start.com · Domains · Slashdot Mirror

Re:Huh? by Michael+Griffiths · 2005-08-02 18:30 · Score: 1 · on Microsoft Testing Rival to Google's Start Page

You are indeed correct.

They have - well, three now - but for most of the development period, only two developers.

Saying "It doesn't work in my browser!" may be factually accurate, but it ignores the fact that this isn't even a BETA. Hell, it's not even an aplha - merely an "incubation project" that's being gradually tweaked and changed rapidly.

I suppose I'd expect Slashdot to seize on any minor error for a Microsoft page. Still, where's the perspective on what is important and not gone? You don't bash a Beta product for having bugs. Generally.

FYI - it doesn't import OPML files correctly? I imported my RSS feeds from OPML into http://www.start.com/3 recently, and it worked perfectly. Granted, I only have around 400 feeds, but even so. Folders, feeds, etc worked perfectly. I know http://www.start.com/1 imported them flat, which was intensely annoying.

Re:Huh? by Michael+Griffiths · 2005-08-02 18:30 · Score: 1 · on Microsoft Testing Rival to Google's Start Page

You are indeed correct.

They have - well, three now - but for most of the development period, only two developers.

Saying "It doesn't work in my browser!" may be factually accurate, but it ignores the fact that this isn't even a BETA. Hell, it's not even an aplha - merely an "incubation project" that's being gradually tweaked and changed rapidly.

I suppose I'd expect Slashdot to seize on any minor error for a Microsoft page. Still, where's the perspective on what is important and not gone? You don't bash a Beta product for having bugs. Generally.

FYI - it doesn't import OPML files correctly? I imported my RSS feeds from OPML into http://www.start.com/3 recently, and it worked perfectly. Granted, I only have around 400 feeds, but even so. Folders, feeds, etc worked perfectly. I know http://www.start.com/1 imported them flat, which was intensely annoying.

Doing better by Slinky+Saves+the+Wor · 2005-08-02 18:15 · Score: 2, Interesting · on Microsoft Testing Rival to Google's Start Page

Their Javascript is broken, at least so says Konqueror.

Error:
http://www.start.com/extern/wsfw/compat/0.072605.0 /msncompat.js:
SyntaxError: Parse error at line 85

Error:
http://www.start.com/extern/wsfw/core/0.072605.1/m sncore.js:
TypeError: Value undefined (result of expression window.attachEvent) is not an object. Cannot be called.

Error: http://www.start.com/3/: TypeError:
Undefined value

Doing better by Slinky+Saves+the+Wor · 2005-08-02 18:15 · Score: 2, Interesting · on Microsoft Testing Rival to Google's Start Page

Their Javascript is broken, at least so says Konqueror.

Error:
http://www.start.com/extern/wsfw/compat/0.072605.0 /msncompat.js:
SyntaxError: Parse error at line 85

Error:
http://www.start.com/extern/wsfw/core/0.072605.1/m sncore.js:
TypeError: Value undefined (result of expression window.attachEvent) is not an object. Cannot be called.

Error: http://www.start.com/3/: TypeError:
Undefined value

Doing better by Slinky+Saves+the+Wor · 2005-08-02 18:15 · Score: 2, Interesting · on Microsoft Testing Rival to Google's Start Page

Their Javascript is broken, at least so says Konqueror.

Error:
http://www.start.com/extern/wsfw/compat/0.072605.0 /msncompat.js:
SyntaxError: Parse error at line 85

Error:
http://www.start.com/extern/wsfw/core/0.072605.1/m sncore.js:
TypeError: Value undefined (result of expression window.attachEvent) is not an object. Cannot be called.

Error: http://www.start.com/3/: TypeError:
Undefined value

MSN Copy? How about GOOGLE copying? by Michael+Griffiths · 2005-08-02 18:07 · Score: 1 · on Microsoft Testing Rival to Google's Start Page

This is a perfect example of why Slashdot has reached new lows.

First of all, this story - though not exactly "this" story - has been on Slashdot before.

Second, let's take a moment to review the Slashdot comments with the facts.

Here's the basic timeline:

A small team at Microsoft releases http://start.com/1 March 6th, 2005. This is a first-generation web-based RSS aggregator, quite slick with AJAX.

The same team releases http://start.com/2 on April 6th, 2005. It's an interesting take on a "bookmar manager." It supports automatic importaing of IE favorites. Later, OPML support is added for other users.

Google releases their personalized home page - http://www.google.com/ig - on or just before May 22nd, 2005. The Slashdot story is here: http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/05/23/002220 7&tid=217&tid=1

The Start team releases the third version - http://start.com/3 - on June 6th, 2005. This supports a far nicer version of the first page, although it does not incorporate the bookmark manager ideas of the second site. They tweak it weekly, sometimes daily, over the coming months (and continue to do so).

