SitePoint Sponsor

User Tag List

Page 5 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 101 to 125 of 146
  1. #101
    SitePoint Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Portland, OR
    Posts
    14
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Self-promoting, sure, and if they are useless, time will tell, but not stupid.
    Well, I suppose 'stupid' is a matter of perspective. This suit will most likely be expensive and time consuming for Opera and will effect little if any real net positive gain for consumers or developers. Call me cynical.

    I think Alex's point is that there are just bigger fish to fry. If history has taught us anything, technologies like offline storage, HTML 5, CSS3, AIR, and ECMAScript 4 will conspire to throw web standards implementation off kilter in all major browser engines for the next couple of years. Web standards are fine to the degree we can get everyone on board together and playing nicely, but they're not the Holy Grail of anything and I simply cannot agree that the lack of proper implementation has brought significant harm to consumers, developers or industry at large.

    It still seems to me that this is an ill-timed solution looking for a problem.
    CreativePro Office: The online office for creative professionals.

  2. #102
    In memoriam gold trophysilver trophybronze trophy Dan Schulz's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Aurora, Illinois
    Posts
    15,476
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Again, it's not a lawsuit. It's just a complaint being added to the EU's claim against Microsoft.

  3. #103
    SitePoint Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Portland, OR
    Posts
    14
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    You're absolutely correct, Dan. My mistake.
    CreativePro Office: The online office for creative professionals.

  4. #104
    In memoriam gold trophysilver trophybronze trophy Dan Schulz's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Aurora, Illinois
    Posts
    15,476
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Don't worry about it.

  5. #105
    SitePoint Addict
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Lancaster
    Posts
    240
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    IE 8 Passed ACID2 test.

    http://channel9.msdn.com/ShowPost.aspx?PostID=367214

    Looks like Microsoft is on track to get compliant so all this hoopla will be over nuttin

  6. #106
    Non-Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Seattle
    Posts
    4,328
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by turboweb View Post
    IE 8 Passed ACID2 test.

    http://channel9.msdn.com/ShowPost.aspx?PostID=367214

    Looks like Microsoft is on track to get compliant so all this hoopla will be over nuttin
    Hmmmm...something smells fishy to me...

    A week after Opera Software filed an antitrust suit against Microsoft that focused, in part, on Microsoftís falure to make Internet Explorer (IE) standards-compliant, Microsoft has gone on record stating IE 8 will include support for key Web standards.
    Microsoft announces a successful INTERNAL test just one week after Opera files its news-making complaint, and the M$ announcement is publicized by http://channel9.msdn.com? M$' announcement sure doesn't seem to be generating much news.

    As I recall, M$ also made lots or promising claims regarding Vista, which was named the year's most disappointing produce by PC World. Sorry if I sound skeptical.

  7. #107
    #titanic {float:none} silver trophy
    molona's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    from Madrid to Heaven
    Posts
    8,271
    Mentioned
    252 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Tarh View Post
    Off Topic:

    That said, this comparison isn't completely fair considering that I've had more "crashes" with Mac OS X than with Windows XP.
    Off Topic:

    Macintosh is very stable, so this makes me wonder about those crashes. Still, typical crashes will only stop the program that caused it, and not the whole OS, as Windows does. Did you buy a Mac, or did you install it in your PC? If the second, you could have some hardware incompatibilities or not the right drivers and that will cause Mac to crash more than it should.

  8. #108
    Level 8 Chinese guy Archbob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    Somewhere in this vast universe
    Posts
    3,741
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by chiefupstart View Post
    Well, I suppose 'stupid' is a matter of perspective. This suit will most likely be expensive and time consuming for Opera and will effect little if any real net positive gain for consumers or developers. Call me cynical.

    I think Alex's point is that there are just bigger fish to fry. If history has taught us anything, technologies like offline storage, HTML 5, CSS3, AIR, and ECMAScript 4 will conspire to throw web standards implementation off kilter in all major browser engines for the next couple of years. Web standards are fine to the degree we can get everyone on board together and playing nicely, but they're not the Holy Grail of anything and I simply cannot agree that the lack of proper implementation has brought significant harm to consumers, developers or industry at large.

    It still seems to me that this is an ill-timed solution looking for a problem.

    What he just said.

  9. #109
    SitePoint Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    37
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Go Opera. :]

  10. #110
    ☆★☆★ silver trophy vgarcia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    in transition
    Posts
    21,235
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by turboweb View Post
    IE 8 Passed ACID2 test.

    http://channel9.msdn.com/ShowPost.aspx?PostID=367214

    Looks like Microsoft is on track to get compliant so all this hoopla will be over nuttin
    Passing the acid2 test now puts IE where other browsers were in 2005. Even passing that stupid test they have a lot to catch up and it's not like the other browsers are standing still.

  11. #111
    SitePoint Addict
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Lancaster
    Posts
    240
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by geosite View Post
    Hmmmm...something smells fishy to me...



    Microsoft announces a successful INTERNAL test just one week after Opera files its news-making complaint, and the M$ announcement is publicized by http://channel9.msdn.com? M$' announcement sure doesn't seem to be generating much news.

    As I recall, M$ also made lots or promising claims regarding Vista, which was named the year's most disappointing produce by PC World. Sorry if I sound skeptical.
    Sorry.. i can't read/believe nor stand anyone who spells Microsoft M$ anymore.

    As for Vista, have you ever ran it? Sure the consumer version has its ups and downs vs xp which is 5 years old but the business version is an absolute dream to implement in a large corporate environment and even more so after Server 2008 is finally RTM.

  12. #112
    SitePoint Addict
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Lancaster
    Posts
    240
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by vgarcia View Post
    Passing the acid2 test now puts IE where other browsers were in 2005. Even passing that stupid test they have a lot to catch up and it's not like the other browsers are standing still.
    Pure FUD.

    Konquerer passed in 2005
    Webkit/Safari late 2005
    Opera in 2006
    Gecko 1.9 build passed late 2006 but won't be in release until Firefox 3.0 next year.

    Acid2 compliance isn't a reality for 99% of the people until 2008. If compliance was the solution to everything Safari/Mac/Webkit should have taken over the web.

  13. #113
    Non-Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Seattle
    Posts
    4,328
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by turboweb View Post
    Sorry.. i can't read/believe nor stand anyone who spells Microsoft M$ anymore.
    It's a fairly popular and easily recognizable abbreviation. MS could work but can also be mistaken for other things. But if you have a problem with it (or are merely claiming to have a problem with it), that's fine. It's a free country.

    As for Vista, have you ever ran it?
    Nope. I migrated to my first Mac. I still use my PC some, but XP has caused me enough troubles; I don't need to wrestle with Vista. I may eventually upgrade to IE7 or IE8 so I can use my PC to check websites in IE. But if rumors that IE8 will only work with Vista are true, then I may have to pass on it. On the other hand, if it actually recognizes standards, then a website that displays correctly in Firefox, Opera or Safari should more than likely display correctly - or at least good enough - in IE8...right?

  14. #114
    Non-Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Seattle
    Posts
    4,328
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    On Edit: Sorry, I double posted somehow.

  15. #115
    SitePoint Wizard megamanXplosion's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Kentucky, USA
    Posts
    1,099
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    People are saying W3C's specifications are not standards but recommendations--but they are wrong so far as I can tell. They have misunderstood W3C's meaning of recommendation. When W3C says a specification is a recommendation they mean it's no longer in the drafting stages like many of their other specifications which are not recommendations (still in the development stage). The W3C Recommandations are web standards. If they weren't web standards then I would love for someone to explain why Microsoft hasn't used their Public Relations team to point this out to protect their image? They would do that if they didn't recognize the W3C specifications as web standards. The reason they don't is because they--like Opera, Mozilla, Apple, Adobe, and so on--do recognize them as web standards. If all browser makers and major website development environment makers are referring to the specifications as "web standards," the obvious conclusion is that mean what they're saying when they call them standards.

    I'm amused that people say browser makers should try to get Microsoft to open Internet Explorer so others can follow. I disagree. Internet Explorer should remain as it is except follow the standards Microsoft helped create. People are too willing to grant Microsoft the power to tinker with web standards while Microsoft knows other browser makers will try to follow them and change course by rendering differently. This could force web designers to conform. That would screw other browser makers who keep their word and reward those who do not.

    I disagree about browsers trying different things before they become a standard. That's fine for new technologies but that approach is unacceptable when extending existing standards. Standards extension should occur through a representative republic negotiation process. In other words, extensions are agreen on by browser makers based on web designer and developer "votes" who give their opinion about the best solution concerning code and user appeasement. Users, in turn, show web designers and developers what appeases them. In such a process, browser makers represent web designers and developers and those people represent users. Extensions agreed on are agreements among people who represent you.

