Heres something you didn't know: I've seen them advertised on engadget and discussed on other forums for the last few months. Surprise!
How have you answered my question? Perhaps I phrased it wrong. Will their product have any effect on the takeup of Apples Airport Express? - in your opinion, obviously.
It will stop SPAM that is from a forged sender, which is a non-trivial amount.
I think you missed the OPs point - namely, that while the spam will no longer get to your inbox, it will still be sent and take up bandwidth and resources.
None of these measures stop spammers sending out their millions of messages. This is where the damage is originating, and this is the best place to cut it off. Of course its also the hardest part to do. Spammers need to be caught and put in jail - something Microsoft is actively pursuing. Thats a far better solution for everyone than needlessly blocking good mail.
You make valid points, although I disagree/differ in opinion ona few of them. Hoowever, all web developers / web application developers have their own personal preferences and bugbears. However...
All of these workarounds lack the simple elegance that would result if the server could just rely on the user agent string.
How exactly do you detect if your user has javascript disabled without going client-side? Javascript is obviously a must for DHTML.
I'm not in any way saying that client-side or server-side is right or wrong - each has its place - but I'm a huge proponent of (as others have since posted in replies to the GP) detecting if your browser has the feature you need on the client-side, and working from there. With proper OO JS there is no need for code to be "sprinkled everywhere with little browser validation tests" - you only need make your test once, your objects handle it from ther on.
advanced DHTML authors have been forced to use client side browser detection for years now
Er, yes. DHTML is client side. Makes sense to detect it client side too. Same with plugin detection - do it client-side. In this day and age of browsers fighting for market share by becoming more standards compliant (including IE7 when it comes out - although god knows how many old IE hacks that will break), theres little point to server-side detection of client browsers - most standards compliant XHTML and CSS will work on all modern graphical browsers. Javascript / DHTML has been getting very easy across browsers. And how hard is:
8: It isn't free, and the hardware, while likely to come down a tad, IMO, will not be as cheap as commodity x86 boxes. But I do expect their prices to become more competitive with the "big boys" of the Wintel market (Dell, HP, etc.). If you are looking for rock-bottom prices, of course you don't go to a major provider like Dell or HP, do you? Then why would you go to Apple? Other than that, I see no reason they can't compete better with Dell and HP on their own turf.
Er. Who can build low-end boxes cheaper than Dell? I build my own high-to-mid-range boxes but if you're looking for a low-end box, you can't get cheaper than Dell.
Go and look up some basic xHTML and CSS guides. In this day and age of established w3c standards its trivial to create simple layouts that look exactly the same in every graphical browser and looks well in non-graphical browsers. When you get to complex layouts it does become more difficult but its far from impossible.
Nope. Thats definitely turned off - wouldn;t have been space to store them all on teh laptop in question. I may have exaggerated when I said "ten minutes", but iTunes was certainly many orders of magnitude slower.
Where can buy this ephpod software? I cant see it on the apple store anywhere. Oh wait you mean its not supported by apple. Strange that. My mp3 player came with all the software it needed - none.
I have a starck at home. It looks nice and contrary to the reviewers limited perspective on computer hardware, has three buttons not two. I guess he's never heard of pressing the wheel down? The starck does have one major problem though - every couple of hours (under windows and linux) its jumps an inch or two in a random direction.
Slashdot Mirror
free as in speech or beer?
Lets see how much longer it takes to fix the non-free browsers ... (this is an old story / dupe BTW)
Spammers take up my bandwidth and time - both of which have financial value. Copyright infringers have yet to cost me anything (that I know of).
Weird. The E-Bay source code appeared on TPB yesterday. Coincidence?
Nevermind. It doesn't matter.
Heres something you didn't know: I've seen them advertised on engadget and discussed on other forums for the last few months. Surprise!
How have you answered my question? Perhaps I phrased it wrong. Will their product have any effect on the takeup of Apples Airport Express? - in your opinion, obviously.
1. Will it interfere with existing wireless networks?
2. Have they now beaten Apple to the crunch ahead of their proposed Airport expansions?
It will stop SPAM that is from a forged sender, which is a non-trivial amount.
I think you missed the OPs point - namely, that while the spam will no longer get to your inbox, it will still be sent and take up bandwidth and resources.
None of these measures stop spammers sending out their millions of messages. This is where the damage is originating, and this is the best place to cut it off. Of course its also the hardest part to do. Spammers need to be caught and put in jail - something Microsoft is actively pursuing. Thats a far better solution for everyone than needlessly blocking good mail.
You make valid points, although I disagree/differ in opinion ona few of them. Hoowever, all web developers / web application developers have their own personal preferences and bugbears. However ...
All of these workarounds lack the simple elegance that would result if the server could just rely on the user agent string.
How exactly do you detect if your user has javascript disabled without going client-side? Javascript is obviously a must for DHTML.
I'm not in any way saying that client-side or server-side is right or wrong - each has its place - but I'm a huge proponent of (as others have since posted in replies to the GP) detecting if your browser has the feature you need on the client-side, and working from there. With proper OO JS there is no need for code to be "sprinkled everywhere with little browser validation tests" - you only need make your test once, your objects handle it from ther on.
advanced DHTML authors have been forced to use client side browser detection for years now
Er, yes. DHTML is client side. Makes sense to detect it client side too. Same with plugin detection - do it client-side. In this day and age of browsers fighting for market share by becoming more standards compliant (including IE7 when it comes out - although god knows how many old IE hacks that will break), theres little point to server-side detection of client browsers - most standards compliant XHTML and CSS will work on all modern graphical browsers. Javascript / DHTML has been getting very easy across browsers. And how hard is:
How strange for a linux based community - usually famed for fixing things that aren't broken.
Cake or Death?
Strange how the rain is coming mostly down sideways today. Would you have any opinions on it, sir?
And your "miss the obvious, making a fool of yourself in the process" trick seemed to have a very similar effect.
Moderation nazi!
Excellent, just what the Galaxy needs - a farting moon.
8: It isn't free, and the hardware, while likely to come down a tad, IMO, will not be as cheap as commodity x86 boxes. But I do expect their prices to become more competitive with the "big boys" of the Wintel market (Dell, HP, etc.). If you are looking for rock-bottom prices, of course you don't go to a major provider like Dell or HP, do you? Then why would you go to Apple? Other than that, I see no reason they can't compete better with Dell and HP on their own turf.
Er. Who can build low-end boxes cheaper than Dell? I build my own high-to-mid-range boxes but if you're looking for a low-end box, you can't get cheaper than Dell.Is this you: http://www.google.com/search?q=sparkle+pants ?
You could try the MPFC - Monty Pythons Flying Circus.
Its a hoax according to Slyck and their IRC channel.
Go and look up some basic xHTML and CSS guides. In this day and age of established w3c standards its trivial to create simple layouts that look exactly the same in every graphical browser and looks well in non-graphical browsers. When you get to complex layouts it does become more difficult but its far from impossible.
Why would they? Americans love to sit around the TV and watch a war - live!
Nope. Thats definitely turned off - wouldn;t have been space to store them all on teh laptop in question. I may have exaggerated when I said "ten minutes", but iTunes was certainly many orders of magnitude slower.
Where can buy this ephpod software? I cant see it on the apple store anywhere. Oh wait you mean its not supported by apple. Strange that. My mp3 player came with all the software it needed - none.
I have a starck at home. It looks nice and contrary to the reviewers limited perspective on computer hardware, has three buttons not two. I guess he's never heard of pressing the wheel down? The starck does have one major problem though - every couple of hours (under windows and linux) its jumps an inch or two in a random direction.