What are you some kind of terrorist? The US is bad ass. We're seconds away from Usama Bin Laden (he'll be pwn3d very soon) and these small fry hackers will be caught easily by our government's most inexperienced hackers. In fact they'll probably give it to a high school class a project.
I just don't think we're that close yet. I do think it is very possible to make a computer that can think as well as a human and a computer has the distinct advantage of not being emotional which will make it superior. But I just don't think we're anywhere near that yet. Humans still make far too many mistakes to perfect AI.
Most people I know got their X key from various sources but it was a legit key. One guy spent sometime with a keygen but he eventually got one that worked and even had no issues with WGA. Perhaps there was something else he did, I'm not sure, but it was a piece of piss to get around Microsoft's security measures for anyone that really wanted to. WGA only stops idiots from thieving.
I'm not sure saying that their ability to buy up innovation is a good thing. If Microsoft has no innovation within them then clearly buying up innovative companies is likely to stifle those companies and their future innovation and in the end the market and consumer loses.
It just makes sense. Which ever side is larger will have more influence (it works that way with everything) and Microsoft buying up a small company means that company will almost certainly be absorbed into the borg-like company that lacks imagination rather than the borg-like company changing its ways thanks to the small company.
So you think it's better to get accused to using stolen software and maybe buy a copy of Windows for them or maybe have them report you to MS and then payout to defend yourself? Yeah, that's a real money making way to do it.
A monopoly doesn't require there to be no competition.
Microsoft can pretty much do what they want and for the most part people have to deal with it. They've tied in their browser making it impossible to make money from a browser, they've included the ability to zip files, their own email client and now have anti-virus. They're using their dominance in the OS market to dominate other areas. Anti-Virus companies may get lucky because people generally don't trust MS security while, oddly enough, sticking with Windows.
Sure Winzip and Winrar but the average person won't use those or pay for them because they see very little value in it. Most people don't care to make rar files or need encryption and it would probably be considered stupid to set up a business these days around zipping software.
It's all well and good to say these things supposedly should come with an OS but as they keep putting the squeeze on various software businesses then those companies will need to cut costs and then someone in India or Manila is doing your job for peanuts you're earning less just to compete therefore your savings from getting that included software is wiped away.
The website can only be viewed if you actively seek it out. Likewise if you want obscene material in the physical world nothing is stopping you from getting it posted to you. Should every single business be held back by the most repressed neighbourhood full of parents who think everyone is a criminal and paedophile?
I can understand applying this logic to concerts that are loud and played in the area but you can't say the whole nation has to comply to the most backwards people in the nation.
No I'm well aware but I'm also lucky my company's website has seen a continual drop in IE6 users since 2007, going from nearly 80% to under 20%. Because of that we're allowed more freedom. As long as everyone can purchase products that's their main concern. Side projects don't need to be too concerned with IE6.
I just realise that the time spent on making sure things work in IE6 could be better spent on doing something productive. IE6 will generally be used by tight wad companies and pirates. These people aren't exactly the ones most likely to spend money so I don't think money should be spent on catering to them.
This isn't even factoring in the fact these people typically run insecure machines and help contribute to all sorts of problems on the internet.
IE6 is an expensive disaster we should be aiming to get rid of from this world.
What sites need to do is support IE6 users but with little effort. Give them an alternative view of the site that's effectively just black text on a white background, like a print style sheet and put a warning at the top that they can't have the full experience until they get a real browser.
Most people not upgrading are likely pirates who are too thick to get around WGA or use Firefox or backwards companies. Most websites don't really need to care about these people. If sites would stick together and give IE6 a bland but informative experience they'd be more likely to upgrade. As it is there is no real reason for these losers to upgrade.
Safari uses webkit so that's Chrome, Konquer, iPhone and many others. Webkit's userbase isn't that small.
The nice thing is that generally if it works in Firefox is will work in everything except IE. If you aim for Firefox and Webkit then you've more or less supported Opera already and where that's not strictly true, unless the client asks for it, don't worry about it too much because as you say Opera isn't that popular. But again coding to standards will do wonders for supporting all those browsers.
I think IE7 should be supported for now. Some people go overboard on what should be done but really we need to get IE6 to go away. IE7 isn't great but it's a damn sight better than IE6.
He's right. If people would code to standards we wouldn't have a handful of people stuck with awful apps that work best in IE6. There is no good reason not to develop with standards.
Some web companies just lack integrity and the balls to stand up for what's right because they aren't good enough to be in that position.
Not that much really but you get a load of incompetent IT admins and generally poorly run companies insisting that there is a whole world of old software out there that needs IE6.
Funny how no software needs IE4 or 5. It only needs IE6 which comes with XP. Of course you can get IE7 for free unless of course your pirated version doesn't pass WGA and quite frankly I think that's the biggest reason someone or some company would still be on IE6. I personally don't think we should waste time and money supporting thieves.
