From Redmond With Love

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Posted by timothy on Tuesday March 22, 2011 @11:00AM from the that-shows-class-and-esprit-de-corps dept.

theweatherelectric writes "Continuing the tradition, the Internet Explorer team has congratulated Mozilla on shipping Firefox 4. Given the proposed accelerated release reschedule for Firefox, Mozillians may need to watch their diet in future."

140 comments

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

Nobody is completely bad by Locke2005 · 2011-03-22 11:01 · Score: 3, Insightful

Once again, the IE folk have proven they are the coolest group in Redmond!

--
I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
1. Re:Nobody is completely bad by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-22 11:03 · Score: 0
  
  Nah.
2. Re:Nobody is completely bad by Locke2005 · 2011-03-22 11:06 · Score: 4, Funny
  
  Of course, that's kinda like being the least slutty girl at the Home for Wayward Girls...
  
  --
  I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
3. Re:Nobody is completely bad by WrongSizeGlass · 2011-03-22 11:06 · Score: 3, Funny
  
  Once again, the IE folk have proven they are the coolest group in Redmond!
  Um, nope ... the cake is a lie.
4. Re:Nobody is completely bad by ThunderBird89 · 2011-03-22 11:08 · Score: 1
  
  Although not Redmond-based, but have you seen the Opera devs, testing whether Opera is faster than a potato? :D
  Or Google doing the same thing, and testing Chrome against many others (Tesla coil discharge, soundwaves, etc).
  
  --
  Hyperbole: I use it liberally!
5. Re:Nobody is completely bad by Locke2005 · 2011-03-22 11:08 · Score: 1
  
  Or the Least obese state in America.
  
  --
  I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
6. Re:Nobody is completely bad by blair1q · 2011-03-22 11:11 · Score: 1
  
  Never underestimate the bandwidth of a basket of fries hurtling down the freeway at 70 mph.
7. Re:Nobody is completely bad by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-22 11:16 · Score: 0
  
  Depends on what you mean by cool; IMO the Visual Studio teams have historically been way more interesting. Theirs used to be the only Microsoft blog I would read.
8. Re:Nobody is completely bad by Nikker · 2011-03-22 11:18 · Score: 1
  
  Tfhe cake is always a lie.
  
  --
  A loop, by its nature, continues. If that didn't make sense, start reading this sentence again.
9. Re:Nobody is completely bad by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-22 11:33 · Score: 0
  
  The cake is a pie
10. Re:Nobody is completely bad by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-22 11:50 · Score: 0
  
  Reminds me of the [legendary] fraternity prank, where donuts arrive at the sorority house one morning followed later that day by a photo of the donuts impaled on the brotherhood's manhood.
11. Re:Nobody is completely bad by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-22 12:26 · Score: 1
  
  The cake is a pie
  That was _last_ Monday.....
12. Re:Nobody is completely bad by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-22 12:27 · Score: 0
  
  even if you don't develop for Windows and even if you hate C#, if you are honest, you will admit that Visual studio is a first class dev environment. Very flexible, and very helpful. It stays out of your way and lets you code, unlike Eclipse. For years when I was doing classic ASP development, I used a plain text editor and refused to use VS, even though most of the other developers used it. Then I walked away from the MS world for 4 years and when I finally got back and dove into ASP.net I found I had to use VS just to have a good debugging environment. I now wish I could have back the time I wasted with UltraEdit when I was doing classic ASP stuff. VS is nice.
13. Re:Nobody is completely bad by marcello_dl · 2011-03-22 12:33 · Score: 1
  
  the cake is a pi * square of radius * height
  height must not include candles.
  
  --
  ---- MISSING MISCELLANEOUS DATA SEGMENT --- [sigdash] trolololol
14. Re:Nobody is completely bad by markdavis · 2011-03-22 13:20 · Score: 0
  
  >"Once again, the IE folk have proven they are the coolest group in Redmond!"
  I think the cake is more of an insult (as if Mozilla needs congratulations by the all powerful Microsoft). But yes, the IE Folk CAN produce a cross-platform food, just not a cross-platform browser ;) And their current browser doesn't even run on XP- some 40% of the MS-Windows installs! Maybe if they ever do that, Mozilla can send THEM a cake...
15. Re:Nobody is completely bad by RobertM1968 · 2011-03-22 13:22 · Score: 0
  
  Once again, the IE folk have proven they are the coolest group in Redmond!
  Then again, perhaps if they stop making cakes for the Mozilla Team, they can concentrate on making standards compliant browsers... you know, the thing they promise and fail to deliver with each release? And no... IE9 is not yet standards compliant - better, yes - but as good as Chrome or FF (in that department)? No. They still can't get simple things correct like div placement - BIG improvement over IE6 which would place things arbitrarily off screen or on the wrong side of the coordinate axis or who the heck knows where... but things are still a few pixels off. Yeah, "No big deal" perhaps. But it's simple math that people learn in 3rd grade. "50+2=55?" C'mon.
  And there are still some CSS font styling/sizing problems - oddly, ones that even occur with using fonts in the MS Web Kit and that come with Windows.
  But, they are getting closer... perhaps they should be sending all the web developers out there cakes for all the extra work we've always had to do to make websites work on their browsers?
  
