Funnily enough the mad scientists books are some of the ones I kept from my childhood, and recently (under parental pressure) took them from storage at mom and dads to the overloaded shelves at my apartment. They are great books, and look forward to passing them on to my offspring. Hell, I'll probably re-read them a few times myself before that happens though!
Good point, except for one thing. Taco's review was not so much butting in (IMHO) as augmenting. There were two separate reviews here, just like in the old days. See theonion.com's point, counterpoint.
I disagree. If part of the HTML standard from the beginning had been that the browser was not allowed to identify itself, then the whole divergence of browsers would not have (possibly) happened, because everyone would be on a level playing field.
This probably wouldn't have stopped microsoft from pulling the carpet out from under netscape, and the suckage of NS from that point forward, but I think that the web would be very different today.
As for pdas, you have a separate page, or have the server have a way to render the page differently for different filenames. For example, if I request foo.html from the server it gives me foo.html, if I request foo.wml from the server it gives me the same page, but does the markup differently (just like CSS can do today) for that page (which is not a real page, more of a mod_perl type of thing, but not).
As for upgrading to mozilla I have, but sites out there still tell me my browser isn't supported. The problem is more to do with web designers using the "opt in" rather than "opt out" mentality. "Allow only ie5 windows" instead of "Don't allow netscape 4.x".
The only thing you get to see on their site is a 404. You can't even get to a contact page, much less a text version of the website. Another site is ctvnews.com. They have the standard "this page won't look good under browsers that aren't ie on windows", but the still let you continue on to see the site (which renders fine thankyouverymuch). That's all I ask.
From what I saw of the shockwave site if they did let you view it on a non-ie/win browser you'd see the page, just fine, and two empty squares where the plugin is missing. It's not even that they have their entire page in shockwave or something lame like that.
That's the sort of stuff that just pisses me right off.
Really? I see it every day, just the other way around:
Generally in the format of something like:
"Netscape 6/mozilla is not supported. Please go [here] to download the latest version of IE"
Or from shockwave (if you go to their site on a non-windows, non-ie browser... the only way to view anything on it is to fake the user agent string to a windows/ie code in konq).
"It appears that your operating system is not supported by shockwave.com. We support the following operating systems: Windows 95, Windows 98, Windows 2000, Windows NT 4.0 (or later), and Mac OS 8.1 (or later)."
I have to give kudoes to http://k10k.net/ because they had a "we don't support netscape 6 DCOM just yet, sucks to be you" type message up a while back, but they have apparently re-designed their site.
This is on a system with a fairly extensive set of apps used normally. I can see where if you use perl for a bunch of your stuff, and guile, there really is no choice but to install the full development files and libs on a system that has no guile stuff on it.
However, it's 40ish mb of archives that I have to download (Thank $DEITY for fast adsl!).
So what happens if you are in the demographic of "25 year old male who does not want to see commercials"? That'd fit me perfectly, and I would be quite happy to never see another commercial in my life. I don't buy things based on commercials, and occasionally I will specifically NOT buy things that have stupid ads. My own quirkiness I guess.
The problem with targetted marketting is you eliminate the impulse buying. If I only ever saw computer ads, how would the toothpaste people make money off me. I see a random ad that tells me I can whiten my teeth and become more attractive to the opposite sex if I get toothpaste brand 'X', decide I need it and go out and buy it. With targetted marketing I might never see this ad and remain ugly the rest of my life.
The way that advertising works right now is basically 'show everything to everybody' and it "works" I guess. Just because I never wears womens shoes doesn't mean that an ad for them wouldn't remind me that I need to get my sister/wife/girfriend a gift and hey, shoes is a good idea.
I say it "works" because I'm not sure how well, but everyone does it so it must be good right?
I hate to break it to you, but the list of platforms you describe is basically irrelevant. So Netscape has cornered the dark back alley of the internet. [...]
That's all well and good for *you* maybe, but I still use netscape, because I don't happen to run an os in the "95%" range you mention. I am forced to use netscape for mail (unless you can find me a linux mailer that does x509 certs). I've found that recently mozilla and galeon give me the ability to totally dump netscape as a browser, but the hpux/sun/irix's of the world might not be as lucky.
