My phone is always on, primarily because I would forget to turn it on if it weren't.
Sometimes I don't answer it.
When I'm in class, my phone may not even be by my side; it might be in my jacket, awiating my return patiently.
And even if it is near, it is always set on Discreet, so it only vibrates. Therefore, any time I don't feel like answering, I don't hear it. Or I simply explain later I was not available.
SMS messages are even easier to ignore: if it's a message, then it was most certainly not immediately relevant.
Though I guess the fact that we do not have a developed voicemail culture, so text messages are used instead.
What I do not understand is people like my mother, who grabs the phone the moment she sits behind the wheel. For FSM's sake, you can phone that person before actually leaving.
Twitter and things like that add useless noise to the Web 2.0. Who's sick of some idiot twittering what they're up to all the time and drowning out all the more thoughtful status updates on Facebook? I don't think even extroverts want to know what everyone is thinking or doing all the time, for fear of realizing how dilute their thoughts really are... it's like those really noiesy couples that talk all the time, but if you ever listen in they're talking about jack all and it deteriorates into whining.
Actually maybe I shouldn't have been so extroverted as to post this. Alright everyone, let's not post at all in protest of extroversion...
It took me a while to understand that this had nothing to do with a certain Slashdotter and his sockpuppets.
Indeed - the problem isn't "Always on", after all I'm fine with my mobile or my landline being always on. The problem is that with IM, it's become "Always on, and always advertising me as on". And so as soon as you come online, however many 10s or 100s of people on your list think that means you're up for making random small talk.
I'd rather IM was treated like a phone - call me if you want to talk about something, but it doesn't mean I'm always up for idle chit chat.
When I'm available for chat, AdiumX lists me as Available. When I'm in a class, sleeping, eating or whatever, I set it to list me as unavailable/busy/invisible/whatever.
People tend to respect that.
Put a <br/> at the end of each line, and instead of empty lines, use the occasional <p>...</p> tag pair. Empty lines are the worst, I'd say; they bring your average way down.
I learned it the hard way, too, but I've been posting my comments in HTML ever since.
I think the Croatian police has some kind of regulation (I no longer know where I heard that) about uniformed cops saying male cops may not be shorter than 1.70 (5'8").
I know I do not recall seeing a male cop shorter than me.
I do know they have no regulations about female cop cup sizes, though. When they pinched my mobile phone some years ago, I went to report the theft... never did I want so much to be arrested, I tell you.
It doesn't matter how many times you explain, if you are wrong, your just repeating your incorrectness.
Pity you cannot prove me wrong. Guess that's why you resort to name-calling instead.
Like I said, IE wasn't abandoned
Except for its dev team dismisssed. Other than that, it wasn't abandoned.
and abandoned is the correct past tense of abandon.
Did I ever claim anything else?
You are now either intentionally missing the point so as to shift the discussion to someplace else, or are just as illiterate as I'd originally pegged you.
So what is the point? Like I said, there has been nothing new the IE has had to support and Microsoft pretty much set the limits to the standards in this realm. Like it or not, that is the way it was and probably still is.
Say what?
While all the standards IE6 was and has remained unable to support are indeed old enough, there has been a significant shift in the coding practices.
Previously, IE6 was the de facto standard, as pages were coded primarily or exclusively to IE6, regardless of the real standards.
Nowadays, I don't see it: people code to standards first, and add IE support later.
Therefore, while IE6's lack of standards compliance along with being bundled with Windows worked against other browsers, nowadays this non-compliance works against it.
I can fucking read. Work on your comprehension skill idiot. If they were just a little bit better, you wouldn't be calling anyone a troll.
If who was just a bit better?
Perhaps you missed where I said that doesn't matter because it is still getting security fixes and that was my point.
As I said, it's life support. All development is dead.
Lol.. I don't need to demonstrate anything.
If you want to disprove my point, then you do.
If all you want is flame, then by all means, keep flaming.
All I have to do is tell you or anyone to view it in different browsers and the programs will have demonstrated everything for me.
