In typical MS fashion it didn't get good until 3 versions later, IE4, before getting proprietary vendor lockin with that piece of shit IE6.
If IE6 was such a piece of shit, as you put it, that implies that the other browsers at the time were much worse than that. You've inadvertently made a profound statement about the browser landscape of the day. IE6 rightfully earned infamy in its unnaturally long life even more repugnant is rampant revisionism. IE introduced a feature that is the foundation of today's web, some of you might be aware of the XMLHttpRequest object, for the non-developers it's like the force now, all around us. JavaScript support and performance, CSS support. Unfortunately this period had to occur, and it will occur again once these lessons are forgotten; Without the stranglehold IE6 eventually obtained, and more importantly stagnated the web with, the choices we have today wouldn't exist.
Their stupidity of not being able to down-grade IE or simultaneously install different versions so web developers could test ALL the various versions, forcing people to rely on hacks like SandBoxie, was absolutely retarded.
As much as it pains me to say Microsoft wasn't unique in this regard, as an aside, try installing multiple versions of Safari. Even the easy mode package managers don't support multiple versions of browsers out of the box (not to say it's difficult). Internet Explorer 6 released in 2001 following the launch of Windows XP. For those unfamiliar with their history, Web Development of that era revolved around IE and Netscape. With IE being the Chrome of its day (as in "works here, onward!") since the browser market was 90%+ IE and IE6 was supported on Windows 98, NT, and 2k. Low usage for potential targets results in a chicken and the egg problem. Low single digits just aren't a priority for many shops, see Opera.
Sandboxie came out in 2004ish and has its uses, especially on 32bit machines. However, for web development involving IE it's much easier to use MultiIE which has been around since 2006. IETester is worth another mention. Not to mention there are alternatives due to the ever growing number of devices and variants released year after year, requiring a different approach such as farms that show screenshots from targeted browsers. Regarding the hassle of Sandboxie, limiting yourself to one tool is pretty silly.
This is a little off topic. Since this criticism is being framed as a Microsoft issue you might be shocked to discover how apps and to a lesser extent websites, are developed and tested in 2015 on devices manufactured and supported by multiple vendors. This process requires physical devices, in many cases multiple to support the popular OSversions on them (there are other OS, but they're less than 8%). Think it's a hack to wrangle Sandboxes or multiple installations, try wrangling devices that let you only upgrade! But what about device simulators, one might ask? Oh yes, they do exist and they're improving but there isn't a substitute for deploying and testing on device. IE variants are a dwindling piece of the very large fragmentation pie.
Microsoft writing the browser from scratch, is too little, too late.
Grow up, smarten up, and learn to live like an intelligent human being intead of some ignorant ass racist
I agree with your sentiment yet nothing in his post implies race. There is a move by some to have "illegal" classified as a pejorative. It's a legal status, nothing more; Unless you're projecting your bias.
The Apple Store for Education does, however, suggest they market directly at students.
The App Store/iTunes sells games, movies, and books, even more people are fond of those than students. Students also don't have lots of disposable money, if you're following the student debt crisis. The vast majority of spending is on entertainment, ~90% of Google's store revenue in 2014 was games, I'd imagine entertainment vastly dwarfs education on the Apple platform.
Particularly since the new MacBook is sold to students at a discount.
Implying only the new ones, or MacBooks are discounted? Nearly all mac products are discounted if you're involved in education.
They're not unique in offering discounts, nor is this a new trend - what people learn with is very important when becoming a professional. Additionally, how do you explain all the Apple devices in movies? They're not used by students exclusively there either. It's a fashion statement, which applies to significantly larger monied demographics.
Another observation of the anti-Eich crowd is they continue use technology developed by this man (JavaScript). I've brought this up with a friend of mine, his opinion was he doesn't use JavaScript, it's the site's developers that do. Many people are against slavery but have no qualms purchasing and using products derived from it (Underwear, electronics). Convenience trumps many things in this world.
This does not display what I was referring to. I've seen this and this topic was featured months ago on this site and discussed at length, and doesn't display the alleged diversity quotas desired by politicians. If Google is not where they want to be they (or the politicians) must be using something as a metric, one assumes this means employee demographics must align with either national (or state?) demographics. If national then more white women and less Asians are needed and this comes at odds with the suggestion cleaning staff and security will rectify this. Cleaning staff matches pretty closely with kitchen staff demographics in California in my observation.