There is nothing worse than useless web developers whose only aim in life is to be the only jerk-off still supporting IE4.
Blind people don't use Lynx (spell it right) so testing in Lynx doesn't tell you enough like it doesn't tell you anything about the blind person's accessibility software's awful JavaScript handling.
Instead of touching yourself over supporting IE3, why don't support the main browsers, buy some accessibility software and test your site with that.
On an unrelated note, I'm tired of accessibility douches telling me to ensure everything caters to the gimpiest person on the planet. Accessibility expert isn't even a real job. It's like SEO expert. It's a title some failed web designer gives to himself. Anyway, the largest problem with accessibility is that the software is awful. Expecting web developers to work around shit software is stupid. The software needs to be upgraded. Last time I went to one of the supposed more popular web accessibility software sites, it wouldn't pass your Lynx test and it contained broken JavaScript and Flash. This is from the company selling the software. Why do you think anyone else cares? They don't.
Someone needs to develop open source accessibility software so everyone can contribute and it doesn't lag behind because there's no commercial viability in developing software 3 people use.
My employer also happens to use Sharepoint (luckily I don't have to use it), it's not even the latest version and it works fine in IE7. What sort of ancient version are you running and why doesn't your company upgrade like I'm sure MS would love for you to do?
Could it be that your company doesn't make that much money because it uses old horrid software and can't keep up with the times and therefore is just waiting to die off?
Sites should block IE6. Fuck 'em. If it's so important for your job to keep IE6 then stay on your shitty intranet apps and quit ruining the internet for the rest of us.
The government has taken away quite a few rights since 2001 and I don't hear any real backlash from it. The elderly and parents love police states and they out vote the young and intelligent so don't think avoiding Google is going to avoid the government stick its microscope up your ass.
However, as a corporation, Oracle can and will have all relevant American laws re-written/re-interpreted as necessary to see all commercial deployment of MySQL in the USA dead within two years.
Good, that may mean we'll finally see a huge leap in PostgreSQL usage.
Slashdot Mirror
What are you some kind of terrorist? The US is bad ass. We're seconds away from Usama Bin Laden (he'll be pwn3d very soon) and these small fry hackers will be caught easily by our government's most inexperienced hackers. In fact they'll probably give it to a high school class a project.
I just don't think we're that close yet. I do think it is very possible to make a computer that can think as well as a human and a computer has the distinct advantage of not being emotional which will make it superior. But I just don't think we're anywhere near that yet. Humans still make far too many mistakes to perfect AI.
Most people I know got their X key from various sources but it was a legit key. One guy spent sometime with a keygen but he eventually got one that worked and even had no issues with WGA. Perhaps there was something else he did, I'm not sure, but it was a piece of piss to get around Microsoft's security measures for anyone that really wanted to. WGA only stops idiots from thieving.
I'm not sure saying that their ability to buy up innovation is a good thing. If Microsoft has no innovation within them then clearly buying up innovative companies is likely to stifle those companies and their future innovation and in the end the market and consumer loses.
It just makes sense. Which ever side is larger will have more influence (it works that way with everything) and Microsoft buying up a small company means that company will almost certainly be absorbed into the borg-like company that lacks imagination rather than the borg-like company changing its ways thanks to the small company.
For western civilisations, Australia has, imo, always been closer to China than the US in regards to freedom or at least in recent years.
I don't care what people call it just as long as they start taking better care to protect themselves from any vulnerability.
Not likely. I can't see every single ISP deciding to roll over and let Google win.
So you think it's better to get accused to using stolen software and maybe buy a copy of Windows for them or maybe have them report you to MS and then payout to defend yourself? Yeah, that's a real money making way to do it.
A monopoly doesn't require there to be no competition.
Microsoft can pretty much do what they want and for the most part people have to deal with it. They've tied in their browser making it impossible to make money from a browser, they've included the ability to zip files, their own email client and now have anti-virus. They're using their dominance in the OS market to dominate other areas. Anti-Virus companies may get lucky because people generally don't trust MS security while, oddly enough, sticking with Windows.
Sure Winzip and Winrar but the average person won't use those or pay for them because they see very little value in it. Most people don't care to make rar files or need encryption and it would probably be considered stupid to set up a business these days around zipping software.
It's all well and good to say these things supposedly should come with an OS but as they keep putting the squeeze on various software businesses then those companies will need to cut costs and then someone in India or Manila is doing your job for peanuts you're earning less just to compete therefore your savings from getting that included software is wiped away.
The website can only be viewed if you actively seek it out. Likewise if you want obscene material in the physical world nothing is stopping you from getting it posted to you. Should every single business be held back by the most repressed neighbourhood full of parents who think everyone is a criminal and paedophile?
