But most of the old ones was designed for DOS, which was easy since it called the BIOS. Injecting a rootkit into an modern OS beginning with MBR code is not nearly as easy.
Yea, I think it is known that optical cables was considered in the development of Light Peak, and ultimately Light Peak/Thunderbolt should work with both copper and optical cabling.
You could follow the standards and dumb race conditions would make certain elements load at different times and cause it to create a mess.
Not to mention crashes and security vulnerabilities too. For example, as I mentioned in another thread, IE's parsing of plain HTML tag soup is robust, but as soon as you add some CSS, even something as simple as <table style=position:absolute;clip:rect(0)> would result in an exploitable crash that had to be fixed in a security update. Not to mention this and this example, and there are probably more.
This was a Big Deal, because now all major browser vendors ship a version which supports things like canvas and mathml. You might even be able to *use* these things on your website sometime in the next century, too; it's just IE6 through 8 that are holding us back.
Don't forget XHTML too, which is already 11 years old.
Another such example is WebM. I think Firefox 3.5 and 3.6 is the biggest barrier to replacing Ogg Theora with WebM for HTML5 video. WebM was announced in May 2010.
Yea, it is the PR 2.0 age, which is not based on controlling the message. In fact, I have a poll on Hacker News on exactly this: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2621415
Actually, when it was the default in Mac OS it was quite good. It was even better than IE on Windows (not that that was a terribly high bar).
In fact, IE5 for Mac actually used a different engine than IE for Windows called Tasman.
Apple's decision to fork khtml into WebKit.
Which was what I think ultimately killed further development on IE for Mac as a standalone browser. Personally I wished that the Tasman engine was ported to Windows.
That after introducing DOCTYPE switching in IE6 which BTW actually helped make IE6 more standard compliant (it was considered decent back in 2001), which caused even more trouble when IE came out of stagnation with IE7.
As proof that the old rendering engine was spaghetti code BTW, consider that while plain HTML parsing of tag soup is pretty robust in IE, as shown in 2004 with mangleme, when faced with CSS, even something as simple as <table style=position:absolute;clip:rect(0)> resulted in an exploitable crash that had to be fixed in a security update.
AFAIK IE7's rendering engine do feels like a hack of the IE6 rendering engine. IE8 feels more like a rewrite, at least in terms of CSS. I can tell by similarities of bugs.
Slashdot Mirror
But most of the old ones was designed for DOS, which was easy since it called the BIOS. Injecting a rootkit into an modern OS beginning with MBR code is not nearly as easy.
The big benefit is standard PCIe chips can be adapted by adding a Thunderbolt controller.
Yea, I think it is known that optical cables was considered in the development of Light Peak, and ultimately Light Peak/Thunderbolt should work with both copper and optical cabling.
I think IE9 finally supports DOM level 2, before I think the DOM was mostly unchanged since the outdated IE5.
You could follow the standards and dumb race conditions would make certain elements load at different times and cause it to create a mess.
Not to mention crashes and security vulnerabilities too. For example, as I mentioned in another thread, IE's parsing of plain HTML tag soup is robust, but as soon as you add some CSS, even something as simple as <table style=position:absolute;clip:rect(0)> would result in an exploitable crash that had to be fixed in a security update. Not to mention this and this example, and there are probably more.
IMO the real evil is not the push to overshare (which IMO is OK, IMO the illusion that celebrities are perfect needs to end), but the tricks they use to lead users to give up more information than expected, like this:
http://yro.slashdot.org/story/10/04/24/1222210/Facebook-Retroactively-Makes-More-User-Data-Public
Even then, keep in mind you can connect your hard drive into another computer to retrieve your data.
This was a Big Deal, because now all major browser vendors ship a version which supports things like canvas and mathml. You might even be able to *use* these things on your website sometime in the next century, too; it's just IE6 through 8 that are holding us back.
Don't forget XHTML too, which is already 11 years old.
Another such example is WebM. I think Firefox 3.5 and 3.6 is the biggest barrier to replacing Ogg Theora with WebM for HTML5 video. WebM was announced in May 2010.
Yea, it is the PR 2.0 age, which is not based on controlling the message.
In fact, I have a poll on Hacker News on exactly this:
http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2621415
FYI, I mentioned this source in another comment:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opera_(web_browser)#History
Apple did something similar with iMovie before. Remember iMovie '08?
Not always. FYI:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opera_(web_browser)#History
Not always.
MS certainly didn't help by making IE free, helped by the Windows monopoly.
Yea, FYI from http://www.neowin.net/forum/topic/862816-opera-ceo-steps-down-immediately-replaced/ :
After delivering strong results over over several quarters, Opera slumped to a surprise loss in the third quarter of 2009.
In fact, WaSP was asking for it as early as 2000:
http://archive.webstandards.org/wfw/ieah.html
Actually, when it was the default in Mac OS it was quite good. It was even better than IE on Windows (not that that was a terribly high bar).
In fact, IE5 for Mac actually used a different engine than IE for Windows called Tasman.
Apple's decision to fork khtml into WebKit.
Which was what I think ultimately killed further development on IE for Mac as a standalone browser. Personally I wished that the Tasman engine was ported to Windows.
And let me add... IE is not free; you are most definitely paying for it in the hefty price of the Windows license.
Which did help kill Netscape and make Opera trial adware.
That after introducing DOCTYPE switching in IE6 which BTW actually helped make IE6 more standard compliant (it was considered decent back in 2001), which caused even more trouble when IE came out of stagnation with IE7.
And yes, that was in quirks mode.
As proof that the old rendering engine was spaghetti code BTW, consider that while plain HTML parsing of tag soup is pretty robust in IE, as shown in 2004 with mangleme, when faced with CSS, even something as simple as <table style=position:absolute;clip:rect(0)> resulted in an exploitable crash that had to be fixed in a security update.
AFAIK IE7's rendering engine do feels like a hack of the IE6 rendering engine. IE8 feels more like a rewrite, at least in terms of CSS. I can tell by similarities of bugs.
The problem with using MSI I think is that the core parts of IE are in system DLLs like MSHTML, WININET, etc.
Chrome uses the same update model.