Why is my logo img rendering poorly on IE, but looks fine on FF and Chrome?

For some reason my logo img looks pixelated in IE, but smooth in both FF and Chrome. Any idea why this would be? To see an example you can look at www.threebearsrealty.com.

Have you tried viewing the site with Compatibility Mode turned on?
Start here:
http://windows.microsoft.com/en-us/internet-explorer/use-compatibility-view#ie=ie-10-win-7
I trust that answers your question...
Thanks
C
http://crayveon.com/blog |
SharePoint Scripts
LinkedIn |
Facebook | Quix Utilities for SharePoint

Similar Messages

Why does the code look fine in Explorer and Chrome, and WAY off in Firefox?

Here is the example link, but there are a lot of pages that turn out like this. Help?
http://www.rv-wireless-internet.com/RV_Wireless1.html
As you can see, looks ok in chrome and IE, terrible in Firefox. ANyone have the tip? I am boggled.
J

To start with, you have no document type declaration on first line of your pages which sends them into Quirks Mode.
File menu > Convert > select a document type that fits your coding skills (HTML 4 transitional or strict).
Run your code through these on-line tools and fix any reported errors. If that doesn't fix the problem, post back.
HTML Validator - http://validator.w3.org
CSS Validator - http://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/
HTML & CSS Tutorials - http://w3schools.com/
Nancy O.
Alt-Web Design & Publishing
Web | Graphics | Print | Media Specialists
www.alt-web.com/
www.twitter.com/altweb

Why are some jpg images scrambled when they appear in my screen saver? The same images look fine in Preview and Finder. Some images appear scrambled in the screen saver 'preview' window and the actual screen saver. Other jpg images look fine.

Why are some jpg images scrambled when they appear in my screen saver? The same images look fine in Preview and Finder. Some images appear scrambled in the screen saver 'preview' window and the actual screen saver. Other jpg images look fine.

The desktop image is fine, taken from the exact same pool of jpg photos. However, as soon as the slide show screen saver comes on, the images are scrambled. What is it about the apple screen saver algorithm that scrambles the pics?

All reds are rendered a rust color in Photoshop, but look fine in other programs.

All reds are rendered a rust color in Photoshop, but look fine in other programs.

Can you please post screenshots so we can get a better understanding of your problem?
Thanks,
Julia

Any reason why my MacBook Pro keeps dropping the WiFi signal - will be fine for ages and then just drops it!, Any reason why my MacBook Pro keeps dropping the WiFi signal - will be fine for ages and then just drops it!

Any reason why my MacBook Pro keeps dropping the WiFi signal - will be fine for ages and then just drops it! Does it at home and work so not either broadband connection

jp270759 wrote:
Hi. MAny thanks for the answer. Am new to Apple - what's the "real" MacBook Pro forum?
I would like to know also!
For your issue - Solution may be found if you search in the "More Like This" section over in the right column.
Change your router channel. Sometimes this is all you will have to do.
Power cycling the router. Read the router's user manual or contact their tech support for instructions.
System Preferences/Internet & Network/Network
Unlock the padlock
Locations: Automatic
Highlight Airport
Click the Assist Me button
In the popup window click the Diagnostic button.
System Preferences/Network- Unlock padlock. Highlight Airport. Network Name-select your name. Click on the Advanced button. Airport/Preferred Networks-delete all that is not your network.
Place a check mark next to "Remember networks this computer has joined." Click the OK button and lock the padlock. Restart your computer.
http://support.apple.com/kb/TS1920 Mac OS: How to release and renew a DHCP lease
No internet connection (wireless)
Check to see if an extra entry is present in the DNS Tab for your wireless connection (System Preferences/Network/Airport/Advanced/DNS).
Delete all extra entries that you find.
Place a check mark next to "Remember networks this computer has joined."
Other resources to check into:
Troubleshooting Wi-Fi issues in OS X Lion and Mac OS X v10.6
Netspot
How to diagnose and resolve Wi-Fi slow-downs
Pv6 troubleshooting
Mac OS X 10.6 Help: Solving problems with connecting to the Internet
What Affects Wireless Internet?
Solutions for connecting to the Internet, setting up a small network, and troubleshooting

Why does my logo in Final Cut Express 4 HD look jagged or interlaced?