  --
  StarTrekPhase2 - The Five Year Mission Continues!
16. Re:Nobody is completely bad by danomac · 2011-03-22 13:32 · Score: 1
  
  Nah, they just forgot to mention you can't cut it without a Microsoft knife, or eat it without Microsoft spoons... ;)
17. Re:Nobody is completely bad by uvajed_ekil · 2011-03-22 13:49 · Score: 3, Funny
  
  ...and it will probably not arrive on time, will not be of the flavor you expected, and it might kill you.
  
  --
  This is a hacked account, for which the owner can not be held responsible.
18. Re:Nobody is completely bad by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-22 13:49 · Score: 0
  
  Na, it's more like the Microsoft IE team is a Mardi Gras cake. It's festive and fun...till someone chokes on the baby Jesus.
19. Re:Nobody is completely bad by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-22 13:53 · Score: 0
  
  NOTHING...and I mean nothing...beats Apple's "congratulations" advert for Microsoft:
  C:\ONGRTLNS.W95
20. Re:Nobody is completely bad by HermMunster · 2011-03-22 13:57 · Score: 1
  
  Knowing Ballmer it's probably the cake left over from their IE9 launch party.
  
  --
  You can lead a man with reason but you can't make him think.
21. Re:Nobody is completely bad by HermMunster · 2011-03-22 14:00 · Score: 1
  
  I'm sorry, but the number of users of XP is far more than 40%. 70% as a figure comes to mind.
  
  --
  You can lead a man with reason but you can't make him think.
22. Re:Nobody is completely bad by markdavis · 2011-03-22 14:14 · Score: 1
  
  I was just basing in on a statistic from a few Googled searches for March 2011. It is entirely possible it is was wrong.
  Either way, it is a huge number for them to ignore. Meanwhile, thankfully, the three other major, most important browsers *ARE* multiplatform:
  Firefox
  Opera
  Chrome
23. Re:Nobody is completely bad by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-22 14:20 · Score: 0
  
  Yeah, that guy is obviously the dumbest self made billionaire.
24. Re:Nobody is completely bad by Cyberax · 2011-03-22 14:22 · Score: 2
  
  "And no... IE9 is not yet standards compliant - better, yes - but as good as Chrome or FF (in that department)? No. "
  IE9 is as good as Chrome or FF for all practical purposes in regards to standards compliance. It passes ACID3 with the same score as FF4, for example.
25. Re:Nobody is completely bad by zach_the_lizard · 2011-03-22 14:38 · Score: 1
  
  It's nice most of the time, but there are WTF moments sometimes. I'm working on a WP7 app (don't ask...), and the XAML preview is totally busted. Something in my layout is killing that part of VS, but it works on the phone and the emulator just fine. The syntax highlighting for that part of the app is totally destroyed too.
  
  --
  SSC
26. Re:Nobody is completely bad by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-22 14:58 · Score: 0
  
  Does the firefox crew send a cake when ie makes a release?
27. Re:Nobody is completely bad by jelizondo · 2011-03-22 15:06 · Score: 1
  
  Oh Lord!
  Forget WP7, I just closed VS 2010 after four and a half hours of fighting with it; simple run-of-the-mill WinForms app, for some reason one table out of dozen in the dataset will not give me a list of parameters of GetData on the auto-complete.
  Clearly, something is wrong but I can't figure out what. Finally I decided I would have to re-do some work and unzipped a back-up from last week, same thing.
  If I figure what it is I might get a Nobel Prize on Occult Sciences!
  Yes, VS 2010 is nicer and much better that its previous incarnations but somehow still one gets erratic behavior and no clue as to what is causing it.
  
  --
  Be very, very careful what you put into that head, because you will never, ever get it out. - Cardinal Wolsey
28. Re:Nobody is completely bad by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-22 17:27 · Score: 0
  
  Ah, the familiar shriek of the MS Shill. Here we go with yet another a nauseating circlejerk of MS marketing jargon.
29. Re:Nobody is completely bad by lennier1 · 2011-03-22 19:19 · Score: 5, Funny
  
  Nah, they just forgot to mention you can't cut it without a Microsoft knife, or eat it without Microsoft spoons... ;)
  Sounds less like a Microsoft cake and more like an Apple pie.
30. Re:Nobody is completely bad by Paul1969 · 2011-03-22 19:20 · Score: 1
  
  Yeah, that guy is obviously the dumbest self made billionaire.
  You need to learn the definition of "self made."
  Hint - it does not contain any references to college roommates, undeserved loyalty or sheer dumb luck.
31. Re:Nobody is completely bad by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-22 19:20 · Score: 1
  
  They're next door in Bellevue, not Redmond. (In fact, they're right next door to the building where the Bing team works)
32. Re:Nobody is completely bad by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-22 22:44 · Score: 0
  
  Microsoft will not be liable for any damages caused by viruses, even if those viruses are the result of manufacturing problems
33. Re:Nobody is completely bad by ByOhTek · 2011-03-22 23:20 · Score: 1
  
  Knowing Ballmer it's probably going to throw some chairs and start shouting "Developers! Developer! Developers!".
  ftfy
  
  --
  Self proclaimed typo king, and inventor of the bear destroying coffee table (patent not pending).
34. Re:Nobody is completely bad by ByOhTek · 2011-03-22 23:22 · Score: 1
  
  My kingdom for some mod points- that's so true.
  Given that it's a Microsoft cake, it's probably just loaded with viruses.
  
