That's idiotic. I can't imagine why anyone would care that they "copied" Firefox et al in providing tabbed browsing, which has become a standard feature in practically every current browser -- so why on earth should they confuse people by using their own proprietary invocation method just to differentiate their product, when every other browser on the market uses middle-click?
I can imagine the uproar from people just like you if Microsoft actually followed your advice: "They're breaking standards! They introduced their own incompatible proprietary interface just to promote browser lock-in!"
Criticize them for their predatory business practices all you like, but this kind of shit is purely assinine.
It's a bit disingenuous to claim the substitution was limited to "a few businesses" when those private businesses were following a precedent set by no less an institution than the U.S. House of Representatives in their own cafeteria. I highly doubt that anybody in the world outside of the U.S. gives a fuck about the menu choices of a few bigoted restaurant owners, but the fact that members of one of our most august political bodies resorted to such antics certainly helped to earn us (or our political representation) laughingstock status in the global community.
Ergo sum, I'm not confident in their ability to really do "strategic" planning
"Therefore I am, I am"...? Hrm. You know, perhaps you shouldn't use scavenged Latin phrases if you don't actually speak the language.
(Which, admittedly, I don't either -- but then again, that's precisely why I don't go around peppering my speech with Latin I think I know in an effort to sound more erudite.)
Sorry, but you're flatly wrong.
You'll note that I didn't say it opened them "correctly"; all I claimed was that it opened them and allowed you to interoperate reasonably well with Word users. And it does: you can can open a.doc containing advanced layout features just fine, with all content (including images) and most layout intact. The most obvious difference you'll note is tabular information, which will have been converted to a tab-delimited format, since Wordpad doesn't have a table layout engine. I'd say this is fairly reasonable behavior, considering the software and its intended purpose.
Now you are revealing your true self. You are just parrotting what you heard somewhere else. There's nothing wrong with DHTML in Opera. In fact, if a site doesn't work it's usually because sites discriminate against Opera, and send it broken code on purpose.
One word:
Bullshit.
Nevermind that you're apparently the kind of arrogant asshole who thinks he can determine someone's "true self" from a couple of lines of text, you flatly don't know what you're talking about. I don't know what you've "heard somewhere else", but I'm guessing it's coming from professional web developers like myself who have just about had it with trying to support Opera's broken Javascript/DOM implementation. There is no concerted effort to undermine Opera by sending it broken code -- why would there be, when you can break it simply by trying to execute simple scripts that run without a hiccup under everything from IE to Firefox to OmniWeb?
Honestly, I'd like to know -- is there something about small, underdog platforms that actually breeds paranoia and delusions of widespread malignant conspiracy amongst their partisans, or do they just somehow attract the mentally unstable?
Opera has some hellaciously cool ideas, but it's flat-out buggier than the Firefox project, which, while still imperfect, is much more responsive to bug reports and seems to exhibit an overall higher level of competence in its code. DHTML in particular is practically unusable in Opera thanks to the poor quality of its Javascript interpreter. Add to that the ease with which non-trivial extensions (many of which duplicate Opera's hellaciously cool ideas) can be added to Firefox, and I see no reason whatsoever to use Opera in any but the most specialized environment (I hear it's quite popular for embedded applications due to its relatively small footprint).
Wordpad has opened Word documents since it shipped with Windows 95 -- it was intended as a lightweight Word-compatible text editor for the precise purpose of allowing people to who didn't own a full-fledged copy of Word to interoperate with those who did.
MSTS either "dumbed down" their explanation for you, or you simply failed to understand it: the "second hidden password" isn't a password at all, but rather a security certificate, and it's far from impossible to create a backup: see http://www.worldstart.com/tips/tips.php/1444 for instructions even an idiot could follow.
Bullshit. EFS isn't tied to your user password in any way, undocumented or otherwise: it's tied to a certificate created the first time you encrypt any file on your filesystem. Without this certificate, you'll be unable to access your encrypted files, regardless what user account or password you happen to be using, so it's wise to back up your certificates to a CD in case of accidental deletion or corruption. THIS IS TRUE OF ANY SECURITY CERTIFICATE UNDER WINDOWS OR ANY OTHER OPERATING SYSTEM. If you can't be bothered to read the documentation for a high-powered feature before using it, don't complain if your lack of preparation backfires on you.
Re:Great. So when can we start warezing games?
on
PSP UMD Format Cracked
·
· Score: 2, Funny
For those of us with only two hands and one PSP, that's generally just fine...
Re:Sure I won't, but I am still annoyed I can't!
on
Google Web Accelerator
·
· Score: 3, Informative
Seriously, I'm not trolling: I've literally lost count of how many times I've written simple DHTML scripts that executed consistently in IE, Firefox, Netscape, Safari, even Omniweb -- only to discover that they caused Opera to absolutely shit itself executing the same code. I don't think it's exaggerating greatly to state that Opera is to DHTML roughly what Netscape 4 was to CSS: so bad that I've simply stopped even trying to support Opera with any but the most basic scripts.
Re:Sure I won't, but I am still annoyed I can't!
on
Google Web Accelerator
·
· Score: 1, Informative
Yes, there is: because Opera's Javascript/DHTML support is abysmal.
Slashdot Mirror
Don't forget to paint it yellow, for speed. (In a pinch you can use lime green, which is almost as fast.)
800mm is .8 meters -- well over two and a half feet.
And more to the point, asinine. Sorry, folks; Freudian slip.
This is just a sad and fayled attemt at speling.