Hi Everyone,
I'm new to Final Cut and I'm having a little trouble with a logo I want to animate over a movie. I've brought it in as a PNG file and I'm able to make it change size and go from one side of the screen to other, however although it looks nice and clear when it's still, once it starts to move it looks all jagged and terribly interlaced. Since I am new to this, I imagine there is some setting or something I am missing.
I made the PNG file by copying and pasting a vector file from Illustrator into Photoshop at 5" x 5" and 300 dpi so I think the resolution is high enough - also the logo does look nice and crisp and clear until it moves across the screen.
If anyone can help me with this, it would be greatly appreciated! I've happily used iMovie for years and am looking forward to what I will do in the future with Final Cut!
William

One issue is your video clips are MP4 (h.264), which all versions of Final Cut don't like.
I have two suggestions:
1) Transcode your video clips to AIC Quick Tme in MPEG Streamclip. It's a free download here.
2) Create an AIC 720p sequence.
Take a small section of the video with your PNG, render and export (QT Movie, current settings.
Open in QT Player. I think your logo will look a lot better.
(And if MtD has other ideas, my additional suggestion would be to pay attention to them.)
Good luck. Let us know how it works out.
Russ

Images, text, etc. display poorly, they are a little fuzzy. IE and Chrome display the imags as they are, very crisp... Why?

I notice that the image quality in Firefox is not as good as other browsers. I have two monitors and have moved the browser into each so it's not my monitor.
What's the fix?

This can happen of Firefox is in 256 color mode, for details see [[Website colors are wrong]]

Why are my steppers misbehaving in closed loop mode, but work fine in open loop

I have a 7344 controlling a 4 axis prototype machine, which is configured with 50,000 steps/rev and linear encoders providing 50800 counts per inch. The physical properties of the machine are less than perfect (prototype!), so there is a considerable amount of backlash in the hardware (about 0.008" - 0.010").
The observed behaviour is as follows: when repeatedly blending in the X,Y plane using vector space 1 in closed loop mode, an axis will be driven (uncommanded) to the zero encoder reading (home position) occasionally (about 1 move in 600). I have kept a log of the commanded positions being passed to the controller (via the flex_load_vs_position function) and a move to zero is not being com
manded. The application is single-threaded, so there is no chance of race conditions. The ready state of the board is being confirmed by means of the flex_check_blend_complete function call before any blend is commanded. The programmed relationship between steps and counts/revolution have been independantly confirmed as being correct.
An A-B-A test with the only change being to initialise the X & Y steppers in open loop instead of closed loop then 'works' - although the physical positioning of the hardware is unsatisfactory due to the physical characteristics of the prototype machine already mentioned, hence the necessity to run closed loop.
I am inclined to interpret the evidence as suggesting that the 7344 is causing an 'occasional' uncommanded move to zero as a result of some interaction between pull-in moves and commanded position on a system where there is a considerable degree of 'elasticity' between the commanded position and the achieved position allied to a rapid-fire de
livery of blend moves.
This problem can be replicated under versions 5.0.1 and 5.2 of the FlexMotion software.
I can clearly run without bumping into the problem by running open loop, but unfortunately that is not acceptable in this situation. Any ideas, anyone?

