Reverse engineering is never illegal, for a start MS makes a hell of a lot of money writing software to work on a machine that was origianly reverse engineered from the IBM 8086...
Other then that, just because its compatible (as Netscape 8) dosn't mean it can't support other things, oh, and when did IE stop supporting PNG?
I'm not sure whats CSS2 and whats not, but didn't MS help in the design of CSS and Netscape do some thing differant? So I would say that at least there MS did contribute to the "advancement of the internet".
The last bit, well. I don't agree. Its no more or less enginered to do what it dose then Netscape was. They both diverged from the standard trying to get an advantage.
I've used lots of browsers and apart from the tabed browsing you get in every thing other then IE, I still find IE the easiest to get along with. Maybe because I use it the most.
Mainly though I hate that CSS classes look differant, the possitioning isn't the same and generaly things look nice in IE, then look nasty in other browsers.
Lastly I should say there are things IE does that the others are starting to catch up with. Opera has had more or less IE compatible JS events since last year, how ever Mozilla still dosn't support even basic event handlers very well, and its just such a pain.
In the end I don't care if its standard, or not. If its rendered the IE way or not. But I do wish they would all just desicide which way is going to stay and every one stick to it.
Halliluya, who cares who renders the page what way, just as long as they all render it the same way....
I honestly don't get why things are not just IE compatible, as most people use IE, and most sites are designed for IE... it seems that not rendering a page properly (that works in IE) is a good reason for people not to use a differant browser....
Slashdot Mirror
I would personaly use Kylix, because it compiles better then any thing else.
:-)
I'm fairly sure I remember that Borland got the linux kernel to build with Kylix and it was faster and smaller.
Borland make the best compilers.
I'd also go for J Builder, because its cool, and its writen in Java. It also makes life easy for you.
Of course, I'd never write C, but what the hell, there is no accounting for taste
Reverse engineering is never illegal, for a start MS makes a hell of a lot of money writing software to work on a machine that was origianly reverse engineered from the IBM 8086... Other then that, just because its compatible (as Netscape 8) dosn't mean it can't support other things, oh, and when did IE stop supporting PNG? I'm not sure whats CSS2 and whats not, but didn't MS help in the design of CSS and Netscape do some thing differant? So I would say that at least there MS did contribute to the "advancement of the internet". The last bit, well. I don't agree. Its no more or less enginered to do what it dose then Netscape was. They both diverged from the standard trying to get an advantage. I've used lots of browsers and apart from the tabed browsing you get in every thing other then IE, I still find IE the easiest to get along with. Maybe because I use it the most. Mainly though I hate that CSS classes look differant, the possitioning isn't the same and generaly things look nice in IE, then look nasty in other browsers. Lastly I should say there are things IE does that the others are starting to catch up with. Opera has had more or less IE compatible JS events since last year, how ever Mozilla still dosn't support even basic event handlers very well, and its just such a pain. In the end I don't care if its standard, or not. If its rendered the IE way or not. But I do wish they would all just desicide which way is going to stay and every one stick to it.
Halliluya, who cares who renders the page what way, just as long as they all render it the same way....
I honestly don't get why things are not just IE compatible, as most people use IE, and most sites are designed for IE... it seems that not rendering a page properly (that works in IE) is a good reason for people not to use a differant browser....