No. The IE shared component was called by Explorer (the shell) and the Add/Remove Programs applet as required. Ie: exactly how shared code is *supposed* to work and exactly how it works on the other platforms.
So you think it makes sense that such tasks require a web browser's shared code?
They were much more competition than Netscape was. Mainly because they were actually in the same market (OSes).
Netscape was cross-platform. The web was untying people from Windows. That was a far bigger danger to Windows. And did OS/2 and Mac ship their web browser with almost every product they sold? Did their products require their web browser?
We're talking about integration, not simple bundling. IE was used as Explorer's shell in Windows 98. IE was used for Add/Remove Programs in Windows 2000.
And no, M$' bundling and integration was not in response to OS/2 and the Mac doing so. Those operating systems never were real competition for Windows. It was all about crushing Netscape.
The fact that Gecko has taken nearly as long to catch up as IE/Trident is disturbing, but they had their own self-inflicted issues to fix (XPCOM? ewww).
Oh come on. It's just a test. It does note indicate overall standards compliance. Gecko is quite good at that. For instance, it's still the only web browser to implement the CSS2:last-child pseudo-selector.
I hope they settle this dispute soon, because it has affected me several times in the past week.
I live in Europe, and am the co-administrator of Phantasy Star Cave. One day I couldn't access it for hours, so I traced the domain, and telia was the node it stopped at. So when I saw this story I was like "That's it! That was the problem!".
My brother bought a new laptop last year with Vista on it. Boy, was it slow and annoying. A week later we installed XP on it, and it ran like a dream.
A friend of mine hates the OS with a passion because, among other annoyances, you can't do anything on it without getting a UAC prompt.
If Vista is so much better, why is it so much slower and resource-hogging than XP? Sheep will say that it's because Vista is so much better than XP. But that doesn't make sense, especially when you're doing the same tasks you did on XP, without using any extra features. M$ is in love with the perpetual upgrade cycle.
The only people who have no problems with Vista have bought a top of the line machine with 2 GB RAM and don't use any older applications. And they've probably turned off UAC as well.
Ads are against the encyclopedia spirit. I also doubt people want to wait a long time for a page to load because of a slow ad server.
I have a much better idea. Integrate Google search, and let Google pay them for having it there. That kind of tactic works well for Mozilla, which also has a lot of users.
Yeah, Ubuntu is so strong coming that my brother, a Linux enthusiast, sees it as the weakest Linux distribution he's tried. It can't play MP3s, or even simple movie files. It can't find the required codecs either. He's quite pissed.
The Wii is $250. The XBox is $400, the Core XBox is $300, the Elite is $500. The PS3 is $600, the ones with smaller hard drives are $500.
If you account for inflation for the prices of older game consoles, the prices do get quite similar to each other.
You said input options, not amount of buttons. I took this to mean that in a PC you can get a keyboard, mouse, joystick, gamepad, etc., while with game consoles you have only a gamepad (and with the Wii you now have the Wiimote) and whatever extra peripheral they make for it.
More input options means that you need to buy more stuff instead of always being able to use the standard input. Not all game genres are great on a keyboard and/or mouse.
You have to buy a whole new console system at $400-$600 every three years.
I call bullshit. The cycle is five years, not three.
Secondly, $400-$600? That's only true for the current generation. Usually a game console costs $300 maximum. It's only with this generation that people suddenly think $400 is an acceptable price, and not any higher than that (look at all the PS3s gathering dust in part because of the price).
The Start Menu went to hell with Windows 98 where it wasn't automatically sorted alphabetically anymore, and also started hiding lesser-used items (I might be wrong on this last one, it might be since Windows 2000).
That, and all the other horrible UI decisions they made when shoving IE into the OS.
Here's an example of their irrational conformity. Suppose you are out jogging in your T-shirt in, say late February because it's unusually hot that day. But it's still winter, so all the Japanese are wearing their winter clothes because everyone else does, regardless of temperature. Some will even come up to you ask if you aren't cold, even though it might be 25C!
They also change clothes (winter -> summer -> winter) on the exact same day.
Or, suppose you're having some fun walking around with an umbrella on a clear day. In Europe and the US, people would find it strange, but think you're just doing your own thing and forget about it, or even laugh about it. In Japan, people will look weird to almost angry at you because you're not being like everyone else.
First year classes for IT studies in high school and college are always crammed with students. The second year more than half of those have failed. Why? Because most of them thought they were capable because they can use a computer decently like most people their age. Or they thought they would be playing video games. I'm not kidding.
In this way the Web has been crippled; prevented from becoming a viable alternative for most applications
For crying out loud, not everything has to get on the web. We have these nice things called desktop applications. Sure, web applications have their placed, and can be very useful for several things, but let's not exaggarate.
Slashdot Mirror
It's extensions, dammit! Or add-ons. I'm tired of seeing people use the wrong term.
If they really were dedicated to web standards, they wouldn't have implemented IE's proprietary coloured scroll bars. Bah.
So you think it makes sense that such tasks require a web browser's shared code?
