I was only replying to your statement "No one is saying they do, despite what you may think." where you were answering someone else's "Why do non-Outlook users always have to be the ones to conform to what Outlook users do?"
I've met a lot of Outlook users who actually do say that non-Outlook users have to be the ones to conform to what Outlook users do. Like it or not. Of course I can ignore them (in most cases), but that doesn't mean that "No one is saying they do". Just because you don't, that doesn't mean nobody else does.
Ahh.. silly argument:) I just pointed out that your statement was slightly misleading. We obviously agree on the relevant subject:)
> >Why do non-Outlook users always have to be the ones to conform to what Outlook users do? >No one is saying they do, despite what you may think.
You've never met any of all those people that truly believes that email equals Outlook, the Internet equals Internet Explorer and computers in general equals Windows?
Either take the logo off the page, or fix the HTML!
I wrote to the webmaster about this issue, and unfortunately he chose the path of least resistance - removing the logo. Ironically, he left the Valid CSS logo. Sometimes, I get soooo tired...
If Alan needs to quit to sleep better at night, then fine. But if he's trying to make a public political statement, he needs to come up with a better way to do it.
Ah, then I suppose we agree. I took it for granted that it was the former. I'm a bit touchy when it comes to people getting bitched at simply because they do what they feel is right. I beg you pardon.
I notice that my original post has been re-modded as a troll. It would be nice if the moderators would look up the definition of "troll" and think more carefully before modding something "Troll" simply because they disagree with it.
Although I don't particularly like what you wrote in your first post (which, of course was why I started replying), I must agree. "Troll" is definately way off, and unfair.
Action is not always an act of bravery. It can be an act of cowardice as well.
Of course. I wouldn't say that it is in this case though. I've quit a job once because I didn't like my employer's methods. Instead, I started working for a company whos methods I liked. If you think that makes me a coward, I suppose I can understand your anti Alan whining too.
If you thought for longer than the several seconds you seem to have, you would realize that if Alan Cox leaves Redhat, he will no longer be paid to work on Linux.
And we certainly know that Linux is what it is primarily because of all the people getting paid for working on it...
I fail to see why people are so upset when they observe that someone has the integrity to stand up for what s/he believes in. Alan seems to believe that AOL/TW is evil, and thus won't work for them. Personally, I believe that arms manufacturers are evil, and won't work for them. I bet you've got something you wouldn't do even if it paid good $$. If not, I suppose there's nothing left to add to this discussion.
In fact if you look at the NT 4.0 Workstation and W2K Pro licenses you'll see that it's against the license to run a web server on them (can't exceed 10 concurrent IP connections).
Are you suggesting that the NT 4 IIS could handle more than 10 simultaneous requests?
You should spend your free time doing what I want you to do because I'm to lazy to do it myself, rather than what you think would be interesting and fun to do yourself.
duh:)
Anyway, irony excluded, the guy is speaking about a windowing system (think X) rather than a window manager (think fvvm). Don't confuse the two...
Lot's of JavaScript constructs used regularly on the web works in IE, but not in Opera.
That's the reason why I fire up IE a couple of times every day for a couple of minutes, but always have an Opera running for 95% of my browsing. Most people don't have the patience to switch between various browsers though.
(this post is so late I hardly think anyone will read it, but I saw doing my meta-modding, and thought it was worth a reply, as the question is very relevant indeed)
What kind of fool risks life and limb to inscribe a high dome in a fictitious language?
What makes a language fictitious? That nobody speaks it? Then I guess Elvish doesn't apply.
Of course, it's actually written in Black speech, as several other posters have discussed here... so I won't go into further detail there...
Flash does have some uses. I've been involved in building a web application where we needed to display vector maps (in order to smoothly being able to zoom into the map, a gif certainly wouldn't do). Our choices pretty much narrowed down to two alternatives, a Java Applet and a Flash animation. We used flash simply since it seems to be less of a headache to use for newbies, and somewhat quicker both to install and use. I'm not a great flash fan, and I pretty much hate the use of unnecessary flash animations, but the format does have its uses...
Ok, this is a cheap shot, but nobody I know, including the most experience WinX admins (Micro$oft advocates included) have been able to make Outlook be 100% compatible with the local Exchange server.
Euhm... the standard answer to the question Why don't you run Linux? is usually It doesn't have a decent clone of applications X [where X not seldom is Microsoft Outlook].
Now the answer to the question Why don't you run application X'? seems to be It doesn't run on Windows
Once again, I'd like to refer to what Neil Gaiman wrote in his journal once he heard of Douglas' death: I hope that his death isn't followed by the publishing of all the stuff he hadn't wanted to see print. (the Saturday, May 12, 2001 entry).
