Re: betfair.com like site

Chad,

>your expense, and at great expense to them is ridiculous. You might as well
>demand 16 bit versions of all you EXE's.

Actually, I think there may be a swing against Javascript afoot.

Moderate size firms (150 users) like ours, without the resources to
fully research and continually research any particular browser's
foibles, and not trusting either ISP-provided content-scanning or MS's
security model or their ability/inclination to make it bullet-proof,
are getting so paranoid about all sorts of malicious web content that
there is a certain attraction to a web browser that does nothing more
than just render served HTML. From our pov, IE as default browser has
to go, and any 3rd party browser prepared to warrant that their
browser *absolutely will not* execute client-side code, regardless of
configuration settings, would be hugely attractive to us.

Cheers, Martyn

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: unTRUTH: How to succeed at others expense.
    ... BUT (AND HERE IS THE KEY TO THE COMPRESSION ... EVERYTHING HAPPENS IN THE BROWSER ... That is because you love anyone or anything that produces benefits for you, at any expense. ... Whatever quiets your conscience will do. ...
    (sci.math)
  • Re: New Firefox Vulnerabilities?
    ... > the expense of those of us who do use Firefox. ... Mike:-) In fact I do use that browser at times along with about ... but always smile when the "dead serious" folk post suggesting ...
    (uk.people.silversurfers)
  • Re: A Very Dangerous Worm in Windows Metafile Images (WMF)
    ... > John Devereux wrote... ... >>> Most of us don't visit malicious web pages. ... > Ilfak's patch blocks WMF files from executing any internal code ... I would rather suggest using another browser, ...
    (sci.electronics.design)