CSS2 is a flawed specification, and not just according to Microsoft. That's why there's CSS2.1.
And I've yet to see any browser support any CSS specification "fully".
That's idiotic. I can't imagine why anyone would care that they "copied" Firefox et al in providing tabbed browsing, which has become a standard feature in practically every current browser -- so why on earth should they confuse people by using their own proprietary invocation method just to differentiate their product, when every other browser on the market uses middle-click?
I can imagine the uproar from people just like you if Microsoft actually followed your advice: "They're breaking standards! They introduced their own incompatible proprietary interface just to promote browser lock-in!"
Criticize them for their predatory business practices all you like, but this kind of shit is purely assinine.
No, actually, they aren't, fucktard.
http://www.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/03/11/sprj.irq .fries/
It's a bit disingenuous to claim the substitution was limited to "a few businesses" when those private businesses were following a precedent set by no less an institution than the U.S. House of Representatives in their own cafeteria. I highly doubt that anybody in the world outside of the U.S. gives a fuck about the menu choices of a few bigoted restaurant owners, but the fact that members of one of our most august political bodies resorted to such antics certainly helped to earn us (or our political representation) laughingstock status in the global community.
Glad you got a laugh out of it, though.
(For the record, I think your actual analysis is spot-on, though it seems to me you could have used it to make a more conclusive argument.)
Ergo sum, I'm not confident in their ability to really do "strategic" planning
"Therefore I am, I am"...? Hrm. You know, perhaps you shouldn't use scavenged Latin phrases if you don't actually speak the language.
(Which, admittedly, I don't either -- but then again, that's precisely why I don't go around peppering my speech with Latin I think I know in an effort to sound more erudite.)
Now here's a man who takes his porn seriously.
Sorry, but you're flatly wrong. You'll note that I didn't say it opened them "correctly"; all I claimed was that it opened them and allowed you to interoperate reasonably well with Word users. And it does: you can can open a .doc containing advanced layout features just fine, with all content (including images) and most layout intact. The most obvious difference you'll note is tabular information, which will have been converted to a tab-delimited format, since Wordpad doesn't have a table layout engine. I'd say this is fairly reasonable behavior, considering the software and its intended purpose.
Now you are revealing your true self. You are just parrotting what you heard somewhere else. There's nothing wrong with DHTML in Opera. In fact, if a site doesn't work it's usually because sites discriminate against Opera, and send it broken code on purpose.
One word:
Bullshit.
Nevermind that you're apparently the kind of arrogant asshole who thinks he can determine someone's "true self" from a couple of lines of text, you flatly don't know what you're talking about. I don't know what you've "heard somewhere else", but I'm guessing it's coming from professional web developers like myself who have just about had it with trying to support Opera's broken Javascript/DOM implementation. There is no concerted effort to undermine Opera by sending it broken code -- why would there be, when you can break it simply by trying to execute simple scripts that run without a hiccup under everything from IE to Firefox to OmniWeb?
Honestly, I'd like to know -- is there something about small, underdog platforms that actually breeds paranoia and delusions of widespread malignant conspiracy amongst their partisans, or do they just somehow attract the mentally unstable?
Precisely -- if a browser doesn't do what I want it to do well, it's irrelevant that it does it faster.
I can paint faster than Van Gogh. Doesn't mean I paint better than Van Gogh.
Opera has some hellaciously cool ideas, but it's flat-out buggier than the Firefox project, which, while still imperfect, is much more responsive to bug reports and seems to exhibit an overall higher level of competence in its code. DHTML in particular is practically unusable in Opera thanks to the poor quality of its Javascript interpreter. Add to that the ease with which non-trivial extensions (many of which duplicate Opera's hellaciously cool ideas) can be added to Firefox, and I see no reason whatsoever to use Opera in any but the most specialized environment (I hear it's quite popular for embedded applications due to its relatively small footprint).
You saying Ethiopians (or Jews) aren't normal?
No. You're an idiot.
Wordpad has opened Word documents since it shipped with Windows 95 -- it was intended as a lightweight Word-compatible text editor for the precise purpose of allowing people to who didn't own a full-fledged copy of Word to interoperate with those who did.
s/political correctness/spelling
MSTS either "dumbed down" their explanation for you, or you simply failed to understand it: the "second hidden password" isn't a password at all, but rather a security certificate, and it's far from impossible to create a backup: see http://www.worldstart.com/tips/tips.php/1444 for instructions even an idiot could follow.
Bullshit. EFS isn't tied to your user password in any way, undocumented or otherwise: it's tied to a certificate created the first time you encrypt any file on your filesystem. Without this certificate, you'll be unable to access your encrypted files, regardless what user account or password you happen to be using, so it's wise to back up your certificates to a CD in case of accidental deletion or corruption. THIS IS TRUE OF ANY SECURITY CERTIFICATE UNDER WINDOWS OR ANY OTHER OPERATING SYSTEM. If you can't be bothered to read the documentation for a high-powered feature before using it, don't complain if your lack of preparation backfires on you.
For those of us with only two hands and one PSP, that's generally just fine...
Seriously, I'm not trolling: I've literally lost count of how many times I've written simple DHTML scripts that executed consistently in IE, Firefox, Netscape, Safari, even Omniweb -- only to discover that they caused Opera to absolutely shit itself executing the same code. I don't think it's exaggerating greatly to state that Opera is to DHTML roughly what Netscape 4 was to CSS: so bad that I've simply stopped even trying to support Opera with any but the most basic scripts.
Yes, there is: because Opera's Javascript/DHTML support is abysmal.