I can't see attachments in Netscape

[Martin Gühmann]

Originally posted by CyberShy
And if I donate more $ to Bill Gates, well so be it. In fact I don't care.

OK that's your opinion. Note that EI6 is still free, but you had no change to avoid EI on your windows system in the past I have still installed IE4, because it is very dificuilt to get rid of it, Netscape4.5, Netscape6.2 and Opera5. The real problem with Microsoft is that you are too dependent on this company. And of course I next Computer will have a MS OS, too as I want to play games. But is won't be Windows ME or Windows 2000. But Windows XP is because of this registration thing also not a good alternative to Window98. Maybe technically it is good, but it is not OK that you buy a product and you have to ask Microsoft that you are allowed to use it. Now you could argue that Microsoft wants to avoid pirated copies, but if you really want to pirate their OS than you will crack it. So the effect is not very hight as the people who wants to make money with pirated copies they will do it.

Originally posted by Asher
I'd also like to point out that your comment had nothing to do with what I said. Businesses do take Microsoft seriously, which is why Windows NT workstations outnumber Linux by some astronomical number.

And why considers the German parliament to replace its old computers by new Unix based systems?

To be honest I don't like the windows 2000 computers at my university as I have at every single computer to costumize my desktop. But on the other hand the Linux computer there are also not without bugs, exept for the Sun Works stations I did not fond any bugs so far.

But it is not very nice if you get some cryptical error messages in Windows when I am playing games.

Originally posted by Urban Ranger
Like your brat friends who came on ACS to call everybody who don't like MS morons and losers? So why are there still so many people using MS stuff?

Maybe we are all losers. So we shouldn't use product of big componies uncritical. They promissed a lot but they can't keep everything. The only dream of companies is to make money otherwise they would go bankrupt soon. So I have no problem with that idea as that is one of the rhules: Make a lot of people buy your products than you can survive. But if you can earn more money than you need than it is better as you can make more and more. That's OK if you are the big company but if you are the costumer you have to pay attention on their products.

So a statement like that is also stereotypical:

Originally posted by Asher
IE6 is king if you want less hassles.

"MS rulez and Linux sux0rs"

The main different between Linux and Windows is that Linux is closer to the hardware, if you use Linux you get to know the computer that you are using. If you use windows it is not necassary to use the command line. But if you learned the command line than it is more efficient to use the computer. On windows you have to use the mouse. Of course you can disable most of the user friendly options in windows and take a look under the surface of the OS. If you used Dos than you know that this file is a *.txt file and not a text document. OK that is easy to guess but if you are searching for a file called *.exe and Windows explorer display it as Anwendung than it starts to get difficuilt.

BTW I can't see the avatars in Netscape4.5 either, but it doesn't bother me too much as I disabled them in my profile anyway. I just see them if I am not logged in. And that happens every time when I disconnected from the net as I don't use cookies. So if you want really see them use another browser like MSEI or Netscape6.2 or Opera5.

-Martin

[Buck Birdseed]

From next year all Campus PCs will be Win2k (bugger, I'd have preffered 98 or XP) with IE6.

[Asher]

Originally posted by Martin Gühmann
but it is not OK that you buy a product and you have to ask Microsoft that you are allowed to use it. Now you could argue that Microsoft wants to avoid pirated copies, but if you really want to pirate their OS than you will crack it. So the effect is not very hight as the people who wants to make money with pirated copies they will do it.

The concept of the "common software pirate" is beyond your little elitist mind. The majority of Windows pirating that went on involved people who have no clue what a crack is lending CDs to friends to install Windows for free with. Activation stops that.

So all of the geeky gurus that have issues with it can crack it, and all of the legit users have to spend the 20 seconds clicking 'Next' a few times to activate it.

And why considers the German parliament to replace its old computers by new Unix based systems?

I heard they were only switching servers to Unix? Most of which are already running Unix?

To be honest I don't like the windows 2000 computers at my university as I have at every single computer to costumize my desktop. But on the other hand the Linux computer there are also not without bugs, exept for the Sun Works stations I did not fond any bugs so far.

If you think Solaris has no bugs you've not used it nearly long enough.

But it is not very nice if you get some cryptical error messages in Windows when I am playing games.

Yes, I especially hated that as well. Modern versions of Windows have way more information. Errors have links to websites with detailed information. You can access this at support.microsoft.com as well. Deal with it.