Netscape was cross-platform. The web was untying people from Windows. That was a far bigger danger to Windows. And did OS/2 and Mac ship their web browser with almost every product they sold? Did their products require their web browser?
We're talking about integration, not simple bundling. IE was used as Explorer's shell in Windows 98. IE was used for Add/Remove Programs in Windows 2000.
And no, M$' bundling and integration was not in response to OS/2 and the Mac doing so. Those operating systems never were real competition for Windows. It was all about crushing Netscape.
Oh come on. It's just a test. It does note indicate overall standards compliance. Gecko is quite good at that. For instance, it's still the only web browser to implement the CSS2 :last-child pseudo-selector.
The Wii controller is better than a mouse and good for FPS.
Replace "Firefox" by "any web browser that is not IE or based on it".
GNU/Linux is not a desktop OS. It's a kernel with a collection of unrelated programs.
I wish they would get the HTML that their search engine outputs standards compliant already. It doesn't even have a DOCTYPE!
I hope they settle this dispute soon, because it has affected me several times in the past week.
I live in Europe, and am the co-administrator of Phantasy Star Cave. One day I couldn't access it for hours, so I traced the domain, and telia was the node it stopped at. So when I saw this story I was like "That's it! That was the problem!".
My brother bought a new laptop last year with Vista on it. Boy, was it slow and annoying. A week later we installed XP on it, and it ran like a dream.
A friend of mine hates the OS with a passion because, among other annoyances, you can't do anything on it without getting a UAC prompt.
If Vista is so much better, why is it so much slower and resource-hogging than XP? Sheep will say that it's because Vista is so much better than XP. But that doesn't make sense, especially when you're doing the same tasks you did on XP, without using any extra features. M$ is in love with the perpetual upgrade cycle.
The only people who have no problems with Vista have bought a top of the line machine with 2 GB RAM and don't use any older applications. And they've probably turned off UAC as well.
Are they almost done with their 1984-like obsession in becoming a police state?
Ooh, look, little Johnny is acting a little weird! Quick, get a DNA sample from him, he could be a future criminal!
It doesn't even make sense!
Where did you get a third hand?!
Ads are against the encyclopedia spirit. I also doubt people want to wait a long time for a page to load because of a slow ad server.
I have a much better idea. Integrate Google search, and let Google pay them for having it there. That kind of tactic works well for Mozilla, which also has a lot of users.
Yeah, Ubuntu is so strong coming that my brother, a Linux enthusiast, sees it as the weakest Linux distribution he's tried. It can't play MP3s, or even simple movie files. It can't find the required codecs either. He's quite pissed.
The Wii is $250. The XBox is $400, the Core XBox is $300, the Elite is $500. The PS3 is $600, the ones with smaller hard drives are $500.
If you account for inflation for the prices of older game consoles, the prices do get quite similar to each other.
You said input options, not amount of buttons. I took this to mean that in a PC you can get a keyboard, mouse, joystick, gamepad, etc., while with game consoles you have only a gamepad (and with the Wii you now have the Wiimote) and whatever extra peripheral they make for it.
More input options means that you need to buy more stuff instead of always being able to use the standard input. Not all game genres are great on a keyboard and/or mouse.
I call bullshit. The cycle is five years, not three.
Secondly, $400-$600? That's only true for the current generation. Usually a game console costs $300 maximum. It's only with this generation that people suddenly think $400 is an acceptable price, and not any higher than that (look at all the PS3s gathering dust in part because of the price).
Also...
For gaming, this is usually a bad thing.
Two versions? Try four.
The Start Menu went to hell with Windows 98 where it wasn't automatically sorted alphabetically anymore, and also started hiding lesser-used items (I might be wrong on this last one, it might be since Windows 2000).
That, and all the other horrible UI decisions they made when shoving IE into the OS.
Here's an example of their irrational conformity. Suppose you are out jogging in your T-shirt in, say late February because it's unusually hot that day. But it's still winter, so all the Japanese are wearing their winter clothes because everyone else does, regardless of temperature. Some will even come up to you ask if you aren't cold, even though it might be 25C!
They also change clothes (winter -> summer -> winter) on the exact same day.
Or, suppose you're having some fun walking around with an umbrella on a clear day. In Europe and the US, people would find it strange, but think you're just doing your own thing and forget about it, or even laugh about it. In Japan, people will look weird to almost angry at you because you're not being like everyone else.
Hear, hear!
First year classes for IT studies in high school and college are always crammed with students. The second year more than half of those have failed. Why? Because most of them thought they were capable because they can use a computer decently like most people their age. Or they thought they would be playing video games. I'm not kidding.
XUL? That's not even a standard, as far as I know.
I sense a disturbance in the Force...
For crying out loud, not everything has to get on the web. We have these nice things called desktop applications. Sure, web applications have their placed, and can be very useful for several things, but let's not exaggarate.
Why not? It'll be like "The Matrix"!
And the association of Grammar Nazis wants its abused apostrophe back!