... I bought most issues, although I could hardly afford them, use NetBSD, and (if I may say so) am waay beyond ML's level; but I was curious, and wanted to support them in some way.
I can't count the number of times when I've been ready to kill over the way older browsers screw up my
designs.
A lot of good design work is held back by the need to support older browsers.
Sorry, but this is the life of a Web designer. A paper designer has near-full control over the end product; a Web designer has next to none. Web designers must get this distinction into their heads; it's a different medium with different rules.
Much like movies have entirely different "rules" from stageplays.
To succeed in this medium you must overcome your microcontrol fetish. One great beauty of this medium is the way it can adapt content to the enduser's needs and finances... insisting on particular technologies (SW or HW) is ruining that.
No design can be called `good' design that is ignorant of the medium.
a commercial site that expected to get every kind of user is going to have to break their back to make sure
they support as many browser versions as practicable
Yeah, you'd think... yet in my experience they're the ones most likely to try to piss me off by telling me what browser to use. ChaptersGlobe was particularly annoying. They'd tell me I had to enable my cookies without even testing them; they just looked at the User-Agent and decided from that whether I had cookies or not. (Interestingly, the first cookie they'd send would come with the page telling me to enable cookies. A Bright Fscking Bunch this was.) Opera... 4 I think... diddled its User-Agent line to work with sites like that. (Which is one reason I don't trust User-Agent stats. Most counters only count IMG loaders, and browsers have to claim to be Netscape, or M$IE lately, to work with many sites... and then they crow about how Messie and Nessie are everything! Grr.)
... anyway, that's why I continued with Amazon despite their patents; my browsers of choice would work!:)
And what's this nonsense I see at WSP about Konquerer being built on Mozilla?? I'll have to straighten that idear out...
Well, half-free... the giveaway is ad-funded; you pay to get rid of the ads.
So they want sites to add JS to give a nasty message and a forced redirect, huh? Just seems like another thing to chuck on the heap of reasons to disable JS. I thought the WSP were Good Guys until now...
Well, I say "artists" because Joy and the RIAA say "artists"... frankly, I'd cross the street to avoid hearing some 90% of the "art" in question... but that's a detail.
Well that's all very well, Mr. Joy, but it seems to me several artists have complained that RIAA and/or its members are very good at systematically robbing them blind. Napster's just not being hypocritical about it. (I'm not excusing Napster; I just don't eat the RIAA shit about compensation for the artists...)
zactly... I thought it actually had a good point buried in it, that open source projects have coordination challenges (eg, the SGI story awhile back, perhaps), and it was couched in irony; but it turned out to be platform for an asshole that delights in reading its own posts. *sigh* slashdot...
Yes, I have to admit, before VB and Outlook it was hard to write things like ILOVEYOU. My god, look at the effort Morris had to put into his Worm, and what a pitiful fraction of machines it affected. M$ had created some wonderful innovations for the virus writers. (What was last week's Outlook virus again? I forget, there have been so many...)
However, M$ has yet to come up with an innovation from which I want to benefit...
MS do not want to outlaw Open Source.
What they have said, is that the government should not encourage it.
If not by outlawing, exactly how? Do you mean the gov't and the gov't-funded should not acquire open technologies and their support services, regardless of how well they may fit the requirements and the budget? That doesn't sound fair to the taxpayer or the project... boohoo if it's unfair to Billy G.
I was playing around with Visual C++ 4 and had a question that wasn't answered in the
FAQ, docs, etc.
Yeah, I love all that "information" that comes with VC++. I spent three hours trying to figure out how to set the desktop icon for an executable. I finally had to snitch the technique from the TCL sources, bedamned if I'm calling and paying M$ for something that trivial. I think they deliberately rig their docs to be impressive to the purchaser but useless to the developer.
note quite, but they had to use an awful lot of whitewash (hence, Whitehouse). I don't think they've ever gotten over the habit, either.
but anyway... what the fuck are they gonna outlaw? Volunteering? Charitable donation? (Wait'll Billy Gee hears about that - what's he gonna do to improve his PR then???) How are you actually going to stop people giving their intellectual property away if they want to?