    That's essentially how it works now, though some argue for a monarchy conception (monopolies create the standards) or anarchial conception (different browsers take different approaches in extending standards). Those will not work. The monarchial conception enables monopolies to screw everyone over. Therefore, users don't get their way and no longer control the WWW. I don't like that idea. The anarchial conception would cause small browser makers to waste millions (or billions) of dollars developing silly rendering widgets to gain attention but eventually remove them when a monopoly screws them. The anarchy might cater to the interests of users but web designers and developers--the informed users--are not given the greater weight they deserve so they're a very small minority voice. The users who seem incapable of realizing cordless mice need battery replacements occasionally will buy browsers by buying operating systems by buying computers because of temporary gimmicky widgets to appeal to Christmas-gift whims. Do you want standards guided by the whims of people who seem incapable of realizing cordless mice need battery replacements once in a while? You need web designers and developers to produce user-appeasing standards that make sense and they need a stronger voice to get that result. The anarchial conception doesn't ensure they have a strong voice. Either way--monarchy or anarchy--the Internet would go to Hell in a handbasket. Only a representative republic approach makes sense.

    I disagree about innovation being the basis for standards rather than standards being the basis for innovation. I disagree with the opposite argument as well. The problem is the simplicity of the single-level conception of innovation. We require a two-tier perspective. Forthcoming standards could include the effective and agreeable innovations (first tier) while providing the flexibility for innovation based on them (second tier). As I argued earlier, the anarchial conception of standards extension makes no sense. It necessarily follows that innovative standards extensions should be good ideas not implemented in a major browser yet. If it were otherwise, browsers could include gimmicky, absurd additions appealing to the whims of the clueless and those become part of the specifications because other browser makers would be pressured by the market to conform. That would allow them to bend over small browser makers, leading to a form of dictatorship. Extensions should be based on good ideas, not good sales. Web designers and developers, on the other hand, can create second tier innovations based on thought or code experiments. (Monopolies are nowhere near as common for websites.) If someone thinks of an innovation but the standard is missing a feature that would allow the realization it, they can suggest it to browser makers who will argue among themselves about including it in the next specification. This two-tier conception of innovation allows second-tier innovation to cause first-tier innovation that causes second-tier innovation and so on in a continual cycle.

    This is how web standards are created today, with one exception. The W3C serves as the "senate floor" whereby the top representatives, the browser makers, agree on what should constitute the next standard. The browser makers are informed by web designers and developers who are informed by users. The only problem with the current scenario is the massive imbalance in power. It's a democratic system being trampled by the feet of a dictatorship. Microsoft's power in molding the WWW has essentially trampled the democratic system of standards creation under its feet and made the situation a monarchial conception of standards creation because of its monopolistic power over the browser market. Microsoft needs to include other browsers (Opera and Firefox should be enough) in its operating system to redress this massive imbalance in power and restore all the function of the democratic process of standards creation. Only that change can bring about a lasting fix to their first complaint of standards compliancy and hence interoperability. That is the main problem Opera's antitrust complaint is seeking to fix.

  16. #116
    SitePoint Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    California
    Posts
    8
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Bunch of whiners and complainers. I can understand that there absolutely should be a choice to consumers. If it is a great browser then consumers will use it. I tend to find that Internet Explorer is a best choice for general web browsing, even though I use FireFox mostly, cause I am in to web development and FireFox offers some great plugins. Free market will dictate which is a better browser and who will use what. Opera better have some deeeeep pockets.

  17. #117
    SitePoint Wizard drhowarddrfine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    3,438
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by thebeacon View Post
    Bunch of whiners and complainers.
    You mean like web developers as a whole? The complaint is thoroughly correct.
    Free market will dictate which is a better browser and who will use what.
    The complaint has nothing to do with that. It's about a monopoly trying to control access from the internet using non-standard techniques unavailable to other software.
    Opera better have some deeeeep pockets.
    Opera doesn't have to spend a dime. This is attached to an overall EU complaint against Microsoft's operating System (Windows) and not just the browser.

  18. #118
    SitePoint Wizard megamanXplosion's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Kentucky, USA
    Posts
    1,099
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    "If it's a great browser, people will use it." That assumes people are provided with knowledge about other web browsers so they become actual options to the more unexperienced computer users. Microsoft's inclusion of only Internet Explorer and no information about other browsers essentially locks the unexperienced computer users in a cage of ignorance, effectively preventing major growths in popularity for other browsers.

