MS operation basics:
1. See what's popular
2. Make a copy, doesent have to be better, can even include bugs and holes
3. Bundle it with Windows
4. Repeat
Fredi
Printable View
MS operation basics:
1. See what's popular
2. Make a copy, doesent have to be better, can even include bugs and holes
3. Bundle it with Windows
4. Repeat
Fredi
haha
I agree, mac users should be treated like witches. The last thing on my mind when im doing my uni work is mac users. Infact id go out my way to make sure the site didnt work with macs.
I think IE and windows sorts the world out. Alot of us are here because microsoft made it easy to pick up a PC and throw bits into it. It really bugs me when people slate it.
The w3c in my opinion is a complete waste of time. On IE there is physically no way to implement the standard without wasting time (just loss and waste). Fair enough firefox, but thats just pish tae. I got a 3.5 gig processor and a gig o memory and theres a massive lag between hittin the FF icon and it loading up.
Im a heavy user so it just wastes my time.
Dont get me started on Nutscrape and Operah and all that either. They are like the nuke, should be uninvented. It wastes my time, your time and everyone elses time just by them existing.
FF was decent in the first place because i was tired of the lame support for general popups and security issues for IE. Then service pack 2 came out and im a happy man. Back to IE.
Ill never waste my time other than FF and IE trying to make things work in all browers.
My view is, if you really want to goto a website for info then do it. My mum, sister, gran, cousin, nephew, brother, lecturer wont give a toss if they using firefox or IE. If they download FF and use it, and some sites dont work, they will just uninstall it and return to IE. Simple as.
If IE loads a page and im happy with it then itll do me, why re invent the wheel?
Please, never show your face at SXSW or @media...
i dont plan to ;)
My God some of you people are so ignorant it disturbs me. What ever happened to free and open markets? Whatever happened to letting people choose the products/services they want from a market? Why do we forbid monopolies?
Thank you, I could not have said it better myself. Let the people decide what they want to use, and if you are too obstinate to only design for IE because you don't know how to design for other browsers than you should not be in the job.Quote:
Originally Posted by iaskwhy
I am not anti Microsoft, I am just pro choice. I know that too much choice is a bad thing in the web as that would lead to conflicting standards and nothing would work. But today we have an international body consisting of all the experts in the field designing standards to make the web a better place for everyone. There is no reason not to adhere to these standards, all it takes is the smallest bit of an open mind and a bit of time.
Funny, I've been using firefox since version 0.9 (about a year) and I can count the sites that didn't work properly on both hands (one of which is hotmail :rolleyes: ) and I've done a LOT of browsing in that time.Quote:
Originally Posted by darkstar
Maybe the sites that didn't work properly were the ones that inflict you with countless pop-ups, take control of your browser, and auto-install software...
...they DON'T work too well with Firefox :)
And yet, the same site (and most government sites) have a welsh translation for those (non-existant) individuals that speak Welsh but not English.Quote:
Originally Posted by darkstar
This is what you get when you mix incompetent webmasters with inappropriate policy, and it's an insult to British taxpayers (like myself)
Funny, I've been using firefox since version 0.9 (about a year) and I can count the sites that didn't work properly on both hands (one of which is hotmail :rolleyes: ) and I've done a LOT of browsing in that time.
Maybe the sites that didn't work properly were the ones that inflict you with countless pop-ups, take control of your browser, and auto-install software...
...they DON'T work too well with Firefox :)
And maybe they are not, Methinks you are guessing here :rolleyes:
2.2 gig and 512 meg memory here. The OS was installed over two years ago, so it could be a LOT faster...and Firefox loads in about a second. It's a very compact piece of software compared to IE, so there's no good reason why you should be getting such a lag. Unless of course you've downloaded something from microsoft that screws up non-MS software?Quote:
Originally Posted by The Scotsman
It was called service pack 2, If I remember correctly......