So while your argument may be true, it doesn't mean that there aren't people still here in the back alley. How about the stats that say that 99% of people in your hometown aren't homeless (or whatever). Does that mean that the 1% that are homeless don't matter? "What? donate to a foodbank? Why, 99% of the people don't need it, so lets just ignore it for the rest".
The majority is great if you are in the majority. Those not in the majority feel quite different;)
Personally I ignore all these types of ratings and stats. As you said, there is *so* much that can be done to weigh the odds in your favor, or to show the odds in favor of whomever you want them to.
Which is good, but my boss uses communicator for email (and even likes it for some reason!).
Outlook and eudora are fine, but right now I'm stuck with x509 verisign certs (which only work on communicator under linux, no other clients) because pgp (which we wanted to go for) doens't work for netscape under linux or windows.
Anyone got a solution for this? Either
a) x509 support for a linux client that isn't netscape
b) pgp support for netscape under windows and linux
Q: The new Windows XP software, I've seen a trial version, contains a number of free products--media player, a CD burner, an Internet firewall. Could that bundling hurt smaller competitors who make stand-alone software? Isn't this kind of bundling that you offered with Windows and Internet Explorer?
A: Just as with Internet Explorer, our job is to offer customers what they want. We are trying to provide more functionality at the same or better prices every day. [A]ll the new capabilities of Windows XP are open to software developers to add onto, to build value around. I think Windows XP ought to be a real boon to the kinds of innovations that come from smaller companies. The inclusion of Internet Explorer with Windows has been absolutely great... for innovation in the software industry. Whether it was great for Netscape is a different question.
I realize that it's not illegal or anything, but isn't what Ballmer's saying here really "our customers were going to other companies for their software, so we decided to bundle it so they don't have to go elsewhere"?
This is of course perfectly legal (I think). If I had a company that made widgets and I could get more clients by adding feature X to my widget, I probably would. However, combine this with complete dominance of the widget market (or close to it, a monopoly however you look at it), this means that widget manufacturures who survive by making feature X are being squashed.
Actually in galeon isn't not even a hidden option;) I actually still allow popups, which are sometimes needed to go to flash sites and whatenot, but I have popups open in tabs by default.
Besides, it's not like the salespeople couldn't use attractive codenames to sell products. Think of the number of slashdotters who'd by your widgetapplication with a codename like "NataliePortman";)
A project with a codename of "NataliePortman"? Where do I get me one of those?!?!?!?
Yes, there are alternatives, but some of them (galeon for example) still depend on mozilla.
As well, while mozilla may be "useless" in a way, it's still proof that open source can work. Well, that's what I'm hoping anyway. I don't think that it'll surpass the monopoly that MS has on the Windows side, but IMHO a commercial strength browser such as mozilla will help linux.
On the mac, if it's faster than the 18 bounces that IE took to start up on my friends iMac under OS/X, it'll do great things for all the macheads out there:)
I completely agree. Our company uses build numbers, so customers get build 1300 or build 1422 and not "version 1.0". This is great for us developers, but the salespeople hate it! They want the ability to say [fanfar]new! version 2.0 is out![/fanfare]
With commercial products this is a sad fact of life. I think we're moving to doing it the way that VM Ware does it, with a version+build ie: "1.1 (build 1321)" Guess we'll see how that works:)
Re:The day I realized Trek sucked
on
Voyager Eulogy
·
· Score: 2
Actually IIRC this rule was broken a couple of times (don't remember the specifics). They explained it by saying something about matching shield harmonics allowing them to beam through.
I'm Netscape's (well actually, Mozilla's) biggest supporter, and this really sucks, but it's just business. Everyone seems to have the solution for Mozilla, but how about this: Drop the cross-platform bull shit. "Winning the browser war" and "cross-platform browser" are mutually exclusive, because you can NEVER make a cross-platform app as fast as it would be if it was only developed for one platform.
Truely spoken by someone who uses windows:)
Seriously though, if they were to drop the "cross platform" thing that would really suck for a lot of people, and probably most of the mozilla advocates would stop being mozilla advocates. Lets be honest, IE is a good browser. When I'm in windows, I use it because it's fast, renders well, and is compatible.
