So get off the IE-hating trip, it's irrational. And ferchrissake, what's worse, MS or AOHell?!?! Remember folks, Nutscrape is AMERICA ONLINE now. Are you AOL users?
Extra time? The only way to make sites _incompatible_ with the world wide web is to do extra work. It takes a lot of idiocy and inexperience to make an incompatible site.
Actually, factory-manufactured diamonds are relatively cheap, but they are of extremely low quality compared to naturally found diamonds (the crystals of industrial diamonds are nowhere near perfect, while those of naturally-found diamonds, which cooled much more slowly and evenly, are beautiful (and valuable). For industrial applications, though, both natural and man-made work equally well).
..says a person who hasn't used it in the past thirteen builds. I haven't found a tech-minded person who wasn't amazed by the abilities of Mozilla. Can you do tabbed browsing, popup killing, and ad server blocking in IE?
Actually, it's called Mozilla 1.0; it's not slow, it has less bugs and less bloat than IE, and it doesn't even try to do what Internet Explorer does.
What does IE do? It renders HTML and CSS in a purposefully incorrect fashion, and extends endlessly upon those languages as well, in very stupid and rediculous fashions.
What does Mozilla do? Instead, its goal is to render web pages according to the W3C standards (a.k.a. correctly). Gee, which is better?
You're obviously missing something. The IE engine on the Macintosh is different than that for Windows. Switching away from the IE/Mac engine won't affect compatibility.
And your statement that "Mozilla is not being developed fast enough" is idiotic at best. It took Microsoft much longer to get to where it is in IE than Mozilla did to get where it is, and Mozilla is a better browser.
And what, some might ask, sort a lunatic would want to climb a mountain? Or fly in a heavier-than-air craft? Or fly the atlantic? Or break the speed of sound? Or land on the moon? Why launch the first satellite into space? Why, some might ask, post to Slashdot? Or read trolling posts modded down to zero?
I have experienced the same thing. I have a friend with a Presario Laptop, and I suggested that he try Mozilla, at least for testing his web site. He looked at it and thought that it was okay. Then I showed him the sidebar and how he could add quick 'n easy HTML 4.0 and CSS 2 References to it and he said that that was cool. I showed him some of the preferences and he liked them. When I suggested to him to use tabbed browsing instead of opening new windows, he decided to switch. I had not even finished; I still needed to show him how to stop popups or change themes.
Mentioning the IRC client and the Composer software expanded his interest, so I continued to mention. I mentioned how he could block images from certain servers, too. He liked the Image, Form, Password, Download, and Cookie managers (under the tools menu), and he put the Web Development tools to good use. I still did not mention the ability to switch to alternate style sheets, text zooming that affected font sizes set using pixels, and searching with Google in the address bar.
You must have used Windows first. In my experience, every interface is unintuitive. When I first used a computer, I had no idea what to do. I didn't know what to do with the mouse, I might have spoken into it like Scotty did. All intefaces need teaching, and once you get used to them, you like them, and other intefaces become "foreign" and "unnatural."
When I first used Windows 3.1, its interface was rather similar to that of a Mac (with folders ("Program Groups," IIRC) containing programs). So it was easy to use (I had sporadically used a Macintosh, which I did not own). Upon using Windows 95, I was confused. I thought things like "What the hell does 'My Computer' mean? I'm staring at my computer, why does it have an icon? 'My Documents?' Whose documents?" I was stuck until somebody showed me the Start menu.
Now I am familiar with Windows 95 (well, actually, 98 SE), but the interface is still often annoying to use. The "My Computer" program is nowhere near as good and easy to use as File Manager. I can't even create a folder without having to go through the "New" submenu, which has about fifty different types of files put in by various software, making the menu take four seconds to appear. I mean, the program's a freakin' browser (because it is).
Every interface is imperfect. Different interfaces appeal to different people. Everybody has their own "perfect interface," which will only become a reality if they make it themselves. Because most people cannot program, they adapt to the interfaces.
Considering that "international" includes the U.S.A., I don't see where you are coming from (out of your ass?). Maybe it never occured to you that some people can feel sad about thousands of deaths in other countries besides their own.
It feels alien merely because you don't use it much. Remember, people who play gameboy more grow (mutate?) better thumbs, people who run more often become better runners, people who practice music become better musicians, and people who use Opera become better at using Opera (and soon start loving it more and more).
Opera's GUI is more "funky" because it has more one-click abilities that other browsers do not offer, such as easy toggling of image loading, print preview, and CSS modes. I suppose that unlike IE (also made for newbies), Opera is made for people who really want to use their browsers. Nothing against IE, though.
Slashdot Mirror
So get off the IE-hating trip, it's irrational. And ferchrissake, what's worse, MS or AOHell?!?! Remember folks, Nutscrape is AMERICA ONLINE now. Are you AOL users?
I thought that the article was about Opera.
Extra time? The only way to make sites _incompatible_ with the world wide web is to do extra work. It takes a lot of idiocy and inexperience to make an incompatible site.
Actually, factory-manufactured diamonds are relatively cheap, but they are of extremely low quality compared to naturally found diamonds (the crystals of industrial diamonds are nowhere near perfect, while those of naturally-found diamonds, which cooled much more slowly and evenly, are beautiful (and valuable). For industrial applications, though, both natural and man-made work equally well).
..says a person who hasn't used it in the past thirteen builds. I haven't found a tech-minded person who wasn't amazed by the abilities of Mozilla. Can you do tabbed browsing, popup killing, and ad server blocking in IE?
Actually, it's called Mozilla 1.0; it's not slow, it has less bugs and less bloat than IE, and it doesn't even try to do what Internet Explorer does.
What does IE do? It renders HTML and CSS in a purposefully incorrect fashion, and extends endlessly upon those languages as well, in very stupid and rediculous fashions.
What does Mozilla do? Instead, its goal is to render web pages according to the W3C standards (a.k.a. correctly). Gee, which is better?
You're obviously missing something. The IE engine on the Macintosh is different than that for Windows. Switching away from the IE/Mac engine won't affect compatibility.
And your statement that "Mozilla is not being developed fast enough" is idiotic at best. It took Microsoft much longer to get to where it is in IE than Mozilla did to get where it is, and Mozilla is a better browser.
How so? The way I see it:
And what, some might ask, sort a lunatic would want to climb a mountain? Or fly in a heavier-than-air craft? Or fly the atlantic? Or break the speed of sound? Or land on the moon? Why launch the first satellite into space? Why, some might ask, post to Slashdot? Or read trolling posts modded down to zero?
I have experienced the same thing. I have a friend with a Presario Laptop, and I suggested that he try Mozilla, at least for testing his web site. He looked at it and thought that it was okay. Then I showed him the sidebar and how he could add quick 'n easy HTML 4.0 and CSS 2 References to it and he said that that was cool. I showed him some of the preferences and he liked them. When I suggested to him to use tabbed browsing instead of opening new windows, he decided to switch. I had not even finished; I still needed to show him how to stop popups or change themes.
Mentioning the IRC client and the Composer software expanded his interest, so I continued to mention. I mentioned how he could block images from certain servers, too. He liked the Image, Form, Password, Download, and Cookie managers (under the tools menu), and he put the Web Development tools to good use. I still did not mention the ability to switch to alternate style sheets, text zooming that affected font sizes set using pixels, and searching with Google in the address bar.
So eMac(s) is an operating system, right? I guess that Presario, iMac, PowerBook, and Thinkpad are also operating systems. :-P
You are correct. That is sad, America's self-centered view of the world.
PNG doesn't suck, and I use it all the time instead of GIFs, but the fact is, IE still sucks at rendering PNG,
maybe his ass is a pile of sticks.
You must have used Windows first. In my experience, every interface is unintuitive. When I first used a computer, I had no idea what to do. I didn't know what to do with the mouse, I might have spoken into it like Scotty did. All intefaces need teaching, and once you get used to them, you like them, and other intefaces become "foreign" and "unnatural."
When I first used Windows 3.1, its interface was rather similar to that of a Mac (with folders ("Program Groups," IIRC) containing programs). So it was easy to use (I had sporadically used a Macintosh, which I did not own). Upon using Windows 95, I was confused. I thought things like "What the hell does 'My Computer' mean? I'm staring at my computer, why does it have an icon? 'My Documents?' Whose documents?" I was stuck until somebody showed me the Start menu.
Now I am familiar with Windows 95 (well, actually, 98 SE), but the interface is still often annoying to use. The "My Computer" program is nowhere near as good and easy to use as File Manager. I can't even create a folder without having to go through the "New" submenu, which has about fifty different types of files put in by various software, making the menu take four seconds to appear. I mean, the program's a freakin' browser (because it is).
Every interface is imperfect. Different interfaces appeal to different people. Everybody has their own "perfect interface," which will only become a reality if they make it themselves. Because most people cannot program, they adapt to the interfaces.
[...] 4.0 and newer browsers support Portable Network Graphics (PNG).
Wrong. Iexplore still can't render any PNG image with the least bit of transparent decency.
But everything else is so true.
Choose JPEG for a GIF file? JPEG is for photos, etc. Not computer-generated graphics and icons!
Perhaps you meant PNG.
Considering that "international" includes the U.S.A., I don't see where you are coming from (out of your ass?). Maybe it never occured to you that some people can feel sad about thousands of deaths in other countries besides their own.
Yeah, and this will happen more often than cellphone-related accidents.
It feels alien merely because you don't use it much. Remember, people who play gameboy more grow (mutate?) better thumbs, people who run more often become better runners, people who practice music become better musicians, and people who use Opera become better at using Opera (and soon start loving it more and more).
Opera's GUI is more "funky" because it has more one-click abilities that other browsers do not offer, such as easy toggling of image loading, print preview, and CSS modes. I suppose that unlike IE (also made for newbies), Opera is made for people who really want to use their browsers. Nothing against IE, though.
Also, in my experience, Opera is much faster.
Ya know, just because an opinion is different from yours does not mean that it's a troll.
Oh wait, this is Slashdot.
Simple. You make contracts every day. You make them when you buy food and when you buy soda from vending machines. Did you sign anything?
They'd probably grab the warez and then report the site.
Considering how much newsgathering Yahoo actually does, I believe the correct term would be "articlez."
FUCK YOU!
See, it works.
Yeah, the fat boy letters sort of gave me that idea. :-)