    Mozilla's success was a fluke. They gained marketshare because the Internet Explorer team was temporarily moved to projects for Windows Vista and a major version of Firefox was released during the time government complaints about Internet Explorer's security were being fervently broadcasted around the world. Microsoft made a project management mistake while security was a major issue, hence Mozilla's success. Now the Internet Explorer team is back and working fervently. They'll throw around some money when Internet Explorer 8 is released to advertise on television and generally squash Firefox like a bug—it's only a matter of time.

  19. #119
    SitePoint Wizard drhowarddrfine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    3,438
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by megamanXplosion View Post
    Mozilla's success was a fluke.
    Gaining 16% to 50% market share from one of the world's largest companies is never a fluke.
    They gained marketshare because...
    Are you making excuses for Microsoft? Either do or not. There is no try.
    Now the Internet Explorer team is back and working fervently.
    How do you know this? Microsoft has a lid on tight and no news or information about IE8 has been released until just recently. Even then, they are minor events. 1) Official name release 2) Passing Acid2.
    They'll throw around some money when Internet Explorer 8 is released to advertise on television
    So a change from IE7? They didn't do any of that for IE7. Are you on the inside or something?
    ... and generally squash Firefox like a bug...
    With no television advertising, Firefox picked up 16-50% marketshare. But since IE is automatically installed on each product, Microsoft still has to advertise to get people to use IE?! That's one bad product.

    In order to beat Firefox, you have to build a better product. IE8 will not be a better product that everyone wants and Bill Gates, Dean H, Chris Wilson have all said so.
    Last edited by drhowarddrfine; Dec 28, 2007 at 08:40.

  20. #120
    Employed Again Viflux's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    London, On.
    Posts
    1,127
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by drhowarddrfine View Post
    IE8 will not be a better product that everyone wants and Bill Gates, Dean H, Chris Wilson have all said so.
    Your blatant Microsoft hate is evident to everyone who spends more than 5 minutes on this forum, but let's not start putting words in people's mouths.

    They have said that IE8 will not include "everything that everyone wants", which is reasonable.

    They have not said (to my knowledge) that "IE8 will not be a better product that everyone wants". I know neither what that sentence is supposed to mean, nor where you found it, but if you're going to start throwing around "he saids, she saids", you need to back it up with some verifiable quotes.

  21. #121
    SitePoint Wizard drhowarddrfine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    3,438
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Viflux View Post
    Your blatant Microsoft hate is evident to everyone who spends more than 5 minutes on this forum
    Hm. I thought we were talking about IE.
    but let's not start putting words in people's mouths.
    ...but if you're going to start throwing around "he saids, she saids", you need to back it up with some verifiable quotes.
    Bill Gates in an interview with Molly Holzschlag
    I donít know where Dean is in terms of if heís willing to commit whatís in IE 8 and whatís not in IE 8. In terms of standards support, heíll see that itís a glass half full. It adds a bunch of new stuff we didnít have before, it doesnít add everything that everybody wants us to do.

  22. #122
    SitePoint Author silver trophybronze trophy

    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Ankh-Morpork
    Posts
    12,158
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by thebeacon View Post
    Opera better have some deeeeep pockets.
    Why?

    They've only filed an anti-trust complaint with the European Commission.

    They'd need deep pockets if they had filed a lawsuit against Microsoft, but they haven't. The EC may do so, though, but that has nothing to do with Opera.
    Birnam wood is come to Dunsinane

  23. #123
    Employed Again Viflux's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    London, On.
    Posts
    1,127
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by drhowarddrfine View Post
    That quote is a lot different from the statement you made.

  24. #124
    SitePoint Wizard drhowarddrfine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    3,438
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I said that Gates said
    IE8 will not be a better product that everyone wants
    Bill Gates said
    it doesn’t add everything that everybody wants us to do.
    Pretty close considering I was typing from memory.

  25. #125
    Employed Again Viflux's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    London, On.
    Posts
    1,127
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by drhowarddrfine View Post
    I said that Gates saidBill Gates saidPretty close considering I was typing from memory.
    There's a pretty significant difference, slanted in your obviously biased opinion, between...

    IE8 will not be a better product
    and...

    it doesn’t add everything that everybody wants
    Time for me to exit from this thread.


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
  •