Uncomfortable Truth! Just to put it out there, their demographics show Whites and Women as underrepresented and Asians as over represented, correct? I assume they're using national rather than Californian demographics otherwise the demographic mix claim is code.
I'm big fan of the franchise, especially RTCW (Return to Castle Wolfenstein) and the most recent title was beautiful, just a cool story. They made a great bizarro world where the Nazi's won, I liked the attention to detail Machine Games put into the title. There were some well done spoofs of 60s era songs (polygon has a little on it)
The full quote is Voltaire's, "I do not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it."
This quote belongs to Evelyn Beatrice Hall from a work published over a century after his death.
In her biography on Voltaire, Hall wrote the phrase: "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it" (which is often misattributed to Voltaire himself) as an illustration of Voltaire's beliefs.[2] Hall's quotation is often cited to describe the principle of freedom of speech.
Re:Brought to you by the same government
on
Fedcoin Rising?
·
· Score: 0
You're honestly equating helping slaves escape with tax-dodging?
They were property after all, I think he'd be more concerned about the use tax tbh. No sympathy for the law breaker after all.
His position is absolute. Would you prefer a godwin? This isn't Social Justice it's the argument that law breaking is immoral no matter what the law. Do you seriously not see the fallacy with equating laws with morality? It implies following laws makes one "good", no matter what the law. The law is the law after all! It became a moral argument when the word wrong was used, instead of against policy, or illegal. It's the same rhetorical trickery used by Politicians and other slithery characters.
Re:Brought to you by the same government
on
Fedcoin Rising?
·
· Score: 0
The teller was wrong... I don't have sympathy for anyone who's intention was to circumvent the law
It's a good thing Slavery isn't still practiced. Law breaking isn't immoral.
I didn't claim that, my comment about regulations was specific to software. My argument was they charge the prices they do because they can. Costs are passed on. Look at how much insurance charges.
Materials is a self inflicted wound. multiple hospitals tried to get better pricing by forming GPO companies. A good idea, but somewhere down the line the majority of them wound up in just a few dozen GPOs. Many of those merged and talked them in to long term contracts. Like 99 year contracts.
Interesting. Since I'm a cowboy today, why can't these organizations reorg and shirk their contracts? Probably not worth it because the vast majority of overhead typically incurred by an organization is the personnel.
As we've all learned, everything on the internet is safe in 2015. I wonder who comes up with the idea and subsequently sponsors these projects? Some Agent Smith, some execufuck, someone with good intentions and a subtly flawed technical execution? Seems a good idea on the surface (for capturing squealers), just let the operation go for a year or two and then zing. Governments are good at those kinds of projects.
Making devices withstand pressure and heat would increase costs quite a bit.
US Healthcare costs are already grossly inflated and the companies charge what they charge because they can get it, not because it's based in reality. I'm trying to find where I read about a medical tool that failed to market because it was priced too cheaply, and was successfully marketed and reintroduced at a higher price point. 2010 cost breakdown structures and equipment is a fraction of the total expenditure. This is like the drought in California asking residents who use up 14% of the water to conserve by 20% (I understand everyone needs to do their part). There is so much waste in medical, for example, you take a tablet out of the container and the patient refuses to take it, pitch it.
I'm involved with software related to caregivers, the regulations are stunning.
Page 99. Carson vividly describes the death of a bird that she thought may have been poisoned by a pesticide, but nowhere in the book does she describes the deaths of any of the people who were dying of malaria, yellow fever, plague, sleeping sickness, or other diseases that are transmitted by insects. Her propaganda in Silent Spring contributed greatly to the banning of insecticides that were capable of preventing human deaths. Carson shares the responsibility for literally millions of deaths among the poor people in underdeveloped nations. Dr. William Bowers, head of the Entomology Department at the University of Arizona, said in 1986 that DDT is the most significant discovery of all time, and “in malaria control alone it saved almost 3 billion lives.”
Rachel Carson’s lack of concern for human lives endangered by diseases transmitted by insects is revealed on page 187, where she writes: “Only yesterday mankind lived in fear of the scourges of smallpox, cholera and plague that once swept nations before them. Now our major concern is no longer with the disease organisms that once were omnipresent; sanitation, better living conditions, and new drugs have given us a high degree of control over infectious disease. Today we are concerned with a different kind of hazard that lurks in our environment—a hazard we ourselves have introduced into our world as our modern way of life has evolved.”
