Slashdot Mirror
Opera to Stop Spoofing User Agent as IE
Anonymous reader writes "The Opera browser will stop spoofing its User Agent (UA) as Internet Explorer. Currently Opera, by default, spoofs its UA to identify itself as Internet Explorer. This is seen, by some, as a move that will bring up Opera's usage stats a bit higher, and will hopefully make webmasters, who develop IE centric sites, more aware of Opera."
Maybe this will keep Opera from bitching about how Firefox is "cheating", etc.
Le français vous intéresse?
But when will they stop shipping with spyware?
They're dammed if they do (users getting blocked from sites they would otherwise be perfectly able to access with Opera) and dammed if they don't (on the usage stats).
Can't they just stick the word "Opera" somewhere in the user agent string, but still make like they're IE?
Drag n' Drop DVD Recommendations
as the user will see a web site not working at all, because the smart web server seing this is not IE, distribute page which are broken or malformed or even simply refuse serving. Nonetheless a step in the right direction if at least it force web master to develop web page which really follow the minimum common denominator (aka: what work for every browser).
I would think a better way to combat the "sites that target opera users" problem would be to have a big button next to "refresh" that says "if the page looks weird click here!"
In that case, the page would refresh and the browser would lie to the webserver about what browser it is for the remainder of that session on that domain.
Best of luck to Opera though. Hopefully there aren't so many sites that will screw the browser over.
Our stats package can supposedly detect Opera's spoofed UA, and I'm still seeing numbers like 0.2%.
Despite my username, right now IE5/Macintosh is the bane of my existance as it is still over the magic 1.0% line.
Whenever I hear the word 'Innovation', I reach for my pistol.
This is seen, by some, as a move that will bring up Opera's usage stats a bit higher
...will hopefully make webmasters, who develop IE centric sites, more aware of Opera. :P
Bring up the usage stats, or maybe, thanks to the websites that don't even serve you if you're not using IE, bring down the usage itself? (Hopefully not the latter!)
More aware of the standards, you mean.
Anyway, Opera has much fewer users than Firefox, so I think any difference that Opera makes will be much less than what Firefox would.... still, it's a good thing; I wonder if Opera users weren't ashamed all this while to be identified as IE users?
and will hopefully make webmasters, who develop IE centric sites, more aware of Opera.
For a competent Web programmer, it will also eliminate the inconvenience of automatically sending broken, "Internet Explorer compatible" output to a browser that can properly interpret a page that complies with Web standards.
Opera has the option to identify itself as Opera, Mozilla, and IE. IE is by default, for some reason which I don't know (anyone care to explain?) why. Anyone using Opera would probably already be savvy enough to change those settings if they wanted too. But some people are just too lazy, and since there's no real benefit to it, they just leave it as is. :-) Not significantly though, but it's a step in the right direction.
Expect IE's market share to drop a bit, and for Opera's to go up.
It's useful, but there's no reason why someone else's browser should be set by default. Don't know, I just never really understood why they did that to begin with.
All-in-all, my point was, that although this is a good thing for the numbers, it's not something largely significant.
Nobody's gay for Mole-Man.
Maybe they should implement a big, friendly button to allow even the most clueless user to identify as Explorer, with some wizard to explain why it can be useful. This is an important functionality.
Victims of 9/11: <3000. Traffic in the US: >30,000/y
Its about time in fairness, when people argue that some sites don't work when its set to Opera surely the same argument can be made for Firefox.
Its important that sites see realistic stats of what people are using.
"WebTV: bringing the Internet into the shallow end of the gene pool since 1995" - Martin Bishop
I tried to read the linked article with the new Opera release, but it said it only supports IE ...
ZEN is a prime number in base-36
Opera has a quick-change menu; hit F12 and you can select between opera/mozilla/IE - Although afaik it shows as IE/opera with the opera stats. It'll be nice to see what the usage stats turn out like though; personally opera does everything I want better than any of the others. Firefox is clunky by comparison, and I love the complete customisation of opera. Not to mention decent tabbed browsing (firefox tabbed browsing is horrible)
Spoofing user agent was lame to begin with. There's no standard called MSIE.
'Once scientists, even the dim-witted social scientists, get muzzled, the Western Civilization is finished.' - oldhack
It doesn't. It does have an Ad-bar on the free version. But it's well worth the money. And it goes away as soon as you register. It's a lot more low-in-fat than most other browsers around. Even more so than Firefox.
*ducks*
Nobody's gay for Mole-Man.
It's about time that Opera starts showing up in the stats instead of inflating Internet Explorer's market share. If MSIE's share drops enough, people will start making sites that take other browsers into account.
Does anyone with a fucking clue actually use Opera?
With MS warning everyone to update the browser sniffing libs for the IE7 release, now is the time to make changes for those who are trying to do something where the client browser gets funky with specific HTML coding.
+++ UGUCAUCGUAUUUCU
Comment removed based on user account deletion
As a test Eric disabled the Opera-validation code, changed Opera to properly identify itself and ran the default S5 slideshow...
So is it possible that Opera took this as a slap in the face and maybe are starting to change their opinion of their place in the world, i.e. "if I can't easily detect your browser I can't begin to fix my code"? Are they trying to stand up against the PR machine that Firefox has behind it to say that they're still in the running, and maybe also make life easier for web developers who'll finally be able to easily identify their browser?
No matter what the reasons, its a good decision IMHO.
Damien
I haven't touched Opera since I switched to Firefox a year ago, but one feature I miss is Opera's ability to advertise itself as IE 5!
I thought Opera could render IE-only code properly, for the sake of convenience, but at the same time be standards compliant? I don't know, not sure. I just thought that was the case. Anyone care to share some knowledge? :-)
Nobody's gay for Mole-Man.
The browser name in the browser should be configurable. You end up with browser nazi sites like this one run by an anti-IE-nazi that put up nasty messages based on your browser. The ability to change the browser name could help get around this type of bad web site design.
Don't blame Durga. I voted for Centauri.
All you have to do is press 'F12' to see the menu with the options to change between Mozilla/Opera/Internet Explorer. Anyone that uses a new browser would most-likely play around with all the options to get accustomed to the interface. It's not a menu that would go undetected. "Quick Preferences" is a bit attention grabbing as well. ;-)
Nobody's gay for Mole-Man.
IE usage statistics will be down by two.
