"On the Bridge! (An MVP upgrade)" <On@the,bridge> wrote in message
news:47e391ec$1@newsgate.x-privat.org...
> my post was about the whole world Bob,
> not only one person...

Again, good for you. "The whole world" can use whatever they want, and so
can I. Everyone is happy.

The date and time was 3/20/2008 5:49 PM, and on a whim, Bob Campbell
pounded out on the keyboard:

>I'm more concerned with correctly displaying the sites I go
> to. IE7 is the standard, so it displays everything correctly.
>

Sites don't display "correctly" in IE because it's "the standard". As
far as "standards" go, if you want to see how a site ACTUALLY displays,
use FF. Then you'll be able to see all the poor coding done. Just
because IE goes into Quirks Mode in order to display lousy code, hasn't
done anyone any favors.

Now that IE8 will default to "Standards Mode", we'll see these web
designers cleaning up their act. And then it won't make any difference
what browser one uses.

--
Terry R.

***Reply Note***
Anti-spam measures are included in my email address.
Delete NOSPAM from the email address after clicking Reply.

"Terry R." <F1ComNOSPAM@pobox.com> wrote in message
news:eDOVqn2iIHA.4844@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> Now that IE8 will default to "Standards Mode", we'll see these web
> designers cleaning up their act. And then it won't make any difference
> what browser one uses.

So there will be even less reason to bother with downloading and installing
a browser other than IE.

Bob Campbell wrote:
> "Terry R." <F1ComNOSPAM@pobox.com> wrote in message
> news:eDOVqn2iIHA.4844@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>> Now that IE8 will default to "Standards Mode", we'll see these web
>> designers cleaning up their act. And then it won't make any
>> difference what browser one uses.
>
> So there will be even less reason to bother with downloading and
> installing a browser other than IE.
Downloading FF is a "bother"??? Nah...the few minutes it takes to
download and install FF I'd consider time WELL SPENT.

The date and time was 3/21/2008 8:59 AM, and on a whim, Bob Campbell
pounded out on the keyboard:

> "Terry R." <F1ComNOSPAM@pobox.com> wrote in message
> news:eDOVqn2iIHA.4844@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>> Now that IE8 will default to "Standards Mode", we'll see these web
>> designers cleaning up their act. And then it won't make any difference
>> what browser one uses.
>
> So there will be even less reason to bother with downloading and installing
> a browser other than IE.
>

For you maybe, but for those that like to customize their browser AND
have a standards compliant browser, FF will be worth it. It took MS
years to finally get around to being "net standards compliant", rather
than everyone coding for IE, which all along was ass-backwards.

--
Terry R.

***Reply Note***
Anti-spam measures are included in my email address.
Delete NOSPAM from the email address after clicking Reply.

"Bob Campbell" <bob@bob.bob> wrote in message
news:13u61ha2vl3q4fd@news.supernews.com...
>
> Frankly I don't give a crap what FireFox, Opera, Netscape or any of the
> other "me too" browsers do, I have enough browsers now thank you.

You think Netscape is (was) a "me too" browser? LOL, you n00b.

> IE7 is the standard, so it displays everything correctly.

LMAO!

ss.

"Synapse Syndrome" <synapse@NOSPAMsyndrome.me.uk> wrote in message
news:OKBFqp4iIHA.2396@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> "Bob Campbell" <bob@bob.bob> wrote in message
> news:13u61ha2vl3q4fd@news.supernews.com...
>>
>> Frankly I don't give a crap what FireFox, Opera, Netscape or any of the
>> other "me too" browsers do, I have enough browsers now thank you.
>
> You think Netscape is (was) a "me too" browser? LOL, you n00b.

Yes, it is now since no one uses it but they keep trying. It was always
crap, however. IE 3 was miles ahead of Netscape 3, and the difference has
only widened over the years.

Yeah, I'm a noob with boxes in the closet of 80 column punch cards
containing COBOL programs I wrote in the late 60s/early 70s on IBM 026 and
029 keypunch machines. Later we got an IBM 129 keypunch/verifier - we
thought we were in heaven.

These programs were then fed into/run/compiled on a Honeywell H-200. You
don't know REAL computing until you've worked on a large room sized machine
with 32K core, 4 tape drives, a card reader, a card punch, and a line
printer, and debugged your programs by reading the pattern of the console
lights. If your compile went OK you got the message "Object program run
tape is on logical tape unit 2" at the bottom of your printout, which you
could then run. Or with a compiler option card you could produce a punched
card object deck to run.