Surely Carson was aware that the greatest threats to humans are diseases such as malaria, typhus, yellow fever, Chagas’s disease, African sleeping sickness, and a number of types of Leishmaniasis and tick-borne bacterial and rickettsial diseases. She deliberately avoids mentioning any of these, because they could be controlled only by the appropriate use of insecticides, especially DDT. Carson evidently preferred to sacrifice those millions of lives rather than advocate any usage of such chemicals.
SNIP
The dead birds Wallace sent out for subsequent study were analyzed by a method that detected only “total chlorine content” and could not determine what kind of chlorine was present; none was analyzed for mercury contamination). It was obviously highly irresponsible for Wallace and Carson to jump to the conclusion that the Michigan State University robins were being killed by DDT, and especially for Carson to highlight the false theory in her book long after the truth was evident.
In many feeding experiments birds, including robins, were forced to ingest great quantities of DDT (and its breakdown product, DDE). Wallace did not provide any evidence that indicated the Michigan State University robins may have been killed by those chemicals. Researcher Joseph Hickey at the University of Wisconsin had testified before the Environmental Protection Agency hearings on DDT specifically that he could not kill any robins by overdosing them with DDT because the birds simply passed it through their digestive tract and eliminated it in their feces. Many other feeding experiments by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and various university researchers repeatedly showed that DDT and DDE in the diet could not have killed wild birds under field conditions. If Carson had mentioned these pertinent details it would have devastated her major theme, which continued to be the awful threats posed by DDT to all nonhuman creatures on the face of the Earth. Instead of providing the facts that would clarify such conditions, she spent several more pages
That means that he sought intimate communications with her under false pretenses.
Does this include fatties on dating websites using creative angles? What about attractive clothing, or being seen in a friends car, oh and makeup! All of these are now fraud!?
Slashdot Mirror
In typical MS fashion it didn't get good until 3 versions later, IE4, before getting proprietary vendor lockin with that piece of shit IE6.
If IE6 was such a piece of shit, as you put it, that implies that the other browsers at the time were much worse than that. You've inadvertently made a profound statement about the browser landscape of the day. IE6 rightfully earned infamy in its unnaturally long life even more repugnant is rampant revisionism. IE introduced a feature that is the foundation of today's web, some of you might be aware of the XMLHttpRequest object, for the non-developers it's like the force now, all around us. JavaScript support and performance, CSS support. Unfortunately this period had to occur, and it will occur again once these lessons are forgotten; Without the stranglehold IE6 eventually obtained, and more importantly stagnated the web with, the choices we have today wouldn't exist.
Their stupidity of not being able to down-grade IE or simultaneously install different versions so web developers could test ALL the various versions, forcing people to rely on hacks like SandBoxie, was absolutely retarded.
As much as it pains me to say Microsoft wasn't unique in this regard, as an aside, try installing multiple versions of Safari. Even the easy mode package managers don't support multiple versions of browsers out of the box (not to say it's difficult). Internet Explorer 6 released in 2001 following the launch of Windows XP. For those unfamiliar with their history, Web Development of that era revolved around IE and Netscape. With IE being the Chrome of its day (as in "works here, onward!") since the browser market was 90%+ IE and IE6 was supported on Windows 98, NT, and 2k. Low usage for potential targets results in a chicken and the egg problem. Low single digits just aren't a priority for many shops, see Opera.
Sandboxie came out in 2004ish and has its uses, especially on 32bit machines. However, for web development involving IE it's much easier to use MultiIE which has been around since 2006. IETester is worth another mention. Not to mention there are alternatives due to the ever growing number of devices and variants released year after year, requiring a different approach such as farms that show screenshots from targeted browsers. Regarding the hassle of Sandboxie, limiting yourself to one tool is pretty silly.
This is a little off topic. Since this criticism is being framed as a Microsoft issue you might be shocked to discover how apps and to a lesser extent websites, are developed and tested in 2015 on devices manufactured and supported by multiple vendors. This process requires physical devices, in many cases multiple to support the popular OS versions on them (there are other OS, but they're less than 8%). Think it's a hack to wrangle Sandboxes or multiple installations, try wrangling devices that let you only upgrade! But what about device simulators, one might ask? Oh yes, they do exist and they're improving but there isn't a substitute for deploying and testing on device. IE variants are a dwindling piece of the very large fragmentation pie.
Microsoft writing the browser from scratch, is too little, too late.
