IE7 does not work with floatbox

Page: 1

Author Post
Member
Registered: Apr 2013
Posts: 2
Hi,

I have a problem when testing my website with IE7 : with floatbox, I can't open the webpage :
"internet explorer cannot display the webpage"

If I remove the line below in the source code, it works (but I can't use floatbox)
<script type="text/javascript" src="./floatbox/floatbox.js"></script>


I've tested with Floatbox v 5.6.1 and v 5.7.2

Any idea to fix the problem ?

Thanks,

Max
Administrator
Registered: Aug 2008
Posts: 3382
Show me the page please.
Administrator
Registered: Aug 2008
Posts: 3382
Thanks for the private link to your test page. In that message you also indicated that the floatboxjs.com demo was not working for you with IE7.

I tested both your page and mine with IE7 browser mode in IE 10 and with a native instance of IE 7 (7.0.5730.13) running in an XP Service Pack 2 virtual machine. In all cases Floatbox behaved fine with both your content and mine showing in a floatbox as it should.

I think the problem is limited to your particular browser and may possibly be related to its configuration or installed add-ons.
Member
Registered: Apr 2013
Posts: 2
Thanks for your answer. Good news if it works !

++
Max
Member
Registered: Jun 2013
Posts: 13
Location: Kiel, Germany
I just have exactly the same problem. I'm testing with BrowseEmAll, and at first I thought it was a problem with this specific program. But then I also tested the site with BowserStack (live-testing option), and it happened there, too; Browsershots delivers a Screenshot for IE8, but not for IE7, which could be an indicator for the same behavior there. I checked a site of another customer, with the same effect.

The first site used Floatbox 5.7.2; I then upgraded to 6.0.3. The second site uses version 6.0.2.

I then tested a quite old site with Floatbox 4.18, and this worked just fine in both IE7 instances.

I'll send you the URLs so you can check this yourself. You can test BrowseEmAll for 14 days. BrowserStack offers a trial, too; unfortunately it is limited to 30 minutes of testing, but for taking a look at three pages this should be enough.

To be honest, I found one source that rendered the page correctly: NetRenderer, another screenshot service. But that's not exactly the majority... ;)

I hope this can somehow be fixed (or you can tell me what I'm doing wrong). Unfortunately I have very little time for finding a way around this just now... :(

Thanks in advance!

Cheers,
Jan
Administrator
Registered: Aug 2008
Posts: 3382
Sorry, I don't consider this to be a problem and isn't something I'll be looking at or trying to "fix". Floatbox works fine in all versions of real IE. The various emulators are not full and exact implementations of the native browsers and are not on the Floatbox supported-browser list.

When sites work in real IE but not in the emulators, the fault lies with the emulator, not with the page being tested.

If you've got a Floatbox problem occurring in a real browser, then this support forum is the right place to turn to.
Member
Registered: Jun 2013
Posts: 13
Location: Kiel, Germany
Well, at least BrowserStack uses real IE browsers:

http://www.browserstack.com/ wrote
Real Browsers
No testers or fake browsers. Test in real browsers including Internet Explorer 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 and 11.

So I guess I can expext a slightly more friendly answer now... ;)

Cheers,
Jan
Administrator
Registered: Aug 2008
Posts: 3382
I'm not being unfriendly.
Here - I'll put a smiley on this reply to prove it. :D

You linked me to some pages related to this thread in an email, but did not indicate what I should look for on those pages.

I fired up the first one in IE7 emulation mode under IE11 and in pure IE7 running on XP. I didn't encounter any Floatbox issues and the floatbox launched from the image of boots as expected. Could you please tell me what Floatbox issue you are encountering on that page so that I can confirm my results.

I do notice that you are using modernizer on that page. Modernizer includes html5shiv. Older html5shiv versions interfere with proper rendering of VML elements such as the floatbox shadow elements. There's more about this, and a workaround provided at http://floatboxjs.com/forum/topic.php?post=7942#post7942.

As for the subject of your posts, if you've got something that works fine in real IE7, but not in BrowserStack, you would need to get in touch with BrowserStack to get that fixed.
Member
Registered: Jun 2013
Posts: 13
Location: Kiel, Germany
admin wrote
I'm not being unfriendly.
Here - I'll put a smiley on this reply to prove it. :D

That's fine, since I don't feel like arguing just now. :)

admin wrote
You linked me to some pages related to this thread in an email, but did not indicate what I should look for on those pages.