  --
  Self proclaimed typo king, and inventor of the bear destroying coffee table (patent not pending).
35. Re:Nobody is completely bad by ByOhTek · 2011-03-22 23:25 · Score: 0
  
  Ah, the familiar shriek of the anti-MS Shill. Here we go with yet another a nauseating circlejerk of Apple or OSS marketing jargon.
  
  --
  Self proclaimed typo king, and inventor of the bear destroying coffee table (patent not pending).
36. Re:Nobody is completely bad by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-23 00:10 · Score: 0
  
  Yes, yes they do:
  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Egpelzdc3VE
37. Re:Nobody is completely bad by Denogh · 2011-03-23 01:35 · Score: 1
  
  I see what you did there.
38. Re:Nobody is completely bad by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-23 02:08 · Score: 0
  
  WINNAR
39. Re:Nobody is completely bad by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-23 02:16 · Score: 0
  
  Nah, they just forgot to mention you can't cut it without a Microsoft knife, or eat it without Microsoft spoons... ;)
  Get with the times. In the Windows 7 environment Sporks are standard.
40. Re:Nobody is completely bad by DCstewieG · 2011-03-23 02:44 · Score: 1
  
  I'm so glad the IE team made the decision not to worry about the ACID test. It's only PR for geeks who'd rather care about a single number than attempt to judge on real world use.
  IE9 is a solid browser which will of course fall behind with the slow IE dev cycle. But if they keep the pace from IE7 through IE9, IE10 will blow the others away.
41. Re:Nobody is completely bad by operagost · 2011-03-23 03:03 · Score: 1
  
  As if there would be any cake left over with Ballmer in attendance. Just look at the guy!
  
  --
  
  Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
42. Re:Nobody is completely bad by RobertM1968 · 2011-03-24 10:11 · Score: 1
  
  For your information , they don't make cakes themselves. And by the way IE9 is not less standard compliant than FF4.
  Wow and WHOOOSH!!!
  Really... it was a joke, which I thought was obvious. Do you really think I'd wanna sit here all day eating cake, or care if they sent them? Or did you really expect I'd think it possible to send millions of web developers cakes, regardless of who actually makes them? Wow, some of you are so dense these last couple days. Nothing personal.
  Oh, and btw, from *independent* testing results, not sponsored by Microsoft, and not performed by companies that MS has a stake in, IE9 is less compliant than FF4 (and Chrome 10 and FF3). This was covered a week ago, with a link to a site that compared all versions of each browser. Believe what you want, but they were pretty cut and dry about it. IE9 is a VAST improvement, but still not as good as FF4 and Chrome. NONE of them ended up being perfect. IE9 simply wasn't as good.
  And the css div position thing? It's real. Try it some time. Make a compliant page, set up a bunch of divs with and without borders, with and without padding, with and without margins. Then, screencap it or whatever, and count the pixels where each is laid out. You'll find IE9 is wrong in it's math (at least per the standard).
  You see... "just a pixel or 3 off" or "it's close enough" or "no one will notice" doesn't cut it for me - that isnt standards compliant... it's "well, it's really close, and a lot better than previous versions" but not standards compliant.
  
  --
  StarTrekPhase2 - The Five Year Mission Continues!
43. Re:Nobody is completely bad by RobertM1968 · 2011-03-24 10:14 · Score: 1
  
  "And no... IE9 is not yet standards compliant - better, yes - but as good as Chrome or FF (in that department)? No. "
  IE9 is as good as Chrome or FF for all practical purposes in regards to standards compliance. It passes ACID3 with the same score as FF4, for example.
  "For all practical purposes" is not the same thing as "standards compliant". On more in depth tests, it scored VASTLY better than IE6, a LOT better than IE7, and DECENTLY better than IE8. But still not as good as FF4 and Chrome.
  Don't use semantics to win an argument. It's standards compliant or it is not. "For all practical purposes" says "It's not... but it's decent enough". Thus, you really haven't refuted anything I've said - you've just provided your opinion that you think it's good enough.
  
  --
  StarTrekPhase2 - The Five Year Mission Continues!
44. Re:Nobody is completely bad by Cyberax · 2011-03-24 22:38 · Score: 1
  
  Don't use semantics to win an argument. It's standards compliant or it is not.
  FireFox and Chrome are NOT standards-compliant. In fact, nobody implements the 4.2 spec completely and without problems.
45. Re:Nobody is completely bad by RobertM1968 · 2011-03-25 06:30 · Score: 1
  
  Don't use semantics to win an argument. It's standards compliant or it is not.
  FireFox and Chrome are NOT standards-compliant. In fact, nobody implements the 4.2 spec completely and without problems.
  Correct. But IE9 is still behind them. Only Safari is as far behind Chrome 10, Opera and Firefox 4 as IE9 is. The point is, when it comes to browsers, IE9 is still at the bottom of the pack, along with Safari and the Android Web Browser.
  See the point now? IE9 is still at the bottom and not nearly as standards compliant as the other market share leaders.
  