What stifles innovation more: giving away closed-sourced products like M$IE where innovation is essentially limited to skinning (who needs it), or giving away an open source product on which one can tinker and truly improve?
Furthermore, the thing Allchins is really complaining about is the GPL, not open source. He may have some point that there's less motivation to sink R&D money into something you must give away (although IBM et al seem plenty willing), that's not an intrinsic of open source; the BSD license is less restrictive in that regard.
He's just a typical M$ windbag. I just hope the Washington windbags will see reason. But if they don't, well, open source can just move out same as crypto did.
the US has one of the highest stardards of living on the planet.
A "standard of living" number is hardly an objective measure; it's one of those statistical fuddles that can very easily be reasonably rebalanced to change the order almost any way you'd like. If it weighted the measures of rampant consumerism a little lower, and took higher account of stress, amount of non-work time, access to health care, the outlook of those who can't pay for schooling, the health of the work environment, etc. I don't think the US would rank nearly so high.
One last jab: seems to me the UN's measure has listed Cnada above the US for some years now.
The difference is that in a capitalist economy, they own corporations that provide services and jobs to people.
And how many of those jobs aren't minimum-wage with no future raping the world's natural resources to produce stuff nobody really needs, making one or two people very wealthy hyperocephalics who think they can buy everyone's favour (not to mention their homeland...)
it just seems he is bitter
because openssh hasn't had the same security holes as ssh
Uh, yeah, that's why he complained about the security problem in older forms of both products and how OpenSSH is prolonging their lives.
I'm sorry; I read his letter; he's not asking OpenSSH to stop development, quite the contrary; he's just asking that they change the name enough that his company isn't put to expense and... what should I call it, faceloss?... damage to reputation... getting inquiries or support calls or misleading journalism because of the consequent confusion. He even asks very nicely. I have no grand philosophical problem with his request; if I had any standing with the OpenSSH project I'd say "let's change the name".
Isn't that like saying Parker has a stranglehold because everyone uses their pens? Or Hammermill because everyone uses their paper? The only way M$ would have a real stranglehold is if they actually had a remote killswitch built into all their wares... Oh wait, they do, it's called Outlook... after all, ILOVEYOU "brought the world to its knees" according to some media organ... okay, point conceded.
Maybe because you're viewing it in Netscape. I was going to make a snarky comment that I'd seen Winduhs do worse* until I looked at it with kview as well.
*(True! there's some bug in mine that every now and again makes antialiasing go up the spout, and i have to wait for the screensaver to cycle or reboot)
Note that unlike others, I consider FTP to be critical.
I consider it to be critical too, unfortunately it's usually incorrectly implemented. I did a browser for myself once (tkHTML was the renderer, the hard part as far as I was concerned). Its only scheme was HTTP, enough to talk to Squid to get the others. Saved a hell of a lot of fuss and bother, both in schemes and cache control.
(Oops, no I lie; it also had FILE and my own X-FILE, which would do Apache-like content-type negotiation so I could locally explore my file-extension-less URIs. I also tinkered with SSL but couldn't figure out what the hell I was doing well enough to know if I was doing it correctly:p)
if only all browser manufacturers had agreed not to display anything for pages which failed an
HTML validation
that's a bit drastic (but, exactly what Netscape does if you omit/title or/table)... but they should have produced stern warning messages and bumbled on as best they could.
The other question is, which HTML? what's a browser supposed to do with a DTD that didn't exist when it was released? Would a full-blown SGML parser make the thing smaller in the end? dunno...
