|
Posted on 01/18/2005 12:48:29 PM PST by stainlessbanner
|
Onyx asked how I was doing those pretty tables in my post when I was posting polling data during the election and I said I was using the copy selection source feature in Firefox. LOL
I think that piqued her interest. :)
Microsoft is referring to the client end, your chart is referring to the server end.
Microsoft stopped supporting Windows 9x a long time ago. They don't even have a website for Windows 9x at Microsoft anymore. Windows ME is still supported, but that's going to come to an end soon.
Microsoft doesn't support its six-going-on-seven-year-old operating system any longer. Nobody else supports their OSes that long either, nor is it expected. Except Microsoft that is.
They make a business decision to stop developing for Win 9x users, I make a business decision to go with products that meet my need and switch to Firebird (now Firefox) and install Open Office. Everyone should be happy.
As soon as they get the kinks worked out of their current operating system, I'll probably buy a new computer with that pre-installed. By then they may have even figured out tabbed browsing.
You go ahead and do just that. Choice is good. People like you are in the majority, demanding that your crappy application from 1996 still work on 2004 OSes. They won't get the "kinks" worked out of their OSes until folks like you come to grips with the fact that you have to update your application software occasionally.
Nothing personal, by the way. Backward compatibility means regression testing. Regression testing means that fixes and technology updates end up in the bit bucket.
Yes, I know. My point is with Apache (opensource software) being the market leader it is more compatible with IE than IIS (closed source) is with Firefox...Who's trying harder to be compatible with who?
Yes it is true that no browser is immune from cracker attack. But why does IE have to not only fail to close many doors to attack, but also lay out the welcome mat?
Your position would have more merit if Microsoft put out lean, elegant software instead of the bloated hogs it releases. No reason I should have to buy new hardware because Gates wants to improve his profit margins. My old computers do everything I need. Slapped in a new $12 card and hooked up a DSL line, dropped in a second hard drive for added storage, and I've been set for the last 3 years.
Now Wordstar for CP/M was elegant. It would run on a 64K machine from a floppy.
It's inherent with Windows OS basic architecture. And that's the elephant in the room.
I downloaded today and ran it - it caught a couple that Adaware never found. However, I just ran adaware and it caught 20 that MS missed. Adding to the confusion, Outlook loads MUCH faster after running the MS spyware.
Like CoolWebSearch, New.net and Xupiter, which are very popular IE extension if you count the number of people who have installed them. Too bad the users didn't know they were installing them.
I recently had to use IE on someone else's machine. What a frustrating experience!
bump for later read
LOL!
What's really funny, is when I clicked on the article to lok at it, it says at the top:
Microsoft Responds To IE Security Concerns - Mozilla Firefox
because my response to Microsoft IE Security Concerns was to install Firefox at work and at home, and talk to my boss about how unsafe IE is and that we should switch over the computers in our employ (500+) to Firefox, or ANYTHING else.
Firefox is the one.
I still miss the WordStar keyboard commands, which made the program very efficient to use compared to having to reach for the mouse to do anything.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
Oh good, they've gotten the press release out. That will help solve a lot of these problems with IE.