The Lounge is rated PG. If you're about to post something you wouldn't want your
kid sister to read then don't post it. No flame wars, no abusive conduct, no programming
questions and please don't post ads.
There is a difference between having to support IE7, and having to make it look good in IE7.
If I were you I would create an adaptive layout that looks good in modern browsers and works on different sized windows to solve the mobile device vs. desktop problem.
For the layout details, though, don't limit yourself to CSS that works in IE7. Just accept that things may look not quite right. It's not too hard to make something that works in IE7, though you'll go crazy trying to make it look exactly the same (unless you want it to look like it's 2005 in ALL browsers). If your organization can accept that using an old browser means their web sites aren't going to look like a modern browser, and may have layout issues, then I'd go with that approach.
If they expect everything to look snappy in IE7 too, then you're screwed.
> If they expect everything to look snappy in IE7 too, then you're screwed.
That's where we were for this release, and what I'm trying to avoid in the future.
For anyone that still needs to estimate what it would take a competant designer with a lot of CSS experience to make a site that looks good in Chrome/FF look pixel perfect in IE7 a good estimate is +100-150%. And, yes I mean multiply your IE7 estimate by 2 or 2.5 And, no I'm not the one that did it (I just did the web application).
My strategy is to support the latest 4 major browsers, which usually are IE, Firefox, Chrome and Safari, then support the 3 most important mobile web browsers, Safari on IOS, Android Browser, Windows Phone IE. For backward compatibility a focus on functionality over design, it should work but it may not look exactly the same and usually i test on the last 4 major versions of a browser, when available.
We are quite similar. We will support whichever browser/version we choose but will get to N% of observed users. This applies for desktop and mobile seperately (although percentages change and measurement is by country). For internal-use corporate customers we name the versions that make up the N% of browsers/devices and if you want something not on the list you pay to get it added. Otherwise we end up spending lots of effort supporting X.Y.Z for 0.008% of user base. Using percentage rather than direct naming means we guarantee to keep adapting to market trends.
LOL. Entertaining. A perfect example of how many people debate politics.
If your actions inspire others to dream more, learn more, do more and become more, you are a leader.-John Q. Adams You must accept one of two basic premises: Either we are alone in the universe, or we are not alone in the universe. And either way, the implications are staggering.-Wernher von Braun Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former.-Albert Einstein
I feel as if the guy has been singled out, not because he was doping but because he was too successful. Unless the USADA is full of idiots they already know you aren't going to win the Tour without some sort of doping - and that is what bothers me a bit.
He wasn't targetted because he was doping but because he was too damn good at it and he won too many times. Had we won 3 Tours they'd of ignored him entirely. The point? Don't pretend to be against doping when in fact you're just against too much of it. The hypocrisy there bothers me.
I experience a form of this every day on the way to work. I can go 5mph over the speed limit and the cops don't care. However, if you make it obvious (10mph) over then they'll nail you. In both cases the law is being broken - so it isn't really the law that matters - but rather, who is being obnoxious about it.
Maybe the rule should be changed from No Doping to No Being Obnoxious.
If they tried to ban him once and failed, trying again for the same charge over the same period is not fair. Independent of all things, you can't just try to find someone guilty of the same charge constantly until you eventually win.
Of course I am completely uninformed in the matter. I do not know how many times Lance has beaten the wrap just that it was more than once.
From my understanding. Everyone who ratted on Lance for taking drugs knew about it cause they were also taking them. Which leads me to believe all cyclists do it. If everyone is doing it than it was an even playing field in which Lance won. Give that man back his titles.
I note that you are a keen cyclist. What sort of drugs are you on then?
I can atest as a witness, it's not alcohol.
Michael Martin Australia
"I controlled my laughter and simple said "No,I am very busy,so I can't write any code for you". The moment they heard this all the smiling face turned into a sad looking face and one of them farted. So I had to leave the place as soon as possible." - Mr.Prakash One Fine Saturday. 24/04/2004
A particle resists our idea of either-or: it's not here or there, it's sort of both. It's not spinning clockwise or counter-clockwise, but a bit of both. It gets a definite location or spin only when it's measured.
So, without measuring, the particle does not exist. The fact that you cannot measure it's spin while knowing it's location (measuring one affects the other) does not logically result in a change of laws; it does not mean that it's "both" until "we" look at it (or measure it), it means we assume both states being possible, because we're not going to measure.
Bastard Programmer from Hell if you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]