How To Subscribe and Unsubscribe is at the end of this note.
Mailing List Trouble? See http://www.langa.com/help.txt
Want an easier-to read formatted HTML version? See http://www.langa.com/whats_new.htm

Please email the LangaList to a friend! (Use this super-fast form!)

The LangaList

14-Mar-99

A Free Email Newsletter from Fred Langa About BrowserTune,
HotSpots, Columns, Tips & Tricks, and Other Activities

In This Issue:
BT2K Is Rockin'
New Tests!
Hidden Gems
The Case of the Missing Colons (ouch!)
Software Double Standard?
A Nasty Win98 Privacy Problem
Win98 Service Pack Update
Just For Grins
More!

BT2K is Rockin'!

First, I'd like to welcome the many thousands of new subscribers to this week's LangaList: the activity at the BrowserTune2000 site has been extraordinarily heavy and very, very gratifying to see.

BT2K is nearing the end of the "demo" phase and is getting ready to move into a true beta test. So far, the tests are working well with a very low incidence of problems and bugs. Most of the email I'm getting is like these:

"Have used BrowserTune many times before, I LOVE the new BT2K and look forward to the final version. Previously, Had to put aside hours to test my browser (and restart due to freezeups), the automated tests are terrific."--  Roz Klaiman rklaiman@wwonline.com

"Just went through BT2000 for the first time and must admit I like the "automatic transmission" style very much! I look forward to the final product with much anticipation." --"Terry Bell" gtbell@direct.ca

"I never was impressed with my 56k connections. Even though I was getting 50k + connections obviously I wasn't getting 50K + performance. I ran BT2K several times with my current ISP and the following results are typical: "The overall average of these tests was 31 Kbps."I was not impressed. Then I decided to take up [a different ISP] on their offer of 30 days free, had a CD handy. Within minutes I was running on the same 56k V.90 modem, and received the following results:"The overall average of these tests was 53 Kbps." I have run several more tests, and even though every connection is not this fast, most are and none are as slow as [my old ISP].  Thanks for making BT2K and I will be checking back often for updates.-- D. Powelson" dpowelson@msn.com

That's exactly the kind of thing BT2K---even in its unfinished form---is good for. Glad so many of your are finding it helpful!

return to top of page

BT2K Versions b1.07/8/
Great New Tests!

If you saved the "custom report" that BT2K sent you, check out the version number at the start of the text. (It's also repeated in the "quick reference" section near the bottom.) If you didn't run version b1.07, you haven't seen the most-current version of BT2K.

Compared to the early versions, b1.07 offers better browser type detection, dozens of cosmetic improvements, supports a larger number of modem types, streamlines the JavaScripts, substantially improves the error-handling, further fine-tunes the advice, and increases support for old and usual browsers.

Version b1.08 will be released during the day this Tuesday (16-Mar-99), and it's the biggest interim release yet, with a series of brand-new tests that will let you see how fast---or slow---your browser's scripting engine is. And I can almost guarantee you'll be in for a surprise!

I know I sure was surprised: As I write BT2K I have three different PCs running with a different major browser running on each. (I use different PCs to help ensure that Browser X running on one machine can't interfere with Browser Y running on another.) From time to time, I change what browser is running on which PC so that eventually, I work through all the major releases of all the major browsers.

As I work on new pages, I test them on all three machines to ensure that the pages look and act the same---except where internal differences in the browsers make them behave differently.

Over the last few weeks, I noticed that some browsers seemed to be running BT2K's scripts slowly. BT2K makes heavy use of scripts, but so do many, many web pages out in the real world: For example, most of the banner ads you see are controlled by JavaScripts. If your browser runs scripts slowly, then you lose performance---and speed---on every page with an ad, or with any kind of script.

So, I wrote a benchmark to time how long it takes a browser's scripting engine to perform a number of very typical browser tasks--- doing integer and floating-point math, manipulating "strings" of text, and so on.

The preliminary results made my jaw drop, and they may stun you, too: If the test results hold up, then about half the people reading this newsletter have a browser that runs scripts 300% slower than the rest! And an unlucky few of you may have a browser that runs scripts at---believe it or not---just 2% of the speed of competing browsers!

Script speed is only one factor in overall browser performance, but it can be a significant one---especially if you happen to have one of the dogs. 8-)

As of late Sunday afternoon, I'm still finishing the new script benchmarks and verifying the results. I'll test the new pages on Monday, and release them (when they're suitably debugged) during the day on Tuesday. Please plan to try the new tests--- they could be a real eye-opener!

return to top of page

Hidden Gems

In last week's LangaList newsletter, I was bemoaning the lack of a good built-in JavaScript debugger for Microsoft Internet Explorer. Netscape's browsers actually have a pretty good one called the "JavaScript Console." When you encounter a script bug in Navigator or Communicator, the Console can show you exactly where the error occurred and even highlight the exact character that caused the problem: You see the actual code, with the error pointed out to you in red.

Microsoft IE, in contrast, simply tells you a line number and character number where the script error occurred. That might be OK, except that Microsoft's own HTML editor, FrontPage, doesn't use line numbers. To debug with IE, you have to use a third-party, line-number-oriented tool, and that's a pain in the ASCII.