Ah, so the mere fact that Slashdot doesn't display properly in IE6 proves that the person responsible for that is incompetent and disproves that it may have been a conscious design decision.
By FSM, I've talked to religious fanatics who made more sense than that.
I don't buy your cost effectiveness either. I am in charge of several large sites along with quite a few smaller ones and it costs me no more to have the pages display the same across all the browsers I specify then it does to hire an incompetent programmer who can't get the job done.
Are you in charge of Slashdot?
If not, how do you know that IE6 support was specified?
OMG, you must be ignoring history and the obvious direction microsoft is going. IE7 doesn't pass the acid test
But it performs better than IE6. That's a step in the right direction.
and neither does IE8 unless you disable a lot of their shit.
IE8 is a beta. Or an alpha. Or whatever.
We'll talk about what defaults are and what works or doesn't work once it gets out.
Read extend into that literally.
Whatever that means.
That could be true but it doesn't matter. IE6 is still the most common up to date microsoft browser until IE7 came out and is still in use today.
So it was the most common Microsoft's browser. But it was never the most up-to-date Windows browser, which is what you were saying initialy.
Almost half of the IE users on the web are still using IE6.
Poor sods. But that doesn't change anything: how many Slashdot users use IE6 to view Slashdot?
You need to work on your comprehension skills and stop being a troll. I was a
I'd also say 16 isn't his rolled CHA score; he couldn't possibly have rolled more than 12. At best.
All the rest is the doing of a few magical items, circumstance bonuses and followers.
Also, since he left my benighted country just a few hours ago, he also possesses a magical shield aura along with several hundred guards: no-one can enter the area within 300 m from him.
Setting your eyes on him can also probably turn you to stone or suffer the effect of Baleful Polymorph; what other reason could there be that people living in vicinity of the route he took were told to shutter their windows and stay inside?
And I wouldn't metamoderate falsely.
As you may be aware of, the metamod application does not show the author; if, however, I got to recognize twitter, I will lose my usual positive bias (I am more likely to disagree with a negative moderation than a positive one) and approach the post in question more critically.
Abandoned is past tense. Abandon is the present tense, no change of tense at all except that MS is still supporting IE6 which means it wasn't abandoned.
I have explained this a number of times, but you have still not learned to read. I will refer you to my previous posts; I have no desire to spell it out to you. Again.
Now defining abandon by part of the IE team being dismissed is sort of playing tricks. All Microsoft did was freeze features in IE6 and move that support to IE7.
Freezing features years before the new version was out... now that's what I call foresight.
They didn't stop securing it. That is the reason I was able to demonstrate that it recieved a security update as recently as feburary of 2008- 2 months ago.
Goody. You must have skipped over the part about security updates having to do with IE being an "integral part of Windows". Learn to fucking read, troll.
I'm bitching about the lack or programing skills of whoever is responsible for the new slashdot UI that can't even use the exact same principles that were used a 6 months ago. You know, the retarded monkey that for whatever reason has decided that they should have to do something or is incapable of doing something that isn't really that hard to do.
You haven't demonstrated that it had anything to do with incompetence.
I still propose it has (nearly) everything to do with cost-effectiveness, but you have only countered it with name-calling.
First of all, microsoft will never have standards compliance because of it's embrace and extend philosophy.
Bullshit.
In order to extend, they first have to embrace.
IE8 will default to standards compliance, they say, and according to all trends, it is their only option.
For FSM's sake, non-geeks have started ridiculing other non-geeks for using IE. If Microsoft don't get their heads out of their collective asses, IE will become a minority browser. This is why they made IE7 in the first place, and why they're developing IE8 so hastily, even taking great care to pass the Acid tests.
They seem to have a mindset of a moving target where they will present their failures as someone else's problems. They play lip service to standards and people are brain washed into thinking they have standards down but it never works in practice. IE7 isn't standards compliant so what your problem?
It is more standards compliant than IE6. It's a definite improvement.
Then again, I think they couldn't have made it any worse unless they decided to program it all in VB.
