^     All messages            3-18 of 18  1-2 >>
18 yingx 08-19-2010 08:27 PM ET (US) The new collection further Tiffany 1837 rings ros and elegance of traditional ′ s celebrate diamond necklace with 20.01 – carat on edge, colour, internal flawless diamond, And mementoes pendant, Tiffany Rings of dazzling petals, opera, such as length – Tiffany 1837 ring sparkling vine, and create the resplendence of pure tangles.   Spam messages 17-15 deleted by QuickTopic between 08-20-2010 02:01 AM and 07-21-2006 08:57 AM 14 Thad Hoffman 06-16-2003 05:33 PM ET (US) The comments about sharing info with Apple's Safari team leaves hope out there Rob. "As many of you already know, this past Friday we confirmed that the MacBU would no longer develop future versions of Internet Explorer for Mac. We will, however, continue to support IE 5 and are sharing our compiled understanding of customer requirements with Apple's Safari team, who is working to meet Mac users' future browser needs." 13 Thad Hoffman 06-16-2003 11:42 AM ET (US) "And even more than consumers, businesses eat up anything that MS produces and acts like it is the only game in town." Amen to that. I refer to those types as "Punch Drinkers".. :-) Rob, I _TOTALLY_ understand. I am in a similar situation - I work for an all MS company, making software, on the lone Mac in the building. Luckily though, only few things do I need my PC for - VSS connectivity, Oracle, and our main 2-tier apps. OS X has made life easier too. SMB, Apache, php, ssh, etc... much easier co-existing than with 9.x here at work. I could run a lot in VPC, but MS owns that now and I don't feel like spending the $$$. Secondly, Oracle needs to port their crud to OS X... 12 Rob McNair-Huff 06-15-2003 02:00 PM ET (US) One problem in my mind with the valiant movement to set standards for Web browsers or for anything else for that matter is that those standards often are disconnected from the experience of real world consumers. I mean, essentially consumers have decided what the standard will be - whatever Microsoft throws out, consumers buy like they have no choice. And even more than consumers, businesses eat up anything that MS produces and acts like it is the only game in town. Meanwhile, well-meaning people are setting standards that may or may not agree with the "standard" coming from MS. Then it becomes a question of what is valid. What is more important: The standard being pitched by well meaning people who want to see everything on the Net work properly or the standard that all of the business world seems to settle on, MS's vision? Caught in the crossfire are people who want to do actual work on their Macs, those who have to straddle the line between their like of Mac OS X and the need to have a computer that will function properly in the world where they need to work to make money. At times right now in my work life I fall in the latter category. And it is those folks who have to worry about making money with their Macs while straddling the line between the business world and the imaginary perfect world who will be forced to buy a Windows machine soon if the browsers that run on Mac OS X can't handle ANYTHING thrown at them. 11 Thad Hoffman 06-15-2003 12:47 PM ET (US) I think Deane makes a good point. In the non-computer world, we consumers control more of what is offered by spending our dollars. In the computer world, we seem to take what we are fed. The old "if my car were to break down and require a restart and system upgrade and suffer viruses" metaphor doesn't seem to fit here. We go "oh, it doesn't work on my machine, I should go get one that works with it" when we should be saying "Oh, doesn't support me, well I'll go spend my money elsewhere". I know this doesn't really fit in a business world, but if we were to stick to standards, then the issues would dissolve. 10 Rob McNair-Huff 06-15-2003 02:33 AM ET (US) Deane, While I agree with your sentiment, in the real world things have to work. If Mac users cannot access Internet content because they use Macs, fewer people will use Macs. Pure and simple. 