My Firefox is playing silly buggers with me...

[Memnoch]

...and I don't know why. Lately I've been having some problems with viewing pages via Firefox. I'm using Firefox 1.5.0.7. Pages don't look like they do with IE 7. Here's an example (this is a page I accessed as part of my grad school research):

Using Firefox




And here is the same page using IE7




The Firefox page looks all weird, while the IE page looks normal(ish).

Anyone know why this happens and how I can fix it? I'd be curious to know if any Firefox users have the same problem as me accessing this page (the URL is http://www.gradschool.sc.edu/ )

[Bozos of Bones]

It's not Firefox's fault some websites are idiotic and hopelessly backward. My old high-school site was like this until me and a friend interveined. Don't give it another thought.

[Larry_OHF]

If the website is unable to support Firefox, then that will happen. I accessed a website today that says:

...This is a beta preview that supports Mac, Mozilla Firefox, and Internet Explorer (Including Version 7)...

In that example, it says that they know that their website is made to support different browsers. If a website has not taken the time to make sure that their page is multi-browser friendly, then you're stuck. (I assume).

My bank's website only supports Netscape and Explorer, and they say that.

[ 10-01-2006, 04:30 PM: Message edited by: Larry_OHF ]

[Memnoch]

So it's not just my Firefox then?

[Larry_OHF]

803-777-7000
This number appears to be for site information. How about it if I call them in the morning and actually ask them if there are known issues with other browsers, or if they indeed support Firefox...why or why not...

I will post my findings after I talk to them.

[Memnoch]

Geez mate, you don't have to go to that trouble. I'd hate to put you out.

[Olorin]

I checked the link, using Firefox 1.5.0.7 for Mac. I got the same thing you did.

It's probably a case of someone trying to do fancy things with their site, without the common sense to check the results in multiple browsers.

My uni has a lot of pages that are 'best viewed using Mozilla' I think just comes down to who is designing the page.

[Larry_OHF]

What trouble? I am interested in it as well, and certainly am pleased to have the chance to help. Hey...if I sleep in late in the morning and do not have the time to call before I run off to school, then I'll not worry about it. Otherwise, I should have time to make one simple call.

[Memnoch]

I just saw this report on some security flaw in Firefox that some hackers reported on. Check these two snapperheads out, they look like they love themselves, eh.

Hackers claim zero-day flaw in Firefox By Joris Evers Staff Writer, CNET News.com Published: September 30, 2006, 10:57 PM PDT . SAN DIEGO--The open-source Firefox Web browser is critically flawed in the way it handles JavaScript, two hackers said Saturday afternoon. . An attacker could commandeer a computer running the browser simply by crafting a Web page that contains some malicious JavaScript code, Mischa Spiegelmock and Andrew Wbeelsoi said in a presentation at the ToorCon hacker conference here. The flaw affects Firefox on Windows, Apple Computer's Mac OS X and Linux, they said. . "Internet Explorer, everybody knows, is not very secure. But Firefox is also fairly insecure," said Spiegelmock, who in everyday life works at blog company SixApart. He detailed the flaw, showing a slide that displayed key parts of the attack code needed to exploit it. . The flaw is specific to Firefox's implementation of JavaScript, a 10-year-old scripting language widely used on the Web. In particular, various programming tricks can cause a stack overflow error, Spiegelmock said. The implementation is a "complete mess," he said. "It is impossible to patch." . The JavaScript issue appears to be a real vulnerability, Window Snyder, Mozilla's security chief, said after watching a video of the presentation Saturday night. "What they are describing might be a variation on an old attack," she said. "We're going to do some investigating." . Snyder said she isn't happy with the disclosure and release of an apparent exploit during the presentation. "It looks like they had enough information in their slide for an attacker to reproduce it," she said. "I think it is unfortunate because it puts users at risk, but that seems to be their goal." . At the same time, the presentation probably gives Mozilla enough data to fix the apparent flaw, Snyder said. However, because the possible flaw appears to be in the part of the browser that deals with JavaScript, addressing it might be tougher than the average patch, she added. "If it is in the JavaScript Virtual Machine, it is not going to be a quick fix," Snyder said. . The hackers claim they know of about 30 unpatched Firefox flaws. They don't plan to disclose them, instead holding onto the bugs. . Jesse Ruderman, a Mozilla security staffer, attended the presentation and was called up on the stage with the two hackers. He attempted to persuade the presenters to responsibly disclose flaws via Mozilla's bug bounty program instead of using them for malicious purposes such as creating networks of hijacked PCs, called botnets. . "I do hope you guys change your minds and decide to report the holes to us and take away $500 per vulnerability instead of using them for botnets," Ruderman said. . The two hackers laughed off the comment. "It is a double-edged sword, but what we're doing is really for the greater good of the Internet. We're setting up communication networks for black hats," Wbeelsoi said. . Source: Click here

[Larry_OHF]

I just got off the phone with the help desk at USC. Sorry I could not do it yesterday. The guy told me that they recommend Internet Explorer, and that they are using version 6. He said that the reason that Firefox is not working right for you is because of its design to disable all the codes and features that a website has that Firefox thinks might be dangerous, and that it does not understand the difference in safe sites such as their university page. He said that Explorer can be programmed to only accept sites that you know are safe and that it would therefore run even better than Firefox would, and give you the same security as Firefox does, since it would be blocking all unproven sites from running their unproven features.

It just proved to me after this phone call (and your previous post) that Firefox is not worth my time.