Not sure about anyone else, I run IE with show errors and I've come across a few here at Invision

 


Webpage error details

User Agent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 7.0; Windows NT 6.1; Win64; x64; Trident/5.0; .NET CLR 2.0.50727; SLCC2; .NET CLR 3.5.30729; .NET CLR 3.0.30729; Media Center PC 6.0; MANM; .NET4.0C; .NET4.0E; MANM; MS STORE DMC2.6.3411.2)

Timestamp: Sun, 25 Dec 2011 17:48:43 UTC


Message: Unable to get value of the property 'insert': object is null or undefined

Line: 1928

Char: 5

Code: 0

URI: https://www.invisionpower.com/clients/public/js/ipb.js?ipbv=32006&load=quickpm,hovercard,attach,textEditor

 

Webpage error details

User Agent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 7.0; Windows NT 6.1; Win64; x64; Trident/5.0; .NET CLR 2.0.50727; SLCC2; .NET CLR 3.5.30729; .NET CLR 3.0.30729; Media Center PC 6.0; MANM; .NET4.0C; .NET4.0E; MANM; MS STORE DMC2.6.3411.2)

Timestamp: Sun, 25 Dec 2011 17:43:49 UTC


Message: Unable to get value of the property 'observe': object is null or undefined

Line: 269

Char: 3

Code: 0

URI: http://www.invisionpower.com/products/board/

Also, I went to close a ticket and got a couple more. I'm using the latest in IE....

It shows your using IE7, this is long outdated... try upgrading to IE8 8 & 9 are the only supported versions of IE by microsoft. If you are using IE9, then turn off compatibility mode. :)

Webpage error details

User Agent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 7.0; Windows NT 6.1; Win64; x64; Trident/5.0; .NET CLR 2.0.50727; SLCC2; .NET CLR 3.5.30729; .NET CLR 3.0.30729; Media Center PC 6.0; MANM; .NET4.0C; .NET4.0E; MANM; MS STORE DMC2.6.3411.2)

Timestamp: Sun, 25 Dec 2011 17:43:49 UTC


Message: Unable to get value of the property 'observe': object is null or undefined

Line: 269

Char: 3

Code: 0

URI: http://www.invisionpower.com/products/board/

Also, I went to close a ticket and got a couple more. I'm using the latest in IE....

......in what time-sink is IE7 "Latest"?
MS themselves are trying to disown that version.... upgrade imminent for you i do hope.

I'm using the current latest public build? I tried it in 32 and 64 bit and get the same errors? I usually use Chrome but was trying the 64 after I upgraded the 64 flash. Oh well.

ie7 is not the current latest build, public or msdn/technet.
ie 9 is public, ie 10 is for msdn subscribers.

in ie click help about, will tell you. if you are on ie 9 and you are id'ing as ie7 then you have set compatibility settings to id your browser as ie 7.

I'm running 9 and the latest build. I also tried it both ways in compatibility mode and not. Get errors both ways.

knew I had seen that version-trident string somewheres in documents used for server 2008r2 and exchange web services, this describes it fairly well.

http://blogs.msdn.co...ent-string.aspx

look at the trident strings, you have set the ip url into compatibility mode, and most likely is independent of what you click on compatibility bar while browsing. maybe its an added url in tools-comp view settings?
.
IE9’s Compatibility View will map to IE7 Standards Mode, and IE9’s UA string when in Compatibility View will be:

Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 7.0; Windows NT 6.0; Trident/5.0)

ie9 in ie7 mode will have issues on lot of stuff.

also with dev tools on you can click browser mode and choose mode, will also cause ie7 mode.


edit: I was able to force errors by using ie7 mode from dev tools screen.

best way to just "know"...
See any rounded corners... missing?
if IE is running in compatibility mode for or IS IE8- all CSS3 styling will be missing.

there is a meta tag that is supposed to ensure that which ever ie browser is being used is set to the highest version

<meta http-equiv="X-UA-Compatible" content="IE=edge" />

http://www.1stwebdesigner.com/design/snippets-html5-boilerplate/

there is a meta tag that is supposed to ensure that which ever ie browser is being used is set to the highest version

[/size][/font][/color]

[color=#333333][font=monospace][size=3]

http://www.1stwebdes...l5-boilerplate/

.....that would make ie compatibility debug unusable.... you do know that right?
forcing no compatibility mode is not an answer...

