IE & standards: Up to NS6, IE 5.5 (& IE 5 for Mac) was the most standards complaint browser. (If this doesn't mean much to, this mean that it supported standards very well.)
Netscape has a tendecy to freak at non-100%-correct(-to-netscape's-standards) HTML.
I don't know about you, but while I think that 100%-correct is a Good Thing, I don't think that the browser should *force* it on you.
Not everybody can be bothered learn HTML, and WYSIWYG isn't perfect either.
Can you show me some examples of the things that MSIE won't display, that are standard, and that NS / Mozilla would display?
Another annoyance of NS6 & Mozilla is that they stick to standards to the last word.
Here is an example: What is the *standard* equilent of IE's document.all & NS(4.XX) document.layers ?
IE 5 support it, and NS6 & Mozilla require it, which is just plain stupid.
It require the web developer to make three sets of pages, IE, NS4, NS6 & mozilla.
If I write a page for IE4, I can be reasonably sure that it would display correctly on IE4+ (that is why most people use document.all for IE, instead of the standard way, btw)
Why can't Mozilla make their browser backward compatible?
Mozilla & memory: I've tested NS6 on 2k machine.
As I said, on linux I've lynx, I don't need anything more. I look for an alternative for IE, especically since I liked NS so much in the past.
I just watched the figure on task mangar climb up & up as I kept surfing (nothing with JS, nothing with DHTML, I surfed to site which are supported by IE 1).
I'll try Mozilla when it is released, I think.
> Don't expect to see anyone sensible do this until the decrypting DAC can be reprogrammed.
By who? I've a DVD that used to be limited to 5 zone changes before it locked, I changed this (had to go to DOS for that, YUCK).
I have no intention of restoring the block again.
So I don't see why would anyone would want to put decryption on the sound card, I don't think that many will do an update that:
A> require them to use dos.
B> maim their sound card.
Or did you expect the sound card companies to be able to reprogram the sound cards?
MS is currently in an interesting position, when it no longer have any serious rivals in the desktop OS field.
But is facing *very* hard competition on the server OS field.
On the desktop side, they have to compete with *themselves*.
On the server side, they have to compete with Unix, VMS, Nonstop, Linux, BSD, etc...
They have to get better, or else they wouldn't sell OSs, wouldn't be able to extract monopoly power, and basically stop being MS and become Apple.
> Compare the stability of Windows 95/98/ME/2000 with the stability of GNU/Linux and other systems and there you have it - death to Windows
Please don't put 9x & NT line on the same sentence.
> All Windows 2000 users are familiar with the "Blue Screen of Death".
Not this one, exactly one BSOD in nearly 8 months of nearly constant use.
And that was when I because a bad driver (IRQL_IS_NOT_LESS_OR_EQUAL_TO)
> Windows 2000 is adequate for routine desktop apps, but it is unable to handle heavy network loads. A few organizations try to make it work as an Internet server.
I followed some old Talk Back messages on ZDNet, and got several 404 Messages, refreshing (sometimes I'd to do three or four refreshing) fixed it.
Does this mean that Solaris isn't capable of handling the load?
It seems that you are unfamiliar with Win2K.
Go here and give it a try:
http://www.microsoft.com/windows2000/edk/default .a sp
And, for the record, why are you saying this at/. ???
* They screwed up Netscape, which in the past had 70% market share
Sorry, but they didn't screwed up Netscape.
Netscape did it to itself all by its own.
It started with total ignorance of standards, went on to *two* years (what is that in internet years?) with no meaningful update. It was buggy as hell, heavy, and unfriendly.
MS had a superior product since 4 versions.
That Netscape did nothing to improve their browser while MS worked on making IE the best browser they could produce, is Netscape's fault.
If they hadn't abused their users for so long, this wouldn't have happened.
I remember using NS 3.?? and I loved it, the only times I would've used IE 3 was to get the superior View Source (open in editable notepad window, instead of the ugly netscape one) feature.
But since versions 4? IE got better, Netscape didn't.
It also doesn't help that NS (especially 6)devour memory like there is no tomorrow, minimum requirement for Netscape 6 is two to four times those of IE 5.5.