Hi, and thanks for coming back so promptly. I think I need to give you some more information - sorry if it turns into a long post!
The system behaviour when it 'misbehaves' is that it starts the anomolous behaviour well clear of any home or limit switch (>6"). When it 'goes wrong', it then slews one or both axes to the zero position. Having arrived at the zero position, it then carries on with the next blend without killing the motor.
The initialisation functions include a seek to home switch, a search for the nearest index point, and a zeroing of the encoder count at the index pulse: hence the zero point is a little displaced from the home microswitch.
I believe that once the system has 'gone wrong', it is stopping at the zero point *not* the h
ome switch.
I have carried out some further tests that may be of help:
If I place a large (1 sec) inter-blend delay in the calling functions, the anomalous behaviour is not noticed. However, the start/stop nature of each move means that this test is knocking the bejezus out of a rather fragile prototype machine, so I can't do this too often!
The encoder positions are being read back on each move cycle and monitored, and they are not showing any anomolous behaviour, so I don't think they are the culprit. I have placed a 'scope on the quadrature encoder inputs and the edges are good and sharp with no real indications of noise.
I could test with a blend factor other than -1 if you think that might be illuminating?"

Why does this snippet produce ORA-01002 in 10g, but works fine in 9i.

While migrating from 9i to 10g, we found that one of our processes failed with ORA-01002: fetch out of sequence. Debugging produced the following example:
DECLARE
CURSOR A IS SELECT Dummy FROM Dual FOR UPDATE;
BEGIN
FOR B IN A LOOP COMMIT; END LOOP;
END;This code works in 9i, but produces an EXCEPTION in 10g:
SQL> SELECT Banner FROM V$Version;
BANNER
Oracle9i Enterprise Edition Release 9.2.0.8.0 - Production
PL/SQL Release 9.2.0.8.0 - Production
CORE    9.2.0.8.0       Production
TNS for Linux: Version 9.2.0.8.0 - Production
NLSRTL Version 9.2.0.8.0 - Production
SQL> DECLARE
2   CURSOR A IS SELECT Dummy FROM Dual FOR UPDATE;
3 BEGIN
4   FOR B IN A LOOP COMMIT; END LOOP;
5 END;
6 /
PL/SQL procedure successfully completed.
SQL> SELECT Banner FROM V$Version;
BANNER
Oracle Database 10g Enterprise Edition Release 10.2.0.4.0 - Prod
PL/SQL Release 10.2.0.4.0 - Production
CORE    10.2.0.4.0      Production
TNS for Linux: Version 10.2.0.4.0 - Production
NLSRTL Version 10.2.0.4.0 - Production
SQL> DECLARE
2   CURSOR A IS SELECT Dummy FROM Dual FOR UPDATE;
3 BEGIN
4   FOR B IN A LOOP COMMIT; END LOOP;
5 END;
6 /
DECLARE
ERROR at line 1:
ORA-01002: fetch out of sequence
ORA-06512: at line 4The documentation on the error explains this case in both 9i and more explicitly 10g. Should this have produced the EXCEPTION in 9i as well? Or, is there something else about 10g?

e.g. a FOR row IN cursor LOOP is now implicit using a bulk fetch operation (100 rows or so).This was also my first guess, but said optimization does not take place when the cursor is defined FOR UPDATE:
SQL> exec dbms_application_info.set_client_info(0)
PL/SQL procedure successfully completed.
SQL> declare
cursor a is select last_name, set_client_info(rownum) from employees;
begin
for b in a loop
    exit;
end loop;
end;
PL/SQL procedure successfully completed.
SQL> select sys_context('userenv','client_info') from dual
SYS_CONTEXT('USERENV','CLIENT_INFO')
100
1 row selected.
Now with FOR UPDATE:
SQL> exec dbms_application_info.set_client_info(0)
PL/SQL procedure successfully completed.
SQL> declare
cursor a is select last_name, set_client_info(rownum) from employees for update;
begin
for b in a loop
    exit;
end loop;
end;
PL/SQL procedure successfully completed.
SQL> select sys_context('userenv','client_info') from dual
SYS_CONTEXT('USERENV','CLIENT_INFO')
1
1 row selected.

Why won't Words With Friends open in Firefox but works fine with IE?

The game "Words with Friends" worked fine until firefox update and Words with Friends new version. Now it will not open. Tried all the support suggestions to no avail. Then I tried it through IE and it works fine.