And security fixes, why wouldn't they just replace IE6 with IE7 an be done with patching IE6? They haven't stop supporting IE6 security wise so I still don't see your point. The security fix life cycles extend beyond the development cycle.
Because IE7 does not and will not work on some of the existing Windows systems.
No your not holding a gun to anyones head. You are advocating making sited incompatible to force people to either upgrade or do without. Or are you denying that again.
That's incentive, not force.
They want something; they do what they need to to get it. Or they do without it.
The only thing I changed was windows to microsoft to get around the confusion of alternative browsers that where available when I said until IE7 came about less then 2 years ago, IE6 was the most up to date windows/MS web browser and the most common one in use. That isn't changing much when my intent was IE versions all along.
What you meant may not have changed much; what you said, however, changed significantly.
If you somehow find that invalidates all of my arguments and validates yours, then I suggest we end this real soon because you have some problems that reason and facts simply won't take care of.
At least it's fun to read.
Especially now that they stand out so (I foed them, so they're nice and red.
Please tell me it's red and I'm not making a fool of my colourblind self.)
Here's the rub, though: Marketing research has virtually/proven/ that all the thing you claim won't get you to buy a product _DO_ get people to buy products.
It's easy to get up on the high horse on the Internet and say, "I'm too bright to fall for all that marketing crap.", but, as the article shows, there is a ton of research that goes into finding out what marketing _works_.
Yeah, whatever.
Of course some marketing works; some even works on most people.
I, for one, am fed up with slogans and scenes. If it means anything, I'm a linguist — I can't stop analyzing these things.
For instance, I only use a prepaid mobile phone. For the past month or three, my service provider has been airing some ads about some new tariffs. The ads themselves I find fairly amusing, though with their frequency, they are just as annoying as all the others. However, today I got to check those tariffs out. And I'm not amused.
The effect those ads had on me was therefore just the same as if they had merely aired five-second ads about those tariffs.
Whatever I buy, I buy it after finding out the specs, be it a computer or a yoghurt, and the only advertising that works on me is a friend's reccomendation. And even that I check some before acting on it.
And you are quite incorect. Microsoft just released a security update for IE6 as late as feb 12 2008. If they would have abandoned IE6, this wouldn't have been possible.
Note the past tense I used; it was not reported speech, no need for tense shifting.
With IE team disbanded, I'd say it was abandonware.
It is true that MS isn't adding new features to IE6 but what has changed so dramatically with web pages, specifically, slashdot web pages in the last year or so that it can no longer work? Nothing has. Nothing at all.
So what are you bitching about then?
And whether it is a piece of shit or not isn't really your call to make universally. It has it's used just like any other program out there. And yes, it is up to date because they are still providing security fixes for it. So check up on what your claiming before making the claims.
Yay, security fixes. Since IE6 is integrated in Windows, plugging IE's holes is essential for Windows functioning.
That doesn't sound like active development or support to me. If IE were a standalone program, this kind of "support" would be only a step above total abandonment.
If IE6 were up to date, it would have decent standards compliance, for one thing.
Whether it is crap or not isn't pertinent to the situation.
Yes, it is. It's crap because it is not standards compliant. Among other things.
Since most pages nowadays are coded to standards (as much as possible, at least), this also means that it is not up to date.
What is pertinent is that for whatever reason people might want to use it. That isn't a crime, your attitude of forcing people to use different software because you don't like something should be.
I'm not holding a gun to anyone's head. (Though you're tempting me.)
I'm not installing different browsers on people's computers behind their backs. (Though in the case of IE6, it would not be such a terrible idea.)
Because you say something doesn't mean I was proved wrong. What a delusional ideal you have about your own self worth.
Your actions speak louder than my words: if I have not struck truth, why did you change your rhetoric?
MS has been actively supporting IE6 up to two months ago that I know of. It provided updates in Dec of 2007, October before that and pretty much every months in 2007. Like I said, it was the current up to date web MS browser for windows until IE7 came about.
Discounting the long-dead IE versions like IE5 and below, it was the only Microsoft's web browser, for Windows or otherwise.
See above about "active support".