I've seen a lot of people here pointing out that this is easy to work around, by changing the browser's user-agent string (possible in most decent browsers and/or possible to do at a non browser level). This, however, is not how it should be done! I want to be identified as an Opera and Mozilla user (I use both those browsers about as much). I want my Opera & Mozilla user agent strings to end up in their logs, and I want various surveys to indicate that the market share I represent is a little bit in those browsers' favour, not IE's.
Face it, the only thing that will ever be able to walk your dog, cook dinner, dry clean your t-shirts, clone you, trade currency derivative and play bridge well is Emacs.
WAP ain't shite, it's just not what the marketdroids say it is... but then again, is anything?
I don't care what the Mozilla page says.
That's a rather peculiar way to handle the information on the only official site about the browser:)
I won't really speak about how Mozilla is not a Netscape only project...
From the release page: We make binary versions of of Mozilla available for testing purposes only!.
Or, if you wish, from the frontpage: We provide binaries for testing and feedback.
:)
Whether this dist or that chooses to include a snapshot of the cvs in their release, is not really up to Mozilla, is it?
There are two things you should remember:
1. Mozilla is not released as a product yet. If you chose to d/l if, you're doing so because you (in the eyes of the mozilla dev staff) is a tester.
2. As per the story: Every change has to have a bug. This means that changes are also considered bugs in bugzilla (I can't guarantee that myself, as I have not used bugzilla, but according to the story that's the way it is). I don't know what the changes/bugs ratio is, but I assume it's more than 2:1.
Re:WTC bombing prophesyed on rap album cover.
on
More WTC News
·
· Score: 1
Hardly surprising. The idea of a terror strike against WTC is hardly very original. It's been described in basically every bad sci-fi/dark future type of fiction material published since the late seventies.
These kids get 9 points for cool afro haircuts, but no more than 2 for originality.
And i was correct, he has admitted that he would not shoot.
The funny part is that you, as opposed to basically everyone in the world who has so far been considered a prominent figure in the fight for freedom and democracy, seem to think this is something bad...?
Slashdot Mirror
Since we seem to be running out of other Debian-based distros, looks like Libranet is my next choice. :)
:)
See subject
I was only replying to your statement "No one is saying they do, despite what you may think." where you were answering someone else's "Why do non-Outlook users always have to be the ones to conform to what Outlook users do?"
:) I just pointed out that your statement was slightly misleading. We obviously agree on the relevant subject :)
I've met a lot of Outlook users who actually do say that non-Outlook users have to be the ones to conform to what Outlook users do. Like it or not. Of course I can ignore them (in most cases), but that doesn't mean that "No one is saying they do". Just because you don't, that doesn't mean nobody else does.
Ahh.. silly argument
> >Why do non-Outlook users always have to be the ones to conform to what Outlook users do?
>No one is saying they do, despite what you may think.
You've never met any of all those people that truly believes that email equals Outlook, the Internet equals Internet Explorer and computers in general equals Windows?
Either take the logo off the page, or fix the HTML!
I wrote to the webmaster about this issue, and unfortunately he chose the path of least resistance - removing the logo. Ironically, he left the Valid CSS logo. Sometimes, I get soooo tired...
If Alan needs to quit to sleep better at night, then fine. But if he's trying to make a public political statement, he needs to come up with a better way to do it.
Ah, then I suppose we agree. I took it for granted that it was the former. I'm a bit touchy when it comes to people getting bitched at simply because they do what they feel is right. I beg you pardon.
I notice that my original post has been re-modded as a troll. It would be nice if the moderators would look up the definition of "troll" and think more carefully before modding something "Troll" simply because they disagree with it.
Although I don't particularly like what you wrote in your first post (which, of course was why I started replying), I must agree. "Troll" is definately way off, and unfair.
Action is not always an act of bravery. It can be an act of cowardice as well.
Of course. I wouldn't say that it is in this case though. I've quit a job once because I didn't like my employer's methods. Instead, I started working for a company whos methods I liked. If you think that makes me a coward, I suppose I can understand your anti Alan whining too.
If you thought for longer than the several seconds you seem to have, you would realize that if Alan Cox leaves Redhat, he will no longer be paid to work on Linux.
And we certainly know that Linux is what it is primarily because of all the people getting paid for working on it...
I fail to see why people are so upset when they observe that someone has the integrity to stand up for what s/he believes in. Alan seems to believe that AOL/TW is evil, and thus won't work for them. Personally, I believe that arms manufacturers are evil, and won't work for them. I bet you've got something you wouldn't do even if it paid good $$. If not, I suppose there's nothing left to add to this discussion.
He can make all the complex, serpentine, philosophical excuses he wants to make -- but in the end he's just a whiner.
No. The fact that he's ready to leave the company makes him much more than a whiner. Whiners whine. They don't act. Alan seems to be prepared to act.