  --
  StarTrekPhase2 - The Five Year Mission Continues!
Rivalry by xMrFishx · 2011-03-22 11:04 · Score: 5, Interesting

That's the sort of rivalry I like. Competition between engineers tends to be good humored banter. Competition between marketeers seems to be cut throat warmongering. Shame really. It should go back to the days of jolly good what what old sport, I say good game with a touch of the old one two.
1. Re:Rivalry by PopeRatzo · 2011-03-22 11:28 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  Competition between engineers tends to be good humored banter.
  Management hates this sort of thing.
  Engineering used to be a career where you could make a good living and have a little dignity. More and more it seems, the people at the top would rather it not be that way. They don't like the notion of a sector of the work force that thinks it's almost as good as the guys who provide the capital. That's why most engineers' working conditions are worse today than they were ten years ago, and their purchasing power has declined. Ask someone who's looked for an engineering job recently. A lot of the fun and a surprising amount of the reward have gone out of it.
  No matter how well trained, no matter how important you are, how vital your job, you are still just a worker, and as such, you cannot be allowed to get above your station. This is how ownership thinks.
  
  --
  You are welcome on my lawn.
2. Re:Rivalry by ShakaUVM · 2011-03-22 11:43 · Score: 2
  
  >>Management hates this sort of thing.
  Yeah, because I'm sure the IE dev team sent the cake behind management's back. Err... again.
  Those tricksy engineers! Got to keep them in their place.
  Believe it or not, Microsoft treating their engineers like shit is a good way to get them to go work for Google. So they don't.
3. Re:Rivalry by tsa · 2011-03-22 12:22 · Score: 1
  
  Their engineers may be treated relatively well, but I bet they don't earn nearly as much as the managers do. They most probably have less secondary benefits as well.
  
  --
  -- Cheers!
4. Re:Rivalry by ShakaUVM · 2011-03-22 12:59 · Score: 2
  
  >>Their engineers may be treated relatively well, but I bet they don't earn nearly as much as the managers do. They most probably have less secondary benefits as well.
  From what I understand from my friends working for the evil empire, you have a RPG-esque "level" when you work at Microsoft. Collect enough "XP" among each of your rated categories, and you level up. Gain a pay raise, and later on, a promotion. You can either stay as a senior developer (or higher level titled developers) or branch into management at some point. From what I understand, in a general sense, your level controls your salary, but past a certain point it may be easier to level up as a manager instead of a developer.
5. Re:Rivalry by tcr · 2011-03-22 13:33 · Score: 1
  
  Let's hope Legal didn't get in on it too, since Firefox supports tabbed browsing and MS are patent trolling.
  Did they check inside the cake for a sinister envelope?
  
  --
  
  Information wants to be beer.
6. Re:Rivalry by RoFLKOPTr · 2011-03-22 13:46 · Score: 0
  
  Their engineers may be treated relatively well, but I bet they don't earn nearly as much as the managers do. They most probably have less secondary benefits as well.
  Wow, ya think so? So you're saying that the people above the engineers actually make more money and benefits than the people they're above? Get outta here *gay hand wave, cheesy smile*.
7. Re:Rivalry by 10101001+10101001 · 2011-03-22 14:10 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  Wow, ya think so? So you're saying that the people above the engineers actually make more money and benefits than the people they're above? Get outta here *gay hand wave, cheesy smile*.
  Just like the NBA, the NFL, etc. Oh, wait.. Yea, it'd almost seem like in some industries it's recognized that just because you're above someone else doesn't inherently mean you should be paid more. It's almost like, oh, experience, importance, and replace-ability also factor into it. For white collar workers, there's plenty of superstars which are pretty irreplaceable with plenty of experience and importance to the future of a department or a whole company. In the mean time, a newly hired manager might very well be rather replaceable even if he's above those superstars.
  In short, why should it be presumed that a manager who is paid reasonable well and has the chance to be promoted in the future as he/she builds experience, importance, and proves his/her irreplaceableness should be paid more than his subordinates? Maybe it makes sense in blue collar work (although even there, I'd tend to disagree at times because in some industries the product sold has plenty of profit and the managers are as much or even more replaceable than a trained blue collar worker), but I can't see how one can presume it in white collar work, especially when the boss and subordinate are in different job classifications. Now, if it were one engineer and a subordinate engineer or one manager and a subordinate manager, I can see more room to presume. But, it's still always down to a case-by-case basis.
  
  --
  Eurohacker European paranoia, gun rights, and h
8. Re:Rivalry by indiechild · 2011-03-22 14:23 · Score: 1
  
  Agree with what you say. Slashdot must be full of marketers!
9. Re:Rivalry by rwade · 2011-03-22 15:35 · Score: 1
  
  Yeah, I'm sure there's a super robust and objective way for every single person to achieve as many XPs as they want to chase after. There's likely no management favoritism involved in the process at all.
10. Re:Rivalry by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-22 15:44 · Score: 0
  
  That's a common misconception and a product of outdated, ineffective business methodology.
  A "manager" has nothing to do with being "above" his/her reports. To "manage" is to make sure the engineer has the right resources (hardware, human, or otherwise) and communication channels to get the job done.
  They're orthogonal concepts; the manager handles the business needs of a project and its engineers, while the engineers handle the technical needs of the project. Remember, providing oversight != controlling.
11. Re:Rivalry by PopeRatzo · 2011-03-22 16:02 · Score: 1
  
  By "management" I am referring to something a little more general than just Microsoft. But I'm pretty sure you know that.
  
  --
  You are welcome on my lawn.
12. Re:Rivalry by PopeRatzo · 2011-03-22 16:12 · Score: 2
  
  So you're saying that the people above the engineers actually make more money and benefits than the people they're above?
  Depends what you mean by "above". An associate dean for finance is "above" a superstar English prof sitting in a named chair, but certainly won't make more money. The top administrator of a hospital won't make as much as the top neurosurgeon.
  Remember, these hierarchies were put in place artificially to reverse the natural order of labor preceding capital that would exist in a "free market". And since these hierarchies are put in place only when ownership is "free" to do so (when there's no organization of labor) it's another example of why "free markets" when it comes to employment do not and can not exist. And not only do these hierarchies exist, but they exist for the sole purpose of limiting the power of individual workers, to create insecurity among them and to keep them working for as little as possible.
  When you look at the top of that same hierarchy, the same forces are not at work, again showing how capital when free to do so (when there's no regulation) will act to work against the free market. There is absolutely no good reason why senior management should earn more than 400 times what an average line worker makes. "But that's the "free market"" you will hear people say. But see, it's not at all.
  
  --
  You are welcome on my lawn.
13. Re:Rivalry by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-22 16:50 · Score: 0
  
  Collect enough "XP" among each of your rated categories, and you level up.
  So THAT's why Windows XP is still around! It's for XP collection purposes. Hard to collect XP with VIstas and 7s...
14. Re:Rivalry by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-22 16:52 · Score: 0
  
  There are levels but no XP. If you do better than others at your level then you have a chance to get promoted. Or rather, if the managers around you think you did better than others at your level you possibly get promoted. Managers have levels too and earn around the same per level as "independent contributors". The pay scale goes up exponentially with level. Engineers at the top earn as much as executives.
15. Re:Rivalry by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-23 00:16 · Score: 0
  
  Heh, and unlike the NBA, NFL, etc, there hasn't been a work stoppage at Microsoft, Google, et. al.
16. Re:Rivalry by ShakaUVM · 2011-03-23 05:25 · Score: 1
  
  From what I understand, it's a mix of both managerial reviews and more objective scores, like doing documentation and so forth. So if you want to level up quickly, you need to make sure you hit up all the categories.
17. Re:Rivalry by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-23 17:27 · Score: 0
  
  "That's why most engineers' working conditions are worse today than they were ten years ago, and their purchasing power has declined"
  And here I thought it was that ten years ago, we were at the end of a tech bubble and everyone in tech was overpaid (this included capital and management as well as engineers). Five years ago, everyone was complaining about not having a job. No one was hiring engineers. The tech revolution was over. Prices have since adjusted back to reality and now we can complain about that instead.
  It's hard to compare purchasing power over time. Thirty years ago, I did not have a computer, a DVD player (not even a VCR), or a microwave. Now I have all three. How much is that worth? Not in 2011 dollars but in 1981 dollars.
18. Re:Rivalry by PopeRatzo · 2011-03-23 23:52 · Score: 1
  
  It's hard to compare purchasing power over time.
  
  It's actually not very hard at all. But real purchasing power is one thing and the number the boys at one of the "business" media networks comes up with are two different things.
  Yes, computers have come down in price in ten years. You can't eat computers. You can't live in a computer. You cannot drive a computer (especially now that the "telecommuting" fad has waned).
  The things that people live on have exploded in price. For some reason though, the inflation number does not include them, but gives massive weight to technology.
  If you put together a more representative basket of the things people buy, you will find that your purchasing power has declined significantly and your working conditions have almost certainly gotten worse in the past ten years. If you look at it over thirty years, you'd jump off a bridge.
  
  --
  You are welcome on my lawn.
On to something by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-22 11:06 · Score: 4, Funny

Ah, so the primary reason for Firefox moving to shorter releases is to get more cakes out of Redmond.
Nice try, Firefox.
1 Matthew Holloway on March 22nd, 2011 at 3:45 pm

I think Matthew Holloway (not me, BTW) may be on to something there.
1. Re:On to something by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-22 13:34 · Score: 2, Funny
  
  Here's another good one: "Considering the way they drove Netscape/Mozilla/Firefox into near oblivion with devious practices, this seems a lot like sending a valentine’s day card to your rape victim, every year."
  3 no on March 22nd, 2011 at 4:16 pm
2. Re:On to something by RoFLKOPTr · 2011-03-22 13:47 · Score: 0
  
  "Considering the way they drove Netscape/Mozilla/Firefox into near oblivion with devious practices, this seems a lot like sending a valentine’s day card to your rape victim, every year."
  That's what I do and she doesn't seem to mind. I'd say it's common courtesy.
Browser wars, yay! (For real.) by ronocdh · 2011-03-22 11:06 · Score: 1

Not only should we congratulate the IE team on this fantastic and wholly good-natured tradition, but the Firefox guys never fail to exhibit a genuinely grateful yet professional tone. Any developer working on IE must recognize the huge shot to the arm that Firefox gave the browser market, and given IE's great strides lately, the gap in usability and security is finally getting narrower between the two browsers. I'd imagine that working on IE would involve a lot of friendly competition, and I'm happy to see that in an industry that's typically rife with cutthroat politics.
Now, when will the Firefox team start sending cakes to the Chrome developers? ;)
1. Re:Browser wars, yay! (For real.) by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-22 11:08 · Score: 0
  
  IE9 is might be shaping up better than FF. There, that's the elephant in the room. Honestly, would this be bad for Windows users? For my single Windows machine (gaming), I'll actually enjoy using it if it turns out like it very well might (i.e. awesome).
2. Re:Browser wars, yay! (For real.) by blair1q · 2011-03-22 11:13 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  I'd bet the existence of Firefox means there are about 100 more IE devs employed than there would otherwise be.
  The cake's a meager kickback.
3. Re:Browser wars, yay! (For real.) by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-22 11:13 · Score: 0
  
  IE9 is might be shaping up better than FF. There, that's the elephant in the room.
  If only he could realize there's no way an elephant could possibly fit in that small room with the padded walls...
4. Re:Browser wars, yay! (For real.) by BagOBones · 2011-03-22 11:21 · Score: 1
  
  I seem to recall an interview around when IE 7 started up to get IE out of the IE 6 rut that the IE devs where stripped down to a bar bones team for a long stretch because there was no company support for them to DO anything new... Seems like with IE 9 they where given some power to innovate and compete.. I am actually impressed with IE9, it is not going to be my primary browser but I am sure happy that it could be the new default when I sit down at someone else's computer.
  
