More advice for the full screen mode.
Sivut toimivat riittävän hyvin MS IE 4.0+, Opera 5.x+, Netscape 6.0+/ vast. Mozilla ja Konqueror 3.x selaimilla. Yleisesti ottaen sivut toimivat parhaiten uusimmilla Opera selaimilla. Sivujen toimivuus vanhemmissa selaimissa on heikko, erityisesti Netscape 4.x kohdalla.

I list below all topic groups, which I have done according to subjects, which they handle. You can return to this topic group by using this menu and the link Table of topic groups on the top of the each page.
Table of topic groupsFront page of CSS-guideGeneral info - Advice pages > My browser recommendations > Operation systems (section 1/2)

Operation systems

Windows 95+

In my mind the widest CSS2-implementation is however in Opera 5.1x+ browsers. Opera supports a little bit proprietary CSS and but not at all proposed features for CSS3.

Opera 5.0 became into the market as an ad-sponsored (adware) half-free version (registered users will not see advertisements (ads)). Because of the small size (the downloadable file is about 2 MB in the 5.x series and 3-4 MB in the 6.x series), it is fast to download from the Internet. The Chief Technology Officer in the Opera Software is Håkon Wium Lie, who was the main architect of CSS in W3C. Technical knowledge how CSS should work is much in the company!

The printed version looks best with Opera because of well-controlled page breaks and certain special CSS, which is useful in printed versions (I have a special CSS for printing; printed versions of my pages have only few images and I removed also some texts from them). Opera supports also the "slide show"[S] mode, which is not supported in other browsers. I have found in Opera 6.0 some generic functionality problems, which are fixed in 6.01. I recommend then to install a 6.01+ browser.

I don't have find many added CSS-implementations in Opera 5.x+ compared to Opera 4.x. I inform, if some feature is supported only in Opera 5.0x, 5.1x or 6.x series. Opera 5.x+ renders almost all CSS1 features, which are handled in the W3C CSS1 Test Suite except switching between alternative style sheets - they are supported in Opera 7.x series. Most errors, which I have mentioned concerning 3.6x don't concern newer versions. Depending on the situation Opera works fast or slow. In Opera 7.x series browsers have been fixed many small bugs (indeed also some new exists) and new supported features have been added including some CSS3 features.

All official Opera 7.x series browser, which I have been tested have been disappointments. In my mind they have in overall worse CSS-support than in Beta 2. They print Web-pages worse than Opera 5.x series browsers. Opera 7.50 crashes easily but Opera 7.51 seems to work reliable. Opera 6.x series browsers has the best printing features. I can't recommend to install Opera 7.x as the only Opera browser.

Concerning rendering of CSS2 Netscape 6.x+ has fine modern rendering engine (Mozilla Gecko). In my mind new Mozilla supports all features of CSS1 and quite wide CSS2. Mozilla 1.1 and Netscape 7.0 browsers starting from around 8/2002 have overall a little bit better normal screen presentation CSS-support than in newest Opera browsers. Newest Mozilla Gecko browsers support partially for printing important page break properties, when printing-related features are in these browsers almost as good as in Opera.

In addition of supporting well CSS2 Mozilla Gecko browsers support much properties, which start with the -moz- prefix. Concerning properties most of them are not non-standard properties but experimental CSS3-implementations (if the -moz- has been used with pseudo-classes and pseudo-elements[S] or other selectors implementations are always proprietary). Because the final CSS3 specifications might define properties differently as working drafts Mozilla Gecko browsers don't support them without the prefix. Mozilla Gecko support also much other proposed CSS3 features and proprietary CSS.

Newest Mozilla Gecko browsers work quite reliable and they are fast browsers. They need however more resources than Opera browsers. If the computer has powerful processor and much RAM newest Mozilla Gecko browsers are quite recommendable browsers.

Older versions have much problems even if Mozilla 0.9/ Netscape 6.1x-6.2x render my pages almost I have designed. Netscape 6.0 has general functionality problems. Netscape 6.2.1 works extremely slow. Netscape 6.1-6.2.1/ corresponding Mozilla 0.9 versions work relative well except that trying to print of pages, which have certain embedded objects crash them (concerns at least pages, which have IFRAME elements).

Eldest 4.x series browsers like Netscape 4.04 have very bad CSS-implementation and they crash easily.Netscape 4.7x series browses (I have tested Netscape 4.79) work quite reliable, but it has almost as bad CSS-implementation as in the older versions.

MS IE 5.5+ renders this quite well, MS IE 5.0 relative well and MS IE 4.0 just fair. MS IE 4.0-5.5 have however serious CSS-implementation errors. I handle worst bugs in the page How to set CSS for backgrounds and borders[S]. Most of them are fixed in MS IE 6.0.