-> Update Firefox to the latest version 10
* [[Installing Firefox on Windows]]
Perform the suggestions mentioned in the following articles:
* [https://support.mozilla.com/en-US/kb/Template:clearCookiesCache/ Clear Cookies & Cache]
* [[Troubleshooting extensions and themes]]
Check and tell if its working.
May not be related to your problem but some of your Firefox Plugins are out-dated
* Update All your Firefox Plugins -> [https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/plugincheck/]
* '''When Downloading Plugins Update setup files, Remove Checkmark from Downloading other Optional Softwares with your Plugins (e.g. Toolbars, McAfee, Google Chrome, etc.)'''

Why are the same three IM clips distorting in IDVD but look fine in QT

I posted this on the IDVD forum but was told to try here.
I burn my IMovie 08 onto IDVD 09 with chapters with professional quality encoding. It is about 117 minutes long & I have 30g on my HD. For some reason, in various spots the picture starts disintegrating like the censor blocking body parts on TV only at various spots of a picture and various points of the movie. There is nothing on imovie that shows a problem.
I then cut the time to 114 min & made a disc image of the three clips of 25 that were constantly distorting with little improvement, if any. So I downloaded new copies of those clips and added them to the project, deleting the old ones. Then I ran a new theme with less movement, fewer pictures. Nothing different. Same clips are distorted and only those. Can anyone help?

I posted this on the IDVD forum but was told to try here.
I burn my IMovie 08 onto IDVD 09 with chapters with professional quality encoding. It is about 117 minutes long & I have 30g on my HD. For some reason, in various spots the picture starts disintegrating like the censor blocking body parts on TV only at various spots of a picture and various points of the movie. There is nothing on imovie that shows a problem.
I then cut the time to 114 min & made a disc image of the three clips of 25 that were constantly distorting with little improvement, if any. So I downloaded new copies of those clips and added them to the project, deleting the old ones. Then I ran a new theme with less movement, fewer pictures. Nothing different. Same clips are distorted and only those. Can anyone help?

Why does my slideshow stop on my live site, but works fine in test?

I have an auto-play slideshow of 7 images that stops after 4 on our live
website. If you click the arrow to advance, the next three images never
load.
http://www.baidesign.com/our-process.html
However, when I test it—preview page and business catalyst— it plays through
to 7, then replays (what I want)
http://baitestsite.businesscatalyst.com/our-process.html
I have tried rebuilding it, but that didn't help. Can't think of anything.
The whole site is full of slideshows. Other than the horizontal transition,
this one is not much different. I have checked the file names of the images
and updated the assets.
Please help! We would like to announce the new website to our clients.

Hello
If the slideshow is working fine in Business Catalyst and not on another (external) host, the issue may be with the upload not being completely successful, or the host itself. Please make sure it's not an upload issue, by reuploading the site again with "all files" selected in the upload option. If that doesn't resolve the issue, then have your host "reset the FTP permissions" for you and then reupload the site to see if that fixes the issue.
Cheers
Parikshit

Why won't the Bing "Preferences" option not run when it does on IE and Chrome?

I am unable to select the preferences option on the main screen of Bing.com.

Is it the "gear" icon? Some add-ons have been known to invisibly block the top part of the page. Any problem with other top menus?
When you have a problem with one particular site, a good "first thing to try" is clearing your Firefox cache and deleting your saved cookies for the site. You might want to log out first to make sure Bing doesn't lose any data mid-session.
(1) Bypass Firefox's Cache
Use Ctrl+Shift+r to reload the page fresh from the server.
(You also can clear Firefox's cache completely using:
orange Firefox button ''or'' Tools menu > Options > Advanced
On the Network mini-tab > Cached Web Content : "Clear Now")
(2) Remove your bing.com cookies (save any pending work first) using either of these. While viewing a page on the site:
* right-click and choose View Page Info > Security > "View Cookies"
* Alt+t (open the classic Tools menu) > Page Info > Security > "View Cookies"
Then try reloading the page. Does that help?