I thought that wasn't necessary because the problem is described in this thread. As Maximixam wrote, IE7 shows the error message "Internet Explorer cannot open the Internet site <URL>. Operation aborted." Apart from that, nothing is rendered.

admin wrote
I fired up the first one in IE7 emulation mode under IE11 and in pure IE7 running on XP. I didn't encounter any Floatbox issues and the floatbox launched from the image of boots as expected. Could you please tell me what Floatbox issue you are encountering on that page so that I can confirm my results.

See above. It's great that it seems to work in your IE installation. BTW: What you said about BrowseEmAll is surely valid for the IE7 emulation mode in newer IEs, too... ;)

admin wrote
I do notice that you are using modernizer on that page. Modernizer includes html5shiv. Older html5shiv versions interfere with proper rendering of VML elements such as the floatbox shadow elements. There's more about this, and a workaround provided at http://floatboxjs.com/forum/topic.php?post=7942#post7942.

Thank you very much for the hint and the link, but I didn't encounter this problem yet. Nevertheless it's good to know what to do if it comes to the worst.

admin wrote
As for the subject of your posts, if you've got something that works fine in real IE7, but not in BrowserStack, you would need to get in touch with BrowserStack to get that fixed.

Well, as I said, they do use real IE installations (they say so, and it looks like IE7, including the version info window). It's difficult to get more real than real... :mrgreen: I chose BrowserStack in order to not be forced to set up a VM for every old IE version. BTW: on http://loc.modern.ie/de-de - a Microsoft site! -, there's a big banner from BrowserStack. I guess Microsoft wouldn't promote it if it didn't work correctly.

But okay, if you assure me that this is a problem that won't show up in "ultimately real" IE7s, I'll leave it at that (hoping that IE7 will soon be history). Thank you very much for taking a look at the sites! :)

Cheers,
Jan
Administrator
Registered: Aug 2008
Posts: 3382
Just for grins, I opened your page in IE 6 too. The page does not render correctly in IE 6, as I'm sure you know and don't care, but there were no error messages and the Floatbox stuff worked just fine.

When a particular browser instance has problems that other browsers of the same make and model don't, the problem must be solved for that troubled browser instance, whether that instance is on BrowserChoice or on Johnny's PC down in the basement.

The title of this thread is incorrect. Floatbox works fine with IE7. This is confirmed by my own testing and the fact that if it did not, I would be flooded with complaints and support requests, but am not.

By the way, I've looked at a couple of cases of one-off instances of Firefox and Safari not behaving correctly. These too were introduced to me as "Floatbox does not work in Firefox" or "Floatbox does not work in Safari", but of course came down to something fishy in the particular browser instance.

Oh yes, and... :D
Member
Registered: Jun 2013
Posts: 13
Location: Kiel, Germany
admin wrote
Just for grins, I opened your page in IE 6 too. The page does not render correctly in IE 6, as I'm sure you know and don't care,

That's right - a customer who absolutely wants his site to support IE6 these days has to pay me extremely well. :mrgreen: I add a message for the users of IE <= 6, and that's it.

admin wrote
but there were no error messages and the Floatbox stuff worked just fine.

Don't misunderstand me, I absolutely love Floatbox for its versatility and reliability; I purchased eight licences up to now, and several more will surely be added. I also recommend Floatbox whenever I'm asked for a good lightbox script. But I hope that doesn't mean I can't post here when I have a problem.

admin wrote
The title of this thread is incorrect. Floatbox works fine with IE7. This is confirmed by my own testing and the fact that if it did not, I would be flooded with complaints and support requests, but am not.

Well, I didn't choose the title, Maximixam did. I just searched the forum and found a thread where someone described the same problem I have.

admin wrote
By the way, I've looked at a couple of cases of one-off instances of Firefox and Safari not behaving correctly. These too were introduced to me as "Floatbox does not work in Firefox" or "Floatbox does not work in Safari", but of course came down to something fishy in the particular browser instance.

I didn't do anything like that. I just said I have a problem with two sites. I even suggested that I might be the one who caused it:

Enigma wrote
I hope this can somehow be fixed (or you can tell me what I'm doing wrong).

