SitePoint Sponsor

User Tag List

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 51 to 72 of 72
  1. #51
    SitePoint Zealot strangealienmagic's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2001
    Location
    Metro Detroit area, Michigan
    Posts
    110
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Originally posted by studiococo
    We as developers CURRENTLY create the experience but that isn't what will happen in teh future, autolinking through common use of user-controlled spiders to build a personal "web" is where the internet is heading. The rise and fall of gophers that keep coming back, of news-hounds, etc shows that people want the information they want the way they want it. That's just a fact. If a person could customize the way a page looked exactly they'd be happier than their experience being "controlled by a 14-year old".
    studiococo, all I can say is that I hope your crystal ball is way wrong. It will make the current state of information overload seem mild.

    Also, if the average person controls the content of their "web experience," from the stats I've seen, we all may as well get into porno right now.

  2. #52
    will code HTML for food Michel V's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2000
    Location
    Corsica
    Posts
    552
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Anyway, a browser should adapt itself to the websites, websites shouldn't have to adapt themselves to the browser.

    With the P3P and Smart-Tags features, Microsoft is using its monopoly to modify the web the way they want it to be: Windows-dependent.


    And please, the "it's good for the user" speech has been heard already: we all know how the user is dumb and wouldn't notice anything.
    [blogger: zengun] [blogware contributor: wordpress]

  3. #53
    SitePoint Guru sowen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Location
    Stockport, UK
    Posts
    729
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Shin Ma,

    That is what te browser is doing. It does not touch your code. It does not adapt your site, and you site does not have to adapt to it. It just places a squiggly line under keywords that might be of intrest to the user who is surfing with IE6. If that user wants to look further they can.

  4. #54
    SitePoint Guru
    Join Date
    Jul 2000
    Location
    Long Island, NY
    Posts
    755
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Let's take a minute to forget the technology end and look at history. Microsoft was late in paying attention to the web at all, and when they finally did, they made clumsy attempts to fit make the web fit with older media concepts. This was either very dumb, or they were just ahead of their time. First, with the introduction of IE 4 as part of the OS, they introduced channels and Push Technology. If this had worked out, it would have turned the web into an interactive version of television, where you just accept what you're given. They also first introduced Slate as a subscription based site. That didn't last long either and it was free very soon. But they knew what they wanted and what they, and every other big company wants is for the web to be another place where people go where they're told and look at what they're handed by huge corporate media, which is own by fewer and fewer companies.

    I don't mean to sound like an anti-business zealot here, but if that's the way the web ends up it will be a tragedy. The web is a revolutionary communications medium. Business certainly has its place on the web, and money will always talk, but it shouldn't have this extra influence on what people look at, where they go, and what links they find on sites that haven't put them there.

  5. #55
    SitePoint Addict
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Location
    Ottawa ON
    Posts
    315
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    The internet was commercialized by a 1992 act of Congress. I think that all agree that commercialization was a positive step because it is certain that without commercialization only a fraction of the current users would be accessing the internet.

    However, the Internet has succeeded because checks have consistently been placed on that corporate control. With Internet Explorer 6 and Netscape 6, developers are encouraged to make browser-specific 'side bar channels' (what they're actually called I'm not positive). I think that a better solution would have been for the browser companies to choose something that wasn't dependant on a particular browser, perhaps something that was written in HTML Basic.
    Last edited by prowsej; Jun 27, 2001 at 17:59.

  6. #56
    will code HTML for food Michel V's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2000
    Location
    Corsica
    Posts
    552
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Both sidebar systems are HTML-based. They just differ in the actual implementation. For example, for a link in a sidebar file, to open in the browser window, you've got to put target="_content", in Mozilla/NS6. I suppose that it's different for IE6.
    Then again, is the sidebar still shipped with IE6 ? And will there be a way for the common webmaster to develop their own sidebars ? It seemed to me that only the big boys had access to the sidebar functionnality of IE6, while on NS6 a simple javascript link does the trick for adding a panel in the sidebar.
    [blogger: zengun] [blogware contributor: wordpress]

  7. #57
    SitePoint Zealot nflicanada's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Location
    Sk, Canada
    Posts
    150
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Shin Ma actually P3P is a privacy platform developed by the W3C so that really can't be construed alone as MS trying to use their monopoly. However I do think they should ship IE with it disabled or set at low to allow for third party cookies.

    W3C.org's P3P page

  8. #58
    SitePoint Addict
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Location
    Ottawa ON
    Posts
    315
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Originally posted by Shin Ma
    Then again, is the sidebar still shipped with IE6 ? And will there be a way for the common webmaster to develop their own sidebars ? It seemed to me that only the big boys had access to the sidebar functionnality of IE6, while on NS6 a simple javascript link does the trick for adding a panel in the sidebar.
    Do you think that I am wrong to see this as a repeat of the battle that ensued after Microsoft and Netscape implemented competing push technologies in their version 4 browsers?

  9. #59
    SitePoint Guru
    Join Date
    Jul 2000
    Location
    Long Island, NY
    Posts
    755
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    You probably woudn't be wrong except that Netscape seems to be saying that browser development is not a priority any more. With AOL having made a deal to continue with IE, there doesn't seem to be any real possibility that Netscape is going to regain any real market share in the immediate future. Since portal development remains in Netscape's plans and normally a viable browser would be quite an enhancement to those plans, I'm beginning to think that they've come to an "understanding" of sorts with MS. I didn't used to be paranoid, really. But recent developments are making me that way very fast.

  10. #60
    SitePoint Addict
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Location
    Ottawa ON
    Posts
    315
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    With AOL having made a deal to continue with IE
    Please point to a news story of this happening, I missed it. Last I heard, the negotiations broke off and the AOL icon was not going to be included in Windows anymore.