And it gets worse if you open several windows at the same time, I've opened three NS6 windows and watched as it ate 65MB. I currently have 5 IE windows open, and IE takes 9MB (peaked at 20MB)
I sometimes has up to 20 - 25 windows open, I don't feel like buying Gigabytes of RAM just to accomedate NS.
When I'm on a *nix, it's lynx or konquerer (usually lynx), Netscape doesn't come *near* my servers.
If you ask computer-illeterate (i.e. users) what a macintosh is, most of then wouldn't know what it is.
If we go by www.thecounter.com numbers, only 3% use Macs.
I only partially agree, the beauty of WMP is that it accept both secure (content provider friendly) data, and open data (cosnumer friendly).
When the client sees this, s/he won't think, "Oh, Microsoft is evil!" they would think that the one who sold them the media (file, cd,dvd, whatever) is evil.
> The technologies, in turn, are being set deeply into the Windows operating system.
Very true, they are so interwhined into Windows that in order to update Windows Media Player, you've to reboot!
Talking about Windows 2000 here, I mean, how deep did they stuck WMP, if they need to reboot in order to update it?
I'll let someone else comment on every part of it, but here are some points I can refute.
> - USB standard
> Intel
> * Lucent, Intel, HP, Compaq,... . Your point?
> * There's an aspect of USB that Apple did amazingly well, BTW. Plug a USB device into a Mac, and it'll download the driver, install it, and enable the device. Try simply plugging a USB device that needs a new driver that's not installed yet into a PC... it's a horrid experience. Automatically doing the right thing instead of torturing the user seems like a praisworthy thing, and better than anybody else's solution so far.
Really? In Win98, I plug in the device, I get a message, "detecting new hardware", then I get the choice of either using the default driver (if exist) or pointing the OS to the driver, or letting the OS look it up in the internet.
Win ME/2K/Whistler does it even better.
Linux is harder, I'll admit.
> - UNIX-based (BSD, Mach) mainstream OS
> You've got to be kidding! Apple invented UNIX?
> * No, I didn't say that Apple invented UNIX. I said that Apple is the first company to ship a mainstream desktop OS based on UNIX.
There *isn't* any *nix based mainstream OS.
The closest thing to it is Linux. There are *way* more linux desktops than OSX desktops.
> - SMP standard (on high-end)
> That's been around since the '60s
> * Not as a standard feature of mainstream desktop computers.
Nope, again:
A> Macs are by no mean mainstream OS.
B> NT had it from the start (3.1? 1993?)
C> Unix had it *long* before that.
> - Real Java in mainstream OS (in MacOS X)
> Sun
> * Solaris isn't a mainstream OS. It's a server OS. It's a good one, but not a consumer OS.
YMMV, but I know several people that use Solaris as a desktop.
You can get a SPARC+Solaris for less than a 1000$, good deal.
And, anyway:
A> Macs aren't mainstream OS.
B> Windows had it first, and the MS implenation of JVM was even better than Sun, IIRC.
Well, Whistler, while not going on all Aquaish, does indeed bear striking resemblence to Macs.
Maybe not in the way it look, but in the overall feeling. Especially if you choose the new settings.
Not to mention that I'm sure that there will be MacOS X themes for Whistler. For those who *really* like to torment their eyes.
As a note, I'm a member of several mailing lists that add "if you wish to be removed from this list..."
The spammers get their phrasing from exactly this kind of stuff.
Not to mention that there are some emails that I want (Amazon's offers are usually accurate, so I like to hear about books that I may want to buy.)
In the eformentioned email lists, people sometimes get hot-headed, it's no common, but also not rare, to see someone try to refute someone else using all caps & exclamation marks.
I think that I agree with others, saying that sending spam should carry a heavy financial fine.
(Let's say 100$ plus termination of service for someone whose ISP got numerous complaints about.)
abuse@isp.com are good, but not enough, I'm afraid.
I'm getting about 10 spam messages a day, (and I use filters) if this go on I'll build a email-abuse button in my mailer. And hope that this would do some good.
Lawyer speak for: "You agree that we can do anything with the information we extract from you, you'll buy the products we advertise, blah blah blah, first born child to be handed over to us as soon as s/he can be of some use, blah blah blad"
And then: If your browser pull ads from our servers that mean that you've read and accepted the license. There is no opt-out from this license.