I'm not sure why I have to defend myself. I had a problem, described it in detail and in a friendly manner without blaming Floatbox of anything. I understand that you want to protect your reputation, but I got your point now. And I don't think it's necessary - I never heard anything bad about Floatbox.

Cheers,
Jan
Administrator
Registered: Aug 2008
Posts: 3382
I'm always happy to help with a problem and don't mind at all taking a look at any and all issues to help identify its nature and resolution. That's what this support forum is for. But I do wish there wasn't this sub-text of hostility and combativeness in your posts.

Really, I'm not being unfriendly. Really, I'm not being argumentative. I'm just trying to get to and communicate the facts of this case.

Why would you think you can't post here when you have a problem? Please always do. Even if it's a problem I can't solve, it still helps me keep up with Floatbox user's experiences and often leads to improvement of the software.

I never said you chose the title and never thought that you did. I just said the title is false. I think it's important to put that fact in this thread. Similarly, no you did not report the Firefox and Safari instance problems, but this information is relevant to this thread.

Not sure why you feel you have to defend yourself. There's no sparring going on here. I'm not sending any barbs your way. I'm just putting in the time to check out the issue, offer any help that I can (in this case, not much), and report the facts that I find.

I'm not "protecting my reputation". I'm providing objective Floatbox support to the best of my abilities. Please, let's approach the next issue in a collaborative and cheerful manner and try not to interpret simple statements of the relevant facts as unfriendly, argumentative, or part of an attack and defend confrontation.

As a general observation, I find that when snippets of previous postings are quoted and then responded to individually, the conversation can quickly deteriorate into a he-said-she-said pissing contest, and steers things away from making forward progress on the common objective: making Floatbox do good things with minimal problems on your websites.
Member
Registered: Jun 2013
Posts: 13
Location: Kiel, Germany
admin wrote
I'm always happy to help with a problem and don't mind at all taking a look at any and all issues to help identify its nature and resolution. That's what this support forum is for. But I do wish there wasn't this sub-text of hostility and combativeness in your posts.

Well, your first answer to me didn't sound like "I'm always happy to help". It really wasn't what I suspected, and to be honest, I was quite p***ed off.

So I'm sorry that I answered in a tone that sounded hostile, but from my second posting on I always had the feeling that I had to defend myself for posting here. Your tone sounded hostile to me, too. I guess that's the problem with written communication - a normal conversation would probably have taken a different direction. :)

admin wrote
I never said you chose the title and never thought that you did. I just said the title is false. I think it's important to put that fact in this thread.

You didn's say this to Maximixam, but to me. So what should I think? ;)

BTW: You're the admin, so feel free to change the thread title to something more adequate.

admin wrote
Similarly, no you did not report the Firefox and Safari instance problems, but this information is relevant to this thread.

That's not what I meant. My case was that I didn't say that Floatbox "doesn't work" for this or that browser, but instead said that I had a problem with two specific sites and that it's also possible that I did something wrong.

admin wrote
I'm just putting in the time to check out the issue, offer any help that I can (in this case, not much), and report the facts that I find.

And I'm thankful for that!

admin wrote
I'm not "protecting my reputation". I'm providing objective Floatbox support to the best of my abilities. Please, let's approach the next issue in a collaborative and cheerful manner and try not to interpret simple statements of the relevant facts as unfriendly, argumentative, or part of an attack and defend confrontation.

I'd really love to. Normally I'm a quite communicative and friendly guy who likes to help others. :)

admin wrote
As a general observation, I find that when snippets of previous postings are quoted and then responded to individually, the conversation can quickly deteriorate into a he-said-she-said pissing contest, and steers things away from making forward progress on the common objective: making Floatbox do good things with minimal problems on your websites.

That's not what I intended to do. But from my experience (and with more than 14,000 postings in my favorite forum alone I have a bit of that) it's easier to get to the point that way. That's what the quote feature is for in the first place. ;) If I just write a lengthy text in reponse to another lengthy text, misunderstandings are often bound to occur.

Let's not quarrel any more. I really appreciate your help, and as I said, I love your work. When I have a little more time, I maybe can find out what exactly causes the problem. If so, I'll post my findings here, if you don't mind.

I wish you a nice day! :)

Cheers,
Jan

Page: 1