies not
with
the makers of the browsers, but with the makers of sites which
implement
browser sniffing? Specifically those who refuse access to any
browser
not calling itself Internet Explorer?

Who would be so dumb as to lock out potential customners because they
don't have your taste of flavour?

A good question indeed. See http://www.quotedb.com/quotes/1349

That particular piece of stupidity does at last seem to be in decline
though. There are still a handful of sites around that find it necessary
to tell me that I am using Opera and that as a result their site may not
display properly. But it's been several months since I was last told to
upgrade to IE 4.

--
Stephen Poley

http://www.xs4all.nl/~sbpoley/webmatters/

Gernot Frisch wrote:

Thank you. What othe browsers are commonly used? I tested IE6, Firefox
and now Safari. Is that enough?

Analyze the logs of your site, then you'll learn what _your_ audience is
using.


Tim

Gernot Frisch wrote:

Thank you. What othe browsers are commonly used? I tested IE6, Firefox
and now Safari. Is that enough?

The only other "major" display engine you're missing is Opera. Also
keep an older version of each around, because many people seldom if ever
upgrade. Furthermore, I'd test with at least one text-mode browser
(Lynx or Links) just to be safe.

Tim