Re: OO? Oh oh!
From: Richard (riplin_at_Azonic.co.nz)
Date: 01/30/04
- Next message: Robert Jones: "Re: Performance in perform loops"
- Previous message: Richard: "Re: OO? Oh oh!"
- In reply to: JerryMouse: "Re: OO? Oh oh!"
- Next in thread: JerryMouse: "Re: OO? Oh oh!"
- Reply: JerryMouse: "Re: OO? Oh oh!"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: 30 Jan 2004 11:09:41 -0800
"JerryMouse" <nospam@bisusa.com> wrote
> > It is only dumb sheep who think that this represents any form of
> > 'standards'.
>
> Hmmm. If (big percentage) agree on something, doesn't that become the
> standard (de facto, at least)?
You confirm my assertion. ;-)
Actually there is a large difference between 'agree' and blind passive
aquiescence. With MS they have demonstrated that their
implementations are only 'standard's until others can interact with
them, and then they change it to ensure their customers need to spend
more money and that their competitors no longer work.
And now with, say, XML documents in Word, they have patents on certain
processes so that they can control who can and cannot interchange data
with them.
> "Drove others out of business?" Who?
You must get youur news feed exclusively from MS and MSN for you to
have to ask.
> Meanwhile, millions - make that tens of
> millions - didn't have to pay Netscape $50 (and that was back when $50 was a
> lot of money).
Actually there used to be dozens of browser makers, Netscape was the
most visible. I used the IBM one supplied with OS/2 (it was also
available for Windows) when Bill Gates 'The Road Ahead' edition 1 did
not even mention the Internet.
MS got Spyglass to write IE for them on a contract that specified that
they would be paid $5 for every copy _sold_. MS never paid them
anything for creating this product for them, it was not 'sold'. This
drove Spyglass out of business. Being a friend of MS is just as
deadly as being an enemy.
Fortunately there are now several browsers that are far better than IE
and that don't have the security problems that MS has built into later
versions. I use Mozilla mostly. Sometimes Konqueror or Galleon
because it is there. My son uses Opera, without my prompting, because
it is so much better than IE. Tabbed browsing, no pop-ups, much
faster, and it is much more secure:
"""------ from Slashdot --------
"In a recent Microsoft Knowledge Base article, they provide 'Steps
that you can take to help identify and to help protect yourself from
deceptive (spoofed) Web sites and malicious hyperlinks.' These steps
include always using SSL/TLS, typing 'JScript commands' in the address
bar, and typing in URLs instead of clicking links! I have a suggestion
that's not in the Knowledge Base: don't use IE!"
------------------- """
But the grand plan for IE was not just to drive Netscape broke, it was
also to _replace_ the Internet with MS's own network to replace AOL
and CmpuServe. If you recall in the early days of IE they _had_ to
connect via MSN and had only limited interaction with the Internet.
MS wanted to drive a new 'standard' that they controlled. Fortunately
they never got the sheep masses that would have allowed them to
declare that the world had changed.
> Yeah. They (or we) will either just mill around and cope, or try jumping
> over the fence. Evidence shows, however, when sheep jump the fence all that
> happens is that people go to sleep.
That's OK, you can advocate and follow the Rip Van Winkle approach.
- Next message: Robert Jones: "Re: Performance in perform loops"
- Previous message: Richard: "Re: OO? Oh oh!"
- In reply to: JerryMouse: "Re: OO? Oh oh!"
- Next in thread: JerryMouse: "Re: OO? Oh oh!"
- Reply: JerryMouse: "Re: OO? Oh oh!"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|