The BeOS style task bar was adopted in Whistler (if you've several instances of the same application open, they will concentrate on one icon, which will give you a menu)
I played for a (very) short time with Nautilus, my impresion was that they tried to make Netscape into a file browser.
Personally, I don't want a be-all end-all application like you describe, I much rather have it the way it is today.
For instance, I can kill 99% of the background garbage in Win95, haven't figured that out completely under Win2K.
For a start, you may want to check Services MMC (Start>Programs>Administrator settings>Services)
You need to do it as admin, btw.
Also, check the web, there are only 4-5 (or so) services that 2K (pro) need in order to work, and it shows.
BTW, *before* you make any changes to your services configuration, make sure to export your settings, if you fsck up something there, you want to have the reference handy.
One easy way to fsck up a 2k machine is to point the kerebos dns adress to non-existing adress, the result, login will take 15 minutes or more, because the machine wait for the kerebos autentication to time-out.
What really slows down Java programs, says Pollak, is when the Java applications try to display user interfaces on the screen of a computer. One way that Pollak has found to speed up Java programs is to rewrite their user interfaces in Microsoft's Visual Basic.
Slashdot Mirror
I never tried to do xhtml pages, but IE is very good with debugging XML syntax.
IIRC, there was also 3K$US Redhat version, tuned for Oracle.
IE & standards: Up to NS6, IE 5.5 (& IE 5 for Mac) was the most standards complaint browser. (If this doesn't mean much to, this mean that it supported standards very well.)
Netscape has a tendecy to freak at non-100%-correct(-to-netscape's-standards) HTML.
I don't know about you, but while I think that 100%-correct is a Good Thing, I don't think that the browser should *force* it on you.
Not everybody can be bothered learn HTML, and WYSIWYG isn't perfect either.
Can you show me some examples of the things that MSIE won't display, that are standard, and that NS / Mozilla would display?
Another annoyance of NS6 & Mozilla is that they stick to standards to the last word.
Here is an example: What is the *standard* equilent of IE's document.all & NS(4.XX) document.layers ?
IE 5 support it, and NS6 & Mozilla require it, which is just plain stupid.
It require the web developer to make three sets of pages, IE, NS4, NS6 & mozilla.
If I write a page for IE4, I can be reasonably sure that it would display correctly on IE4+ (that is why most people use document.all for IE, instead of the standard way, btw)
Why can't Mozilla make their browser backward compatible?
Mozilla & memory: I've tested NS6 on 2k machine.
As I said, on linux I've lynx, I don't need anything more. I look for an alternative for IE, especically since I liked NS so much in the past.
I just watched the figure on task mangar climb up & up as I kept surfing (nothing with JS, nothing with DHTML, I surfed to site which are supported by IE 1).
I'll try Mozilla when it is released, I think.
> Don't expect to see anyone sensible do this until the decrypting DAC can be reprogrammed.
By who? I've a DVD that used to be limited to 5 zone changes before it locked, I changed this (had to go to DOS for that, YUCK).
I have no intention of restoring the block again.
So I don't see why would anyone would want to put decryption on the sound card, I don't think that many will do an update that:
A> require them to use dos.
B> maim their sound card.
Or did you expect the sound card companies to be able to reprogram the sound cards?
*I* wouldn't buy those sound cards.
> I use Windows for the software that runs under it, not the OS itself.
Switch Windows for any other OS (except maybe 9x, in this case you use it in order to look at BSOD), and I would agree with you.
> So with Windows, you are stuck between stability and compatibility. Win2K is a nice try, but you still can't have both.
Well, the good news is that you wouldn't need to compromise much longer.
Actually, yes, it would.
MS is currently in an interesting position, when it no longer have any serious rivals in the desktop OS field.
But is facing *very* hard competition on the server OS field.
On the desktop side, they have to compete with *themselves*.
On the server side, they have to compete with Unix, VMS, Nonstop, Linux, BSD, etc...
They have to get better, or else they wouldn't sell OSs, wouldn't be able to extract monopoly power, and basically stop being MS and become Apple.
> Compare the stability of Windows 95/98/ME/2000 with the stability of GNU/Linux and other systems and there you have it - death to Windows
t .a sp
/. ???
Please don't put 9x & NT line on the same sentence.
> All Windows 2000 users are familiar with the "Blue Screen of Death".
Not this one, exactly one BSOD in nearly 8 months of nearly constant use.
And that was when I because a bad driver (IRQL_IS_NOT_LESS_OR_EQUAL_TO)
> Windows 2000 is adequate for routine desktop apps, but it is unable to handle heavy network loads. A few organizations try to make it work as an Internet server.
I followed some old Talk Back messages on ZDNet, and got several 404 Messages, refreshing (sometimes I'd to do three or four refreshing) fixed it.
Does this mean that Solaris isn't capable of handling the load?
It seems that you are unfamiliar with Win2K.
Go here and give it a try:
http://www.microsoft.com/windows2000/edk/defaul
And, for the record, why are you saying this at
>Once it's on my computer, it's mine too.
A lot of people doesn't agree with you.
ISVs, artists, RIAA, the courts, and the like.
* They screwed up Netscape, which in the past had 70% market share
Sorry, but they didn't screwed up Netscape.
Netscape did it to itself all by its own.
It started with total ignorance of standards, went on to *two* years (what is that in internet years?) with no meaningful update. It was buggy as hell, heavy, and unfriendly.
MS had a superior product since 4 versions.
That Netscape did nothing to improve their browser while MS worked on making IE the best browser they could produce, is Netscape's fault.
If they hadn't abused their users for so long, this wouldn't have happened.
I remember using NS 3.?? and I loved it, the only times I would've used IE 3 was to get the superior View Source (open in editable notepad window, instead of the ugly netscape one) feature.
But since versions 4? IE got better, Netscape didn't.
It also doesn't help that NS (especially 6)devour memory like there is no tomorrow, minimum requirement for Netscape 6 is two to four times those of IE 5.5.
And it gets worse if you open several windows at the same time, I've opened three NS6 windows and watched as it ate 65MB. I currently have 5 IE windows open, and IE takes 9MB (peaked at 20MB)
I sometimes has up to 20 - 25 windows open, I don't feel like buying Gigabytes of RAM just to accomedate NS.
When I'm on a *nix, it's lynx or konquerer (usually lynx), Netscape doesn't come *near* my servers.
Isthere lynx for windows?
If you ask computer-illeterate (i.e. users) what a macintosh is, most of then wouldn't know what it is.
If we go by www.thecounter.com numbers, only 3% use Macs.
I only partially agree, the beauty of WMP is that it accept both secure (content provider friendly) data, and open data (cosnumer friendly).
When the client sees this, s/he won't think, "Oh, Microsoft is evil!" they would think that the one who sold them the media (file, cd,dvd, whatever) is evil.
> The technologies, in turn, are being set deeply into the Windows operating system.
Very true, they are so interwhined into Windows that in order to update Windows Media Player, you've to reboot!
Talking about Windows 2000 here, I mean, how deep did they stuck WMP, if they need to reboot in order to update it?
And then they broke is with QT4.
I'll let someone else comment on every part of it, but here are some points I can refute.
... . Your point?
... it's a horrid experience. Automatically doing the right thing instead of torturing the user seems like a praisworthy thing, and better than anybody else's solution so far.
> - USB standard
> Intel
> * Lucent, Intel, HP, Compaq,
> * There's an aspect of USB that Apple did amazingly well, BTW. Plug a USB device into a Mac, and it'll download the driver, install it, and enable the device. Try simply plugging a USB device that needs a new driver that's not installed yet into a PC
Really? In Win98, I plug in the device, I get a message, "detecting new hardware", then I get the choice of either using the default driver (if exist) or pointing the OS to the driver, or letting the OS look it up in the internet.
Win ME/2K/Whistler does it even better.
Linux is harder, I'll admit.
> - UNIX-based (BSD, Mach) mainstream OS
> You've got to be kidding! Apple invented UNIX?
> * No, I didn't say that Apple invented UNIX. I said that Apple is the first company to ship a mainstream desktop OS based on UNIX.
There *isn't* any *nix based mainstream OS.