  --
  EA David Gardner -"... but the consumers have proven that actually what they want is fun."
5. Re:Browser wars, yay! (For real.) by Nikker · 2011-03-22 11:28 · Score: 1
  
  It doesn't matter, MS has the ability to hire engineers, PHD's and Physicts to put together solitaire, they are up and fighting again but they have to take on FireFox and Chrome to do it. If this settles they will sit on their hands for a bit mess with the security, kill it slowly and something else will come up. Thanks for the cake and it really is a lie, thanks to deep pockets by Google and Mozilla now keep kicking some IE ass!
  
  --
  A loop, by its nature, continues. If that didn't make sense, start reading this sentence again.
6. Re:Browser wars, yay! (For real.) by UnknownSoldier · 2011-03-22 11:44 · Score: 1
  
  > IE9 is might be shaping up better than FF.
  Um, let me know when IE9 can run on WinXP please ...
7. Re:Browser wars, yay! (For real.) by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-22 11:49 · Score: 0
  
  If only he could realize there's no way an elephant could possibly fit in that small room with the padded walls...
  Because integrated Ad Block and script/ActiveX control is going to totally suck, amirite?
  These extensions are a big reason some people still stick with Firefox over other browsers, if IE9 supports them out of the box, whatever the reason, that's a win for end users.
  Firefox is a slow, bloated monster compared to what it used to be, it's no surprise that many early adopters would be disappointed in it these days.
8. Re:Browser wars, yay! (For real.) by kevinmenzel · 2011-03-22 12:06 · Score: 3, Informative
  
  Get a new OS. Or a new computer. Seriously, I'm running Windows 7 on an 8 year old laptop right now, with 1GB of RAM. It's a 1.3 Celeron, and it runs just as good as XP did on the same machine. The laptop is so old that the screen hinges broke off, so it's hooked up to my CRT on input #2. Yes I have all the visual glitz turned off, but I still get the fancy new audio stack out of the bargain, plus it's running IE9. I pretty much just use that computer for web browsing, CD-burning, and some other basic tasks, but it does the job.
9. Re:Browser wars, yay! (For real.) by Dunbal · 2011-03-22 12:27 · Score: 2
  
  With HTML5, IE9 might be able to run Win Xp?
  
  --
  Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
10. Re:Browser wars, yay! (For real.) by outsider007 · 2011-03-22 15:24 · Score: 1
  
  The Chrome developers can afford their own cake.
  
  --
  If you mod me down the terrorists will have won
11. Re:Browser wars, yay! (For real.) by arkane1234 · 2011-03-22 15:30 · Score: 1
  
  Hey.. buddy.. you realize that requires spending 150-200 bucks right?
  Some people don't see any reason to do that other than to keep up with the Jones'. Can use that money to put a months worth of fuel into my vehicle,or buy a few games.
  
  --
  -- This space for lease, low setup fee, inquire within!
12. Re:Browser wars, yay! (For real.) by AliasMarlowe · 2011-03-22 19:21 · Score: 1
  
  Seriously, I'm running Windows 7 on an 8 year old laptop right now, with 1GB of RAM. It's a 1.3 Celeron, and it runs just as good as XP did on the same machine
  Hey, I've also got an 8-year-old laptop with 1GB of RAM and a 1.6GHz Pentium M. It's also got a 17" 1920x1200 display without a single dead pixel, and its battery is still in pretty good shape. However, when I upgraded it from XP about 6 years ago, I moved to Ubuntu which runs better than XP on this machine. It currently runs 10.04 LTS, and everything works fine. It's our "kitchen computer" and is used for rather more than just email & browsing - it can play HD movies (vlc) loaded from our server, and is used for editing documents (OpenOffice), processing photos (Bibble pro, Gimp), and vector graphics (Inkscape), among other tasks.
  
  --
  Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. - Voltaire
13. Re:Browser wars, yay! (For real.) by Xest · 2011-03-22 21:46 · Score: 1
  
  No need to bet, it's true, Microsoft had all but killed off the IE development team.
  IE6 came out around 2001 and Firefox first released in 2004, and took some time to become popular.
  Because of the lack of competition or need to move much in the browser market, Microsoft saw little reason to invest in IE.
  But then Firefox started to become a credible threat, by 1.5 it had gained a noticable amount of ground and was showing no sign of slowing.
  Microsoft in 2006 released their first new browser release for 5 years, in the same month as Firefox 2.
  I'd agree this is probably why the IE team are so decent towards the Firefox team- because they realise that without the competition they brought, their jobs really would not be there.
14. Re:Browser wars, yay! (For real.) by kevinmenzel · 2011-03-23 19:16 · Score: 1
  