No disk drives at all. No CRT, we had a teletype style keyboard/printout
near the console lights/switches.

Yeah, I'm a real noob!

The date and time was 3/21/2008 1:06 PM, and on a whim, Bob Campbell
pounded out on the keyboard:

> "Synapse Syndrome" <synapse@NOSPAMsyndrome.me.uk> wrote in message
> news:OKBFqp4iIHA.2396@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>> "Bob Campbell" <bob@bob.bob> wrote in message
>> news:13u61ha2vl3q4fd@news.supernews.com...
>>> Frankly I don't give a crap what FireFox, Opera, Netscape or any of the
>>> other "me too" browsers do, I have enough browsers now thank you.
>> You think Netscape is (was) a "me too" browser? LOL, you n00b.
>
> Yes, it is now since no one uses it but they keep trying. It was always
> crap, however. IE 3 was miles ahead of Netscape 3, and the difference has
> only widened over the years.
>
> Yeah, I'm a noob with boxes in the closet of 80 column punch cards
> containing COBOL programs I wrote in the late 60s/early 70s on IBM 026 and
> 029 keypunch machines. Later we got an IBM 129 keypunch/verifier - we
> thought we were in heaven.
>
> These programs were then fed into/run/compiled on a Honeywell H-200. You
> don't know REAL computing until you've worked on a large room sized machine
> with 32K core, 4 tape drives, a card reader, a card punch, and a line
> printer, and debugged your programs by reading the pattern of the console
> lights. If your compile went OK you got the message "Object program run
> tape is on logical tape unit 2" at the bottom of your printout, which you
> could then run. Or with a compiler option card you could produce a punched
> card object deck to run.
>
> No disk drives at all. No CRT, we had a teletype style keyboard/printout
> near the console lights/switches.
>
> Yeah, I'm a real noob!
>

All that has nothing to do with browsers. Nor does it make you an
expert in this topic.

IE3 was hardly "miles" ahead of NS. NS4 was "miles" ahead of anything
else. The ONLY reason the gap widened was because MS plopped IE into
Windows. The same reason MS Office decimated other office applications,
when almost all new computers came "pre-installed" with it. Just about
everyone I knew thought it was great not to have to purchase a new
version of their favorite software because there was already a word
processor and spreadsheet "included". They didn't think that once they
started using it that further down the road they would be pretty much
locked into Office, since MS made it very difficult for other software
makers to be compatible. Funny, not much has changed in that area either.

--
Terry R.

***Reply Note***
Anti-spam measures are included in my email address.
Delete NOSPAM from the email address after clicking Reply.

In article <uwrPsG6iIHA.5412@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl>,
"Terry R." <F1ComNOSPAM@pobox.com> wrote:

> All that has nothing to do with browsers. Nor does it make you an
> expert in this topic.
>

So what makes you the "expert on this topic?

> IE3 was hardly "miles" ahead of NS.

In your opinion. In my opinion it was. What makes your opinion
better than mine?

Well how many years have gone by? You are the first I have ever heard to say
that IE3 was better... lol

it was crap and thats why netscape was the king back then

Look I used both back then ... and probably leaned towards IE more too.. but
lets get the historical facts straight



"Bob Campbell" <bob@bob.bob> wrote in message
news:bob-7B81B3.18310421032008@news.supernews.com...
> In article <uwrPsG6iIHA.5412@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl>,
> "Terry R." <F1ComNOSPAM@pobox.com> wrote:
>
>> All that has nothing to do with browsers. Nor does it make you an
>> expert in this topic.
>>
>
> So what makes you the "expert on this topic?
>
>> IE3 was hardly "miles" ahead of NS.
>
> In your opinion. In my opinion it was. What makes your opinion
> better than mine?

In article <47e45411$1@newsgate.x-privat.org>,
"On the Bridge! \(An MVP upgrade\)" <On@the,bridge> wrote:

> Well how many years have gone by? You are the first I have ever heard to say
> that IE3 was better... lol
>
> it was crap and thats why netscape was the king back then
>
> Look I used both back then ... and probably leaned towards IE more too.. but
> lets get the historical facts straight

So did I. "Historical facts" have nothing to do with it. IE3 was
better than Netscape 3 IMO. YMMV.