Why is Siri really, really dumb sometimes with phonetics, but often fine?

I can't imagine I'm the only person with this problem but couldn't find a board with this question posted.
Sometimes Siri is smart. Sometimes she is really, really dumb.
Ex:
I say "Call Jinny" (as spelled in my address book)
Siri says "I don't see Jenny in your address book. Would you like me to look for locations by that name?"
"Call Dr. Jen work"
"Which number would you like me to call for Dr. Jen? Mobile or work?"
"Call home" (There is an entry labled "Home" in my address book"
"I don't see a number listed for Beth Home"
Sometimes she does these tasks fine but other times it's pitiful.
Her phonetic reasoning skills are very variable to put it mildly.
This is obviously a very first world problem. I can push buttons myself. I'm more curious than anything else.

The short "i" and short "e" sounds are extremely close. In the U.S., many people do not here the difference at all, hence phrases like "ink pen" (as opposed to say, "safety pin"). Depending on ambient noise and your diction, that could be easily confused.
The solution for calling home is much simpler. Don't label your own contact information "Home". Use your name. Make your contact entry just like a normal contact with first name, last, etc. Then, go to Settings>General>Siri>My Info and chose your contact. Then, when you say, "Call Home", Siri will know you mean your home and, as long as your home phone number is properly labeled in the contact, it should work.

MacBook Pro retina 13" (late 2013, Haswell) why is the highest resolution rendered in 3360x2100, which the system obviously can't handle?!

Hey Apple and Apple users,
I just recently switched from an MacBook Air (mid 2013) to the new Haswell MacBook Pro retina 13" (late 2013 model).
The main reason to do so was the better screen and the option to run higher scaled resolutions, as advertised.
I was willing to trade in the Air's low weight, smaller formfactor and the extra batterylife for the better screen.
When it comes to resolutions:
1280x800 is just a joke nowadays, why is the MacBook Pro still based on it? 13" and 1440x900 work quite fine...see MacBook Air.
1440x900 is okay in everyday life situations, but sometimes you just need "more space" as the third scaling option calls it as well in the display-settings.
1680x1050 on 13" can sometimes be challenging, but it is really fine if you need to work and have a lot UI elements to deal with (Photoshop etc.)
So 1680x1050 scaled on the 2560x1600 screen would be my daily driver for work. So I expected a scaling factor of "1.5238..." (2560/1680) will be used most of the time.
Frankly spoken...I am really disappointed by the 13" retina MacBook Pro and the way OS X Mavericks is handling the scaling.
It obiously works well and responsive with the 1280x800 non-scaling resolution ("best for retina, scaling factor 2: 1280 --> 2560).
Is still "okay-snappy" at 1440x900 (scaling factor 1.777...: 1440 --> 2560).
But it totally breaks down at 1680x1050 (scaling factor 1.523...: 1680 --> 2560).
I use "Mission Control" all the time and it is stuttering and slow...overall a sluggish and unbearable experience.
The same goes for Desktop-Switching by swiping the screens or resizing and moving windows and files around.
So I was wondering why...and then I noticed that when taking a screenshot of my entire screen (CMD + 3) the image size of the screenshot was 3360x2100 and not the expected 2560x1600.
This means Mavericks is not scaling the UI with the appropriate factor (see above). For retina MacBooks it ist simply rendering one pixel of the classic, non-retina Interface in now 4 pixels (2x2) and sending this straight to the screen, which then "scales" it down to the resolution it is able to display.
Why is this bothering me? – Because the machine has to do a lot more work to render the higher resolution that can't even be displayed, due to the screens limitations.
2560x1600 = 4096000 pixels = 100%
3360x2100 = 7056000 pixels = 172%
This means the MacBook has to render 72% more information than actually can be displayed on the built-in screen and are just lost.
Of course this makes the overall UI feel sluggish and idly! Especially with the not that performant Intel Iris IGP and no dedicated graphics card.
All this extra "rendering" just results in a worse battery life due to the extra work that the graphics card and CPU have to do.
First, Apple...are you serious about this?
What can we do about this?
Is there a way to have this properly scaled?
Thanks in advance to everyone.