And yes, I did limit it to MS browsers because we are talking about the most used browsers of the world, MS browsers.
You may have been talking about them. Or was that the royal 'we'?
Besides, it doesn't really matter as long as IE users are a minority on this site.
It still isn't more then IE's share.
What is this, a dick measuring contest?
So my statement stands true, "it is what was available to the majority of people. You are insane if you think the majority of people use fire fox or opera when IE6 was available".
It is what was preinstalled on the majority of desktop systems.
I never said the majority of people in the world used Firefox, Opera or whatever; however, I'd guess Slashdot readership is a bit differend demographic. And we were discussing Slashdot, weren't we?
Lol.. No it shows how retarded your position is.
Your strawman shows how retarded my position is... riiight.
Of course morons usually don't know when they are acting like morons so I won't hold it ag
IIRC, a research showed that people spend so much on marketing because everybody else is doing it.
Ads don't have that much of an effect anymore, but if you stopped advertising, you might disappear.
Most of the advertising money is therefore spent on keeping the status quo — seems a waste of resources to me.
I only think marketers are evil as it is because of them that I'm bombarded with innumerable messages I'm not in the least interested in.
If you want me to buy a product, make a good product.
Don't try to show me how people are having fun, having sex or having cake; I'm not interested in pretty little stories. I know you lie, or at least consciously break the Gricean maxims, hoping no-one would notice.
About the only thing conventional marketing can make me do is decide not to buy the advertised product. Annoy me enough and that's exactly what is going to happen.
Good: show me the product.
Bad: show me pretty little stories with little or no relation to the product.
Good: discrete ads. If I'm interested, I'll se it.
Bad: ubiquitous flashing and screaming ads that make me switch the channel, enable ad blocking et al.
And no, I don't think marketers want to make me buy stuff I don't want.
That would be idiotic.
Marketers want to make me want stuff I don't need, or even make me need stuff I don't presently need.
Slashdot Mirror
My phone is always on, primarily because I would forget to turn it on if it weren't.
Sometimes I don't answer it.
When I'm in class, my phone may not even be by my side; it might be in my jacket, awiating my return patiently.
And even if it is near, it is always set on Discreet, so it only vibrates. Therefore, any time I don't feel like answering, I don't hear it. Or I simply explain later I was not available.
SMS messages are even easier to ignore: if it's a message, then it was most certainly not immediately relevant.
Though I guess the fact that we do not have a developed voicemail culture, so text messages are used instead.
What I do not understand is people like my mother, who grabs the phone the moment she sits behind the wheel. For FSM's sake, you can phone that person before actually leaving.
It took me a while to understand that this had nothing to do with a certain Slashdotter and his sockpuppets.
Carry on, nothing to see here...
When I'm available for chat, AdiumX lists me as Available. When I'm in a class, sleeping, eating or whatever, I set it to list me as unavailable/busy/invisible/whatever.
People tend to respect that.
Um... that's what the Busy, Invisible and Do Not Disturb options are for.
You should have used HTML formatting.
Put a <br/> at the end of each line, and instead of empty lines, use the occasional <p>...</p> tag pair. Empty lines are the worst, I'd say; they bring your average way down.
I learned it the hard way, too, but I've been posting my comments in HTML ever since.
P.S. Obligatory Userfriendly link
Dear Ruth,
"too much ruth" meant "Ruth, you're too fat."
Lose a couple hundred pounds and we'll talk.
Really?
I think the Croatian police has some kind of regulation (I no longer know where I heard that) about uniformed cops saying male cops may not be shorter than 1.70 (5'8").
I know I do not recall seeing a male cop shorter than me.
I do know they have no regulations about female cop cup sizes, though. When they pinched my mobile phone some years ago, I went to report the theft... never did I want so much to be arrested, I tell you.
Ahem. Do carry on.
BOsFH are not born.
They are spawned from the depths of Usenet. Which is kind of like Hell, only the flames last longer.
I do wonder what happens when they find the image of YMCA Jesus.
D'you think they'll sue the Catholic Church?
If they do, I wanna watch. With pop-corn.