9 Deane 06-14-2003 05:48 PM ET (US) This pushing and pulling between browsers and sites will get nowhere unless we insist on standards compliance. Apple shouldn't be trying to make Safari compliant with IE, dead or not. Sites, like my Bank in Australia 'recommending' we use IE or Netscape, need to get their code w3c compliant. And security issues sorted. Likewise, Apple Safari and all third party browser developers who truly intend to go the distance. Web developers' number one bookmark must be http://www.w3.org/ 8 Rob McNair-Huff 06-14-2003 02:40 AM ET (US) Hey again Thad, Yeah, I have filed bugs on some of the issues, but the problem I run into is that each of the sites I access for work are secure sites. There is no way to submit them so that someone can reproduce the problems. I also run into some secure sites that I cannot access with any browser other than OmniWeb, of all browsers. These are sites related to Lycos that use odd security certificates. In short, the problem is partly with the way that none of the Mac browsers are completely compatible with IE/Win. It is just as much the fault of the developers of those sites, but nonetheless who is at fault the sites don't work correctly on Mac browsers and unfortunately IE/Mac comes closest to working... Really, I would love to have any one Mac browser work well enough to fit all of my needs. Right now I use Safari a lot, Mozilla some, OmniWeb some, and IE for some critical work. Dead or not, until a Mac browser comes along to fit the need, IE will remain something I have to use for some sites... 7 Thad Hoffman 06-14-2003 01:31 AM ET (US) Rob, those issues I conceed to you on. Though I feel it is more an issue of the sites implementors than necessarily a limitation of the other browsers (but not always...) Do you ever file an evangilism bug in bugzilla to see if maybe those issues can get resolved? That's the biggest plus of Mozilla over all others. You can file bugs and they get fixed. I've yet to have a bug filed not get fixed within 3 weeks. A reverse issue for me is my offfices Outlook web interface uses MS's technology and security junk. Mac IE won't connect. Only NS 4.5 or Moz 1.0/NS 6+ work with it. I have always found that most amuzing. 6 Rob McNair-Huff 06-14-2003 01:17 AM ET (US) Hey Thad, I don't discount what Mozilla can do on the Mac. But while it is a good browser, there are a number of sites that I can't use Mozilla to work with that are critical for the work I do. The work I do on Matchmaker.com, IE is the only Mac browser that will work. The financial writing I do, I do use Mozilla for one facet of the work but if I do editing assignments I have to use IE. Mozilla is more cutting edge, but when it comes to working with a Mac to do the kind of work I do, Mozilla doesn't cut it... 5 Thad Hoffman 06-14-2003 12:41 AM ET (US) Rob, I don't think your comments are fair to Mozilla. It has already out paced, out innovated, and is neck and neck with IE as far as developer toys go. It offers all the objects, all the expansion, and even more customization than IE does. Plus it does it equally on all platforms. Moz 1.3 has proven it's worth well. Camino, Safari, IE Mac are all about even. They all serve to just offer web browsing. IE Mac has always paled as a "real" browser compared to Wintel's version. MS purposely kept the com objects needed by businesses out of the Mac side to hinder it as a business platform, yet they could still say they "supported" Mac. Safari and Camino will catch up/surpass IE. All IE Mac had going for it was better CSS support over Wintel's version. I haven't found a site that Mozilla or Safari can't handle that I need to use IE for. I fear more the AOL - MS settlement more so than losing IE on the Mac. 4 http://dws.us/ 06-13-2003 09:40 PM ET (US) If you don't like to side effects, then don't use the drug. Micro$oft only has the power people have given it. 3 Rob McNair-Huff 06-13-2003 05:32 PM ET (US) Thad, I think the real reason MS is killing IE is that it helps puts Apple and its user base more in the minority than they were before the official announcement that IE is dead. It isn't like IE won't continue in some form under Windows. Instead, it forces Apple to stop playing around and create a real heavy weight browser out of Safari because there is no room to breathe. Web content will evolve, IE on the Mac won't, and Safari can't handle everything we can throw at it today. In short, I am not gloating about this decision at all. It puts Apple and third party Web browser developers for Mac OS X on notice that they have to prove they can innovate and follow Microsoft's lead if they want the Mac to remain relevant.	Upgrade to PRO Upload pictures, personalize your board, and more! About these ads
^     All messages            3-18 of 18  1-2 >>