However, 99% of my time (that is, when I'm not playing blackandwhite) is spent in linux. Having the best choice for a browser so far (IMHO anyway, please don't start the konq vs opera, vs... flames) suddenly be dropped from my platform would make me loose a lot of respect for the mozilla team.
I think that probably (and this is a pure guess) 80% of their use is by linux people who want something that doesn't suck as bad as netscape 4.x. Dropping cross platform in mozilla might be fine for windows people, but as a linux person, I really would like a browser that is great.
(paraphrased from another source)
Really. Who cares how fast a new hot-rod can go from 0-60 if there's a 50% chance that stepping on the gas pedal will make it explode?
Lots of people do this anyway, they just phrase it differently. They say "yes, I think I'd like to buy a copy of windows today".
Wishful thinking of course, but I'm behind you 100 (3).
Of course, the only place in publications that you get true opinions is somewhere where money doesn't matter, ie, the web (or at least, small sites on the web, not something like gamespot, or any place that uses advertising from game companies (or the company related to whatever they are reviewing) as income.
Personally I say Mod This (the parent of this comment that is) Up!:)
I gotta agree with you. It wasn't "real", but what on TV is? I hope that those complaining that TLG wasn't researched enough aren't the same type who compare "Boot Camp" with anything resembling reality.
It was a decent enough show to come home to on a friday night anyway. Now what is there? Will I have to go out and discover a "real life" or something?
Slashdot Mirror
Funnily enough the mad scientists books are some of the ones I kept from my childhood, and recently (under parental pressure) took them from storage at mom and dads to the overloaded shelves at my apartment. They are great books, and look forward to passing them on to my offspring. Hell, I'll probably re-read them a few times myself before that happens though!
Good point, except for one thing. Taco's review was not so much butting in (IMHO) as augmenting. There were two separate reviews here, just like in the old days. See theonion.com's point, counterpoint.
:)
Oh, and chill out dude
I disagree. If part of the HTML standard from the beginning had been that the browser was not allowed to identify itself, then the whole divergence of browsers would not have (possibly) happened, because everyone would be on a level playing field.
This probably wouldn't have stopped microsoft from pulling the carpet out from under netscape, and the suckage of NS from that point forward, but I think that the web would be very different today.
As for pdas, you have a separate page, or have the server have a way to render the page differently for different filenames. For example, if I request foo.html from the server it gives me foo.html, if I request foo.wml from the server it gives me the same page, but does the markup differently (just like CSS can do today) for that page (which is not a real page, more of a mod_perl type of thing, but not).
As for upgrading to mozilla I have, but sites out there still tell me my browser isn't supported. The problem is more to do with web designers using the "opt in" rather than "opt out" mentality. "Allow only ie5 windows" instead of "Don't allow netscape 4.x".
The only thing you get to see on their site is a 404. You can't even get to a contact page, much less a text version of the website. Another site is ctvnews.com. They have the standard "this page won't look good under browsers that aren't ie on windows", but the still let you continue on to see the site (which renders fine thankyouverymuch). That's all I ask.
From what I saw of the shockwave site if they did let you view it on a non-ie/win browser you'd see the page, just fine, and two empty squares where the plugin is missing. It's not even that they have their entire page in shockwave or something lame like that.
That's the sort of stuff that just pisses me right off.
Really? I see it every day, just the other way around:
Generally in the format of something like:
"Netscape 6/mozilla is not supported. Please go [here] to download the latest version of IE"
Or from shockwave (if you go to their site on a non-windows, non-ie browser... the only way to view anything on it is to fake the user agent string to a windows/ie code in konq).
"It appears that your operating system is not supported by shockwave.com. We support the following operating systems: Windows 95, Windows 98, Windows 2000, Windows NT 4.0 (or later), and Mac OS 8.1 (or later)."
I have to give kudoes to http://k10k.net/ because they had a "we don't support netscape 6 DCOM just yet, sucks to be you" type message up a while back, but they have apparently re-designed their site.