Put it on Youtube, then Yahoo can't take it down so easily.
It doesn't matter how many times you explain, if you are wrong, your just repeating your incorrectness.
Pity you cannot prove me wrong. Guess that's why you resort to name-calling instead.
Like I said, IE wasn't abandoned
Except for its dev team dismisssed. Other than that, it wasn't abandoned.
and abandoned is the correct past tense of abandon.
Did I ever claim anything else?
You are now either intentionally missing the point so as to shift the discussion to someplace else, or are just as illiterate as I'd originally pegged you.
So what is the point? Like I said, there has been nothing new the IE has had to support and Microsoft pretty much set the limits to the standards in this realm. Like it or not, that is the way it was and probably still is.
Say what?
While all the standards IE6 was and has remained unable to support are indeed old enough, there has been a significant shift in the coding practices.
Previously, IE6 was the de facto standard, as pages were coded primarily or exclusively to IE6, regardless of the real standards.
Nowadays, I don't see it: people code to standards first, and add IE support later.
Therefore, while IE6's lack of standards compliance along with being bundled with Windows worked against other browsers, nowadays this non-compliance works against it.
I can fucking read. Work on your comprehension skill idiot. If they were just a little bit better, you wouldn't be calling anyone a troll.
If who was just a bit better?
Perhaps you missed where I said that doesn't matter because it is still getting security fixes and that was my point.
As I said, it's life support. All development is dead.
Lol.. I don't need to demonstrate anything.
If you want to disprove my point, then you do.
If all you want is flame, then by all means, keep flaming.
All I have to do is tell you or anyone to view it in different browsers and the programs will have demonstrated everything for me.
Ah, so the mere fact that Slashdot doesn't display properly in IE6 proves that the person responsible for that is incompetent and disproves that it may have been a conscious design decision.
By FSM, I've talked to religious fanatics who made more sense than that.
I don't buy your cost effectiveness either. I am in charge of several large sites along with quite a few smaller ones and it costs me no more to have the pages display the same across all the browsers I specify then it does to hire an incompetent programmer who can't get the job done.
Are you in charge of Slashdot?
If not, how do you know that IE6 support was specified?
OMG, you must be ignoring history and the obvious direction microsoft is going. IE7 doesn't pass the acid test
But it performs better than IE6. That's a step in the right direction.
and neither does IE8 unless you disable a lot of their shit.
IE8 is a beta. Or an alpha. Or whatever.
We'll talk about what defaults are and what works or doesn't work once it gets out.
Read extend into that literally.
Whatever that means.
That could be true but it doesn't matter. IE6 is still the most common up to date microsoft browser until IE7 came out and is still in use today.
So it was the most common Microsoft's browser. But it was never the most up-to-date Windows browser, which is what you were saying initialy.
Almost half of the IE users on the web are still using IE6.
Poor sods. But that doesn't change anything: how many Slashdot users use IE6 to view Slashdot?
You need to work on your comprehension skills and stop being a troll. I was a
He's in a wheelchair.
Rolling is his only mode of transportation anyway.
AFAIK, his INT score shouldn't be higher than 9.
I'd also say 16 isn't his rolled CHA score; he couldn't possibly have rolled more than 12. At best.
All the rest is the doing of a few magical items, circumstance bonuses and followers.
Also, since he left my benighted country just a few hours ago, he also possesses a magical shield aura along with several hundred guards: no-one can enter the area within 300 m from him.
Setting your eyes on him can also probably turn you to stone or suffer the effect of Baleful Polymorph; what other reason could there be that people living in vicinity of the route he took were told to shutter their windows and stay inside?
It's not an assumption.
And I wouldn't metamoderate falsely.
As you may be aware of, the metamod application does not show the author; if, however, I got to recognize twitter, I will lose my usual positive bias (I am more likely to disagree with a negative moderation than a positive one) and approach the post in question more critically.
Abandoned is past tense. Abandon is the present tense, no change of tense at all except that MS is still supporting IE6 which means it wasn't abandoned.