This is Opera v8.0 UA string when set to identify as Internet Explorer:And this is in Opera v8.0 when set to identify as Opera:The problem is that many old servers still serve different web sites or deny access to that server if they don't find Mozilla somewhere in the UA string. This is why IE7 also has "Mozilla/4.0" at the beggining of its UA string. To preserve backwards compatbillity. If you're wondering why some web servers don't allow browsers with no "Mozilla" in their UA string, it's because Netscape used this UA string and many servers didn't allow other "nonstandard" browsers to their site. Remember this was back in the day when Netscape had 95% share and no one really cared about standards.
And any half decent UA sniffing script already knows about Opera. If it weren't so it would also detect IE as Mozilla - because IE's UA string looks something like this:To sum things up:
a) Opera has allways identified itself as Opera, IE as IE and Mozilla as Mozilla.
b) This won't boost Opera share because every web script kiddy already knows that EVERY browser (except the newest Safari and Opera 8.10) uses a Mozilla at the beggining of the UA string.
c) It may happen that you won't be able to view some really old sites (1996) which still run on non-Apache/non-IIS servers.
Designing sites compatible for both major(widely used) browsers (IE and FF) is a pain. And heck AFAIK Opera snubs some css syntax, sheez.
Why do people even use this browser? Nobody I know uses it. If I write my own shitty browser can I get slashdotted too every time I change my UA identifier?
I'm assuming you were going for a (Score: +5, Funny), since I just tried it and it did work. :-P And I'm not spoofing as IE, either! Hurray for intercompatible websites! Standards rock!
Nobody's gay for Mole-Man.
This was kind of silly. About time.
Best Community for Gaming and Gadgets!
by *default* Opera set it's UA to be IE, but any selfware Opera user will change it to be Opera anyway. (I've been using Opera since 4.xx, and I always set mine to Opera). it's not something obscure to set, it's in the quick menu (F12, then set the Identify as Opera/Mozilla/IE)
I personally like Opera a lot more then Mozilla/Firefox, because it's gesture command is much faster and useful then what's availible so far in Mozilla.
"...Why buy the cow when you can get the sex for free? Or something like that, she was all senile and sh*t" - Jason Mewes, Mallrats. Why pay for Opera when, on a modern system, Firefox or a properly configured IE is just as good?
-everphilski-
Thing is, while Opera can render pages "designed for IE" just fine, a lot of sites still refuse to load if the browser's not IE. Nevermind sites like Hotmail, which deliver purposedly broken CSS if the browser detected is Opera - making the page look funny or disabling functionality like purging of the spam mail folder.
Opera makes it easy to change the browser identification (via "Quick preferences"), but still, it can be annoying. Specially for non-technical users.
Please mod this up,
PS. Slashdot is stupid
Comment removed based on user account deletion
In what way is pointing out the fact that sites often fail to detect Opera because it spoofs as IE by default whining?
What do you mean by "whining" anyway?
Is it whining if your browser is being discriminated against, and you make a point of that? Were the black slaves in the US "whining" when they wanted freedom? Were those who wanted to abolish slavery "whining"? Yeah, I'm purposedly exaggerating slightly, but surely you get my point.
I don't get the hostility towards Opera. The company pays several people to work with web standards in the W3C. The guy who invented CSS works for the company. Even as tiny as Opera is it has still defined what a modern browser is supposed to do. A lot of the "innovations" in Firefox and IE7 were introduced by Opera. Heck, the company even officially opposes software patents, so it's not even trying to prevent free software from just doing whatever Opera can do (or at least trying). Stuff Mozilla representatives are bragging about in Minimo, such as Small Screen Rendering, spatial navigation, and other things Minimo is supposedly going to revolutionize the mobile browser market with, were invented by Opera, and have been available to users of mobile phones with Opera on them for ages.
Why the constant derogatory comments about Opera on Slashdot? I mean, the first paragraph you wrote was informative, but then you just had to add that second paragraph to make sure that you showed everyone how you really think Opera is lame, "so please don't mod me down for saying something remotely positive about Opera"?
Clever signature text goes here.
There are no binaries for x86_64 of Opera, while I can perfectly run Firefox natively 64 bit. And Gecko will probably become very popular on handhelds too, thanks to Nokia and Minimo.
their pa8ting
Correcting the stupid bug that prevents one from typing international characters in Opera on Linux/Mandriva/KDE (like ñ, é, ü, etc.).
All (I mean *ALL*) other apps deal correctly with accents -- and Opera up to 7, too -- but not Opera 8.
My wife and daughter prefer Opera to Mozilla. I use Konqueror, but was ok with Opera until that bug appeared _months_ ago.
Already filed a bug, no answer whatsoever, forums (fori?) just acknowledge the problem; the suggested solution is using the statically compiled version (which is lame, to say the least).
If I'm ignorant of some already known solution, please, please, somebody do enlighten me!
Also they have another problem under KDE: Opera does not print. People even post scripts to deal with this (which is lame, too -- not the scripts, but Opera is lame).
But there's an easy workaround here: print with Opera to a file (postscript), open Konq as filemanager and print with Kghostscript. Too easy, and I'd like to post this solution on MyOpera's forums. Guess what? They want me to register!
What are they afraid of? That I post a solution in public and charge them afterwards? Boy, the things we have to do to remain anonymous these days... how long can I remain anonymous without being a criminal just for doing that?
Exactly. Only really really braindead software actually misidentifies Opera, so its usage stats will likely not shoot up any significant amount. What will happen though is webpages from 1998 will have to be updated to stop checking for IE vs NS4 with silly useragent checks and start using object existance checks.
Morphing Software
Ok, browsers have User Agent strings. Not all browsers are compatible with every web standard. Websites are becoming more complex (google maps etc.) and taking advantage of newer browsers. So, the question is, do we limit ourselves to the lowest common denominator (among browsers above a certain market share threshold at least), or do we make sites that can change depending on the browser?
If yes, then should the site do browser detection and serve up different pages? If not (and I think if certainly should be "not"), then how do we go about supporting an ever widening gap in browser features? Simply wait for all browsers above our threshold market share to catch up? I suppose that's what we do now, but it's quite annoying to not be able to use some nice features because of that.
Another thought: web apps (vs. installed apps) have the great advantage of being upgradeable with no user action. But eventually we get to the point where upgrades require the user to take action and upgrade her browser... So the web app just serves as a buffer to user action.
to make it look like internet explorers stats are going up http://extensionroom.mozdev.org/more-info/useragen tswitcher/
Maybe Firefox or IE aren't "just as good" for everyone. Maybe people have different needs. Maybe some people just want a small, fast, feature-rich browser which is secure, and which doesn't require tons of confusing extensions to do various things.
Clever signature text goes here.
Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1) Opera 7.54 [en]
The interesting part is, that if read the HTTP specification, and then interpret accordingly, this string contains three product tokens and one comment. The product tokens are "Mozilla/4.0", "Opera", and "7.54". So actually it does not identify itself as MSIE, neither does IE. The [en] part is syntactically wrong, and really should have been part of a comment. Another mistake is that "Opera" and "7.54" are given as two different product names. Adjusting according to the specification, the user agent string should have been "Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1) Opera/7.54 (en)"
I'm sure if you count what browsers really identify themselves as, Mozilla will be a clear winner. Mozilla, IE, and FireFox all identify themselves as Mozilla.
If the article had been named "Opera to Stop Spoofing User Agent as Mozilla", it would have been technically correct.
Do you care about the security of your wireless mouse?
So in reality, it's Opera spoofing Mozilla 4.0 spoofing MSIE 6.0 spoofing Opera...
Caveat Emptor is not a business model.
If you really can't go for the lcd (which you should try, there's rarely the need for javascript and never, IMHO, for flash. Use server-side scripts to be independent) then check for technology support instead of browser brand. .* - [T=application/xhtml+xml]
for example (as .htaccess on an Apache server) serves xhtml pages (called html no matter what) as application/xhtml+xml to browsers who understand and as text/html (the default) to all others (IE only, AFAIK, but that's not important). You can easily adapt this to your needs, simply check for HTTP_ACCEPT and be done with it.
RewriteEngine on RewriteBase / RewriteCond %{HTTP_ACCEPT} application/xhtml\+xml RewriteCond %{HTTP_ACCEPT} !application/xhtml\+xml\s*;\s*q=0 RewriteCond %{REQUEST_FILENAME} \.html$ RewriteCond %{THE_REQUEST} HTTP/1\.1 RewriteRule
On the one mind, I agree it's ghastly that Opera (or Safari, or Firefox, or whatever) has to pretend to be MSIE just to get served certain web pages. Changing the string might inconvenience some users in the short term, but it'll encourage web authors to better support other browsers, which is a Good Thing(tm) in the longer term.
But on the other, aside from stats, why should it have to identify itself at all? What's wrong with something like
or similar? Groucho Marx is quoted as saying that he wouldn't want to belong to any club that'd have him as a member; I feel the same about web sites; if a site has to customise its pages for my browser, whatever that browser is, then I'm suspicious of it.Ceterum censeo subscriptionem esse delendam.
If you fill out a lot of forms, say for buying stuff on the Internet, or for whatever reason, the feature of opera where by it stores your name, and another piece of information you want it to store, and makes it accessible with a simple right click is indispensable. That being said I still use firefox.
What will happen though is webpages from 1998 will have to be updated to stop checking for IE vs NS4 with silly useragent checks
Fat Chance. Anyone who is still doing NS4 detection is probably using a library script that they don't understand. If they aren't checking for Opera now, this change alone won't cause them to start.
and start using object existance checks
I tested a script-heavy site with an old version of Opera. It turns out the DOM objects and methods existed, but didn't do anything. I guess Opera just put them there so that scripts wouldn't error out in a manner that allowed users to see why the site didn't work. I don't know if Opera still does this, I hope not.
Whenever I hear the word 'Innovation', I reach for my pistol.
why not just leave it as IE but change the version number something unique like IE, Blah blah, Version 6.969 .. obviously that was never released by microsoft, so anybody looking for opera stats can find it in their server logs... or does changing the version number screw things up ?
Phew, looks like I'm the first one to tell you this! I'd better hurry! Hey man, you need the Firefox user-agent switcher extension! I'd link you but I'm in a hurry quick go to MozUpdate
Whew! Did I win???
Opera sucks. Sorry.
http://www.kuvaton.com/kuvei/ff.jpg
-Palal
Because of you, OSS will never get ANYWHERE, except for your wet dreams about sucking whorevald's teeny little cock. OSS is a steaming pile of some of the shitiest code eever puked forth by untalented hands upon a hapless keyboard. Fucking faggot monkey zealots.
..offtopic. 8-(
I thought I could talk about Opera and not just about "user agent spoofing".
Anyway, I hope some Opera guy reads about this.
And posts an answer or something.
Fwiw, I use Firefox because I can change the UA to whatever I like ... not just three preselected options as with Opera. At the moment I'm using Googlebot's UA just to be a [censored]. But I have about 40 different ones based on my own personal moods. Try that with Opera - oh, you can't. Nevermind.
If website authors would just stick to the standards and web browser authors would stick to the standards these submoronic browser issues would fade faster than a fart in a stiff wind.
https://www.cotse.net/ - which, btw, is functional with EVERY browser including Lynx!
Think of me when you shave your legs...
Stats programs think that Opera is Internet Explorer, but it's much more subtle than that.
Just trawling roughly through our logs, we have:
/. :) Let's all pretend it's Konqueror!
0.2% Opera
6.5% Firefox
88.1% IE
Dunno what the other 6% is, and I ain't about to trawl through and investigate for
Wrong. This is my useragent and I'm using Opera 8.
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; U; en; rv:1.7.5) Gecko/20041110
In Opera 8, you can change ua.ini to make the Opera x.x disappear. Then the site won't be able to detect Opera at all. Look up ua.ini. It's understandable that you don't know this since it's a new feature in Opera 8.
Now that is a great idea. And I'll bet Google wouldn't mind doing it in the least, considering recent history.
--MarkusQ
We need a new borg icon for the Firefox fanboys. Just like the Billy-G worshippers, any time anyone mentions the virtues of a non-Firefox browser they shit their pants, whip out their willies, and start jacking off at the altar of free software.
I've said it before and I'll say it again: ANY monoculture is a bad monoculture. It doesn't matter what the dominate monoculture is, it's always a bad thing to have a market overwhelmed by a single product. If the fanboys had any brains at all they'd welcome every non-IE browser into the market and encourage the whole passle to compete against one another, rather than blasting everything that might take market share from their precious One True Browswer(TM).
I sincerely hope that Opera and Firefox continue to take IE down a peg. I also sincerely hope that neither Opera nor Firefox ever reaches a dominant market position. It's better for everyone involved if the market for browsers remains in contention among as many products as possible.
Well, better for everyone except the fanatics, of course. But it's about time we stopped listening to their ilk anyway.
Max
My god carries a hammer. Your god died nailed to a tree. Any questions?
nxtw, @ least YOU have and are (and I will give you this) a rational, intelligent replier to my initial statements of fact about Opera vs. IE/FireFox/Mozilla etc....