Actually, if I recall correctly we intend to include that meta tag in our next release. We do not want users using compatibility mode with the software, as it creates issues (as seen here).

We support the latest 2 browser iterations 'officially' (meaning, if you find bugs using IE8 or IE9 right now, we will look into them). Bugs noticed while using IE7 (or using IE in version 7 compatibility mode) will not be resolved if they do not directly cause the software to no longer function. By that, I mean, if you cannot read a page in IE7 we will likely look into the issue. We will not hunt down every IE7 javascript issue, however, because the browser version is very outdated and not likely to support the latest technology.

Hello all. I am using Windows 8 and IE 10. I have many issues with displaying my IPB forum. Also I have issues with text editor. Is there any quick fix?

Here's a thought, don't use IE.

IE should die, they do not keep standards for it. MS always must have done all their "better" way.

IE should die, they do not keep standards for it. MS always must have done all their "better" way.

Here's a thought, don't use IE.

Here's a thought, keep your religious views to yourself.

The only reason IE3 ever made it as big as it did was that Netscape wouldn't know a standard if it jumped up and bit them on the nose. And the reason Firefox ever made it as big as it did was that IE6 was antiquated and terrible. The same cannot be said of IE8+, which have increasingly improved support for standards from the abomination that was IE6 standards support. IE10 is very close to "just working" with HTML and scripts targeted at historically much more compliant engines such as Webkit and Gecko. Soon we'll actually be able to write one set of HTML, one set of CSS, and not have to care what browser the viewer is using.

Here's a thought, keep your religious views to yourself.

The only reason IE3 ever made it as big as it did was that Netscape wouldn't know a standard if it jumped up and bit them on the nose. And the reason Firefox ever made it as big as it did was that IE6 was antiquated and terrible. The same cannot be said of IE8+, which have increasingly improved support for standards from the abomination that was IE6 standards support. IE10 is very close to "just working" with HTML and scripts targeted at historically much more compliant engines such as Webkit and Gecko. Soon we'll actually be able to write one set of HTML, one set of CSS, and not have to care what browser the viewer is using.

The point is, despite the 7 generations between IE3 and IE10, they are still less than adequate.

And my statement had nothing to do with a religious viewpoint or spiritual entity of faith. If you are referring to a continuous and devout belief, like in "religious attempts at learning chemistry," then you are also incorrect sir. My dissatisfaction with Internet Explorer is not a devoted attempt to rid the world of Internet Explorer. It is perfectly fine for people that do almost nothing extensive on the internet. But the majority of people here should be or probably are involved in more complex tasks via the internet or offline computing. I do not like IE, but my open and blatant statements about what I think people should or should not be doing is not even remotely connected to a faithful, spiritual, continuous, or devoted belief.

Here is the solution to IE10 problems: http://community.invisionpower.com/topic/367648-fix-for-ie10-compatibility-issues/

IE has problems displaying anything, complain to MS to make a browser that actually works.

Soon we'll actually be able to write one set of HTML, one set of CSS, and not have to care what browser the viewer is using.

You do know people write different render engines? So unless all those developers magically decide to give up and let only one set of developers make a render engine, this will not happen.

IE has problems displaying anything, complain to MS to make a browser that actually works.

You do know people write different render engines? So unless all those developers magically decide to give up and let only one set of developers make a render engine, this will not happen.

I'm of the mind that Microsoft thinks they are bigger than W3C, therefore they set the browser standards. :D

IE has problems displaying anything, complain to MS to make a browser that actually works.

You do know people write different render engines? So unless all those developers magically decide to give up and let only one set of developers make a render engine, this will not happen.

