We Keep Coding

Open HTML link with IE11 [duplicate]

I have designed a website using Firefox and am now looking to integrate a softphone into the webpage, but unfortunately it is made with ActiveX, so Firefox won't support it.
I have tried opening my page in IE9, and it looks a mess because I've used CSS3 for a lot of it and haven't coded it for different browsers because we will only be using Firefox within the office.
Is there a way that I can tell my page in Firefox to specifically open a new page in Internet Explorer and just have the softphone in there? Or is there a way to get ActiveX running in Firefox with a plugin or something?

You can open a link in Microsoft Edge from any browser by adding microsoft-edge: in front of the url in the HREF.
EDGE (works)
I don't know how to get it to work in other browsers though. My team and I spent quite a bit of time on it and couldn't find a raw HTML/JavaScript solution.

I don't think you can open a IE window from firefox, but you can easily build a firefox plugin based on your activex using http://code.google.com/p/ff-activex-host/

It really depends on your exact situation.
If you are targeting multiple users outside a corporate network this is hardly possible to achieve. However, if you are targeting your company's network it's possible to do this using custom protocol.
Your link then would look like: ie://opens_in_ie.com
You'll have to make changes to registry of target computers though. More info about custom protocols is available here: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa767914%28v=vs.85%29.aspx
In most cases, system administrator can do this remotely.

IETab V2 will let you open a tab within Firefox that runs the IE engine.
Once installed, you can force a link to open with IE by formatting the URL or bookmark like this:
chrome://ietab2/content/reloaded.html?url=http://domain.com

It's somewhat specific, but I created an internal site at work, and I wanted to link to another internal site that only works in IE. To do this, I created/defined my own application protocol in the registry. Then I added to my links the protocol header. This is similar to what apple does when you click a link and it opens iTunes. The downside to this approach, however, is that users will have to install the registry modification for it to work... like I said, it's really a solution for a very specific scenario.

Same answer as from chuck wallace
If you want to start from for example in Internet Explorer, go to C:\Program Files\Internet Explorer\iexplore.exe and create a shortcut to the Desktop.
When you check the properties from this created shortcut, you will see the Target: C:\Program Files\Internet Explorer\iexplore.exe.
Now you can place the shortcut from the website, behind the Target. It will show something like this: C:\Program Files\Internet Explorer\iexplore.exe www.nu.nl. Or this C:\Program Files\Internet Explorer\iexplore.exe https://stackoverflow.com.
This way it opens IE first and then the website.

Is there a tool to quickly run a short javascript in IE8, without having to run Internet Explorer?

For example, I found that calling something like this
document.getElementByID('myElement').value.trim();
crash in IE8 because strings don't have trim() in IE8. Is there any way (e.g. using some website in the internet) to run such short, one-off code to verify issues like this without having to find a computer with Internet Explorer?

I use Browserling all the time to make sure html renders properly. I know it does run javascript, but that's in the cloud. The paid version has a feature called "bug hunter" but I don't know exactly what it does. They have a 30 day money-back guarantee so it might be worth trying it for a month. Or you could email them and ask.

Use the Developer tools in the newer versions of IE.
Open IE (desktop mode) and press F12.
In the toolbar, you can select the Browser Mode and the Document Mode.

Detect java version in Chrome

I am trying to find a way to detect a user's java version using javascript. I have tried both PluginDetect and deployJava.js. Both work on Firefox but return null on Chrome. Not getting any warning about blocked plugins, and no console messages, so I'm not entirely sure what the problem is. Anyone know?

Chrome no longer supports NPAPI (technology required for Java applets) or check also if javascript is enable on chrome.
But i found some sites maybe this can help u to detect browser and browser version:
Using jquery api
2nd site
jsfiddle demo browser detect
css-trick.com
Javascript detect what Chrome version STACKOVERFLOW
And This last

How do I debug Internet Explorer on Windows Phone 7?

I'm not a Windows Phone developer, and I want as little to do as possible with anything related to Microsoft. Nonetheless, I need to get my mobile web app running properly on Windows Phone 7. What debugging tools are available for the platform? Something like the Webkit developer tools or Firebug would be ideal, either from the phone itself or more likely, remotely debugging from my computer.
If such a thing doesn't exist, I'd settle for being able to read Javascript error messages, and view the contents of variables using alert() or similar. At this point, all I know is that my JS is failing: I don't know where or why, let alone how to fix it.
My dev computer is running OS X, and I'd really like to be able to use these tools from OS X if possible. Assuming that debugging tools exist (which I really hope they do) are they designed for Windows only? If so, does anyone know how well they would work with Wine or similar?
EDIT: I have a physical Windows Phone 7 device, so I can use that. However, alert() doesn't seem to be working, which is why I'm posting this question. Does alert() normally work on the WP7 browser?

You'll likely find the Mobile Perf Bookmarklet to be the easiest all-in-one tool for testing any mobile device.
Works well on the iPhone/iPad/Samsung Galaxy Tab in my testing so far.
Quote:
It displays a menu with links that load other bookmarklets including Firebug Lite, Page Resources, DOM Monster, SpriteMe, CSSess, and Zoompf.