That's for when you go to the gym or go for a run or a bike ri.... erhmm... never mind. :)
Good point, except that I'm happily running gnome 1.4 under debian unstable and selecting gnucash caused 15 extra packages to be installed:
libguppi11
libwrapguile
libwww-perl
slib
scm
guile1.4
guide1.4-slb
libgwrapguile0
libnet-perl
liburi-perl
libhtml-parse-perl
guile-common
libnet-telnet-perl
libhtml-tagset-perl
This is on a system with a fairly extensive set of apps used normally. I can see where if you use perl for a bunch of your stuff, and guile, there really is no choice but to install the full development files and libs on a system that has no guile stuff on it.
However, it's 40ish mb of archives that I have to download (Thank $DEITY for fast adsl!).
... and make sure you do it with this really threatening 1984 look when you say it... "we KNOW where you're going."
:)
So what happens if you are in the demographic of "25 year old male who does not want to see commercials"? That'd fit me perfectly, and I would be quite happy to never see another commercial in my life. I don't buy things based on commercials, and occasionally I will specifically NOT buy things that have stupid ads. My own quirkiness I guess.
The problem with targetted marketting is you eliminate the impulse buying. If I only ever saw computer ads, how would the toothpaste people make money off me. I see a random ad that tells me I can whiten my teeth and become more attractive to the opposite sex if I get toothpaste brand 'X', decide I need it and go out and buy it. With targetted marketing I might never see this ad and remain ugly the rest of my life.
The way that advertising works right now is basically 'show everything to everybody' and it "works" I guess. Just because I never wears womens shoes doesn't mean that an ad for them wouldn't remind me that I need to get my sister/wife/girfriend a gift and hey, shoes is a good idea.
I say it "works" because I'm not sure how well, but everyone does it so it must be good right?
Sounds like a debian install :)
I hate to break it to you, but the list of platforms you describe is basically irrelevant. So Netscape has cornered the dark back alley of the internet. [...]
;)
That's all well and good for *you* maybe, but I still use netscape, because I don't happen to run an os in the "95%" range you mention. I am forced to use netscape for mail (unless you can find me a linux mailer that does x509 certs). I've found that recently mozilla and galeon give me the ability to totally dump netscape as a browser, but the hpux/sun/irix's of the world might not be as lucky.
So while your argument may be true, it doesn't mean that there aren't people still here in the back alley. How about the stats that say that 99% of people in your hometown aren't homeless (or whatever). Does that mean that the 1% that are homeless don't matter? "What? donate to a foodbank? Why, 99% of the people don't need it, so lets just ignore it for the rest".
The majority is great if you are in the majority. Those not in the majority feel quite different
"Lies, damn lies, and statistics".
Personally I ignore all these types of ratings and stats. As you said, there is *so* much that can be done to weigh the odds in your favor, or to show the odds in favor of whomever you want them to.
Which is good, but my boss uses communicator for email (and even likes it for some reason!).
Outlook and eudora are fine, but right now I'm stuck with x509 verisign certs (which only work on communicator under linux, no other clients) because pgp (which we wanted to go for) doens't work for netscape under linux or windows.
Anyone got a solution for this? Either
a) x509 support for a linux client that isn't netscape
b) pgp support for netscape under windows and linux
TIA
Q: The new Windows XP software, I've seen a trial version, contains a number of free products--media player, a CD burner, an Internet firewall. Could that bundling hurt smaller competitors who make stand-alone software? Isn't this kind of bundling that you offered with Windows and Internet Explorer?
... for innovation in the software industry. Whether it was great for Netscape is a different question.
A: Just as with Internet Explorer, our job is to offer customers what they want. We are trying to provide more functionality at the same or better prices every day. [A]ll the new capabilities of Windows XP are open to software developers to add onto, to build value around. I think Windows XP ought to be a real boon to the kinds of innovations that come from smaller companies. The inclusion of Internet Explorer with Windows has been absolutely great
I realize that it's not illegal or anything, but isn't what Ballmer's saying here really "our customers were going to other companies for their software, so we decided to bundle it so they don't have to go elsewhere"?
This is of course perfectly legal (I think). If I had a company that made widgets and I could get more clients by adding feature X to my widget, I probably would. However, combine this with complete dominance of the widget market (or close to it, a monopoly however you look at it), this means that widget manufacturures who survive by making feature X are being squashed.