The closest thing to it is Linux. There are *way* more linux desktops than OSX desktops.
> - SMP standard (on high-end)
> That's been around since the '60s
> * Not as a standard feature of mainstream desktop computers.
Nope, again:
A> Macs are by no mean mainstream OS.
B> NT had it from the start (3.1? 1993?)
C> Unix had it *long* before that.
> - Real Java in mainstream OS (in MacOS X)
> Sun
> * Solaris isn't a mainstream OS. It's a server OS. It's a good one, but not a consumer OS.
YMMV, but I know several people that use Solaris as a desktop.
You can get a SPARC+Solaris for less than a 1000$, good deal.
And, anyway:
A> Macs aren't mainstream OS.
B> Windows had it first, and the MS implenation of JVM was even better than Sun, IIRC.
As far as I understand (not much, admittedly), MacOSX handle Mac OS9 by loading OS9 and letting it handle its executable.
If I'm correct, I don't see much difference than using VMware to run windows/linux.
Interesting question, can you run Mac OS9 on VMWare on x86?
Um, Whistler?
Well, Whistler, while not going on all Aquaish, does indeed bear striking resemblence to Macs.
Maybe not in the way it look, but in the overall feeling. Especially if you choose the new settings.
Not to mention that I'm sure that there will be MacOS X themes for Whistler. For those who *really* like to torment their eyes.
As a note, I'm a member of several mailing lists that add "if you wish to be removed from this list ..."
The spammers get their phrasing from exactly this kind of stuff.
Not to mention that there are some emails that I want (Amazon's offers are usually accurate, so I like to hear about books that I may want to buy.)
In the eformentioned email lists, people sometimes get hot-headed, it's no common, but also not rare, to see someone try to refute someone else using all caps & exclamation marks.
I think that I agree with others, saying that sending spam should carry a heavy financial fine.
(Let's say 100$ plus termination of service for someone whose ISP got numerous complaints about.)
abuse@isp.com are good, but not enough, I'm afraid.
I'm getting about 10 spam messages a day, (and I use filters) if this go on I'll build a email-abuse button in my mailer. And hope that this would do some good.
They put this in their Term of Serivce:
Lawyer speak for: "You agree that we can do anything with the information we extract from you, you'll buy the products we advertise, blah blah blah, first born child to be handed over to us as soon as s/he can be of some use, blah blah blad"
And then: If your browser pull ads from our servers that mean that you've read and accepted the license. There is no opt-out from this license.
Kind of like MS licenses, but worse.
The BeOS style task bar was adopted in Whistler (if you've several instances of the same application open, they will concentrate on one icon, which will give you a menu)
I played for a (very) short time with Nautilus, my impresion was that they tried to make Netscape into a file browser.
Personally, I don't want a be-all end-all application like you describe, I much rather have it the way it is today.
Real Men (tm) use edlin.
:)
Um, about Whistler, it uses 2K's driver model, which mean that close to all (there are few that doesn't) of 2k's drivers will work on Whistler.
What is this native device support that you are talking about?
The control panel has been reorginize, it was divided to sections, restorable to original shape in a click of the mouse.
You need the hardware to support it, (if I would try it on my computer, any OS, the board would fry itself and me), but if it's supported, it works.
For instance, I can kill 99% of the background garbage in Win95, haven't figured that out completely under Win2K.
For a start, you may want to check Services MMC (Start>Programs>Administrator settings>Services)
You need to do it as admin, btw.
Also, check the web, there are only 4-5 (or so) services that 2K (pro) need in order to work, and it shows.
BTW, *before* you make any changes to your services configuration, make sure to export your settings, if you fsck up something there, you want to have the reference handy.
One easy way to fsck up a 2k machine is to point the kerebos dns adress to non-existing adress, the result, login will take 15 minutes or more, because the machine wait for the kerebos autentication to time-out.
http://www.salon.com/tech/col/garf/2001/01/18/java _response/index1.html
Now *that* is halarious:
What really slows down Java programs, says Pollak, is when the Java applications try to display user interfaces on the screen of a computer. One way that Pollak has found to speed up Java programs is to rewrite their user interfaces in Microsoft's Visual Basic.