MS IE 5.5+ support at some level page break properties, but not as well as Opera 4.x+. In order to create well printed web sites, makes much additional work. I have however tried to make most of my pages so, that also MS IE could print them relative well. Because I have done changes to some pages, I can't anymore guarantee optimal printing in MS IE in last updated pages because it is extremely troublesome to define optimal page break points for MS IE.

MS IE 5.5+ support some proposals for CSS3. Most of supported features belong to the so-called i18n (I handle them shortly in the page Font and text properties + media types[S]). They are useful for Asian people. Browsers support also some What kind of non-standard (proprietary) CSS browsers support.

In addition to MS IE, Mozilla Gecko and Opera browsers, an interesting alternative is NeoPlanet. It is not however an independent browser but just a user interface to MS IE and Mozilla Gecko rendering engines. The only advance of NeoPlanet is the possibility to change the rendering engine. Like in Netscape 6.x (like also in Opera 5.10+) the skin can be changed.

Below is a list of best rendering the CSS2 of the CSS-guide in my tests among Windows-browsers. I have ranked, how browsers support in my sites used different media types and media groups[S] (screen presentations and especially the normal screen presentation have the highest weight) and how dynamic menus work (I have another table[S], which tells how browsers implement them). That's why this estimation tells also in general much about how wide and well the CSS2 implementation is in different browsers. Because Opera browsers have much version-specific differencies I have taken several version of Opera.

I give numeric estimation with the scale of values 4,0-10,0. The estimation is first multiplied with the emphasis factor and then divided so, that the maximum estimation can always be 10,0 (the emphasis factor has been mentioned in the table below). The golden background means the best estimation and bold text especially noticeable results. Red background color means remarkable bad bugs in the presentation. The estimation according to stars have been done at the following way:

Mozilla 1.1-1.2, Netscape 7.0 Opera 7.0 Beta 1 Opera 7.0 Beta 2 Opera 7.10 Opera 6.04 MS IE 6.0 The emphasis factor: Max. points:
The total estimation of screen presentations: 8,9 (17,8) 9,7 (19,4) 9,9 (19,8) 9,7 (19,4) 8,4 (18,2) 7,7 (15,3) 2,0 20,0
The normal screen presentation: 9,9 (16,8) 9,7 (16,5) 9,9 (16,8) 9,7 (16,5) 9,6 (16,3) 9,0 (15,8) 1,7 17,0
The "slide show mode": - 9,7 (2,0) 9,9 (2,0) 9,7 (2,0) 9,6 (2,0) - 0,2 2,0
Alternative normal screen presentations: 9,9 (1,0) 9,7 (1,0) 9,9 (1,0) 9,7 (1,0) - - 0,1 1,0
Printing: 9,2 (9,2) 9,5 (9,5) 8,0 (8,0) 8,3 (8,3) 9,9 (9,9) 9,0 (9,0) 1,0 10,0
Total points: 27,0 28,9 27,8 27,7 28,6 24,8 - 30,0
In average: 9,0 9,7 9,3 9,2 9,5 8,3
The emphasized total estimation: 2. 1. 3.
Stars: [Star] [Star] [Star] [Star] [Star] [Star] [Star] [Star] [Star] [Star] [Star] [Star] [Star] [Star]

Below are the arguments for this estimation:

Notes of the arguments:

  1. Opera 7.x+ and Mozilla Gecko browsers offer special buttons for easier navigation by LINK elements. I have not taken account thism matter.

  2. Getting proper width control for MS IE needed a special trick, which I mention in the functionality page[S].

  3. In Mozilla 1.3x/ Mozilla 1.4x the generic functionality is worse than in Mozilla 1.1.

  4. In print preview Opera 7.0 Beta 1-2 border for elements don't work. Beta 1 however prints borders but Beta 2 and 7.10 don't. Sometimes Opera 7.0 Beta prints first letters in most cases incorrectly (this bug has been fixed in 7.1x series) but it prints better generated contents than earlier versions. At this moment the best printing can be achieved with Opera 6.x series browsers.

  5. All topic groups don't have neither special CSS for the slide show mode of Opera nor alternative style sheets for Mozilla Gecko/ Opera 7.x+ browsers. If CSS-pages would not have get special CSS, especially MS IE would have get much higher total estimation . That's why I have used a slighter grading scale than normally.

  6. I have given additional points for Opera supporting of the special full screen mode because special CSS for the full screen mode has been defined for my CSS-guide. Both the normal screen presentation and the special full screen mode are screen presentation modes. Because Opera supports altogether three presentation modes, it has at the respect of supporting different media types the widest CSS2-implementation. In other topic groups than in the CSS-guide the full screen mode has the same CSS as the normal screen presentation.