Unlike some of the other replies I received like this one:
http://it.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=157615&thre shold=-1&commentsort=0&tid=95&mode=thread&pid=1320 9072#13209287 [slashdot.org]
BUT, on your replies? At least they were factual & had merit... I will attempt to express my viewpoints vs. your own which were PRETTY GOOD couters I have to admit!
I will just discuss it rationally, vs. each of your points...
Here goes, point by point:
1.) nxtw - "This would be important if everyone had slow computers. I remember using Opera way back on when I had a computer that needed a speed bost over IE/Netscape."
It matters man, IF you are a performance enthusiast (which I consider myself as) on a computer (cars too). Every bit helps.
Your argument is that of the Visual Basic crowd (which used to be my fav tool for development prior to discovering Delphi 1.0 in 1995): The CPU will make up for the slowness of the interpreted language speed vs. native code based operations.
Well, e.g.?
In Visual Basic Programmer's Journal issue Sept./Oct. 1997, entitled "Inside the VB 5 Compiler Engine", Delphi beat the snot out of BOTH Microsoft's MSVC++ &/or VB5... especially in MATH & STRINGS work, which EVERY program does... and by HUGE margins in those 2 of 10 or so tests.
Delphi lost by a PUNY margin in 2 of the tests, 1 to VB (ActiveX form loads which VB is HIGHLY optimized for, even beating its brethren VC++ here) & graphics form paints (small loss to VC++ here)... but, all else, even though they downplayed it? The charts showed that a language like Delphi outperformed VB & VC++ HUGELY, overall in 8 of the 10 tests.
To someone like myself? That turned me from being a TOTAL VB/Access coder to a Delphi coder when I tried it myself, & have not looked back since.
It is THAT much faster of a tool in development (RAD) & also the code produced by it... CPU's types notwithstanding. Measured by hi-res multimedia timers in each procedure (like basic subroutines) or functions, you can SEE it easily.
So, I have to go with that argument here vs. your point there. I am a developer & I want that "instant advantage" a better/faster RAD compiler like Delphi gives you.
By the by? Those test results were found again to be true circa 2000-2001 online in "Jakes Programming Efficiency Contest"... why do you think Mr. Bill Gates hired away Anders Hejlsberg from Borland to Microsoft to make C# & improve Visual Studio??
He knew he had to get him or be beaten by Borland losing the "mindshare" of developers like myself worldwide... which he did to an extent. I only use MS stuff when forced to on the job, which IS alot!
-----
2.) nxtw - "That was five years ago. But Firefox's performance is more than adequate on every system I used, e.g. Firefox and IE can load pages faster than they can downloads them."
Doesn't matter really, @ least not to someone like myself (way avid performance & efficiency enthusiast & developer)...
I know one thing though - start loading those XUL 3rd party addons for FireFox for that added functionality you like?
What happens to its speed then?? I already know:
I have 24 of them installed here... FireFox's loadspeed ALONE goes WAY down, especially during FireFox loadtime!
-----
3.) nxtw - "Opera may, however, provide a benefit on an old 266MHz system I have, so I plan on trying it out."
This is good, it is open-minded fairness from you, I appreciate that.
-----
4.) nxtw - "I don't see this as an issue. With Firefox, and what I've seen of IE6 SP2, it's not easy to install addons (ActiveX, XPIs.) Furthermore, the additional func
I use Opera, I like Opera, and I want to continue using it. It always made me a bit irritated that I HAD to pretend to be using IE to get into certain sites, even though many of them worked fine with Opera. My bank's site included in that list.
I think it's odd that so many people posted on this topic with the attitude "who cares about Opera anyway". This isn't about Opera. It's about standards.
In the IT world, we commit to standards for interoperability. We've all seen the benefits of this, whether we know it or not; open technologies, which are revolutionizing IT, and the internet itself in fact are possible only when the IT community adheres to standards.
Technology improves and consumers win when we follow standards. There are only two reasons I can think of not to: Greediness of the big players to keep hold of marketshare and the laziness of developers.
http://ob-la-blog.blogspot.com/
I get 0.9 % Opera on my tech-oriented site (50K hits per month).
Stop spoofing as Netscape 4?
I'm looking at you Internet Explorer, you Safari and you Konqueror (they don't even tell you the default, but on Ubuntu it spoofs as "Mozilla/5.0 (compatible;" as well as "(like Gecko)" ).
Analogies don't equal equalities, they are merely somewhat analogous.
Us sweet sweet Opera users will still be able to change our UA to IE so that we can do things like bank and order pizza.
Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 7.0b; Windows NT 6.0; .NET CLR 2.0.50215; SL Commerce Client v1.0; Tablet PC 2.0)
n/t
I guess today is a passable day to die.
Yeah, I believe Opera 5 or 6 didn't really support DOM all that well. That's one of the main reasons the company did a complete rewrite of the rendering engine for version 7.
Opera 7 and 8 are much better with complex sites. The worst part though, is that presto (the new engine) has been out for something approaching 3 years. And people both still talk about Opera's lacking DOM support and use scripts that are either 3 + years old or operate on those assumptions.
Believe me, it's as bad as the people who still put down Windows XP like it crashed like Windows 98.
I can understand if something just came out, but jeezus - 3 years? Get with the program...
Opera, Proxomitron-Grypen,GPG 0x0A1C6EE3
News at 11:00!!!!
/. and that's saying something.
This is probably the lamest most non-news worthy post I've even encountered on
Since Opera is highly IE compatible...
No, it's highly standards compatible.
remember.. its CVS the pharmacie, not the software
I will give them props for at least supporting Firefox and Safari, but not supporting Opera specifically is just...wrong. Has anyone got Opera to render the page anyways? Does it look horrible? Looked fine in Firefox...
Excluding pirated versions, you either paid for it or are running ads. Opera should have a list of paying customers and an accurate log from their ad server. They should be able to publish some realistic numbers, not just downloads.
Yes, this post is a dupe
Just leave a bug in Opera so that sites that don't work right constantly refresh, even when you go onto other sites. Opera has enough users to take down all sites hostile to their browser in short time, which will get the message across.
The hard part is figuring out how to do the above without doing anything illegal.
I'm sawing to bring down the chand.... no I can't do it!
// series. After visiting Xerox, Jobs had new ideas on how to make changes to the Macintosh and Lisa projects.
Opera is like Xerox, and IE is like Microsoft, and Mozilla/Netscape is like Apple. Xerox had it first, Apple made theirs like Xerox but a bit different, and then Microsoft came in and monopolized the market.
For those who say that Apple had it first, the original Macintosh resembled the Cannon Cat and was based on the Apple
Remember, Slashdot does not have a -1 disagree moderation, and no, troll, flamebait, and overrated are not substitutes.