So a statement like that is also stereotypical:

No, that is actually the plain facts.
Sites are designed around IE, you'll have less hassles with IE accordingly. Feel free to shoot that down, but you can't.
So if you meant stereotypical by rational thought, then you'd be correct.

The main different between Linux and Windows is that Linux is closer to the hardware

ROFLMAO!
Somebody here obviously hasn't taken any OS design courses or read any books.
"closer to the hardware"...

if you use Linux you get to know the computer that you are using. If you use windows it is not necassary to use the command line. But if you learned the command line than it is more efficient to use the computer. On windows you have to use the mouse. Of course you can disable most of the user friendly options in windows and take a look under the surface of the OS. If you used Dos than you know that this file is a *.txt file and not a text document. OK that is easy to guess but if you are searching for a file called *.exe and Windows explorer display it as Anwendung than it starts to get difficuilt.

God forbid you go turn on "show file extensions", huh?
The problem with your type is you don't take the time to look at Windows. You look at the default settings, which are geared towards non-geeks, then you laugh in disgust and go to Linux. Figure out Windows, know how to change what you don't like.

[Asher]

Originally posted by Snapcase
From next year all Campus PCs will be Win2k (bugger, I'd have preffered 98 or XP) with IE6.

Win2K is far less buggier than 98, and some argue even less buggier than XP.

XP is just Windows 2000 with some minor changes (UI especially).

[Buck Birdseed]

It comes down to the interface issue. I've always found Win2k much less intuitive to work with than Win98 or XP. It's just not thought through properly- Why do network settings have to be in five distinct places with what goes where apparently totally random? Who needs more than one LAN? Why does working woth logins have to be so bloody horrible?

[Martin Gühmann]

Originally posted by Asher
If you think Solaris has no bugs you've not used it nearly long enough.

I did not said that Solaris is bug free I just said that I did not found them. I already found some problems with the Linux comps at my uni. But windows there has also it problems. I have to custumize every single computer so that the OS surface will look as I like on the Linux comp it is enough to do it on one cumputer and I can use the same user surface. On every machine the network.

Originally posted by Asher
God forbid you go turn on "show file extensions", huh?
The problem with your type is you don't take the time to look at Windows. You look at the default settings, which are geared towards non-geeks, then you laugh in disgust and go to Linux. Figure out Windows, know how to change what you don't like.

Actually I already costumized the Windows98 surface to my taste.

-Martin

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by Asher
Win2K is far less buggier than 98, and some argue even less buggier than XP.

I just had an interesting experience with W2K. It ate Active Directory after I installed Exchange.

Thank heavens for backups.

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by Asher
The concept of the "common software pirate" is beyond your little elitist mind. The majority of Windows pirating that went on involved people who have no clue what a crack is lending CDs to friends to install Windows for free with. Activation stops that.

Copy protection annoys legit users and never bothers the pros. This has been done before many times. The results were always the same.

Originally posted by Asher
Sites are designed around IE, you'll have less hassles with IE accordingly.

Those would be sites that run IIS, yes? Can I suggest a dose of CodeRed or two?

Really, the biggest sites are not designed around any particular browser. That's the fact.

Originally posted by Asher
Somebody here obviously hasn't taken any OS design courses orread any books.

Yeah, like you have taken any OS courses, freshman.

Originally posted by Asher
Figure out Windows, know how to change what you don't like.

The problem with Windows is you cannot change many of the things you don't like very often.

Can I de-integrate IE? No? 'nuff said. Okay, I can if I use WinLite during installation, but that's not what MS provides.

[Asher]

Originally posted by Urban Ranger
Copy protection annoys legit users and never bothers the pros. This has been done before many times. The results were always the same.

Bull****.
If that was true, how come they ran out of second-licenses people buy at the store to install it on more than one computer?

Wishful thinking on your part...

Those would be sites that run IIS, yes? Can I suggest a dose of CodeRed or two?

Well, be my guest. The smart admins patched CodeRed months before it hit.

Not that you have any idea what you're talking about. Many, many sites (mine included) don't fully work on any version of Netscape/Mozilla, but it runs Apache.

Really, the biggest sites are not designed around any particular browser. That's the fact.

Right, the biggest sites. Apolyton isn't one of those?
The fact here is every site tests for IE, while only "most" test for Mozilla/NS. Deal with that.

