I took the following test here: jquery.com/test/
And I encourage everyone here to do this. The results were that the test only failed in one instance:
137. ajax module: jQuery.post(String, Hash, Function) - simple with
xml (1, 2, 3)
1. Check for XML: 5-2
2. Check for XML: 3
My browser: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.9.1b3pre) Gecko/20090117 Shiretoko/3.1b3pre ID:20090117035052
The reason for this I report here shortly, do the test for your browser of choice,
The rest of the test results were brilliant. Tests completed in 63731 milliseconds. 1 tests of 1271 failed,
Well nothing happened as I expected with noscript enabled, temp allowed the jquery.com and test started.
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-GB; rv:1.9.0.5) Gecko/2008120122 Firefox/3.0.5
Mine didn’t get up to 137, the last entry is 131. There was no consolidation of the results.
All tests that completed 0, ?, ? where ? is the number of tests the green number matched the number of tests.
Ran it a second time with the same results, so it can’t even run all the tests on my system.
Hi DavidR, @DavidR
Means your browser hasn’t caught up with the developer either of Fx or the JQuery Javascript Library.
When you save the page as a txt file, you can see all the test results displayed in extenso. Those starting with 0 are fine, those starting with 1 are those your current browser cannot handle. It is strict WWW3 standards.
Evidently while I am cruising the latest nightly Shiretoko developer’s build, I have better results, but I will try it also at my Flock which is similar to your Fx version, well you smelled some of the future that is coming to your browser now anyway… 8)
jQuery is a lightweight JavaScript library that emphasizes interaction between JavaScript and HTML. It was released January 2006 at BarCamp NYC by John Resig.
Dual licensed under the MIT License and the GNU General Public License, jQuery is free and open source software.
Both Microsoft and Nokia have announced plans to bundle jQuery[1] on their platforms, Microsoft adopting it initially within Visual Studio[2] and use within Microsoft’s ASP.NET AJAX framework and ASP.NET MVC Framework whilst Nokia will integrate it into their Web Run-Time platform (source: Wikipedia). @OrangeCrate
Congrats goes out to OrangeCrate, he has all the functionality he wants, html-JS lightweight in WWW3 Standard, that is what it tells my friend, be happy with us,
This could mean one thing that your Ubuntu is more WWW3Standards compliant as Windows is, but then for open source software I did not expect these results to be any different, really. For SRWare’s Iron I landed with similar results only “Tests completed in 36041 milliseconds. 0 tests of 1270 failed.”
Well with the latest version of firefox I would have thought it would handle the test. I tried to do as you suggested, did the File, Save As and firefox promptly crashed.
No thanks, it isn’t as well supported in add-ons as far as I’m aware and I have many add-ons I won’t do without and I’m generally happy with firefox.
If SRWare Iron is just Chrome with the google monitoring removed I didn’t like Chrome no matter how much quicker it was, it was pants as far as the other issues were concerned.
@DukeNukem,
Thanks for catching that one for the users of your OS! You didn’t realize that the build system didn’t do this on its own and that DukeNukem needs to explicitly install these file in debian/rules. =( the specific debdiff will install the webinterface along with the transmission-common package.) That is why you have the failing results, and that is why Windows users still hesitate to change over using linux,
@DavidR, I can fully understand your point of view, I only use that particular browser for rendering pages that don’t render well in Firefox or Flock, because I only use IE when absolutely there is no other way around this,
The highlighted text doesn’t make much sense Polunus, what are you talking about? What failing results, and what the hell does all of this have to do with a reluctance to switch to Linux. Nobody’s talking about that at all. This thread was just some goofy test you wanted everyone to take. Right?
You read conclusions that I did not make, I just reacted to you having the results of the test, while DukeNukem failed all, I did some exploration why that could be and came up with what I came up with, if you have a better explanation or DukeNukem has, I am willing to learn here, please inform us all…
If it is otherwise and you and DukeNukem had the same results I misread and retract my comments immediately.
You know I am a warm defender of all open software. This test has nothing to do with an OS, just with JQuery script working or not. People that do not have Java, do not have Java functionality, people without Flash, have an empty plug-in and Flash does not work in the browser. So why it works for you and is not supported for DukeNukem. This is just an open discussion of a test, don’t read any personal things or evaluation in it, I am completely 1000% totally unbiased!
Well the 1271 (204) tests needs some time to download, so yes you may be right there, I posted down what it should be, and maybe you may pre-fetch it, and then re-load the page, you can find in the attached txt.file,
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-GB; rv:1.9.0.5) Gecko/2008121300 SUSE/3.0.5-1.1 Firefox/3.0.5
Tests completed in 32059 milliseconds.
0 tests of 1270 failed.
Here is another linux result, under OpenSUSE 11.1
Duke didn’t fail anything. His results read the same as mine, or anyone else who “passed”(?) this test.
Look Polonus, I use Linux only, and not Windows, nor any other Microsoft products. That’s my personal choice. And no, I don’t use avast! for Linux, because I don’t see a need for it. That again is my personal choice. So, when I post here, I’m not flaunting Linux, it just happens to be the only OS I use.
But, I still check in around here occasionally, because, in the past month, I’ve set-up two new Windows computers (one XP, and the other Vista). On both, I dumped Norton, and included avast! Home in the setup. Plus, I just cleaned up a malware infested XP box a few days ago, for a friend of a neighbor. Installing avast! Home was part of the package of programs for him to go forward with after we got his computer cleaned up. So, as you can see, I’m still a great fan of avast! Last year, I probably installed avast! more than a dozen times, being the “go to” guy around here for all things computers.
Frankly, you misread Duke’s innocent post, blew the answer out of proportion (of what I could understand of it), and then took a shot at Linux. I called you on that, and that’s all there was to my post.
I thought we settled this through a PM, why did you have to come back to the matter here in the thread and repeat something you read into something misinterpreted. Like to close the argument that wasn’t one from the start,