Anyone know a good way to change the user agent string to anything I want in Opera?
So when is IE going to stop identifying itself with a string that starts with "Mozilla"?
I've also sorta wondered: Isn't "Mozilla" a registered trademark? Is it actually legal for IE to identify itself this way? Not that any of us would really want to take Microsoft to court, y'know, but this does seem to be a somewhat dubious practice.
Those who do study history are doomed to stand helplessly by while everyone else repeats it.
"Great, it's the return of excessive capital-and-symbol anonymous man! [slashdot.org] I'm thrilled. Again, please post as a logged-in user." - by interiot (50685) on Sunday July 31, @05:36PM
First of all: Is that the best you have, being a human spelling & grammar checker? If you have trouble reading my words (nobody else here seems to)?? Don't read them, simple.
Secondly? Please... can't you EVER do better than THAT vs. myself? Apparently not if you're @ it again, like usual!
Poor tactics, via your "human grammar/spellcheck/diction" checking obsession you seem to have with me. How I write is my own style, & not all your complaints will change it. Above all - your picking @ others writing style (when nobody else does)? Clearly indicates the problem is YOURS, not mine. If you cannot draw the meaning of my words via the context in which they are used?
Perhaps, YOU have the problem?
Can you drink in, & digest that?
Third - NOW, Why should I register as a regular??
(TO make it easier for YOU to 'track my whereabouts' as I can you with ease via your username 'interiot'??? LOL, no way - TOO smart for that here buddy! You want to take shots @ me? You do the work: Find me. I am NOT going to "make it easy on you", ok? You want some, you come GET some.)
HOWEVER:
I like your "different strokes for different folks" reply, because it's true. Personally, about myself, you are correct in one regard:
Personally, I go for, & USUALLY find and stick by, the most efficient & speediest (yet fully function & feature-laden) choice in apps of ANY particular type I can find...
Again, usually, I DO find them.
I've been writing code as a pro for more than 12 years now, & for a good decade before that, been messing around on computers of all types from mainframes & midranges down to today's modern PC. I can spot pretty readily what is what in most programs via simple tools for analysis like taskmgr.exe (or others), as well as knowing what language types used produce faster or more efficient code than others BY DEFAULT... there is play here, why I state that @ the end. Depends on the coder's skills.
To the rest of what you stated, well... All I can say is this:
You find a test, a legitimately run test as I did above, & post it here showing FireFox is faster than Opera on as many platforms & in as many functions?
I will concede, THEN you've got me. I have not found any such test online yet, so I used the one I posted...
Just facts is all.
As far as features? Opera's LOADED with them man, inclusive of voice control, wand features, & other things other browsers actually copied from Opera! Read the entirety of this thread & then tell me diff., ok?
(And, afaik? No security holes appeared lately (or as many in the past, period) for Opera or as much as they do for IE &/or FireFox/Mozilla series browsers).
Adding features is risky, trust me, I know, I write code & have professionally for over 12 years now. Everytime I add things to code I am either:
1.) Adding new features to
or
2.) Fixing because the coder before me messed up large?
It's RISK... huge risk, & needs bigtime testing first before going production/live.
NOW, that said?
If the history of IE & ActiveX DLL extension hasn't shown us ALL that?
I don't know WHAT will! Well, I take that back: FireFox has itself & recently with the 'greasemonkey' 3rd party XUL addon that showed itself security vulnerable (but was patched fast, granted, but... how LONG did it exist, & who KNOWS who exploited it, being my MAIN point there?).
Yes, users have more choice & control with XUL 3rd party addons for FireFox/Mozilla, but I have 1 question of you:
How do you identify which ones are safe & secure to install (ala the VERY recent greasemonkey problem which was patched fast, but is MY prime indicator of 1 very serious thing - those XUL addons? Potential danger...)
APK
Would it not be possible for the browser to detect it is rendering badly or getting duff stuff from the server and say, "ho hum, I'm dealing with a M$ borganism, lets do that again but this time say I'm IE7"?
threadeds blog
1. There's value in brevity. If you can get your points across with a minimum of words, you save your reader time.
2. There's value in distilling your thoughts into two or three bullet points. People don't want to work hard to try to figure out what you're saying. People are more likely to read and understrand your viewpoint if you do a little work to make it short and coherent first.
3. You claim to be intelligent. If so, great. You write like you're from the PR department or fromt upper management, like you need to hype up your writing to make it more impressive. If you you have good ideas, express them clearly, and people will recognize that. They'll recognize that a lot better if you don't have a bunch of hyper formatting.
4. Write less. People don't want to respond to your logical points if a) they have to comb through your first post to make sure they didn't misunderstand it, and b) if you're going to respond with many more pages that they will have to take a lot more of their personal time to try to completely understand.
So in reality, it's Opera spoofing Mozilla 4.0 spoofing MSIE 6.0 spoofing Opera...
Not exactly, but close. In reality it is Opera spoofing MSIE/6.0 spoofing Mozilla/4.0.
Do you care about the security of your wireless mouse?
I use opera for any site that wants my password. Hahaha - yes I appreciate the irony of me not logging in and being anonymous here.
Anyway, one simply cannot argue with Opera's unblemished security record.
My bank requires IE for online banking - logins, the works. But I won't use Windows. I will never compromise. I've happily been using Opera, identify as IE and away I go.
If they stop supporting this, however, does anyone know if Wine runs IE okay?
Using a QEmu image of a Microsoft OS is quite slow. And I don't want to use that poopoo OS anyway.
It's way faster, easier to use, way more stable, and is ages ahead when it comes to features and innovations and useability. I think IE users don't care that their browser sucks, and Firefox users just assume their browser is the best because it's not microsoft and it's open source (Big Mistake).
For me it doesn't matter what the useragent is. When I do up my websites, I make sure it looks the same on all of them. IE, Netscape, Mozilla, Opera. If it don't then I fix it.
I think the useragent thing needs to be thrown out and these lazy assed web developers need to start really earning the titles of developers.
Sorry if I sound cranky, but it's Monday and I still ain't won the lotter.
I read Slashdot for the headlines, because the headlines, unlike the articles, are usually original and never duplicated
Opera may have something to brag about, or they may not. Current wisdom suggests even they don't necessarily know (though the download count on their site might give them a rough estimate).
Thus far they've been hiding behind the veiled argument that "you can't say we're not successful because nobody, including us, knows how successful we are!"
And they're not *really* throwing away that argument. The new user statistics will still be an underestimate of the total userbase, because it won't factor in people who are still spoofing as IE with an older version of the software.