We live in an age of rapid travel, where anyone can be virtually anywhere else in under 36 hours.
yup. We somehow got very stupid in the last few decades. Time was we made 'em all wait out a quarantine of days offshore and whoever survived got in; now for the sake of speedy business and shorter vacations we whiz around in these aluminum plague-cans and sacrifice the world's health. We couldn't possibly inconvenience a Very Important capitalist business-class traveler with such petty concerns as the greater good, now, could we? It's such an outmoded, passé, archaic, old-fashioned, low-tech idear, this quarantine thing, after all, isn't it... Fah.
Slashdot Mirror
No more Mei Ling :(
... barleycorns, noggins, slugs, calories, horsepower, BTUs, ... oh, and colour TV :)
Sorry, but this is the life of a Web designer. A paper designer has near-full control over the end product; a Web designer has next to none. Web designers must get this distinction into their heads; it's a different medium with different rules. Much like movies have entirely different "rules" from stageplays.
To succeed in this medium you must overcome your microcontrol fetish. One great beauty of this medium is the way it can adapt content to the enduser's needs and finances... insisting on particular technologies (SW or HW) is ruining that.
No design can be called `good' design that is ignorant of the medium.
Yeah, you'd think... yet in my experience they're the ones most likely to try to piss me off by telling me what browser to use. ChaptersGlobe was particularly annoying. They'd tell me I had to enable my cookies without even testing them; they just looked at the User-Agent and decided from that whether I had cookies or not. (Interestingly, the first cookie they'd send would come with the page telling me to enable cookies. A Bright Fscking Bunch this was.) Opera... 4 I think... diddled its User-Agent line to work with sites like that. (Which is one reason I don't trust User-Agent stats. Most counters only count IMG loaders, and browsers have to claim to be Netscape, or M$IE lately, to work with many sites... and then they crow about how Messie and Nessie are everything! Grr.)
... anyway, that's why I continued with Amazon despite their patents; my browsers of choice would work! :)
And what's this nonsense I see at WSP about Konquerer being built on Mozilla?? I'll have to straighten that idear out...
Well, half-free... the giveaway is ad-funded; you pay to get rid of the ads.
So they want sites to add JS to give a nasty message and a forced redirect, huh? Just seems like another thing to chuck on the heap of reasons to disable JS. I thought the WSP were Good Guys until now...
Well, I say "artists" because Joy and the RIAA say "artists"... frankly, I'd cross the street to avoid hearing some 90% of the "art" in question... but that's a detail.
Well that's all very well, Mr. Joy, but it seems to me several artists have complained that RIAA and/or its members are very good at systematically robbing them blind. Napster's just not being hypocritical about it. (I'm not excusing Napster; I just don't eat the RIAA shit about compensation for the artists...)
I'd stay out of the Navy were I you... their latest ships are operated by M$ -- poorly. (look for `Navy'...)
zactly... I thought it actually had a good point buried in it, that open source projects have coordination challenges (eg, the SGI story awhile back, perhaps), and it was couched in irony; but it turned out to be platform for an asshole that delights in reading its own posts. *sigh* slashdot...
mmm I won't guess who's ahead, but last I looked at KDE and NetBSD (yesterday :-) Europe and Japan were sure holding up their end. (ends?)
Pfah. Industries rise and fall, always have, always will. Software will fall one day, replaced by something else. What's really damaging, to the economy and to the industry, is all the H1-B visas.
Yes, I have to admit, before VB and Outlook it was hard to write things like ILOVEYOU. My god, look at the effort Morris had to put into his Worm, and what a pitiful fraction of machines it affected. M$ had created some wonderful innovations for the virus writers. (What was last week's Outlook virus again? I forget, there have been so many...)
However, M$ has yet to come up with an innovation from which I want to benefit...
If not by outlawing, exactly how? Do you mean the gov't and the gov't-funded should not acquire open technologies and their support services, regardless of how well they may fit the requirements and the budget? That doesn't sound fair to the taxpayer or the project... boohoo if it's unfair to Billy G.