Yeah, like you have taken any OS courses, freshman.

You'd be surprised what I've taken through non-standard institutions.

The problem with Windows is you cannot change many of the things you don't like very often.

Or rather, you can but you're too clueless/lazy to figure out how.

Can I de-integrate IE? No? 'nuff said. Okay, I can if I use WinLite during installation, but that's not what MS provides.

Windows XP: Control Panel -> Add/Remove Programs -> Internet Explorer

Thanks for playing.

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by Asher
If that was true, how come they ran out of second-licenses people buy at the store to install it on more than one computer?

Wishful thinking on your part...

Who are "they?"

I am always amused by you asserting this and asserting that, without any real experience in the sector to back you.

What's the term for this? Ah, hot air.

Originally posted by Asher
Well, be my guest. The smart admins patched CodeRed months before it hit.

Months? MS would <em>not</em> admit any security flaws until sh!t hits the fan. Frequently when a hole is discovered by an outsider, MS just won't do a thing until the outsider gets enraged enough to publish exploits publicly.

Are you ready for this one?

Numerous installations of Microsoft ASP.NET are vulnerable to cross-site scripting (CSS), according to a recent post by Johannes Westerink to the BugTraq mailing list.

Originally posted by Asher
Not that you have any idea what you're talking about. Many, many sites (mine included) don't fully work on any version of Netscape/Mozilla, but it runs Apache.

Sure, you can get a plugin of ASP for Apache, but you gotta be daft if your website is IE-specific so those 20% of surfers who don't use IE can't see what's on yours.

Even Microsoft's own site is fully functional with non-IE browsers.

Originally posted by Asher
Right, the biggest sites. Apolyton isn't one of those?

When compared to Yahoo!, Google, Angelfire, Geocites, and Hotmail? No. They have server farms and millions of hits a day.

Originally posted by Asher
The fact here is every site tests for IE, while only "most" test for Mozilla/NS. Deal with that.

If you are talking about <em>every</em> website, which include the innumerable one-page personal homepages that are created by those who don't know what they are doing, you're wrong.

Half of them aren't even tested.

Originally posted by Asher
You'd be surprised what I've taken through non-standard institutions.

Perhaps you got some non-standard stuff there

Originally posted by Asher
Or rather, you can but you're too clueless/lazy to figure out how.

Windows XP: Control Panel -> Add/Remove Programs -> Internet Explorer

What about 98/Me/NT4/2K? Enlighten me

[Asher]

Originally posted by Urban Ranger
Who are "they?"

I am always amused by you asserting this and asserting that, without any real experience in the sector to back you.

What's the term for this? Ah, hot air.

There was a press release about it months ago. Feel free to peruse microsoft.com if you want.

What's the term for this? Ah, google.
Seriously, if you're so eager to find out, google search it.

Months? MS would <em>not</em> admit any security flaws until sh!t hits the fan. Frequently when a hole is discovered by an outsider, MS just won't do a thing until the outsider gets enraged enough to publish exploits publicly.

Uh, yeah. Months. It was patched, literally, months before it was exploited.

And your statement is quite frankly bull****. Most of the bugs found are patched and shipped out and then the "outsider" is thanked. Really, UR, look it up for yourself.

Are you ready for this one?

Hey, wow! Look at that, a bug in something that's in beta testing! NEAT!

Sure, you can get a plugin of ASP for Apache, but you gotta be daft if your website is IE-specific so those 20% of surfers who don't use IE can't see what's on yours.

Even Microsoft's own site is fully functional with non-IE browsers.

People can see what's on my website, it's just that the rather crippled nature of Netscape makes it look uglier. 6.0 is WAY better than 4.x was, but it still can't have an image in a table cell background. Why? W3C doesn't have a precious little standard marked out for it...

Oh, and no, Microsoft's own site is not fully functional with non-IE browsers. Click on the boxes and drag them around, then right click. Compare the behaviors in IE and Netscape.

If you are talking about <em>every</em> website, which include the innumerable one-page personal homepages that are created by those who don't know what they are doing, you're wrong.

Half of them aren't even tested.

Is that supposed to excuse it? That the authors don't know what they're doing?
Doesn't make a damn bit of difference to the end user.

What about 98/Me/NT4/2K? Enlighten me

Deal with it in those.
It's not the end of the world, you know.