An additional problem was my toolbar. The many buttons was glued together, while they are spaced above and beyond each other when you view the web page with Mozilla Firefox. This was easily fixed, ironically with a certain CSS statement that Internet Explorer does not have support for. The last problem was the looks of a button when you hover with your mouse over it. The last button of every toolbar was broken so that the hovering effect did not display correctly in Internet explorer. Internet Explorer is so bug ridden you just can't have a work-around for any issue. The point I'm looking to make is that the web page looked not to bad all things considered, if you kept in your mind that it was only designed and tested with Mozilla Firefox.
Another interesting thing I discovered from my visitor reports was that 95% utilized a screen resolution of 1024x768. I'm still designing for a 14" screen with an 800x600 resolution but ensure that my site displays correctly on a 1024x768 resolution. I have made the mistake in earlier times by designing sites on an 800x600 resolution only, because I simply did not think about a higher resolution at that time. This was a very stupid mistake to make, I was chasing site visitors away, unknowingly, because I was too reluctant to obtain myself a bigger screen that will handle a higher display resolution.
This is certainly maybe the most ironic part of my discoveries. People don't mind to spend money upgrading their screen so as to comply with the newest trend of screen answers, something that does nothing to enhance the security of your web activities, but when they get the opportunity to getting a free browser, that supplies better security than their own current browser, they simply refuse to make the move. May possibly seen Internet Explorer fix common HTML errors, like using two double quotes next to one another while there should are only one. Firefox do not display the image referenced after these double quotes and directed this error out after you viewed the page origin.
Internet Explorer ignored the second double quote and displayed the image like there was no error whatsoever. It did the cover-up work for the coding error, while Mozilla Firefox exposed that. Internet Explorer is therefore not the type of browser a web designer would use to validate their own HTML code. You would prefer prefer an alternative enjoy Firefox, which tells you when you are making coding errors. But this even holds a threat for the normal user. Would you always trust a browser that make an effort to correct a designer's slipups, or would you alternatively trust a browser that doesn't allow the faulty code to execute whatsoever? Hackers are always on the lookout for common mistakes to use. You have a bigger chance to exploit faulty code than code that never got executed in the first place. After all how confident considering that Internet Explorer will make comfortable and reliable when correcting HTML problems?
Mozilla Firefox has a much better track record, not only with security issues, but also various other features, many features that current version of Internet explorer does not provide for. mozila fire