Bull-Fucking-Shit it wasn't! X-D
Yeah, I love all that "information" that comes with VC++. I spent three hours trying to figure out how to set the desktop icon for an executable. I finally had to snitch the technique from the TCL sources, bedamned if I'm calling and paying M$ for something that trivial. I think they deliberately rig their docs to be impressive to the purchaser but useless to the developer.
"Reversed" as in they paid you? Or just "refunded"? (Of course you used up way more than $95 of time getting it back, from the sound of it :p )
note quite, but they had to use an awful lot of whitewash (hence, Whitehouse). I don't think they've ever gotten over the habit, either.
but anyway... what the fuck are they gonna outlaw? Volunteering? Charitable donation? (Wait'll Billy Gee hears about that - what's he gonna do to improve his PR then???) How are you actually going to stop people giving their intellectual property away if they want to?
What stifles innovation more: giving away closed-sourced products like M$IE where innovation is essentially limited to skinning (who needs it), or giving away an open source product on which one can tinker and truly improve?
Furthermore, the thing Allchins is really complaining about is the GPL, not open source. He may have some point that there's less motivation to sink R&D money into something you must give away (although IBM et al seem plenty willing), that's not an intrinsic of open source; the BSD license is less restrictive in that regard.
He's just a typical M$ windbag. I just hope the Washington windbags will see reason. But if they don't, well, open source can just move out same as crypto did.
A "standard of living" number is hardly an objective measure; it's one of those statistical fuddles that can very easily be reasonably rebalanced to change the order almost any way you'd like. If it weighted the measures of rampant consumerism a little lower, and took higher account of stress, amount of non-work time, access to health care, the outlook of those who can't pay for schooling, the health of the work environment, etc. I don't think the US would rank nearly so high.
One last jab: seems to me the UN's measure has listed Cnada above the US for some years now.
And how many of those jobs aren't minimum-wage with no future raping the world's natural resources to produce stuff nobody really needs, making one or two people very wealthy hyperocephalics who think they can buy everyone's favour (not to mention their homeland...)
Uh, yeah, that's why he complained about the security problem in older forms of both products and how OpenSSH is prolonging their lives.
I'm sorry; I read his letter; he's not asking OpenSSH to stop development, quite the contrary; he's just asking that they change the name enough that his company isn't put to expense and ... what should I call it, faceloss? ... damage to reputation ... getting inquiries or support calls or misleading journalism because of the consequent confusion. He even asks very nicely. I have no grand philosophical problem with his request; if I had any standing with the OpenSSH project I'd say "let's change the name".
:-)
*(True! there's some bug in mine that every now and again makes antialiasing go up the spout, and i have to wait for the screensaver to cycle or reboot)
I consider it to be critical too, unfortunately it's usually incorrectly implemented. I did a browser for myself once (tkHTML was the renderer, the hard part as far as I was concerned). Its only scheme was HTTP, enough to talk to Squid to get the others. Saved a hell of a lot of fuss and bother, both in schemes and cache control.
(Oops, no I lie; it also had FILE and my own X-FILE, which would do Apache-like content-type negotiation so I could locally explore my file-extension-less URIs. I also tinkered with SSL but couldn't figure out what the hell I was doing well enough to know if I was doing it correctly :p)
that's a bit drastic (but, exactly what Netscape does if you omit /title or /table)... but they should have produced stern warning messages and bumbled on as best they could.
The other question is, which HTML? what's a browser supposed to do with a DTD that didn't exist when it was released? Would a full-blown SGML parser make the thing smaller in the end? dunno...
yup. We somehow got very stupid in the last few decades. Time was we made 'em all wait out a quarantine of days offshore and whoever survived got in; now for the sake of speedy business and shorter vacations we whiz around in these aluminum plague-cans and sacrifice the world's health. We couldn't possibly inconvenience a Very Important capitalist business-class traveler with such petty concerns as the greater good, now, could we? It's such an outmoded, passé, archaic, old-fashioned, low-tech idear, this quarantine thing, after all, isn't it... Fah.