And there's a lot of good reasons not to upgrade.
Opera doesn't have any auto-update feature and, at least in my experience, has a tendency to forget settings and sessions when you upgrade versions, so I imagine many users don't upgrade until there's a newer version with a feature they want enough to bother with the whole process.
And, an obvious and more relevant argument here, the ability to identify your browser as IE is a FEATURE. In older versions, you can still CHOOSE to identify yourself as Opera, if you want to help boost the stats of your browser of choice. But I, like many I'm sure, leave it as IE or Mozilla because it's more convenient than switching everytime I go to a site that doesn't let in Opera. So if you take away that feature in a future version, thus breaking compatibility with many sites, this may lead to more webmasters fixing their sites for Opera, but the more likely and more immediate result will be users either abandoning Opera or, more notably, NOT UPGRADING. Version 8.0 works fine, so why upgrade and lose the FEATURE that lets me view my favorite sites?
And, of course, the significant number of people who choose not to upgrade in the near future, and Opera's inability to estimate what percentage of the userbase these people comprise, means they get to have their cake and eat it too. If the browser statistics in the near future show Opera with a huge boost (and it's actually a 2-for-1 gain since every user they gain in the statistics is a user IE/Firefox loses), they can say "I told you so" and brag about their larger userbase.
And if the new statistics aren't particularly impressive, they can STILL say the stats are not accurate because some "unknowable" percentage of Opera users are still using the older version of the browser.
So, smart strategy I suppose. I have a hunch that the percentage of Opera users who set their browsers to identify as IE may be an overwhelming majority, so the impact this move might have on the browser stats *might* be pretty staggering. Then again, it might not be. Opera is my browser of choice and I think it beats the stuffing out of both IE *AND* Firefox, so I wish the company well. But the bottom line is we're stll a long ways away from having browser stats that accurately represent Opera's userbase.
CVS replies with canned answers as long as it's less work for them than fixing the problem. Answering e-mails with canned answers is easy. But they will do something if you guys call them and people have to sit in the phone explaining it over and over again.
Make sure to tell long and pointless ramblings instead of technical details.
Sare, titul shud be speld "speld". Mi mistak.
You didn't mention Nazis in your post. Why didn't you compare faking IE to being in Nazi concentration camps? It would have made more sense. To make a proper troll, you should have written something like "Every time that I have to fake out a web site into thinking that I'm actually using IE, I feel like I'm being led into the gas chambers at Auswitz.".
Opera hits are 0.53% of the hits to my sites. So, as far as I'm concerned, Opera making any changes won't help. Opera does indeed include "opera" in the user-agent, even if pretending to be MSIE.
Here's other stats for fun:
Steve Magruder, Metro Foodist
You mentioned nazis, which is not unexpected by a braindead Firefox fanboy who gets all defensive when someone takes one of his friends to task for lying.
You got caught with your pants down. Get over it, kid.
"Spelling/grammar is not an issue" - by interiot (50685) on Monday August 01, @01:20AM
Oh, really? Who are you trying to b.s. here?? Didn't you state that about my writing here:
http://it.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=156306&thre shold=-1&commentsort=0&tid=154&mode=thread&cid=131 03544
Verbatim QUOTE of you interiot - "Please post as a logged-in person, So I can see if you always talk like that. And if you really do always talk like that, log in so I can put you in my "Foes" list.
And stated because of HOW I write you would "add me to your foes list", how damn childish! And, no matter what you say now - Your own words bury you right there.
This is the 3rd time now you've done this stupidity here on these forums (e.g.-> picking @ my writing style etc.), e.g. here, where you want me to post as a regular user (obviously by your own words, so you can track me & by your own admission? Add me to your "foes" list):
Interiot, read this, it's just for you: Don't like what I write? DON'T READ IT, SIMPLE ENOUGH?? OK???
Did you not understand that in my last reply???? Understand it now then.
Know what? Just because of that statement in that URL from you??
I will NEVER register here as a regular & be as trackable as YOU are buddy, because, like I stated last thread:
You want some? You'll have to work @ it, & that amuses me to NO END, because you??
You're EASY to find here (but I won't be)...
However, then, looking @ your lack of technical prowess in this field (I have read your list of replies here lol now)?
You don't have to worry about me bothering you... you don't RATE highly enough imo in technical skills for me to bother as your own replies do you in as my quote of your motives above show with your OWN words regarding myself.
In your replies from what I read, the REALLY funny part was that nobody sees ANY technical merit on the topic @ hand, or factual data in any of your replies whatsoever directed my way either, or really to others as well.
In case you didn't notice? This is what this topic is about - Opera/IE/FireFox etc.
Instead of playing "English Professor" here, try "Computer Scientist" ok? You'd be on topic. For once.
-----
1.) "There's value in brevity. If you can get your points across with a minimum of words, you save your reader time." - by interiot (50685) on Monday August 01, @01:20AM
Number #1 that is according to YOU. YOU, hate to break it to you? YOU Are NOT everyone.
Everyone who's read my posts here understood them well enough. Perhaps you have ADD or some other problem like dyslexia. Go to a doctor & find out.
So don't even try to "speak for the planet"... what an arrogant assumption thinking you can do this.
There might be value in brevity when there's a problem with someone's ability to read & this appears to be the case with you. My style of quoting (as I did here) works, and has countless times online @ various sites where I assist others for decades now with technical problems in their OS, programs, OR even writing their programs. Like yourself, I quote their points, assist on them 1 @ a time, to NOT miss a detail hopefully. This adds bulk to my posts, but sometimes, you have to in order to be accurate.
-----
2.) " There's value in distilling your thoughts into two or three bullet points. People don't want to work hard to try to figure out what you're saying. People are more likely to read and understrand your viewpoint if you do a little work to make it short and coherent first." - by interiot (50685) on Monday August 01, @01:20AM
Ah, again - You speak for "people" like YOU are everyone (or even a 'someone' w/in this field) - AGAIN: Wake up, you're not.
Above all, once more - Don't like what I write? Don't read
Last time I used Opera on a Mac it was a Classic-only program and it sucked ass. Safari and Firefox for me, baby.
:)
Opera is blindingly fast on Windows and I love it, but unless they've made major changes recently I'm sticking with supports-css2-blur-feature Safari.
end of discussion
Yes, it is OVER, now isn't it? LOL, it seems that my last reply shut you up pretty handily, simply by:
= 13216924
:)
. html
t icleid=41095&cpage=176
= 2608
A.) Using your OWN words (saying you wanted to add me to your "foes list" because of my writing style: GROW UP! The resort of the lame used by you in grammar/spellchecks)
B.) Your own "skimming" & making assumptions about my role in this field, and being WAY wrong.
http://it.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=157615&cid
Oh, by the way Interiot - Do you have a PhD in English Writing or a related field?