Almost immediately after the newsletter went out, I got email from a number of readers pointing out a nifty (and free!) tool I'd somehow completely missed: the Microsoft Script Debugger, available in the tools section of at http://www.microsoft.com/workshop/. (You have to register on the site before you can download the debugger, but registration is free and painless.)

It's a nice tool: It integrates with IE, and when a script problem occurs, the error dialog offers a "Debug?" button; If you click it, a sort of enhanced NotePad opens up that lets you see the error in full, color-coded context. If you're working off local pages, you even can edit and save the corrected code on the spot, with or without Trace breakpoints enabled so you can step through the script one line at a time. Nice!

Reader Gabriel White  was the first to point out the Microsoft Script Debugger to me. He also says the Debugger can even serve as a lightweight HTML editor; its color-coding of HTML tags makes it easier to understand even complex pages. Thanks, Gabe!

From time to time in the past, we've used this column to discuss "hidden gems" like the Script Debugger---great little applets that we've come across that don't get much publicity or play, but are definitely worth having.

But it's been too long since we last pooled our knowledge that way. So: What downloads have you found that you've added to your "must have" list of software? What useful (but under-promoted or under-appreciated) tools do you keep handy? What hidden gems have you found?

Our discussion will run all week: Drop by the WINDOWS Magazine "Dialog Box" online discussion area (accessible via the front page at http://content.techweb.com/winmag/) and join in!

return to top of page

The Case of the Missing Colons

No, not the medical kind. I'm talking about punctuation. 8-)

Last week's email newsletter somehow lost its colons: The JavaScript tip, for example, should have  appeared as:

javascript:alert("Cookie is: " + document.cookie)

The address for "Neat net Tricks" should have been http://www.neatnettricks.com, and so on.

The HTML version of the LangaList was correctly formatted. It's always available for you, online, in the What's New section at www.langa.com. You also can find all back issues there, in fully searchable form.

If anything ever seems weird in the all-text version, just check out the HTML version at www.langa.com, and chances are you'll find a 100% correctly-formatted version there.

return to top of page

The Software Double-Standard

If you use a Netscape browser, you should know that there are brand-new releases:   Navigator is up to 4.08  and Communicator to 4.51.

Also, both new releases have retained a number of long-standing bugs that get in the way of complex web pages. (One of these bugs is so old it traces its roots back to the earliest days of JavaScript!) Other browser makers (including Opera and Microsoft) have worked around these problems, but Netscape has not.

For example, Navigator has had a bug since JavaScript first appeared: Complex scripts cannot be placed within the TD tags of a table. It's not an insurmountable problem---IE, for example, has no problem with code of arbitrary complexity placed anywhere you want inside tables. It's just that Netscape has never gotten around to fixing the bug.

This is a particular problem for BT2K because all of CMP's pages are table-based. There's no good way to avoid the tables, so the only option is to use a long, complicated, pain-in-the-butt "document.write" trick to fool the browser into not realizing it's working inside a table. As long as you hide the TD tags from the browser in this way, Navigator/Communicator is happy. Doh!

Similarly, Netscape is equally finicky about Font tags inside HTML "Divisions." For example, even the very latest versions of Netscape browsers will crash and burn when they try to run the following simple code. (Note in this code, I'll replace the HTML "greater than" and "less than" delimiters with parenthesis, so as not to fool your mail reader or browser into trying to run this code.)

(div id="crashandburn" style="position:absolute")
(TABLE WIDTH=300)
(TR)(TD)Netscape browsers never get this far.(/font)(/TD)(/TR)
(/TABLE)
(/div)

The meaningless unpaired (/font) tag is the problem. That little extra tag actually causes instant browser death! Navigator/Communicator generates an Illegal Operation/Invalid Page Fault: The browser stops cold and immediately shuts down!

But  Opera (generally regarded as the "purest" of the browsers) has no trouble at all with the code---it just ignores the meaningless tag. Likewise, Microsoft IE just ignores the tag and renders the page perfectly. Only Netscape crashes and burns.

There's lots more, but you get the idea.

Despite problems like these, Netscape is still a well-regarded browser. It's strange: Bugs from Netscape or Opera or Red Hat or Apple---or almost anyone except Microsoft--- are just part of the package and no big deal. But bugs from Microsoft (some say) are a glaring example of shoddy workmanship, lazy monopolistic practices, lousy programming, and an expression of the vast evil that lurks in the suburbs of Seattle. After all, all Microsoft products stink, right?

Gimme a break.

Do you see a double standard in the way software products are evaluated? Do non-Microsoft products gain a halo-effect simply by not being from Microsoft? Conversely, do good Microsoft products get disparaged for no good reason other than the fact that they are from Microsoft? And: Which do you think is the best browser, and why? Join in a week-long discussion starting Wednesday (17-Mar-99) midday (EST; UT-5) at http://www.informationweek.com/langaletter!

return to top of page

A Nasty Win98 Privacy Problem

These two articles say it much better than I could here. If you're using Windows 98, check out:

http://content.techweb.com/winmag//news/1999/0301/0312a.htm and especially http://content.techweb.com/winmag//web/regwiz.htm.

Those pages will explain exactly what's going on, why it's a problem, and then tell you exactly what to do to fix it. Click on over now!

And Speaking of Win98...

...where the heck is the service pack?

Well, it's on the way, and another WinMag page has the details. See http://content.techweb.com/winmag//specialreports/win99/default.htm.

return to top of page

Just for Grins: Y2K