Too late for whom? W
But you can roll it in glitter!
Well that's just fantastic.
Grow up, smarten up, and learn to live like an intelligent human being intead of some ignorant ass racist
I agree with your sentiment yet nothing in his post implies race. There is a move by some to have "illegal" classified as a pejorative. It's a legal status, nothing more; Unless you're projecting your bias.
Who wants a watch that only works with an iPhone?
Duh, iPhone users :D
If you don't like the iPhone 7 will you really ditch your $1k smart watch just so you can switch to a better phone?
Just to interject politics where they don't belong, you're saying "If you like your iPhone, you can keep your iPhone?"
Paraphrasing someone from /. past, Apple devices are like buying a ford Ford Focus, for the price of a BMW and you're convinced you've got a Ferrari.
The Apple Store for Education does, however, suggest they market directly at students.
The App Store/iTunes sells games, movies, and books, even more people are fond of those than students. Students also don't have lots of disposable money, if you're following the student debt crisis. The vast majority of spending is on entertainment, ~90% of Google's store revenue in 2014 was games, I'd imagine entertainment vastly dwarfs education on the Apple platform.
Particularly since the new MacBook is sold to students at a discount.
Implying only the new ones, or MacBooks are discounted? Nearly all mac products are discounted if you're involved in education.
They're not unique in offering discounts, nor is this a new trend - what people learn with is very important when becoming a professional. Additionally, how do you explain all the Apple devices in movies? They're not used by students exclusively there either. It's a fashion statement, which applies to significantly larger monied demographics.
Another observation of the anti-Eich crowd is they continue use technology developed by this man (JavaScript). I've brought this up with a friend of mine, his opinion was he doesn't use JavaScript, it's the site's developers that do. Many people are against slavery but have no qualms purchasing and using products derived from it (Underwear, electronics). Convenience trumps many things in this world.
This does not display what I was referring to. I've seen this and this topic was featured months ago on this site and discussed at length, and doesn't display the alleged diversity quotas desired by politicians. If Google is not where they want to be they (or the politicians) must be using something as a metric, one assumes this means employee demographics must align with either national (or state?) demographics. If national then more white women and less Asians are needed and this comes at odds with the suggestion cleaning staff and security will rectify this. Cleaning staff matches pretty closely with kitchen staff demographics in California in my observation.
Uncomfortable Truth! Just to put it out there, their demographics show Whites and Women as underrepresented and Asians as over represented, correct? I assume they're using national rather than Californian demographics otherwise the demographic mix claim is code.
I'm big fan of the franchise, especially RTCW (Return to Castle Wolfenstein) and the most recent title was beautiful, just a cool story. They made a great bizarro world where the Nazi's won, I liked the attention to detail Machine Games put into the title. There were some well done spoofs of 60s era songs (polygon has a little on it)
I periodically check the site, it's been awhile though, cool to see new additions. Thanks, I just spent more time than anticipated...
30 years ago (1998)
Are these dog years?
The full quote is Voltaire's, "I do not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it."
This quote belongs to Evelyn Beatrice Hall from a work published over a century after his death.
In her biography on Voltaire, Hall wrote the phrase: "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it" (which is often misattributed to Voltaire himself) as an illustration of Voltaire's beliefs.[2] Hall's quotation is often cited to describe the principle of freedom of speech.
You're honestly equating helping slaves escape with tax-dodging?
They were property after all, I think he'd be more concerned about the use tax tbh. No sympathy for the law breaker after all.
His position is absolute. Would you prefer a godwin? This isn't Social Justice it's the argument that law breaking is immoral no matter what the law. Do you seriously not see the fallacy with equating laws with morality? It implies following laws makes one "good", no matter what the law. The law is the law after all! It became a moral argument when the word wrong was used, instead of against policy, or illegal. It's the same rhetorical trickery used by Politicians and other slithery characters.
The teller was wrong ... I don't have sympathy for anyone who's intention was to circumvent the law
It's a good thing Slavery isn't still practiced. Law breaking isn't immoral.
Its not the regulations killing materials costs.
I didn't claim that, my comment about regulations was specific to software. My argument was they charge the prices they do because they can. Costs are passed on. Look at how much insurance charges.
Materials is a self inflicted wound. multiple hospitals tried to get better pricing by forming GPO companies. A good idea, but somewhere down the line the majority of them wound up in just a few dozen GPOs. Many of those merged and talked them in to long term contracts. Like 99 year contracts.
