From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Dec 26 21:34:58 2005 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BFDF016A41F for ; Mon, 26 Dec 2005 21:34:58 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from akbeech@gmail.com) Received: from msgmmp-4.gci.net (msgmmp-4.gci.net [209.165.130.14]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3B29C43D62 for ; Mon, 26 Dec 2005 21:34:56 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from akbeech@gmail.com) Received: from stargate.akparadise.com ([24.237.206.237]) by msgmmp-4.gci.net (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.03 (built Jun 27 2005)) with ESMTPA id <0IS400MVMJY7YI20@msgmmp-4.gci.net> for freebsd-questions@freebsd.org; Mon, 26 Dec 2005 12:34:56 -0900 (AKST) Received: by stargate.akparadise.com (Postfix, from userid 0) id CE8403F87; Mon, 26 Dec 2005 12:35:01 -0900 (AKST) Date: Mon, 26 Dec 2005 12:34:47 -0900 From: Beech Rintoul In-reply-to: <20051226162456.40038.qmail@web33306.mail.mud.yahoo.com> To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org, danial_thom@yahoo.com Message-id: <200512261235.00095.akbeech@gmail.com> Organization: NorthWind Communications MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: multipart/signed; boundary=nextPart1293393.cDg2quU5gd; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha1 Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit References: <20051226162456.40038.qmail@web33306.mail.mud.yahoo.com> User-Agent: KMail/1.8.3 Cc: Subject: Re: BSD Question's. X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 26 Dec 2005 21:34:59 -0000 --nextPart1293393.cDg2quU5gd Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline On Monday 26 December 2005 07:24 am, Danial Thom wrote: > --- dick hoogendijk wrote: > > On 24 Dec Kent Stewart wrote: > > > There is also the problem that some sites are > > > > designed to work with > > > > > Internet Explorer. You can try to visit with > > > > firefox but that doesn't > > > > > always work even with firefox on XP. > > > > NO site should be designed to work with > > IExplorer. I know it's done, but > > it should not! Why do we have W3C? If we could > > all just do things "by > > the book" the internet would be a much nicer > > place to visit. > > > > People who design for IExplorer are bad! They > > have microsoft in mind and > > _not_ the visitors. I hate it when choice gets > > violated! It should be > > called a crime against freedom. > > No, you're wrong here. You're letting your > religious philosophy cloud your business sense. > You develop to service the highest percentage of > your expected viewer base. The truth is that the > vast majority of visitors to most web sites are > going to be using IE. While using unnecessary > features as a primary component of your site that > ONLY work with IE is foolish, you can't > compromise your design just so that it will work > with the 3% of religious fanatics that refuse to > install IE on thier machines. Business is about > numbers, and the numbers say that your site HAS > to work with IE, and its nice if it works with > others. I generally test with IE, Firefox and > Netscape and I don't care much about much else. > > > I have a friend in the travel biz who gets an > unusual amount of traffic from AOL, because most > of his customers are not computer people. His > site needs to be well tested on AOL, where I > couldn't really give a rat's behind if my > commercial site works with AOL or not. You have > to make sure your site works with the greatest > majority of browsers available that will be > accessing any given site. > > Its unfortunate that MS does what they want > rather than following the standards, but in > reality the standards should follow MS, because > its really the only way to make everything work. > Much of Microsoft's "extra" stuff is pretty > useful and arguably better; its time the unix > geeks get over it and stop whining about the big > bad bully for the good of the big picture. MS > isn't going away anytime soon. The truth is that > anything MS does is a de-facto standard, whether > you like it or not. > > DT I guess we should just throw out w3c and assign the task to microsoft. Whil= e=20 wer'e at it lets get rid of all net standards. After all microsoft is so fa= r=20 ahead we'll never catch up. Beech =2D-=20 =2D------------------------------------------------------------------------= =2D------------- Beech Rintoul - System Administrator - akbeech@gmail.com /"\ ASCII Ribbon Campaign | NorthWind Communications \ / - NO HTML/RTF in e-mail | 201 East 9th Avenue Ste.310 X - NO Word docs in e-mail | Anchorage, AK 99501 / \ - Please visit Alaska Paradise - http://akparadise.byethost33.com =2D------------------------------------------------------------------------= =2D------------- --nextPart1293393.cDg2quU5gd Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQBDsGIDVq19LUoGB+MRAou4AKCHwdChSujKUChsXtTbGkDAQAfUvACfaF4l +AiOuW3IT440vU0nBr8CaDk= =poyq -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --nextPart1293393.cDg2quU5gd--