Let him whine. I'll still use Linux, with or without the support of Alan Cox.
Yes, we all know that RedHat is Linux.
In fact if you look at the NT 4.0 Workstation and W2K Pro licenses you'll see that it's against the license to run a web server on them (can't exceed 10 concurrent IP connections).
Are you suggesting that the NT 4 IIS could handle more than 10 simultaneous requests?
Sorry, had to bite on such an obvious bait =)
I agree!
:)
You should spend your free time doing what I want you to do because I'm to lazy to do it myself, rather than what you think would be interesting and fun to do yourself.
duh
Anyway, irony excluded, the guy is speaking about a windowing system (think X) rather than a window manager (think fvvm). Don't confuse the two...
Lot's of JavaScript constructs used regularly on the web works in IE, but not in Opera.
That's the reason why I fire up IE a couple of times every day for a couple of minutes, but always have an Opera running for 95% of my browsing. Most people don't have the patience to switch between various browsers though.
(this post is so late I hardly think anyone will read it, but I saw doing my meta-modding, and thought it was worth a reply, as the question is very relevant indeed)
What kind of fool risks life and limb to inscribe a high dome in a fictitious language?
What makes a language fictitious? That nobody speaks it? Then I guess Elvish doesn't apply.
Of course, it's actually written in Black speech, as several other posters have discussed here... so I won't go into further detail there...
Linux is the greatest, and microsoft suck! ;-) )
(Sorry, this makes half the other \. comments redundant
Backslashdot
News for nerds. Stuff that matters.
:)
What kind of steps can people use to protect themselves now
:)
This step and this, for instance
Flash does have some uses. I've been involved in building a web application where we needed to display vector maps (in order to smoothly being able to zoom into the map, a gif certainly wouldn't do). Our choices pretty much narrowed down to two alternatives, a Java Applet and a Flash animation. We used flash simply since it seems to be less of a headache to use for newbies, and somewhat quicker both to install and use. I'm not a great flash fan, and I pretty much hate the use of unnecessary flash animations, but the format does have its uses...
Ok, this is a cheap shot, but nobody I know, including the most experience WinX admins (Micro$oft advocates included) have been able to make Outlook be 100% compatible with the local Exchange server.
Euhm... the standard answer to the question Why don't you run Linux? is usually It doesn't have a decent clone of applications X [where X not seldom is Microsoft Outlook].
Now the answer to the question Why don't you run application X'? seems to be It doesn't run on Windows
From the bottom of my heart.... HUH?
Once again, I'd like to refer to what Neil Gaiman wrote in his journal once he heard of Douglas' death: I hope that his death isn't followed by the publishing of all the stuff he hadn't wanted to see print. (the Saturday, May 12, 2001 entry).
I've seen a lot of people here pointing out that this is easy to work around, by changing the browser's user-agent string (possible in most decent browsers and/or possible to do at a non browser level). This, however, is not how it should be done! I want to be identified as an Opera and Mozilla user (I use both those browsers about as much). I want my Opera & Mozilla user agent strings to end up in their logs, and I want various surveys to indicate that the market share I represent is a little bit in those browsers' favour, not IE's.
And this would stop them from filming it... why, again?
Face it, the only thing that will ever be able to walk your dog, cook dinner, dry clean your t-shirts, clone you, trade currency derivative and play bridge well is Emacs.
WAP ain't shite, it's just not what the marketdroids say it is... but then again, is anything?I don't care what the Mozilla page says. :)
That's a rather peculiar way to handle the information on the only official site about the browser
I won't really speak about how Mozilla is not a Netscape only project...
From the release page: We make binary versions of of Mozilla available for testing purposes only!.
:)
Or, if you wish, from the frontpage: We provide binaries for testing and feedback.
Whether this dist or that chooses to include a snapshot of the cvs in their release, is not really up to Mozilla, is it?
There are two things you should remember:
1. Mozilla is not released as a product yet. If you chose to d/l if, you're doing so because you (in the eyes of the mozilla dev staff) is a tester.
2. As per the story: Every change has to have a bug. This means that changes are also considered bugs in bugzilla (I can't guarantee that myself, as I have not used bugzilla, but according to the story that's the way it is). I don't know what the changes/bugs ratio is, but I assume it's more than 2:1.
Hardly surprising. The idea of a terror strike against WTC is hardly very original. It's been described in basically every bad sci-fi/dark future type of fiction material published since the late seventies.
These kids get 9 points for cool afro haircuts, but no more than 2 for originality.
And i was correct, he has admitted that he would not shoot.
The funny part is that you, as opposed to basically everyone in the world who has so far been considered a prominent figure in the fight for freedom and democracy, seem to think this is something bad...?