Got a popup from the tray to indicate updates available, clicked the red arrow. It downloads a full installer which is less than optimal and leaves it on the desktop on completion.
However, it removed the 1.0.2 entry which is progress!
Prefetching is an explicit Mozilla Suite UI Preference (advanced/cache) but you have to go to about:config to change it in FF.
We normally disable prefetch on our Mozilla 1.7.6 installs but we don't get a box to tick in FF 1.0.2, even in an "Advanced" submenu.
For those who want to jump up and down and say "if you don't want to change about:config you're not l33t enough to use Firefox" I say:
a) I thought FF wasn't aimed at the l33t b) I have no problem changing about:config for myself c) I do have a problem advocating a browser to non-technically comfortable users when options like this (as opposed to beta-options grossly affecting stability) are not in the UI.
If a solely about:config option is debuted in x.y and is still around in x.y+2 it should either be added to the UI or removed entirely and reworked. Since prefetch has been in Mozilla since 1.2 it should be in FF's UI.
But then, as a Suite Supporter I would say that, wouldn't I?
You can pick what you install with the Suite you know... browser only if that's what you want!
ActiveX - the only way to destroy it...
on
IE7 Details Emerge
·
· Score: 1
... is to cast into the fires of Mount Doom.
Re:Petition to Stop IE7's Lack of Standards
on
IE7 Details Emerge
·
· Score: 1
This is pathetic. The IE team's blog entries seem to indicate their awareness of standards compliance and that their track record isn't stellar.
Can anyone tell me where signing an online petition was a direct cause of getting something changed?
Anyway, most Slashdotters would want IE to stay non-compliant so FF can keep their selling point. (And I'm posting this from FF1.0.1 so don't mod me down just coz I won't join the reflexive MS bash).
We don't use Firefox because of CSS. We use it because we don't want ActiveX.
If this guy's current or future employers in Ontario google search him and find the WPost articles and pay to download the articles, the damage to him is ongoing. That's why the website is relevant! Because of archiving, you can't rely on the argument that all of the Post articles from that era are now rotting in a Flint, Michigan dump (where Toronto sends garbage).
If the Post had printed a decent apology after the tribunal reinstated him, his lawyer would probably have advised him against pursuing the action as the Post would be able to show they acted in good faith and did their best to correct the error. Instead it looks like the Post wouldn't do that.
From TFRuling - he was looking for:
(a) An order directing the Post to cease and desist in the publication of certain false and injurious communications concerning the plaintiff that have appeared on its web page continuously since January 1997.
(b) An order directing the Post to prominently publish a retraction of the false statements made about the plaintiff commencing in the articles of January 5, January 9 and January 10, 1997 and continuing to the present time on its website.
So now we go to trial, where the Post has an opportunity to defend its coverage. It will possibly assert that the UN tribunal reinstated him but that is not proof their allegations were untrue. So they can still win, they just have to prove the veracity of what they printed and if they can't why they wouldn't pull the story from the website and apologise.
If people stopped defaming others (which is not the same as writing stuff provably true) blogging would drop 90% for one thing. It would be a very good day for the net though.
Who modded this insightful? Do you think GWB and Co. are going to cross the border to sue in an Ontario court? What's their basis for jurisdiction gonna be? This guy actually lives and works in Ontario, for starters.
"The UN fired Mr. Bangoura in 1997 after two articles in The Washington Post accused him of sexual harassment and financial improprieties. A UN tribunal later found the allegations baseless and said he should be compensated and reinstated."
Canadian law means the Post has to justify why publishing information which was insufficiently investigated and found to be untrue but caused the guy to be fired is not cause to pay damages. It's hilarious that all manner of stupid stuff can be sued for in US courts but slander and defamation are almost impossible to pursue.
They can restrict their site to US IPs if they don't want to be sued elsewhere. As the ruling noted, no-one made the Post create an internet site, it was a marketing decision. There are consequences, and now the Post realises that.
IANAL, but the French Civil Code system's rulings would find difficulty in being applied in a common law jurisdiction like the UK or Ireland.
For action to be taken, there would have to be some kind of framework like the European Arrest Warrant. Given the way the Eurocrats bullied through the recent patent legislation one can't rule it out.
First time I've done it but this is an excellent explanation of how the world does work, even if it would be nicer if it worked the way the next parent up wanted.
Regrettably, there is little progress in convincing people IE-only sites are a bad thing.
However, centralised administration and lockdown of IE is totally possible. We do it - Internet Zone at High, Trusted Sites locked list, using IEAK and Group Policies to allow only sites we know are kosher and deploying Mozilla as default browser for other sites. (We used to use Mozilla Mail but are moving from IMAP).
Just because you can't replace the door doesn't mean you can't replace the locks. Get Firefox. Get IEAK. Get to know GPEDIT.MSC and POLEDIT.EXE
Slashdot Mirror
Can you refer to the posted bug so we can vote on it? I could search myself but if you care that much I assume you have the number to hand.
after several full 1.0.1/1.0.2 to 1.0.3 installs.
:)
Could be I was just born lucky, of course
I wouldn't mind though if the installer were to, say, check FF has been closed before installing!
or "imagine a Beowulf cluster of those!"