  7. Because alternative style sheets have in the CSS-guide less meaning than the full screen mode of Opera they have the least weight when I rank screen presentation modes. To the total estimation don't belong how browsers support user style sheets, because the author of the Web-sites can't define them (I have handle user style sheets in an extra page[S]).

  8. Netscape 6.x+ base on Mozilla 0.x-1.x[S] browsers. Mozilla browsers are evaluation versions and Netscape commercial versions. Browsers, which have the same build-id deserve in most cases an equal estimation. First official versions of Mozilla 1.1 and Netscape 7.0 have almost the same date, but Netscape 7.0 base on Mozilla 1.0.1. I don't have found in my pages any rendering differences between Mozilla 1.1 and Netscape 7.0.

  9. Because CSS3 is not ready, I have not taken account such CSS3 features which I might have used. I have listed supported CSS3 features in my CSS table 1[S], CSS table 1b[S], ../HTMLKit/CSSTable 2[S] and ../HTMLKit/CSSTable 2b[S]. The widest CSS3-implementations are in Mozilla Gecko browsers. If CSS3-features would have been taken account new Mozilla Gecko browsers have the widest CSS-implementation.

  10. I handle the basic functionality of other browsers in the functionality page[S].

CNet: PC Magazine (Opera 5.02); NeoPlanet; Microsoft: CSS Enhancements in Internet Explorer 6 Public Preview.


The MS IE 5.x for Mac has better CSS-implementation than MS IE 5.x for Windows. It is completely different browser as Windows MS IE for Windows browsers, because it has different designers and the different rendering engine (Tasman).

Opera is today available as Mac-versions. About the same Mozilla Gecko browsers as in Windows are also available for Mac. According to an e-mail Mozilla Gecko browsers render my dynamic menus relative well.

If I would have made an estimation using the same principles as in the Windows-estimation browsers would have got the same order as Windows browsers. According to an e-mail MS IE for Mac doesn't support page break rules, why it doesn't support paged media. At least in this matter MS IE 5.0 for Mac is worse than newest Windows browsers.

According to some e-mails the JavaScript-support is not as well as in Windows browsers and MS IE 5.0 for Mac renders my dynamic menus worse than MS IE 5.0+ for Windows.

According to an information I got MS IE will be not developed anymore. Opera is in danger because of Safari browser. On the base of a screen capture Safari has excellent CSS2 support - maybe approximately as good or even better than in Opera and Mozilla Gecko browsers. But according to an e-mail it has bad JavaScript support. Because I don't know Mac-browsers well enough I can't give any recommendation concerning Mac browsers.

Other platforms

Opera and Mozilla Gecko browsers offer to the Linux/ Solaris platform as good browsers as for Windows. Concerning Opera browser newest versions might not be available for Linux. In the Linux platform Mozilla Gecko based browsers have many different user interfaces. For example Galeon use the Mozilla Gecko rendering engine. It use lighter user interface than the corresponding Netscape browser. They use then less resources and might work faster. It might be the most reasonable to install Mozilla 1.x because other browsers might use an old rendering engine, which is not possible to update to the newest Mozilla Gecko.

For Linux is also other browsers. The file explorer of the KDE interface Konqueror works also as a Web-browser. It uses by default a rendering engine, which has been called KHTML, but the browser can apparently be configured to use the Gecko rendering engine. Indeed Konqueror 3.1 render in some respects my pages better than Mozilla 1.3.-1.5.x and official Opera 7.x browsers. Like some Gecko browsers it has serious problems with PNG-images.

Galeon; ; New Architect.

According to an e-mail some Mozilla OS/2 browsers crash in some pages, which use search engines.

Final or beta versions of Opera are available also to QNX, BeOS, FreeBSD, OS/2 and Symbian OS (EPOC) platforms. According to an e-mail OS/2 browsers work like corresponding Windows versions. In principle Opera Software has the readiness to build an Symbian OS browser, which supports four media types (screen, projection, handheld and print).

Opera has been introduced 29.5.2001 as the default browser to the Symbian operation system:

Symbian and Opera Software today announced an agreement to include Opera as the default browser in Symbian's reference designs for Communicator devices.
Symbian's reference designs for Communicators enable a wide range of pen and keyboard based devices to be developed by Licensees, combining voice and data communications with powerful Internet and data capabilities the first one scheduled to ship being the Nokia 9210 Communicator which will be available in H1, 2001.

Opera is today the default browser for example in Nokia 9210i Communicator and several Psion handheld devices.

Opera press releases: Symbian enhances wireless Internet offering with Opera.