Okay...I thought deeply about this issue.
Even looking into ways to maybe fixing this on the software side. But it occured to me that this is to deeply embedded into the system that it won't be possbile to come up with a sufficient third-party solution.taht
The problem is that there is no intermediate step inbetween "standard DPI" graphics and "HiDPI" (image-resources named "[email protected]").
But there should be one, to minimize the amount of image information that needs to be processed by the device.
This effects especially the MacBook Pro retina 13", as it has the less powerful Intel Iris IGP, when performing on the highest scaled resolution (equivalent to 1650x1080).
As well as the MacBook Pro retina 15" without a dedicated, second Graphics Unit,when performing on the highest possible scaled resolution (equivalent to 1920x1200).
Those devices don't have enough resources to handle the consequential "HiDPI" resolutions of 3360x2100 for the 13" and 3840x2400 for the 15" model.
(Comment: 3840x2400 = 9,2MP, which is more than the standard 4K resolution of 3840x2160.
I analyzed the scaling factors as follows:
Factor "2" to display 1280x800 on the 13" model and 1440x900 on the 15" model in HiDPI.
Factor "1.777..." would be required to display 1440x900 on the 2560x1600 screen of the 13" model.
Factor "1.714..." would be required to display 1650x1080 on the 2880x1800 screen of the 15" model.
Factor "1.523..." would be required to display 1650x1080 on the 2560x1600 screen of the 13" model.
Factor "1.5" would be required to display 1920x1200 on the 2800x1800 screen of the 15" model.
As all the models seem to have no problem with rendering the intermediate scaling step (1440x900 for the 13" and 1680x1050 for the 15" model) at HiDPI, hence with the scaling factor 2. There is no real need to provide the UI-elements.
But in my opinion there is a strong need for a "MidDPI" ([email protected]) intermediate step for all the UI graphic elements that wis based on the scaling factor 1.5.
This would result in the following:
13" MacBook Pro retina with 2560x1600 screen:
1280x 800 @ 2x = 2560x1600 (no surplus, native screen resolution)
1440x 900 @ 2x = 2880x1800 (the surplus of 1088000px = ~1MP can still be handled and compansated by the weak Iris IGP)
1680x1050 @ 2x = 3360x2100 (the surplus of 2960000px = ~3MP is too much for the weak Iris IGP)
NEW 1680x1050 @ 1.5x = 2520x1575 (with a small border of left=20px, bottom=13, right=20, top=12 pixels, which means ~2,2mm and ~1.3mm around the 1.5x scaled image!).
15" MacBook Pro retina with 2880x1800 screen:
1440x900 @ 2x = 2880x1800 (no surplus, native screen resolution)
1680x1050 @ 2x = 3360x2100 (the surplus of 1872000px = ~2MP can still be handled by the Iris Pro IGP)
1920x1200 @ 2x = 3840x2400 (the surplus of 4032000px = ~4MP can't be handled sufficiently by the Iris Pro IGP)
NEW 1920x1200 @ 1.5x = 2800x1800 (nu surplus, native screen resolution, no border needed!)
The big advantage is that all the graphics have already been remodeled for the HiDPI mode.
So scaling those "factor 2x" images down to "factor 1.5x" should be comparably easy!
Example:
Left: Traditional "standard DPI" icon of "all my files".
Right: "@2x.png" for the "HiDPI" modes.
Middle: "@1.5x.png" suggestions for the "MidDPI" mode; easily scaled down from the lovely HiDPI graphics.
With this simple introduction of the "MidDPI" modes a significant amount of processing power can be saved.
This not only improves battery life when driving those higher scaled resolutions, but also lets the user access those resources for what really matters: processing power for the primary job that the Mac needs to get done.
Thanks in advance.

Why is my logo img rendering poorly on IE, but looks fine on FF and Chrome?

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for