Unless you have a Windows Phone 7 device, you will need to run Windows in BootCamp and install the Windows Phone Developer Tools in order to test in IE on the emulator. I don't know about Whine, but I ran into major problems trying to test in Parallels - so based on my experience, I suggest keeping it as simple as possible.
There is no console in IE on the phone, so you will need to use alert, like you suggested, or just write text to a div on your page as a custom console.
If you really want to code in OS X (which I definitely understand), using a separate machine for testing IE in the WP7 emulator is going to be your best bet.
EDIT: I just tested alert and it did work fine on my Windows Phone. My guess is that a syntax error is preventing it from calling.

The following may be interesting
Simple IE debug tool for Windows Phone
Supports
Html traversing
Html node styles, properties, metrics
Reading console output
Executing js on device side from console (including intellisense)
Dynamic script injection - ability to debug live sites
Not supported
js breakpoints

Just wanted to add a note to say that full JavaScript debugging is possible now with Windows Phone 8.1 and Visual Studio 2013 Update 2. Full details are available at:
http://blogs.msdn.com/b/visualstudioalm/archive/2014/04/04/diagnosing-mobile-website-issues-on-windows-phone-8-1-with-visual-studio.aspx
I realize that this doesn't help the versions referenced in the original question (WP7), but I'm hoping this will help people who may find this question and are running a more recent version.

Something that has worked for me, is to test my mobile pages through the Windows Vista built-in Internet Explorer browser.
It comes with a script debugger ( which you have to enable in Advanced Options tab through the Internet Options menu ), and it seems that it gets really close to the Internet Explorer Mobile implementation.
Another tip would be, that, instead of using window.alerts, you can also use document.write or set output to a div content.

I'm using this hack to have console.log send info back to the server (it uses window.fetch, which I'm polyfilling, but could use xhr instead) https://gist.github.com/wheresrhys/bf93057ee3a594454582

Call a JavaScript function defined in an iframe in Chrome using the file protocol

This question is extremely similar to the fully-updated version of the question asked here: How to call a JavaScript function from one frame to another in Chrome/Webkit with file protocol — unfortunately, that question was never actually answered.
I have an HTML page that contains an SVG image in an iframe. The SVG exports a JavaScript API that allows it to do useful things (reset to zoomed and centered, display at "actual size"). Below the iframe, I've put buttons that the user can click on that call through to the functions defined in the SVG.
My code looks like this:
function reset() {
document.getElementByID('iframe').contentWindow.reset();
}
It works perfectly in Safari, Firefox, and even IE 9 (which supports SVGs - hooray!). But on Chrome, it fails: the debugger informs me that:
Property 'reset' of object [object DOMWindow] is not a function.
And indeed, there does seem to be truth to that: even though 'contentWindow' is of type DOMWindow, it has no methods or fields (at least, not that the debugger will show me). Even asking for its 'document' field fails (yields null).
The rub appears to be the use of the file:// protocol to transfer both the containing HTML and the contained SVG. As noted in the question I referenced above, Chrome produces the following error when the attempt to access 'contentWindow' is made:
Attempt to access frame with URL file://[...]/contained.svg from frame with URL file://[...]/container.html. Domains, protocols and ports must match.
In general, I think security is great; this looks like a security-inspired restriction. But here, it seems to have gone too far: these are files on the user's filesystem, after all, and in my case, are even in the same directory.
Hosting the code is not an option - it must reside on the user's machine. I'd hate to have to tell people "just don't use Chrome - it has silly notions of security."
Is there no way to work around this restriction?

Of course there is no way :) These file protocols are meant to be explicitly called by the user. There is absolutely no way for a web application to allow that, as you have seen.
The only way to do that is if you "as a user" allowed that to happen, if so, you can enable that by adding the following command line parameter:
// By default, file:// URIs cannot read other file:// URIs. This is an
// override for developers who need the old behavior for testing.
--allow-file-access-from-files
So open up Chrome with: chrome.exe --allow-file-access-from-files this is used for development.

Thanks to the information offered by #Mohamed Mansour, I was able to find more details on this issue.
The rationale for Chrome's behavior is to prevent a maliciously-crafted page from, through JavaScript and internal frames, accessing the contents of your file system without your knowledge and upload data to the Internet [Chromium bug 4197, Chromium bug 47416].
It is unfortunate, from my point of view, that the Chromium team chose to take things as far as they did. Gecko is a bit more subtle in whacking this mole: it limits cross-page scripts to same-subdirectories [Mozilla bug 230606, Same-origin policy for file protocol]. The result is much less surprising for users and developers and has generated much, much less angst than has arisen over Chrome's behavior — read Chromium bug 47416 in particular to see what I mean.
Because of this behavior, I've had to modify my "website" — which cannot be hosted on the Internet and must reside on local-users' machines — so that it throws up a dialog box telling users to switch browsers. It's really too bad — I'd like to support Chrome but just can't expect my users to relaunch it with an obscure command-line option whenever they want to run my "website."
I'm posting my findings here in case anyone else stumbles across my question when Chrome seems to mysteriously not work for them and also to encourage anyone who reads this to consider starring Chromium bug 47416. The developers have made it painfully clear that they are unwilling to consider changing Chrome's behavior unless it's clear people really care about the issue. Being told "I've had to tell users not to use Chrome" hasn't been enough encouragement.