Interesting. Since I'm a cowboy today, why can't these organizations reorg and shirk their contracts? Probably not worth it because the vast majority of overhead typically incurred by an organization is the personnel.
As we've all learned, everything on the internet is safe in 2015. I wonder who comes up with the idea and subsequently sponsors these projects? Some Agent Smith, some execufuck, someone with good intentions and a subtly flawed technical execution? Seems a good idea on the surface (for capturing squealers), just let the operation go for a year or two and then zing. Governments are good at those kinds of projects.
Thanks for the informative links.
Making devices withstand pressure and heat would increase costs quite a bit.
US Healthcare costs are already grossly inflated and the companies charge what they charge because they can get it, not because it's based in reality. I'm trying to find where I read about a medical tool that failed to market because it was priced too cheaply, and was successfully marketed and reintroduced at a higher price point. 2010 cost breakdown structures and equipment is a fraction of the total expenditure. This is like the drought in California asking residents who use up 14% of the water to conserve by 20% (I understand everyone needs to do their part). There is so much waste in medical, for example, you take a tablet out of the container and the patient refuses to take it, pitch it.
I'm involved with software related to caregivers, the regulations are stunning.
I'm a single programmer on a single laptop and I don't want systemd
I'm just a poor boy from a poor family~ SystemD Rhapsody
A downside is the spectrum produced. One experiment involves using multiple lights (different varieties) and see which the girls prefer.
The Narcissistick(tm).
Page 99. Carson vividly describes the death of a bird that she thought may have been poisoned by a pesticide, but nowhere in the book does she describes the deaths of any of the people who were dying of malaria, yellow fever, plague, sleeping sickness, or other diseases that are transmitted by insects. Her propaganda in Silent Spring contributed greatly to the banning of insecticides that were capable of preventing human deaths. Carson shares the responsibility for literally millions of deaths among the poor people in underdeveloped nations. Dr. William Bowers, head of the Entomology Department at the University of Arizona, said in 1986 that DDT is the most significant discovery of all time, and “in malaria control alone it saved almost 3 billion lives.”
Rachel Carson’s lack of concern for human lives endangered by diseases transmitted by insects is revealed on page 187, where she writes: “Only yesterday mankind lived in fear of the scourges of smallpox, cholera and plague that once swept nations before them. Now our major concern is no longer with the disease organisms that once were omnipresent; sanitation, better living conditions, and new drugs have given us a high degree of control over infectious disease. Today we are concerned with a different kind of hazard that lurks in our environment—a hazard we ourselves have introduced into our world as our modern way of life has evolved.”
Surely Carson was aware that the greatest threats to humans are diseases such as malaria, typhus, yellow fever, Chagas’s disease, African sleeping sickness, and a number of types of Leishmaniasis and tick-borne bacterial and rickettsial diseases. She deliberately avoids mentioning any of these, because they could be controlled only by the appropriate use of insecticides, especially DDT. Carson evidently preferred to sacrifice those millions of lives rather than advocate any usage of such chemicals.
SNIP
The dead birds Wallace sent out for subsequent study were analyzed by a method that detected only “total chlorine content” and could not determine what kind of chlorine was present; none was analyzed for mercury contamination). It was obviously highly irresponsible for Wallace and Carson to jump to the conclusion that the Michigan State University robins were being killed by DDT, and especially for Carson to highlight the false theory in her book long after the truth was evident.
In many feeding experiments birds, including robins, were forced to ingest great quantities of DDT (and its breakdown product, DDE). Wallace did not provide any evidence that indicated the Michigan State University robins may have been killed by those chemicals. Researcher Joseph Hickey at the University of Wisconsin had testified before the Environmental Protection Agency hearings on DDT specifically that he could not kill any robins by overdosing them with DDT because the birds simply passed it through their digestive tract and eliminated it in their feces. Many other feeding experiments by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and various university researchers repeatedly showed that DDT and DDE in the diet could not have killed wild birds under field conditions. If Carson had mentioned these pertinent details it would have devastated her major theme, which continued to be the awful threats posed by DDT to all nonhuman creatures on the face of the Earth. Instead of providing the facts that would clarify such conditions, she spent several more pages
That means that he sought intimate communications with her under false pretenses.
Does this include fatties on dating websites using creative angles? What about attractive clothing, or being seen in a friends car, oh and makeup! All of these are now fraud!?