Google updated their personalized page on or just before July 26th, 2005. The Slashdot story is here: http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/07/26/124023 2&tid=217

Now, the Start.com/3 site is being Slashdotted as a competitor to Google's Homepage. It is, naturally. However, it seems the person who submitted the document neglected to do any basic research, such as looking up the BLOG of the Start.com team: http://spaces.msn.com/members/startcom/ Now, this blog is referenced in the "Staff Picks" section of the Start.com/3 page, as well as easily located via Google.

This now means a horde of Slashdot people visit the site, and then say that MSN is "copying" Google. Now, I'm afraid that this is simply incorrect. Most likely, there is simply a convergence of ideas. "Brilliant minds think alike", so to speak. However, if you want to resort to the childish claims of "He copied me!", then I am afraid that Google is clearly copying the Start pages, down to the layout and javascript. The Start team has added features, and recently added support for OPML import of feeds. And yes, you didn't guess it, EXPORT OF FEEDS into an OPML file.

What happened to MSN's evil "stickiness" policy?!?! My god! And you can't do the same with the Google page.

I've been following the development of Start.com for quite a while - since the first intiative gained some media attention in late March/early April. Of course, the fact that it spread around the blogosphere and was nifty had nothing to do with Google releasing a version of its customized homepage in late May. Realistically, it actually DID have NOTHING to do with it, and was an element of an overall strategy. However, I'm sure - as this so plainly shows - that had Microsoft released Start.com two months after Google released their Personalized Home Page (and with less features), they'd receive a huge number of "OMG YOU TOTALLY COPIED!" comments.

I suspect I shouldn't be astonised at how Slashdot has reacted to this article. But, really, if you're going to post something - at least make sure what you post is TRUE. This PARTICULARLY applies to the Editors; explain to me why they didn't at least FACT-CHECK this article first? Isn't that supposed to be what editors DO?

The truth IS important, despite what you see on television today.

MSN Copy? How about GOOGLE copying? by Michael+Griffiths · 2005-08-02 18:07 · Score: 1 · on Microsoft Testing Rival to Google's Start Page

This is a perfect example of why Slashdot has reached new lows.

First of all, this story - though not exactly "this" story - has been on Slashdot before.

Second, let's take a moment to review the Slashdot comments with the facts.

Here's the basic timeline:

A small team at Microsoft releases http://start.com/1 March 6th, 2005. This is a first-generation web-based RSS aggregator, quite slick with AJAX.

The same team releases http://start.com/2 on April 6th, 2005. It's an interesting take on a "bookmar manager." It supports automatic importaing of IE favorites. Later, OPML support is added for other users.

Google releases their personalized home page - http://www.google.com/ig - on or just before May 22nd, 2005. The Slashdot story is here: http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/05/23/002220 7&tid=217&tid=1

The Start team releases the third version - http://start.com/3 - on June 6th, 2005. This supports a far nicer version of the first page, although it does not incorporate the bookmark manager ideas of the second site. They tweak it weekly, sometimes daily, over the coming months (and continue to do so).

Google updated their personalized page on or just before July 26th, 2005. The Slashdot story is here: http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/07/26/124023 2&tid=217

Now, the Start.com/3 site is being Slashdotted as a competitor to Google's Homepage. It is, naturally. However, it seems the person who submitted the document neglected to do any basic research, such as looking up the BLOG of the Start.com team: http://spaces.msn.com/members/startcom/ Now, this blog is referenced in the "Staff Picks" section of the Start.com/3 page, as well as easily located via Google.

This now means a horde of Slashdot people visit the site, and then say that MSN is "copying" Google. Now, I'm afraid that this is simply incorrect. Most likely, there is simply a convergence of ideas. "Brilliant minds think alike", so to speak. However, if you want to resort to the childish claims of "He copied me!", then I am afraid that Google is clearly copying the Start pages, down to the layout and javascript. The Start team has added features, and recently added support for OPML import of feeds. And yes, you didn't guess it, EXPORT OF FEEDS into an OPML file.

What happened to MSN's evil "stickiness" policy?!?! My god! And you can't do the same with the Google page.

I've been following the development of Start.com for quite a while - since the first intiative gained some media attention in late March/early April. Of course, the fact that it spread around the blogosphere and was nifty had nothing to do with Google releasing a version of its customized homepage in late May. Realistically, it actually DID have NOTHING to do with it, and was an element of an overall strategy. However, I'm sure - as this so plainly shows - that had Microsoft released Start.com two months after Google released their Personalized Home Page (and with less features), they'd receive a huge number of "OMG YOU TOTALLY COPIED!" comments.

I suspect I shouldn't be astonised at how Slashdot has reacted to this article. But, really, if you're going to post something - at least make sure what you post is TRUE. This PARTICULARLY applies to the Editors; explain to me why they didn't at least FACT-CHECK this article first? Isn't that supposed to be what editors DO?

The truth IS important, despite what you see on television today.

MSN Copy? How about GOOGLE copying? by Michael+Griffiths · 2005-08-02 18:07 · Score: 1 · on Microsoft Testing Rival to Google's Start Page

This is a perfect example of why Slashdot has reached new lows.