1.0.2/XPSP2
Got a popup from the tray to indicate updates available, clicked the red arrow. It downloads a full installer which is less than optimal and leaves it on the desktop on completion.
However, it removed the 1.0.2 entry which is progress!
my Irish one expires 2011. Cost about C$110 though.
Always wondered what a suite without crap like AmiPro and Quattro Pro would be like... WordPerfect, 1-2-3, Paradox and Organiser - could have worked!
but Seamonkey still has it. Go Suite Go.
Prefetching is an explicit Mozilla Suite UI Preference (advanced/cache) but you have to go to about:config to change it in FF.
We normally disable prefetch on our Mozilla 1.7.6 installs but we don't get a box to tick in FF 1.0.2, even in an "Advanced" submenu.
For those who want to jump up and down and say "if you don't want to change about:config you're not l33t enough to use Firefox" I say:
a) I thought FF wasn't aimed at the l33t
b) I have no problem changing about:config for myself
c) I do have a problem advocating a browser to non-technically comfortable users when options like this (as opposed to beta-options grossly affecting stability) are not in the UI.
If a solely about:config option is debuted in x.y and is still around in x.y+2 it should either be added to the UI or removed entirely and reworked. Since prefetch has been in Mozilla since 1.2 it should be in FF's UI.
But then, as a Suite Supporter I would say that, wouldn't I?
You can pick what you install with the Suite you know... browser only if that's what you want!
... is to cast into the fires of Mount Doom.
This is pathetic. The IE team's blog entries seem to indicate their awareness of standards compliance and that their track record isn't stellar.
Can anyone tell me where signing an online petition was a direct cause of getting something changed?
Anyway, most Slashdotters would want IE to stay non-compliant so FF can keep their selling point. (And I'm posting this from FF1.0.1 so don't mod me down just coz I won't join the reflexive MS bash).
We don't use Firefox because of CSS. We use it because we don't want ActiveX.
or we'll stop sending you all our tax dollars by electing Liberals. Yeah, like that's gonna happen :)
nom du keyboard
If this guy's current or future employers in Ontario google search him and find the WPost articles and pay to download the articles, the damage to him is ongoing. That's why the website is relevant! Because of archiving, you can't rely on the argument that all of the Post articles from that era are now rotting in a Flint, Michigan dump (where Toronto sends garbage).
If the Post had printed a decent apology after the tribunal reinstated him, his lawyer would probably have advised him against pursuing the action as the Post would be able to show they acted in good faith and did their best to correct the error. Instead it looks like the Post wouldn't do that.
From TFRuling - he was looking for:
(a) An order directing the Post to cease and desist in the publication of certain false and injurious communications concerning the plaintiff that have appeared on its web page continuously since January 1997.
(b) An order directing the Post to prominently publish a retraction of the false statements made about the plaintiff commencing in the articles of January 5, January 9 and January 10, 1997 and continuing to the present time on its website.
So now we go to trial, where the Post has an opportunity to defend its coverage. It will possibly assert that the UN tribunal reinstated him but that is not proof their allegations were untrue. So they can still win, they just have to prove the veracity of what they printed and if they can't why they wouldn't pull the story from the website and apologise.
If people stopped defaming others (which is not the same as writing stuff provably true) blogging would drop 90% for one thing. It would be a very good day for the net though.
Who modded this insightful? Do you think GWB and Co. are going to cross the border to sue in an Ontario court? What's their basis for jurisdiction gonna be? This guy actually lives and works in Ontario, for starters.
The Post published on the web information that got him fired. He wants payback. Wouldn't you?
"The UN fired Mr. Bangoura in 1997 after two articles in The Washington Post accused him of sexual harassment and financial improprieties. A UN tribunal later found the allegations baseless and said he should be compensated and reinstated."
Canadian law means the Post has to justify why publishing information which was insufficiently investigated and found to be untrue but caused the guy to be fired is not cause to pay damages. It's hilarious that all manner of stupid stuff can be sued for in US courts but slander and defamation are almost impossible to pursue.
They can restrict their site to US IPs if they don't want to be sued elsewhere. As the ruling noted, no-one made the Post create an internet site, it was a marketing decision. There are consequences, and now the Post realises that.
IANAL, but the French Civil Code system's rulings would find difficulty in being applied in a common law jurisdiction like the UK or Ireland.
For action to be taken, there would have to be some kind of framework like the European Arrest Warrant. Given the way the Eurocrats bullied through the recent patent legislation one can't rule it out.
Did you see the MSG sign with the line through at the bottom of the page you linked?
Terminator T-101 picked one, good enough for me :)
I think CBC were running advertising for it last night during Harry Potter.
First time I've done it but this is an excellent explanation of how the world does work, even if it would be nicer if it worked the way the next parent up wanted.
as Amtrak require ID too.
Regrettably, there is little progress in convincing people IE-only sites are a bad thing.
However, centralised administration and lockdown of IE is totally possible. We do it - Internet Zone at High, Trusted Sites locked list, using IEAK and Group Policies to allow only sites we know are kosher and deploying Mozilla as default browser for other sites. (We used to use Mozilla Mail but are moving from IMAP).
Just because you can't replace the door doesn't mean you can't replace the locks. Get Firefox. Get IEAK. Get to know GPEDIT.MSC and POLEDIT.EXE