  However, if you plan on upgrading, and save accordinly long term, then you're talking as a worst case scenario with no interest earned from like, a saving's account, $25 a year, or about $2 a month. At least where I live, minimum wage is $10/hour - so that's about 12 minutes of minimum wage labour a month for 8 years. Which doesn't exactly seem unreasonable from a financial perspective. Of course, as has been noted, other options include running a free modern operating system, and/or running one of the many other browsers. However, I'm still not buying a complaint that an upgrade costs to much, when, yes, that money COULD be spent in other ways... if you care that much about running IE9 to complain that it doesn't run on XP.
  Whereas if I valued games or movies or gas more than operating system upgrades, I wouldn't particularly complain that "Feature X" requires an upgrade. It's Windows. Upgrades cost money. They come with new features. It's the model Microsoft uses to make money. They've used the same model to make money for decades. It wasn't a surprise that this would happen....
have you seen the new scripture? by FudRucker · 2011-03-22 11:06 · Score: 1

http://i.imgur.com/JjuFs.png

--
Politics is Treachery, Religion is Brainwashing
1. Re:have you seen the new scripture? by compro01 · 2011-03-22 11:43 · Score: 1
  
  Sadly, it's not new. It's the same one that shipped with 3.0
  
  --
  upon the advice of my lawyer, i have no sig at this time
2. Re:have you seen the new scripture? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-22 12:13 · Score: 0
  
  "Elizabeth Montgomery in... Bewitched." Da dum, da dum, da dum dum da dum, ...
Terrible Cake by greyline · 2011-03-22 11:08 · Score: 0

The IE team must have gotten that cake from a grocery store bakery, because it looks like crap. I'd rather have a shitty Hallmark card or a bunch of Mylar balloons than that awful cake.
1. Re:Terrible Cake by blair1q · 2011-03-22 11:15 · Score: 3, Funny
  
  Nope. Made it themselves, with MS Cake.
2. Re:Terrible Cake by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-22 11:18 · Score: 0
  
  The IE team must have gotten that cake from a grocery store bakery, because it looks like crap. I'd rather have a shitty Hallmark card or a bunch of Mylar balloons than that awful cake.
  Next time you ship a new version of a major browser, then, tell the IE team not to worry about sending you a cake.
3. Re:Terrible Cake by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-22 12:04 · Score: 1
  
  Aww. Little boy upset that he didn't get any cake?
4. Re:Terrible Cake by amicusNYCL · 2011-03-22 12:26 · Score: 3, Funny
  
  Call down Mr. Waddams, hopefully you'll get some next year. Now back to Storage B with you.
  
  --
  "Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
Let them eat cake... by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-22 11:09 · Score: 0

IE was basically abondonware before firefox spearheaded the competition, are the team thanking mozilla for their employment or did they jizz in it?
Actually some questions are better left unanswered... wonder if it tasted salty?
From Redmond with love, huh? by Plammox · 2011-03-22 11:11 · Score: 0

SP1 took down my windows 7 64 bit installation at work yesterday. (My mortal sin was to have other language packs installed than En-US) Nice to see that the MS folks are prioritizing important work...!
1. Re:From Redmond with love, huh? by IQgryn · 2011-03-22 11:26 · Score: 1
  
  I'm sure arranging for a cake to be sent could take the entire day for the entire Microsoft dev team.
  
  I bet not, though. Especially the Windows devs, which, by and large, aren't the IE devs.
2. Re:From Redmond with love, huh? by AnonGCB · 2011-03-22 11:33 · Score: 1
  
  You do realize those are completely separate teams and that this probably took a secretary an hour or so to do, right?
  
  --
  http://CryoLANparty.com/ A lan I'm staff on!
3. Re:From Redmond with love, huh? by Plammox · 2011-03-22 11:56 · Score: 1
  
  Yes. Please respect my right to rant.
4. Re:From Redmond with love, huh? by Plammox · 2011-03-22 12:01 · Score: 0
  
  And might I add: If pimple-faced, basement dwelling geeks can pull off linux kernel updates that never fail (never happened to me at least) would it be wrong to expect the same from MS?
5. Re:From Redmond with love, huh? by Missing.Matter · 2011-03-22 12:22 · Score: 1
  
  What? You mean they didn't take the single person working on SP1 and made him make a cake?
6. Re:From Redmond with love, huh? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-22 12:36 · Score: 0
  
  I hate to interrupt this schizophrenic conversation, but do you realize you've answered your own question?
7. Re:From Redmond with love, huh? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-22 13:24 · Score: 1
  
  Yours is the rant of a frustrated, stupid dependent. Not smart enough to use the open sores variants, unable to pay someone to keep the commercial products running properly. I'd say I feel for ya, but you're also a dink; perhaps you should stay perched in front of one-way media flow ,and leave the complicated things to people who can handle them?
8. Re:From Redmond with love, huh? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-22 14:16 · Score: 0
  
  Yep, because if it never happened to you, then it never happened at all. Anecdotal evidence is the best!
9. Re:From Redmond with love, huh? by Plammox · 2011-03-22 20:16 · Score: 1
  
  The love for MS on Slashdot is touching. ;-)
10. Re:From Redmond with love, huh? by Plammox · 2011-03-22 20:25 · Score: 0
  
  Excuse me, AC, but the university I work for paid for a product. Is it wrong to expect the supplier to at least test the patch before it goes out with a decent test coverage? After all, I'm not the only one with the problem.
Only 1 cake? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-22 11:11 · Score: 0