  11. #61
    SitePoint Wizard silver trophy Jeremy W.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    Toronto, Canada
    Posts
    9,121
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    You really are nit-picky aren't you?

    The point remains that NS is "pulling back" from their concentration on the browser, essentially meaning though it will happen (a new browser) it won't be as fast (like v6 was fast in coming, right?).

    Thing is this whole thread has pretty much died... We're going round and round and nothing new is being said. All facts have been laid out, all opinions have been said... Can we drop it?
    SVP Marketing, SoCast SRM
    Personal blog: Strategerize
    Twitter: @jeremywright

  12. #62
    SitePoint Evangelist thewitt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2001
    Posts
    468
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Microsoft has just announced they are dropping Smart Tags from IE 6 due to customer response...

    -t

  13. #63
    SitePoint Zealot strangealienmagic's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2001
    Location
    Metro Detroit area, Michigan
    Posts
    110
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Ding dong the witch is dead....

  14. #64
    SitePoint Wizard
    Join Date
    Sep 1999
    Posts
    1,390
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Originally posted by thewitt
    Microsoft has just announced they are dropping Smart Tags from IE 6 due to customer response...

    -t
    Yup. I just read the article at news.com - http://news.cnet.com/news/0-1003-200...html?tag=tp_pr

  15. #65
    SitePoint Wizard silver trophy Jeremy W.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    Toronto, Canada
    Posts
    9,121
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    So innovation dies again... You must be thrilled
    SVP Marketing, SoCast SRM
    Personal blog: Strategerize
    Twitter: @jeremywright

  16. #66
    SitePoint Wizard
    Join Date
    Sep 1999
    Posts
    1,390
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Originally posted by studiococo
    So innovation dies again... You must be thrilled
    Oh boy...

    I don't think it is innovation. I think it is more of a sneaky way for Microsoft to control the Internet. "Control" isn't the right word, but I think you know what I mean.

    Don't get me started on MS here...I'll save my words for the other thread I am fired up in

  17. #67
    SitePoint Wizard creole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Location
    Nashvegas Baby!
    Posts
    7,845
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Originally posted by studiococo
    So innovation dies again... You must be thrilled
    If I invent this amazing widget that could revolutionize the way we frimjam the jibbitz, but then find out that people don't want it, how was I innovating? I failed as a businessperson because I didn't do market research to find out if people even WANTED my widget in the first place.

    The public has spoken and MS bows to the public demand. They show commendable business sense.
    Adobe Certified Coldfusion MX 7 Developer
    Adobe Certified Advanced Coldfusion MX Developer
    My Blog (new) | My Family | My Freelance | My Recipes

  18. #68
    SitePoint Wizard silver trophy Jeremy W.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    Toronto, Canada
    Posts
    9,121
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I agree that it was good business sense however it was a great idea (if really bad implementation) to have users have the info they want at their fingertips.

    Maybe there could be a more unobtrusive way of doing it, one so that ms didn't control the db, whatever. That isn't the issue. The issue is that users all of a sudden had instant access to relevant information and I think that's innovative.
    SVP Marketing, SoCast SRM
    Personal blog: Strategerize
    Twitter: @jeremywright

  19. #69
    SitePoint Wizard creole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Location
    Nashvegas Baby!
    Posts
    7,845
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I agree with that part. The funny thing is if some OTHER company did it and offered this to users, people would probaly praise the company.



    now that's funny.
    Adobe Certified Coldfusion MX 7 Developer
    Adobe Certified Advanced Coldfusion MX Developer
    My Blog (new) | My Family | My Freelance | My Recipes

  20. #70
    SitePoint Wizard silver trophy Jeremy W.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    Toronto, Canada
    Posts
    9,121
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I agree Very funny
    SVP Marketing, SoCast SRM
    Personal blog: Strategerize
    Twitter: @jeremywright

  21. #71
    SitePoint Wizard dominique's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2000
    Location
    orbis terrarum
    Posts
    1,523
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Originally posted by prowsej
    Please point to a news story of this happening, I missed it. Last I heard, the negotiations broke off and the AOL icon was not going to be included in Windows anymore.
    Here it is, it dates back to June 6th, 2001 though:
    [...]
    AOL Time Warner's retreat from creating distinct Netscape browsing software figures in the on-again, off-again talks the company is holding with Microsoft to renegotiate its license to embed the Internet Explorer in its AOL service.

    The talks, which broke down last week but are said to have since resumed, would extend a five-year AOL-Microsoft browser deal that expired in January of this year, among other topics.
    [...]

    http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/nm/2001...cape_dc_1.html

  22. #72
    SitePoint Zealot strangealienmagic's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2001
    Location
    Metro Detroit area, Michigan
    Posts
    110
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Originally posted by studiococo
    I agree that it was good business sense however it was a great idea (if really bad implementation) to have users have the info they want at their fingertips.
    I think the part about "users have the info they want at their fingertips" with ST implementation is arguable.

    I have read informative articles where the writer has included links to a half dozen different terms, stories, whatever, - per paragraph - and all it did was bog me down in checking out the various links.

    By providing the links it made me feel as if I was missing some key point if I didn't check them out as I went along.

    Now , if you were write a fairly self contained article, only to have it peppered with ST links that you (as author) didn't feel necessary to include in the first place, that might very well have someone bogged down with a bad case of information overload.

    I personally find if a concept, term, or whatever is important enough for me to look into, I'll do it on my own, whether a link is provided for me or not.

    A web with every paragraph of text indiscriminately laced with links, just because technology makes it possible, seems less helpful than more.


Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •