What do you think?
http://kianuel.myminicity.com

On Sat, 29 Mar 2008 22:43:03 +0000, Luigi Dal Monte wrote:

> What do you think?

I think you're a moron.


--
"Ubuntu" -- an African word, meaning "Slackware is too hard for me".

Responding to Luigi Dal Monte...
> What do you think?
> http://kianuel.myminicity.com
>

Tried looking using Dillo, just got "This site needs javascript".

Therefore, site broken.

Not a good start.

Thus spake Mike:
> Responding to Luigi Dal Monte...
>> What do you think?
>> http://kianuel.myminicity.com
>>
>
> Tried looking using Dillo, just got "This site needs javascript".
>
> Therefore, site broken.

<chuckling>

> Not a good start.

I just hate a "requirement" for a site to "be accessible" based on
something as unneeded as Java and any other "whiz bang!" effects.
Whatever happened to consideration of text-only or simple (X)HTML
optioned Web sites? What I mean is what happened to Web sites which
were written to offer a choice?

As it was:

Upper management & Web dev:

"Would you like HTML, text-only or Java with your Web experience
today?"

User:

"I'd like text-only, please. Oh, and hold the frames if you will?"

Upper management & Web dev:

"No problem. Here you are. And thank you for coming by!"


As it is:

Upper management & Web dev:

"You must have Java and cookies enabled to use our site. Oh, and we
*strongly* recommend the use of InternutExploder web browser for
our, erm your, best experience".

User:

"But all I want is to see if your site has what I'm seeking.
Besides, I don't like InternutExploder because it's buggy and
unsecured".

Upper management & Web dev:

"THEN GO AWAY!!" (mumbling to himself, "Crummy users, who do they
think they are?")

--
sk8r-365
And there followed him great multitudes of people from Galilee,
and from Decapolis, and from Jerusalem, and from Judaea, and from
beyond Jordan. -- Matthew 4:25

sk8r-365 wrote:
> Thus spake Mike:
>> Responding to Luigi Dal Monte...
>>> What do you think?
>>> http://kianuel.myminicity.com
>>>
>> Tried looking using Dillo, just got "This site needs javascript".
>>
>> Therefore, site broken.
>
> <chuckling>
>
>> Not a good start.
>
> I just hate a "requirement" for a site to "be accessible" based on
> something as unneeded as Java and any other "whiz bang!" effects.
> Whatever happened to consideration of text-only or simple (X)HTML
> optioned Web sites? What I mean is what happened to Web sites which
> were written to offer a choice?

I remember when I begun to surf around on the net, then it was quite plane
sites, just text and some images when needed. No need to register on sites to
get access to everything they had, no rich organizations hunting poor people
who shared files. It was the time of the free internet, not spam free but not
more in a year than you get in a day today. Suddenly something bad happen,
someone invented frames...


--

//Aho

"J.O. Aho" <user@example.net> wrote in message
news:659udjF2f9tckU1@mid.individual.net...
> sk8r-365 wrote:
> > Thus spake Mike:
> >> Responding to Luigi Dal Monte...
> >>> What do you think?
> >>> http://kianuel.myminicity.com
> >>>
> >> Tried looking using Dillo, just got "This site needs javascript".
> >>
> >> Therefore, site broken.
> >
> > <chuckling>
> >
> >> Not a good start.
> >
> > I just hate a "requirement" for a site to "be accessible" based on
> > something as unneeded as Java and any other "whiz bang!" effects.
> > Whatever happened to consideration of text-only or simple (X)HTML
> > optioned Web sites? What I mean is what happened to Web sites which
> > were written to offer a choice?
>
> I remember when I begun to surf around on the net, then it was quite plane
> sites, just text and some images when needed. No need to register on sites
to
> get access to everything they had, no rich organizations hunting poor
people
> who shared files. It was the time of the free internet, not spam free but
not
> more in a year than you get in a day today. Suddenly something bad happen,
> someone invented frames...

<>

the good old days

http://www.archive.org/web/web.php

Responding to J.O. Aho...
> sk8r-365 wrote:
>> Thus spake Mike:
>>> Responding to Luigi Dal Monte...
>>>> What do you think?
>>>> http://kianuel.myminicity.com
>>>>
>>> Tried looking using Dillo, just got "This site needs javascript".
>>>
>>> Therefore, site broken.
>>
>> <chuckling>
>>
>>> Not a good start.
>>
>> I just hate a "requirement" for a site to "be accessible" based on
>> something as unneeded as Java and any other "whiz bang!" effects.
>> Whatever happened to consideration of text-only or simple (X)HTML
>> optioned Web sites? What I mean is what happened to Web sites which
>> were written to offer a choice?
>
> I remember when I begun to surf around on the net, then it was quite plane
> sites, just text and some images when needed. No need to register on sites to
> get access to everything they had, no rich organizations hunting poor people
> who shared files. It was the time of the free internet, not spam free but not
> more in a year than you get in a day today. Suddenly something bad happen,
> someone invented frames...
>

As I recall, the fundamental idea behind HTML was that contents was
offered with tags for formatting, and that the end user would render
that formating according to their needs.

Then came the advertisers, and suddenly the web is flooded with
people who expect everything to be done for them. Then that becomes
mandatory rather than optional.

One needs to draw a line in the sand with this kind of thing, and
decide for oneself if a site is broken, not wait for some browser or
"webmaster" to decide for you.

As I said, that site is broken. ;\


"Best viewed in" = Broken web page generator, and so on. A simple
Email to the site admin each time someone hits their supa-doopa
(broken) page design, should give them a clue. Keep fixing things at
the user end, and they just see that as encouragement... >:(

--
\===* www.jonestheweb.myby.co.uk *===/
)8 Data-Pimped by your ISP yet? 8(
(For clues, search "anti phorm")

Luigi Dal Monte wrote:

> What do you think?
> http://kianuel.myminicity.com

Oh how fine. FF3b4 with noscript hangs on that and needs a kill signal.
WTF.
--
vista policy violation: Microsoft optical mouse found penguin patterns
on mousepad. Partition scan in progress to remove offending
incompatible products. Reactivate MS software.
Linux 2.6.24. [LinuxCounter#295241,ICQ#4918962]

Mike <Not@Arizona.Bay>:
>
> As I recall, the fundamental idea behind HTML was that contents was
> offered with tags for formatting, and that the end user would render
> that formating according to their needs.

The best laid plans ...

> "Best viewed in" = Broken web page generator, and so on.

Agreed.

> A simple Email to the site admin each time someone hits their
> supa-doopa (broken) page design, should give them a clue. Keep

Dreamer. "Sheesh. The 5063rd Linux complainer on the site today.
10,000 IE users so far, and no one's complained. Those Linux people
sure must have sh*tt* browsers."


--
Any technology distinguishable from magic is insufficiently advanced.
(*) http://blinkynet.net/comp/uip5.html Linux Counter #80292
- - http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc1855.html Please, don't Cc: me.

s. keeling wrote:

> Mike <Not@Arizona.Bay>:
>>
>> As I recall, the fundamental idea behind HTML was that contents was
>> offered with tags for formatting, and that the end user would render
>> that formating according to their needs.
>
> The best laid plans ...
>
>> "Best viewed in" = Broken web page generator, and so on.
>
> Agreed.
>
>> A simple Email to the site admin each time someone hits their
>> supa-doopa (broken) page design, should give them a clue. Keep
>
> Dreamer. "Sheesh. The 5063rd Linux complainer on the site today.
> 10,000 IE users so far, and no one's complained. Those Linux people
> sure must have sh*tt* browsers."
>
>
Please finish your homework...
....luv mum

Responding to s. keeling...
> Mike <Not@Arizona.Bay>:
>>
>> As I recall, the fundamental idea behind HTML was that contents was
>> offered with tags for formatting, and that the end user would render
>> that formating according to their needs.
>
> The best laid plans ...
>
>> "Best viewed in" = Broken web page generator, and so on.
>
> Agreed.
>
>> A simple Email to the site admin each time someone hits their
>> supa-doopa (broken) page design, should give them a clue. Keep
>
> Dreamer. "Sheesh. The 5063rd Linux complainer on the site today.
> 10,000 IE users so far, and no one's complained. Those Linux people
> sure must have sh*tt* browsers."
>

Still working on a solution to this one. :(

"...but I'm not the only one..."

--
\===* www.jonestheweb.myby.co.uk *===/
)8 Data-Pimped by your ISP yet? 8(
(For clues, search "anti phorm")