NO??
(Didn't think so!):
After all: If you cannot grasp the meaning of someone's words via the context in which they are utilized, or merely grasp the technical detail?
Either don't read it, learn more about it, or just admit you may have somekind of problem like ADD, or dyslexia...
(That's nothing to be ashamed of and can be overcome!)
*
(Arstechnica/Interiot - Once more, You're only embarassing yourselves, via your own words & motivations regarding myself, via your OWN words in the URL I cite above.)
Funny, how you ran away pretty fast after that URL above I cited...
APK
P.S.=> TOO easy! Especially "nailing it right on the head" you are just another 'arstechnican' trying me again, lol:
http://paperlined.org/apps/slashdot/anonymous_APK
Isn't that what you cited? Again - TOO easy! You make me look good. Thank-YOU!
All the edited arstechnica private playpen links you put up?
They're not here & the ones here can't be altered by you.
Here is what counts.
Not your edited/altered postings over @ arstechnica whom are known as, well, less than credible (see below) in this field worldwide.
And, anyone is free to see that I have not been to arstechnica since 2001, but searching "APK" there after that time? You turn up 5,000 or so posts about me... thanks for the flattery. You're only showing people I got to you.
LOL, you arstechnica people try me time & again online only to lose as per usual on technical issues it is not even FUNNY for me anymore, I actually pity you.
Above all - You don't know how good it is to have people of your IQ (or lack thereof) to tear apart...
I NEVER start with you, but the results showed who finished what here... Soooo, "C-YA"!
Hey Interiot? Instead of running?? Do something constructive:
WELL, How about disproving what I asked you arstechnica 'great technical people' to disprove here (for a year almost no less & you failed to) instead, @ the top of this page?
http://www.windowsitpro.com/articles/index.cfm?ar
Everyone, you have to excuse the 'geek angst' of the arstechnica children like interiot here, lol...
This describes their 'tactics' for everyone & it's not even my OWN estimations of them:
http://www.storageforum.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t
Take a read of that? And know where "interiot" is coming from - arstechnica, who have tried this for years against me online, failing as usual... just like @ the WindowsITPro forums URL above.
Again, Ah... just TOO EASY!... apk
The real APK & yourself had a chuckle over this eh? Boy, you are in for one heck of a surprise soon is all I can say.
APK
P.S.=> You'll be hearing from my attorneys shortly... DO NOT EMAIL ME AGAIN! apk
How could I forget? Here in the Southeastern US there is one on every frickin' corner (across from a Baptist Church).
Seems that my last reply shut you up pretty handily, simply by citing your own mistakes here:
:)
http://it.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=157615&cid= 13216924
A.) Using your OWN words (saying you wanted to add me to your "foes list" because of my writing style: GROW UP! The resort of the lame used by you in grammar/spellchecks)
B.) Your own "skimming" & making assumptions about my role in this field, and being WAY wrong.
Oh, by the way Interiot - Do you have a PhD in English Writing or a related field?
NO??
(Didn't think so!)
After all: If you cannot grasp the meaning of someone's words via the context in which they are utilized, or merely grasp the technical detail?
Either don't read it, learn more about it, or just admit you may have somekind of problem like ADD, or dyslexia... but realize, it's YOUR problem.
Not mine.
Everyone else responded to & dealt with my post just fine & it even modded up 1 & 2 points.
(If you have problems like that, & why you tried to pick on my writing style? WELL, that's nothing to be ashamed of and can be overcome!)
----
(Arstechnica/Interiot - Once more, You're only embarassing yourselves, via your own words & motivations regarding myself, via your OWN words in the URL I cite above.)
Funny, how you ran away pretty fast after that URL above I cited... you blew it for yourself.
*
Just like your arstechnica pals have for years vs. myself online (following me around, I don't bother you & avoid you - there is nothing for me to learn in this field from the likes of you is why, to be blunt about it!)...
APK
P.S.=> For me? This was TOO easy!
Especially "nailing it right on the head" you are just another 'arstechnican' trying me again, lol, & failing... Failing vs. myself, just like all of arstechnica has here for a year straight now:
http://www.windowsitpro.com/articles/index.cfm?art icleid=41095&cpage=176
Jeremy Reimer (one of your own, probably you) says "Arstechnica is the greatest single collection of talent online in computing" or something along those lines?
For such a 'great assemblage of computing knowledge/talent', how come they cannot manage to dispute & disprove the points I made there then, with specific facts to do so?
Great judge HE is (NOT!) -
Funniest part about that URL from Windows IT Pro magazine is, that I gave your arstechnica crew there EVERY fair opportunity to get the better of me, & thru the pages there?
I cited many times you've tried this on me over the years & many forums... lol, ALWAYS failing.
Now, you know better than to try me on technical matters don't you? Apparently so, & now instead, tried your "english grammar" spellcheck on me ala arstechnica methods noted here:
http://www.storageforum.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t= 2608
Do I have to cite all the times I "spanked you all" in front of everyone here on forums other than your own you followed me to (like Aryeh Holzer/Daisyman, or PeterB being absolutely DESTROYED by myself before for attempting this type of thing on me, for instance)?
Oh, I can bring those up again if you'd like... lol, but the one from Windows IT Pro will do for now.
That WindowsIT Pro article has most of them cited in its content pages thru them anyhow...
LOL, what I love is? It got a SUCH a rise outta ya there, BIG-Time.
I had such fun doing it.
I found out, You cannot beat facts. This is where I knock-the-chocolate out of your crowd everytime.
Facts.
E.G.-> Jeremy Reimer (one of your 'technical authors' @ arstechnnica no less) doesn't even have
SETI's an awesome effort & concept! A truly noble effort, in a world that is powered TOO much of the time on greed & corruption as well as pursuit of the "Holy Dollar"... Hope it helps find "E.T", & not the borg, you know?
Ahem: Speaking of "GOD", Jeremy Reimer of arstechnica believes he is one, check out his newsgroup posting:
r eimer & post_nr=5273
news-reader.org/article.php?group=alt.fan.jeremy-
----
Author:Jeremy Reimer Subject:Re: Jeremy Reimer *IS* God!
Body:"Jeremy Reimer"
wrote in message news:
> Jeremy Reimer is the scale by which we should all measure the importence of our lives!!
> I agree with this brilliant man!
INDEED!
----
What an idiot. From a pack of idiots, arstechnica, there is the worst of the lot. A megalomaniac.