Hell, I eat 3 cakes of that size each day.
1. Re:Only 1 cake? by geminidomino · 2011-03-22 13:35 · Score: 1
  
  Gabriel Iglesias? Fluffy, izzat you?
Ah, the good ol' days! by AsmCoder8088 · 2011-03-22 11:13 · Score: 2

Nothing like a bit of friendly competition, heh..
Re:Lies by blair1q · 2011-03-22 11:14 · Score: 5, Funny

> The cake is a lie9
FTFY.
Rubber band? by Khopesh · 2011-03-22 11:18 · Score: 1

I thought that was a rubber band around the IE logo at first, had to zoom in to see that it's probably just sugar. (These cakes aren't gags ... yet)

--
Use my userscript to add story images to Slashdot. There's no going back.
Timeo danaos... by ArAgost · 2011-03-22 11:18 · Score: 1

Meanwhile, on Twitter, they bought ad space to promote IE9 over the release of FF4. Stay classy, Microsoft! http://twitpic.com/4c6nth
Re:Lies by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-22 11:26 · Score: 0

Lye cakes. Mmmmmmm.
Must be the reason for the faster release cycle... by sixteenbitsamurai · 2011-03-22 11:36 · Score: 1

Firefox devs really like cake, apparently.

--
Yeah, that just happened.
Re:In before dumb comments about the cake being a by Microlith · 2011-03-22 11:43 · Score: 0

You mad?
Some real quality 4chan level commentary there.
In return? by freakingme · 2011-03-22 11:43 · Score: 1

Someone tell me Mozilla did the same when IE9 was released.
1. Re:In return? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-22 12:04 · Score: 0
  
  In return, Firefox doesn't do tab isolation, so that IE still has something to brag about.
2. Re:In return? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-22 12:10 · Score: 0
  
  IE9?
3. Re:In return? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-22 12:43 · Score: 0
  
  I know I sent them some chocolate cake...
4. Re:In return? by naoursla · 2011-03-22 17:03 · Score: 1
  
  Nope.
Re:Diet watching by lysdexia · 2011-03-22 12:01 · Score: 1

You are welcome. (Yes, this looks like arse on purpose ...)
Re:Public Service Announcement by Plammox · 2011-03-22 12:04 · Score: 1

This goes for legit copies of Win7 as well. (As in my case)
Cookie! by hugetoon · 2011-03-22 12:24 · Score: 3, Funny

Talk about a big one...
Are they testing for a buffer overflow?
1. Re:Cookie! by ashvagan · 2011-03-22 12:31 · Score: 1
  
  Talk about a big one... Are they testing for a buffer overflow?
  Nope, it was a wafer cake, so it's called a wafer overflow
Re:In before dumb comments about the cake being a by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-22 12:26 · Score: 1

In before dumb comments about "in before"... oh wait.
But in all seriousness, please don't clutter Slashdot with such drivel.
Re:Diet watching by Dracos · 2011-03-22 13:02 · Score: 1

IE6, 7, or 8 trying to render any acid test.
Cool, but where are the standards? by dmomo · 2011-03-22 13:41 · Score: 3, Funny

Sure that cake looks great with IE, but slap any other browser on it, and the "C" in "Congratulations" will be smack dab in the middle of the cake with all of the other text oozing of the right onto the table.
Looking at the cake. by EnsilZah · 2011-03-22 14:29 · Score: 1

If there's one thing the IE people have proven is that there is in fact an I in Ieam.
best comment at the parent article by Swampash · 2011-03-22 15:26 · Score: 1

"Considering the way they drove Netscape/Mozilla/Firefox into near oblivion with devious practices, this seems a lot like sending a valentine’s day card to your rape victim, every year."
1. Re:best comment at the parent article by grcumb · 2011-03-22 18:10 · Score: 1
  
  "Considering the way they drove Netscape/Mozilla/Firefox into near oblivion with devious practices, this seems a lot like sending a valentine’s day card to your rape victim, every year."
  Well, if you want to be picky about it, a closer analogy would actually be the child of the murdered parent.
  And given that Mozilla is looking more and more like Inigo Montoya... yeah, I'd send cake.
  
  --
  Crumb's Corollary: Never bring a knife to a bun fight.
The Real Hidden Message by TheRon6 · 2011-03-22 18:53 · Score: 1

I think we're all missing the underlying subtext here. There's a reason the IE team always sends its congratulations in the form of a cake... because it's a lie.

--
Does this rag smell like chloroform to you?
How cute! by Alex+Belits · 2011-03-22 20:37 · Score: 1

Now die in a fire, Microsoft scum!

--
Contrary to the popular belief, there indeed is no God.
Cookies?? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-03-23 01:36 · Score: 0

Can someone please explain this phrase?
"Mozillians may need to watch their diet in future"
-tia
Re:In before dumb comments about the cake being a by Schemat1c · 2011-03-23 14:03 · Score: 1

I know. I'm just purposefully calling him out because it's the same person who's been hounding me about it. Hint: I know it's the same person because it's been over a year since I had that sig and he's the only person to complain about it.
Nope, don't flatter yourself. I just hate spammers that join forum discussions just to lure people to their spam links. I had had a few beers and threw some nerd rage your way.
Great detective work Colombo.

--

"Nobody knows the age of the human race, but everybody agrees that it is old enough to know better." - Unknown