The jokers that published those statistice probably WERE guessing, there's no way one in ten websites don't work with Firefox.Quote:
Originally Posted by darkstar
yes, thats it, they were guessing! :rolleyes:
as you are evidently not interested in reading the article i have posted some of the offending sites here:
Odeon.co.uk
Jobcentreplus.gov.uk
Insurance.co.uk
British American Tobacco
Mansell.plc.uk
Companieshouse.gov.uk
Flybmi.com/cargo
bssuk.co.uk
I have read the article, as well as the original report on the scivisium site.Quote:
Originally Posted by darkstar
What I find highly conspicuous by it's absence in the report, is the number of sites tested, the selection criteria, and perhaps a list of actual sites in the survey.
Take your list of eight offending sites and add another eight that work in firefox, now you can say that 50% of websites don't work in firefox.
Even better, add 7992 sites that work perfectly, and you can say that only one in 1000 sites have a problem.
My point is that without the details of the survey, the results mean absolutely nothing, and are no more useful to me or anybody than a guess.
One mans failure to follow standards is another mans progress. What, you want everything to remain the same? The whole concept of using 'standards' to describe something as fluid as internet browser development is a misnomer. How can you apply that word to an industry that is still brand new by any other standard? :DQuote:
MS did never care about any standards, not the standards of the W3C and not the standards they defined on their own. They not even get the basic idea behind a format like RSS! A company like that should never and can never be the one that defines the official standards.
Quote:
What I find highly conspicuous by it's absence in the report, is the number of sites tested, the selection criteria, and perhaps a list of actual sites in the survey.
"Some 100 leading consumer sites were assessed by web-testing firm SciVisum"
This was cunningly Hidden in the second paragraph on the bbc page.
but of course you are correct, its actually a conspiracy against Firefox, and its all been made up on the spot :p
This is all too funny. The whole idea of imposing standards on any one here, or the rest of the types that make up people associated with the internet is absurd. If FF or any other browser can not view every site out there, then FF is at fault, not MS or NS or anyone else. Deal with it. Who needs two browsers anyway? :D
...hence the one in ten, I did get that far. :)
It's not a conspiracy against firefox, the company responsible for the report has advised it's sponsors to make their sites more accessable to non-ie users as a result.
If you really beleive that 100 consumer sites were chosen at random, try doing so yourself.
Actually, do what scivisium did...find another eight sites that DONT work. When you get to 100 and you're still looking, you'll see what I mean.
Their advice only sells when it worries people, this isn't about firefox or IE, its about a consultancy firm trying to make itself seem more useful than it is. Couple that with the exposure they've received as a result of these "worrying" figures, and you'll forgive me for being just a little more skeptical.
So if I build a site that doesn't work properly in any browser, they all have to go back to the drawing board?Quote:
Originally Posted by iaskwhy
Cool, I'm on it..... :cool:
Yeah, let's create some new tags!
Or what about:Code:<shake device="notebook" time="2000">
Or:Code:<make3d method="red/green" z=20>This text is three dimensional!</make3d>
Doesent work in IE! IE is at fault! :pCode:<kill device="lcdscreen">
Fredi
<ihoss/> or hang on, lets make that <ihoss> so it doesnt follow the standards at all.
Standards are released in versions, so the industry wont stop evolving. xthml 2.0 and css 3 are being worked on to improve the web, but if every browser made their on stuff then that would be like everyone encoding videofiles differently and expecting the videoplayers to play it perfectly anyways.
@ lesli_felix
The Nile and its tributaries flow though nine countries. The White Nile flows though Uganda, Sudan, and Egypt. The Blue Nile starts in Ethiopia. Zaire, Kenya, Tanzanian, Rwanda, and Burundi all have tributaries, which flow into the Nile or into lake Victoria Nyanes.
which one are you in? :)
you have already said Hotmail doesn't work so you can add that to your list.
Hotmail is owned by microsoft, I don't think adding it to the list would be entirely fair.
Have you looked at those 100 sites yet? Or are you still trying to find ways to use faulty deductive logic to avoid the point I was making?