I can understand applying this logic to concerts that are loud and played in the area but you can't say the whole nation has to comply to the most backwards people in the nation.
No I'm well aware but I'm also lucky my company's website has seen a continual drop in IE6 users since 2007, going from nearly 80% to under 20%. Because of that we're allowed more freedom. As long as everyone can purchase products that's their main concern. Side projects don't need to be too concerned with IE6.
I just realise that the time spent on making sure things work in IE6 could be better spent on doing something productive. IE6 will generally be used by tight wad companies and pirates. These people aren't exactly the ones most likely to spend money so I don't think money should be spent on catering to them.
This isn't even factoring in the fact these people typically run insecure machines and help contribute to all sorts of problems on the internet.
IE6 is an expensive disaster we should be aiming to get rid of from this world.
Worst comeback ever!
What sites need to do is support IE6 users but with little effort. Give them an alternative view of the site that's effectively just black text on a white background, like a print style sheet and put a warning at the top that they can't have the full experience until they get a real browser.
Most people not upgrading are likely pirates who are too thick to get around WGA or use Firefox or backwards companies. Most websites don't really need to care about these people. If sites would stick together and give IE6 a bland but informative experience they'd be more likely to upgrade. As it is there is no real reason for these losers to upgrade.
Yeah they're so secure that they use one of the most insecure browsers. Genius.
Safari uses webkit so that's Chrome, Konquer, iPhone and many others. Webkit's userbase isn't that small.
The nice thing is that generally if it works in Firefox is will work in everything except IE. If you aim for Firefox and Webkit then you've more or less supported Opera already and where that's not strictly true, unless the client asks for it, don't worry about it too much because as you say Opera isn't that popular. But again coding to standards will do wonders for supporting all those browsers.
I think IE7 should be supported for now. Some people go overboard on what should be done but really we need to get IE6 to go away. IE7 isn't great but it's a damn sight better than IE6.
He's right. If people would code to standards we wouldn't have a handful of people stuck with awful apps that work best in IE6. There is no good reason not to develop with standards.
Some web companies just lack integrity and the balls to stand up for what's right because they aren't good enough to be in that position.
Not that much really but you get a load of incompetent IT admins and generally poorly run companies insisting that there is a whole world of old software out there that needs IE6.
Funny how no software needs IE4 or 5. It only needs IE6 which comes with XP. Of course you can get IE7 for free unless of course your pirated version doesn't pass WGA and quite frankly I think that's the biggest reason someone or some company would still be on IE6. I personally don't think we should waste time and money supporting thieves.
Shut up.
There is nothing worse than useless web developers whose only aim in life is to be the only jerk-off still supporting IE4.
Blind people don't use Lynx (spell it right) so testing in Lynx doesn't tell you enough like it doesn't tell you anything about the blind person's accessibility software's awful JavaScript handling.
Instead of touching yourself over supporting IE3, why don't support the main browsers, buy some accessibility software and test your site with that.
On an unrelated note, I'm tired of accessibility douches telling me to ensure everything caters to the gimpiest person on the planet. Accessibility expert isn't even a real job. It's like SEO expert. It's a title some failed web designer gives to himself. Anyway, the largest problem with accessibility is that the software is awful. Expecting web developers to work around shit software is stupid. The software needs to be upgraded. Last time I went to one of the supposed more popular web accessibility software sites, it wouldn't pass your Lynx test and it contained broken JavaScript and Flash. This is from the company selling the software. Why do you think anyone else cares? They don't.
Someone needs to develop open source accessibility software so everyone can contribute and it doesn't lag behind because there's no commercial viability in developing software 3 people use.
My employer also happens to use Sharepoint (luckily I don't have to use it), it's not even the latest version and it works fine in IE7. What sort of ancient version are you running and why doesn't your company upgrade like I'm sure MS would love for you to do?
Could it be that your company doesn't make that much money because it uses old horrid software and can't keep up with the times and therefore is just waiting to die off?
Sites should block IE6. Fuck 'em. If it's so important for your job to keep IE6 then stay on your shitty intranet apps and quit ruining the internet for the rest of us.
The government has taken away quite a few rights since 2001 and I don't hear any real backlash from it. The elderly and parents love police states and they out vote the young and intelligent so don't think avoiding Google is going to avoid the government stick its microscope up your ass.
Linux isn't for the Trig Palins of this world.
OOo does more than enough for the average person. There is no reason to pay for the over priced insecure bloated shit known as Microsoft Office.
Good for them. If the handicap benefit from Sun getting the government to use a more secure OS then I fail to see the problem.
However, as a corporation, Oracle can and will have all relevant American laws re-written/re-interpreted as necessary to see all commercial deployment of MySQL in the USA dead within two years.
Good, that may mean we'll finally see a huge leap in PostgreSQL usage.