I have explained this a number of times, but you have still not learned to read. I will refer you to my previous posts; I have no desire to spell it out to you. Again.
Now defining abandon by part of the IE team being dismissed is sort of playing tricks. All Microsoft did was freeze features in IE6 and move that support to IE7.
Freezing features years before the new version was out... now that's what I call foresight.
They didn't stop securing it. That is the reason I was able to demonstrate that it recieved a security update as recently as feburary of 2008- 2 months ago.
Goody. You must have skipped over the part about security updates having to do with IE being an "integral part of Windows". Learn to fucking read, troll.
I'm bitching about the lack or programing skills of whoever is responsible for the new slashdot UI that can't even use the exact same principles that were used a 6 months ago. You know, the retarded monkey that for whatever reason has decided that they should have to do something or is incapable of doing something that isn't really that hard to do.
You haven't demonstrated that it had anything to do with incompetence.
I still propose it has (nearly) everything to do with cost-effectiveness, but you have only countered it with name-calling.
First of all, microsoft will never have standards compliance because of it's embrace and extend philosophy.
Bullshit.
In order to extend, they first have to embrace.
IE8 will default to standards compliance, they say, and according to all trends, it is their only option.
For FSM's sake, non-geeks have started ridiculing other non-geeks for using IE. If Microsoft don't get their heads out of their collective asses, IE will become a minority browser. This is why they made IE7 in the first place, and why they're developing IE8 so hastily, even taking great care to pass the Acid tests.
They seem to have a mindset of a moving target where they will present their failures as someone else's problems. They play lip service to standards and people are brain washed into thinking they have standards down but it never works in practice. IE7 isn't standards compliant so what your problem?
It is more standards compliant than IE6. It's a definite improvement.
Then again, I think they couldn't have made it any worse unless they decided to program it all in VB.
And security fixes, why wouldn't they just replace IE6 with IE7 an be done with patching IE6? They haven't stop supporting IE6 security wise so I still don't see your point. The security fix life cycles extend beyond the development cycle.
Because IE7 does not and will not work on some of the existing Windows systems.
No your not holding a gun to anyones head. You are advocating making sited incompatible to force people to either upgrade or do without. Or are you denying that again.
That's incentive, not force.
They want something; they do what they need to to get it. Or they do without it.
The only thing I changed was windows to microsoft to get around the confusion of alternative browsers that where available when I said until IE7 came about less then 2 years ago, IE6 was the most up to date windows/MS web browser and the most common one in use. That isn't changing much when my intent was IE versions all along.
What you meant may not have changed much; what you said, however, changed significantly.
If you somehow find that invalidates all of my arguments and validates yours, then I suggest we end this real soon because you have some problems that reason and facts simply won't take care of.
Hell, even twitter himself sometimes makes sense. Sometimes he even writes something insightful and not entirely offensive.
However, due to more alter egos I can readily remember, even the positive moderations he gets might get turned over if I get to metamoderate them.
As far as I'm concerned, he can eiter grow up and learn to communicate or suffer the consequences of getting on my nerves.
So is it a royal We or multiple personality disorder?
Nah.
MS Chairs.
Everyone wants to do useful things with their time and that's why we hate M$.
Oh, for FSM's sake... we? We?
At least it's fun to read.
Especially now that they stand out so (I foed them, so they're nice and red.
Please tell me it's red and I'm not making a fool of my colourblind self.)
That's right.
Subliminal (kill) messages (your) are (parents) just (then) an (kill) urban (yourself) legend.
Yeah, whatever.
Of course some marketing works; some even works on most people.
I, for one, am fed up with slogans and scenes. If it means anything, I'm a linguist — I can't stop analyzing these things.
For instance, I only use a prepaid mobile phone. For the past month or three, my service provider has been airing some ads about some new tariffs. The ads themselves I find fairly amusing, though with their frequency, they are just as annoying as all the others. However, today I got to check those tariffs out. And I'm not amused.
The effect those ads had on me was therefore just the same as if they had merely aired five-second ads about those tariffs.