First of all, this story - though not exactly "this" story - has been on Slashdot before.

Second, let's take a moment to review the Slashdot comments with the facts.

Here's the basic timeline:

A small team at Microsoft releases http://start.com/1 March 6th, 2005. This is a first-generation web-based RSS aggregator, quite slick with AJAX.

The same team releases http://start.com/2 on April 6th, 2005. It's an interesting take on a "bookmar manager." It supports automatic importaing of IE favorites. Later, OPML support is added for other users.

Google releases their personalized home page - http://www.google.com/ig - on or just before May 22nd, 2005. The Slashdot story is here: http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/05/23/002220 7&tid=217&tid=1

The Start team releases the third version - http://start.com/3 - on June 6th, 2005. This supports a far nicer version of the first page, although it does not incorporate the bookmark manager ideas of the second site. They tweak it weekly, sometimes daily, over the coming months (and continue to do so).

Google updated their personalized page on or just before July 26th, 2005. The Slashdot story is here: http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/07/26/124023 2&tid=217

Now, the Start.com/3 site is being Slashdotted as a competitor to Google's Homepage. It is, naturally. However, it seems the person who submitted the document neglected to do any basic research, such as looking up the BLOG of the Start.com team: http://spaces.msn.com/members/startcom/ Now, this blog is referenced in the "Staff Picks" section of the Start.com/3 page, as well as easily located via Google.

This now means a horde of Slashdot people visit the site, and then say that MSN is "copying" Google. Now, I'm afraid that this is simply incorrect. Most likely, there is simply a convergence of ideas. "Brilliant minds think alike", so to speak. However, if you want to resort to the childish claims of "He copied me!", then I am afraid that Google is clearly copying the Start pages, down to the layout and javascript. The Start team has added features, and recently added support for OPML import of feeds. And yes, you didn't guess it, EXPORT OF FEEDS into an OPML file.

What happened to MSN's evil "stickiness" policy?!?! My god! And you can't do the same with the Google page.

I've been following the development of Start.com for quite a while - since the first intiative gained some media attention in late March/early April. Of course, the fact that it spread around the blogosphere and was nifty had nothing to do with Google releasing a version of its customized homepage in late May. Realistically, it actually DID have NOTHING to do with it, and was an element of an overall strategy. However, I'm sure - as this so plainly shows - that had Microsoft released Start.com two months after Google released their Personalized Home Page (and with less features), they'd receive a huge number of "OMG YOU TOTALLY COPIED!" comments.

I suspect I shouldn't be astonised at how Slashdot has reacted to this article. But, really, if you're going to post something - at least make sure what you post is TRUE. This PARTICULARLY applies to the Editors; explain to me why they didn't at least FACT-CHECK this article first? Isn't that supposed to be what editors DO?

The truth IS important, despite what you see on television today.

Well, play with the URL a bit and see what else by davidsyes · 2005-08-02 17:22 · Score: 1 · on Microsoft Testing Rival to Google's Start Page

is there...
(What the HELL is this:
"Your comment has too few characters per line (currently 22.8).)"
What a lame lameness filter... for text?
"Your comment has too few characters per line (currently 22.0)." (must be the clarity/separation dashes...)
sheesh!!!
Let's see:
http://www.start.com/
just returns a blank, bannerless page, having the words "start" in white, each letter surrounded by a colord disk, followed by same-colored ellipsis
====

http://www.start.com/1

"©2005 Microsoft Corp - Feedback - This site is not an officially supported site. It is an incubation experiment and doesn't represent any particular strategy or policy. For other incubation experiments, see http://sandbox.msn.com./ Enjoy!"
=============
Hmmm, let's try
http://www.start.com/2
We get:
http://www.start.com/2/default.aspx
which produces:
"Add my IE favorites to this page
Import OPML
Show removed items
Favelet:Add to Start
Loading...
©2005 Microsoft Corp - Feedback - This site is not an officially supported site. It is an incubation experiment and doesn't represent any particular strategy or policy. For other incubation experiments, see http://sandbox.msn.com./ Enjoy!"
=============
http://www.start.com/4
"The page cannot be found
The page you are looking for might have been removed, had its name changed, or is temporarily unavailable."
===========
Hmm, while I don't give a rat for ms, the grandparent's reference doesn't immediately jump out as:
"the layout and use of javascript is strikingly similar to Google's. Second, one of the few major differences is that there is no MS equivalent banner or other flashing indication that it is an MS site.""
Well, if one goes and plays numbers on the location bar, different things tend to pop up.
As for the original URL in the byline, I typed into the search box:
"what is this shit?"
and out popped to the URL/location bar:
http://search.msn.com/results.aspx?FORM=START3&src h_type=0&q=what+is+this+shit%3F
sigh....
----
Isn't ms getting stale by the day? But, I guess I wasted about 10 minutes adding my 40 cents worth of time. (Yep, added
and changed to HTML Formatted and the lame anti-lameness message went away...a 40-second check)