http://www.cricalix.net/archives/2007/02/28/browser-caching-of-doom-doom-i-say/ Going sane since 1978 Sun, 06 Sep 2009 13:13:40 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 http://www.cricalix.net/archives/2007/02/28/browser-caching-of-doom-doom-i-say/comment-page-1/#comment-8503 cricalix Thu, 01 Mar 2007 19:15:15 +0000 http://www.cricalix.net/archives/2007/02/28/browser-caching-of-doom-doom-i-say/#comment-8503 Yep, that's to do with Safari supporting ICC profiles, and the rest not. Yep, that’s to do with Safari supporting ICC profiles, and the rest not.

]]> http://www.cricalix.net/archives/2007/02/28/browser-caching-of-doom-doom-i-say/comment-page-1/#comment-8501 Nabil Thu, 01 Mar 2007 19:03:04 +0000 http://www.cricalix.net/archives/2007/02/28/browser-caching-of-doom-doom-i-say/#comment-8501 I can top that for browser-hate: different browsers on the same system loading the same IMAGE differently. Not talking about where it puts the image on the screen, but the image itself is affected by which browser it's in. I recently revamped my blog, and redid the image... the image is a slightly different hue and gamma depending on whether I'm viewing it in Safari, Camino (Gecko 1.8+), and Opera. Haven't been able to entirely track down why, but I think it has something to do with whether or not the rendering engine supports embedded profiles in the jpg. *twitch* I can top that for browser-hate: different browsers on the same system loading the same IMAGE differently. Not talking about where it puts the image on the screen, but the image itself is affected by which browser it’s in. I recently revamped my blog, and redid the image… the image is a slightly different hue and gamma depending on whether I’m viewing it in Safari, Camino (Gecko 1.8+), and Opera. Haven’t been able to entirely track down why, but I think it has something to do with whether or not the rendering engine supports embedded profiles in the jpg. *twitch*

]]>