Actually in galeon isn't not even a hidden option ;) I actually still allow popups, which are sometimes needed to go to flash sites and whatenot, but I have popups open in tabs by default.
:)
Tabbed browsing rocks
If you're looking for good .debs a dude by the name of christophe has made patched 0.9 .debs which are available at ftp://ufies.org/pub/galeon/people/christophe
.8.1's.
./
They are made for the galeon project, but don't rely on any external (ximian, etc) debs. They are IIRC just recompiles of kitame's
Apt-gettable even via:
deb ftp://ufies.org/pub/galeon/people/christophe
Besides, it's not like the salespeople couldn't use attractive codenames to sell products. Think of the number of slashdotters who'd by your widgetapplication with a codename like "NataliePortman" ;)
A project with a codename of "NataliePortman"? Where do I get me one of those?!?!?!?
:)
Yes, there are alternatives, but some of them (galeon for example) still depend on mozilla.
:)
As well, while mozilla may be "useless" in a way, it's still proof that open source can work. Well, that's what I'm hoping anyway. I don't think that it'll surpass the monopoly that MS has on the Windows side, but IMHO a commercial strength browser such as mozilla will help linux.
On the mac, if it's faster than the 18 bounces that IE took to start up on my friends iMac under OS/X, it'll do great things for all the macheads out there
I completely agree. Our company uses build numbers, so customers get build 1300 or build 1422 and not "version 1.0". This is great for us developers, but the salespeople hate it! They want the ability to say [fanfar]new! version 2.0 is out![/fanfare]
:)
With commercial products this is a sad fact of life. I think we're moving to doing it the way that VM Ware does it, with a version+build ie: "1.1 (build 1321)" Guess we'll see how that works
Actually IIRC this rule was broken a couple of times (don't remember the specifics). They explained it by saying something about matching shield harmonics allowing them to beam through.
*shrug*
I'm Netscape's (well actually, Mozilla's) biggest supporter, and this really sucks, but it's just business. Everyone seems to have the solution for Mozilla, but how about this: Drop the cross-platform bull shit. "Winning the browser war" and "cross-platform browser" are mutually exclusive, because you can NEVER make a cross-platform app as fast as it would be if it was only developed for one platform.
:)
... flames) suddenly be dropped from my platform would make me loose a lot of respect for the mozilla team.
Truely spoken by someone who uses windows
Seriously though, if they were to drop the "cross platform" thing that would really suck for a lot of people, and probably most of the mozilla advocates would stop being mozilla advocates. Lets be honest, IE is a good browser. When I'm in windows, I use it because it's fast, renders well, and is compatible.
However, 99% of my time (that is, when I'm not playing blackandwhite) is spent in linux. Having the best choice for a browser so far (IMHO anyway, please don't start the konq vs opera, vs
I think that probably (and this is a pure guess) 80% of their use is by linux people who want something that doesn't suck as bad as netscape 4.x. Dropping cross platform in mozilla might be fine for windows people, but as a linux person, I really would like a browser that is great.
Get your good good LOTR-lovin' at http://ufies.org/files/lotr_trailer3.rm
HTH, HAND
(paraphrased from another source)
Really. Who cares how fast a new hot-rod can go from 0-60 if there's a 50% chance that stepping on the gas pedal will make it explode?
Lots of people do this anyway, they just phrase it differently. They say "yes, I think I'd like to buy a copy of windows today".
:)
Wishful thinking of course, but I'm behind you 100 (3).
:)
Of course, the only place in publications that you get true opinions is somewhere where money doesn't matter, ie, the web (or at least, small sites on the web, not something like gamespot, or any place that uses advertising from game companies (or the company related to whatever they are reviewing) as income.
Personally I say Mod This (the parent of this comment that is) Up!
I gotta agree with you. It wasn't "real", but what on TV is? I hope that those complaining that TLG wasn't researched enough aren't the same type who compare "Boot Camp" with anything resembling reality.
It was a decent enough show to come home to on a friday night anyway. Now what is there? Will I have to go out and discover a "real life" or something?