Yes, and all those rendering engines are written to render according to standards. Admittedly if all you know is IE6, this might be news to you. But in 2012, all browsers write to standards so we don't have to care what browser the user has.

I'm of the mind that Microsoft thinks they are bigger than W3C, therefore they set the browser standards. :D

Actually, at one point in time IE was actually the most standards compliant browser - unfortunately it was written to a draft standard and the standard changed (that is why the box model is wrong, incidentally - it used to be right until the model spec changed, and they never updated it to comply with the new spec). IE10 is actually being written to standards - no "standard setting" here, apart from their almost religious refusal to include WebM video support out of the box (but you can install a plugin).

<-- is trying to figure out why the deuce an upgrade to..... well, lets face it, MS is *finally* coming *close* to a par on browser terms(netscape? died, literally, why is that mess even mentioned?) requires a forced *downgrade* in rendering when last I heard they were trying to at least come somewhere in the ballpark of other browsers this time...... sigh, further annoying IE bugs to require fixing.
Kyanar, we dislike the browser simply as perfectly valid code in gecko/webkit can go to **** on IE for 0 valid reason, if they kept to the CURRENT standards it wouldn't be so bleeding bad..... but as you pointed out, they take way too bleeding long to keep up, and when they push an update, they break as much as they comply with.

ie will always default to working best for asp/ado.net driven and, if by some luck they happen to work with php//etc count your blessings.
they have to make sure to always work on exchange/sharepoint/storage server for number of reasons, some legal (records management) some profit.

but from what I have seen ie10 has issues on sharepoint and exchange 2010 even.
crock of crap...wish they would smarten up.

<-- is trying to figure out why the deuce an upgrade to..... well, lets face it, MS is *finally* coming *close* to a par on browser terms(netscape? died, literally, why is that mess even mentioned?) requires a forced *downgrade* in rendering when last I heard they were trying to at least come somewhere in the ballpark of other browsers this time...... sigh, further annoying IE bugs to require fixing.

Kyanar, we dislike the browser simply as perfectly valid code in gecko/webkit can go to **** on IE for 0 valid reason, if they kept to the CURRENT standards it wouldn't be so bleeding bad..... but as you pointed out, they take way too bleeding long to keep up, and when they push an update, they break as much as they comply with.

You obviously haven't even tried IE10, so I'm just going to ignore you.

ie will always default to working best for asp/ado.net driven and, if by some luck they happen to work with php//etc count your blessings.

they have to make sure to always work on exchange/sharepoint/storage server for number of reasons, some legal (records management) some profit.

but from what I have seen ie10 has issues on sharepoint and exchange 2010 even.

crock of crap...wish they would smarten up.

That, good sir, is because Sharepoint and Exchange 2010 were designed to support Firefox and Chrome as first class citizens. Behind the scenes, pretty much every recent Microsoft web product now uses jQuery, HTML5 and CSS3. Your assertion that "will always default to working best for asp/ado.net driven" is also both false and logically irrelevant (ADO.NET doesn't render anything, ever, and ASP.NET spits out whatever you pump in - and Visual Studio gets quite angry at you nowadays for using legacy IE hacks or non-standard code. It even adds jQuery by default to all projects too).

You obviously haven't even tried IE10, so I'm just going to ignore you.

That, good sir, is because Sharepoint and Exchange 2010 were designed to support Firefox and Chrome as first class citizens. Behind the scenes, pretty much every recent Microsoft web product now uses jQuery, HTML5 and CSS3. Your assertion that "will always default to working best for asp/ado.net driven" is also both false and logically irrelevant (ADO.NET doesn't render anything, ever, and ASP.NET spits out whatever you pump in - and Visual Studio gets quite angry at you nowadays for using legacy IE hacks or non-standard code. It even adds jQuery by default to all projects too).

if possible try not to be a sanctimonious prick when replying to me.
if not possible don't waste your time, I have enough crap to deal with making IE10 work on my own sharepoint intranet sites.