Whatever I buy, I buy it after finding out the specs, be it a computer or a yoghurt, and the only advertising that works on me is a friend's reccomendation. And even that I check some before acting on it.
And you are quite incorect. Microsoft just released a security update for IE6 as late as feb 12 2008. If they would have abandoned IE6, this wouldn't have been possible.
Note the past tense I used; it was not reported speech, no need for tense shifting.
With IE team disbanded, I'd say it was abandonware.
It is true that MS isn't adding new features to IE6 but what has changed so dramatically with web pages, specifically, slashdot web pages in the last year or so that it can no longer work? Nothing has. Nothing at all.
So what are you bitching about then?
And whether it is a piece of shit or not isn't really your call to make universally. It has it's used just like any other program out there. And yes, it is up to date because they are still providing security fixes for it. So check up on what your claiming before making the claims.
Yay, security fixes. Since IE6 is integrated in Windows, plugging IE's holes is essential for Windows functioning.
That doesn't sound like active development or support to me. If IE were a standalone program, this kind of "support" would be only a step above total abandonment.
If IE6 were up to date, it would have decent standards compliance, for one thing.
Whether it is crap or not isn't pertinent to the situation.
Yes, it is. It's crap because it is not standards compliant. Among other things.
Since most pages nowadays are coded to standards (as much as possible, at least), this also means that it is not up to date.
What is pertinent is that for whatever reason people might want to use it. That isn't a crime, your attitude of forcing people to use different software because you don't like something should be.
I'm not holding a gun to anyone's head. (Though you're tempting me.)
I'm not installing different browsers on people's computers behind their backs. (Though in the case of IE6, it would not be such a terrible idea.)
Because you say something doesn't mean I was proved wrong. What a delusional ideal you have about your own self worth.
Your actions speak louder than my words: if I have not struck truth, why did you change your rhetoric?
MS has been actively supporting IE6 up to two months ago that I know of. It provided updates in Dec of 2007, October before that and pretty much every months in 2007. Like I said, it was the current up to date web MS browser for windows until IE7 came about.
Discounting the long-dead IE versions like IE5 and below, it was the only Microsoft's web browser, for Windows or otherwise.
See above about "active support".
And yes, I did limit it to MS browsers because we are talking about the most used browsers of the world, MS browsers.
You may have been talking about them. Or was that the royal 'we'?
Besides, it doesn't really matter as long as IE users are a minority on this site.
It still isn't more then IE's share.
What is this, a dick measuring contest?
So my statement stands true, "it is what was available to the majority of people. You are insane if you think the majority of people use fire fox or opera when IE6 was available".
It is what was preinstalled on the majority of desktop systems.
I never said the majority of people in the world used Firefox, Opera or whatever; however, I'd guess Slashdot readership is a bit differend demographic. And we were discussing Slashdot, weren't we?
Lol.. No it shows how retarded your position is.
Your strawman shows how retarded my position is... riiight.
Of course morons usually don't know when they are acting like morons so I won't hold it ag
IIRC, a research showed that people spend so much on marketing because everybody else is doing it.
Ads don't have that much of an effect anymore, but if you stopped advertising, you might disappear.
Most of the advertising money is therefore spent on keeping the status quo — seems a waste of resources to me.
I only think marketers are evil as it is because of them that I'm bombarded with innumerable messages I'm not in the least interested in.
If you want me to buy a product, make a good product.
Don't try to show me how people are having fun, having sex or having cake; I'm not interested in pretty little stories. I know you lie, or at least consciously break the Gricean maxims, hoping no-one would notice.
About the only thing conventional marketing can make me do is decide not to buy the advertised product. Annoy me enough and that's exactly what is going to happen.
Good: show me the product.
Bad: show me pretty little stories with little or no relation to the product.
Good: discrete ads. If I'm interested, I'll se it.
Bad: ubiquitous flashing and screaming ads that make me switch the channel, enable ad blocking et al.
And no, I don't think marketers want to make me buy stuff I don't want.
That would be idiotic.
Marketers want to make me want stuff I don't need, or even make me need stuff I don't presently need.
Will you try to dispute that point as well?