Reimer? As in "Lord Baldrick"?? That little creeps nothing but a poseur loser. I know him from the newsgroups days as getu reimer and he is a know nothing loser.
What did you study when you were in college? Did you go for the minor in CS, or/and were there other things you studied?
ALL I could, way above & beyond coursework, which is HOW you do it in order to be successful.
:)
Business Information Systems (dataprocessing) Bachelors of Science (MIS concentration) -
This was (ontop of highschool in EARLY 80's, doing BASIC on WHO KNOWS WHAT, iirc, DEC PDP-11 series maybe? Via modem bootjacks etc. (all the old stuff you see in the film "wargames", etc.)).
In college, it was a mixture of using Vax VMS 1180 slave terminals in dorms & labs, & UNIX... commandlines are AMAZINGLY similar imo anyhow. So, I took to it well @ that level (this was above class, which was stuff like BASIC & COBOL).
Then, later on
Comp. Sci. degree (standalone associates to update/refresh to newer technologies beyond the DEC Vax VMS & Unix stuff I learned on in the 1980's...) 1991-1993.
So, my first year HERE, came coding stuff like Borland C++ 3.1, Lahey Fortran, MASM 5.0, TurboPascal 5.5, QBasic &/or QuickBasic in DOS... later it was VB 3.0 (16-bit) & VB 4.0 (32-bit).
This, by the by? Was WAY above what I was required to do, & even did some of it over summers... I wanted to see the diff.'s in diff. languages, & make comparisons... ALL I really found out imo?
Was that for the MOST part? They're just syntax - it was courses like DataStructures that REALLY taught me the most... @ least above the init. basic stuff.
Howver, Delphi (object pascal 7.0 based), which NOW is truly my favorite tool?
I discovered on my own on the job later in 1995 in its 16 bit 1.0 model, along with VC++ more modern versions 2.0 onwards for 32-bit etc. with ALOT of Access & VB in the mix!
(MSVC++, which imo, I am not nuts about, but can deal with it... I prefer Borland C++ Builder still to it).
That's as far as languages &/or programming stuff.
Stuff like DOS/Win3.x & just on transition to 32-bit stuff like Os/2 & Windows NT 3.x-3.5x, rest was on my own was what I developed on here, was a weird time because in the beginning we had 8088's first year, second year up to 486 Dx/2 66mhz rigs that could run the "heavier" OS'... later on, Linux when it came out in Slackware 1.02 iirc, around 1993, just to see how "Unix-Like" it was & so I could have a UNIX on my home machine (486 Dx/4 133mhz, 32mb RAM, WD dual 212mb disks, Diamond Stealth 24 1mb ISA video... all ISA machine).
The OS stuff? I had to learn MOSTLY on my own. I actually WANTED to. Know what??
Of 300 of us in the major on my 2nd degree? Only 12 of us survived it...
With ONLY myself & a russian pal of mine instantly landing jobs out of the last 12 of us with a Fortune 500 called "Goulds Pumps" right off the bat, recommended by our prof.'s no less...
Hard work pays off!
*
How about you?
You have my history, education-wise, which ended in 1993, there... what is yours, now I am curious.
APK
P.S.=> Can you be cool to me FINALLY, or what? Thanks... Above all - if you don't like how I write?? I don't know what to tell you - but you are definitely attacking me based on non-technical issues! apk
I can be cool to you, but my perception is that the discussion goes downhill quickly if anything is said that you don't agree with (eg. the Memory-Optimization Hoax thread that seems like it will continue to go on until one of you two don't have the physical strength to type any more). But I'll give technical conversation a try anyway.
Regarding your comments about ActiveX vs XUL, I don't think that XUL is going to create many holes. Javascript is heavily sandboxed, and ActiveX is not. There are a few ways to easily create holes in those sandboxes, and that's what's accidentally happened with Greasemonkey. But I don't think that it will be a common occurance for accidental holes to be created, because there are only a handful of ways to create such holes.
forums (fori?) just acknowledge the problem;
"forum" is a second declension neuter noun. The Latin plural is "fora".
Is this a sigs-optional kind of place? 'Cause I am totally down with that if you know what I mean.
"Me? I graduated 5 years ago, bachelor's in CS, and have worked at a Fortune 100 company since then. My favorite languages are Perl [paperlined.org] and javascript [paperlined.org], but things like Postscript/Forth, Tcl, Lisp, and make influence me a lot. VB 3 & 4 were definitely standouts."
:)
VB's alright, I use it & have been since 3.0 up to 6.0... it's all the 'same stuff' now in object.property method anyhow REALLY, when you boil down to the fundamentals nowadays in them all, anyhow.
Piece of advice, just in case? Get around some in your first 10 years...
Why do I say that? WELL, you can get "locked into" a way of thinking or doing things that might or might not be THE best for every similar scenario... whether this be code, IS/IT/MIS layout, or network topology familiarity.
It helps - voice of experience. Voices you'd hear & learn with (maybe get paid more too than now, bonus) @ other places as well... believe me, it happens.
"I can be cool to you"
Good. This is good. About all I ask of anyone really.
"but my perception is that the discussion goes downhill quickly if anything is said that you don't agree with (eg. the Memory-Optimization Hoax thread that seems like it will continue to go on until one of you two don't have the physical strength to type any more). But I'll give technical conversation a try anyway."
I am not even typing there anymore, just asking the naysayers there disprove my points with technical facts from credible sources that disprove the ones I used.
Pure copy & paste, fairly challenging my naysayers... only takes less than a second via Ctrl+C & Ctrl+V (the classics on the keys...).
I even wrote the author there to try to do so. After pointing out & fixing holes in his apps as well... & still pointing them out. He really ought to fix them.
"Regarding your comments about ActiveX vs XUL [slashdot.org], I don't think that XUL is going to create many holes. Javascript is heavily sandboxed"
Holes get found in it a LOT man! Come on. Javascript has even been misused in adbanners and its been shown @ LEAST 2-3 times the last year or two here @ slashdot no less!
"and ActiveX is not."
This is good for INTRANETS!
(e.g.-> ActiveDocument driven interfaces for internal use, & that is my opinions of it. It can be used that way @ least imo. Inside a protected network perimeter).
"There are a few ways to easily create holes [learnhouston.com] in those sandboxes,"
Right - hence my reply about Javascripting flaws above. Java as well. Heck, probably FLASH also.
"and that's what's accidentally happened with Greasemonkey. But I don't think that it will be a common occurance for accidental holes to be created, because there are only a handful of ways to create such holes."
Time only will tell...
*
APK