If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
Microsoft blackballs IE
On Sun, 10 Feb 2019 10:31:18 +0000, Neil was quoted:
We're in a downward spiral as a result of the general acceptance of Google's proposed revised structure for the internet. What's that then? |
Ads |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
Microsoft blackballs IE
In message , mechanic
writes: On Sat, 9 Feb 2019 19:46:42 -0500, Wolf K wrote: IMO, Strunk & White's _Elements of Style_ is still the best short guide to writing well available. [Would they have suggested "...available to writing well"? "well available" is a little jarring, to me anyway. (-:] Yes no doubt it's Lee Child's bedtime reading. I _think_ it's a little US-specific - not that that's wrong of course; we both have our preferences. For UK audiences, Eric Partridge's "Usage and Abusage", and Fowler's "Modern English Usage" (IIRR), are probably the best-known - if only because people enjoy disagreeing with them! (Partridge's "Mind the Stop" - specifically about punctuation - is also seminal. Though almost certainly not definitive.) (It also amuses me that a fowler would by nature pursue a partridge.) -- J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf I long for the commercialised Christmas of the 1970s. It's got so religious now, it's lost its true meaning. - Mike [{at}ostic.demon.co.uk], 2003-12-24 |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
Microsoft blackballs IE
On 2/10/2019 7:16 AM, mechanic wrote:
On Sun, 10 Feb 2019 10:31:18 +0000, Neil was quoted: We're in a downward spiral as a result of the general acceptance of Google's proposed revised structure for the internet. What's that then? Do a web search. It's off-topic for this group. -- best regards, Neil |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
Microsoft blackballs IE
On Sat, 09 Feb 2019 10:00:37 -0800, pyotr
filipivich wrote: "Mayayana" on Sat, 9 Feb 2019 09:38:19 -0500 typed in alt.windows7.general the following: Finally, Microsoft is officially saying IE shouldn't be used: https://techcommunity.microsoft.com/...er/ba-p/331732 As with most Microsoft writing, it's poorly written, in a conversational but quasi-technical style with clunky, made-up terms thrown in. For example, "technical debt" means existing reasons you need to use IE. "Endpoints" means websites. I wish MS would provide basic English classes for their employees. The author is not pointing to the security problems at all. He only points out that MS broke IE11 in terms of backward compatibility, paints that as a good thing, and doesn't want you to blame MS for IE11 not working as expected. Of course, if IE11 was standards compliant and still supported quirks mode by default, it would be universally compatible. Instead, IE11 does neither. Interestingly, the author never even mentions Edge. So the official MS position now is, "please don't use our browsers online"! No problem, folks. Weird it is. I was a regular customer of TaxAct, till last year when it had to have IE 11 installed or it would not work. Nope, wouldn't be prudent, not gonna do it. The Oz tax department will not recognize Edge. It wants Chrome, IE11 or those other ones. I had to change everything to Chrome. |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
Microsoft blackballs IE
On Sun, 10 Feb 2019 14:24:49 -0500, Neil wrote:
On 2/10/2019 7:16 AM, mechanic wrote: On Sun, 10 Feb 2019 10:31:18 +0000, Neil was quoted: We're in a downward spiral as a result of the general acceptance of Google's proposed revised structure for the internet. What's that then? Do a web search. It's off-topic for this group. So why mention it then? |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
Microsoft blackballs IE
On 10/02/2019 22:22, mechanic wrote:
So why mention it then? To meet his daily quota of useless posts here. This newsgroup has become a sewer for everything. -- With over 950 million devices now running Windows 10, customer satisfaction is higher than any previous version of windows. |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
Microsoft blackballs IE
"mechanic" wrote
| We're in a downward spiral as a result of the general acceptance | of Google's proposed revised structure for the internet. | | What's that then? | | Do a web search. It's off-topic for this group. | | So why mention it then? I don't know whether he was referring to something or just being glib, but I think there's some truth there. If you look at webpage source code, nearly every commercial webpage is pulling script and fonts from Google. They're happy to foot the bill for 1+ MB of traffic per page just for the chance to spy on people. It's nuts when you think about it. People could put these files on their own sites. Instead they pull them from Google. (They don't know any better? Google requires it? I don't know.) Add to that the ubiquity of Google/Doubleclick ads, Google stats and Googletagmanager. On top of that, something like 2/3 of browsers online are Chrome -- spyware for Google. They own search, they own most ads and most browsers. They run an interlocked system of email, docs, etc that people find so convenient they're happy to be imprisoned in Google' services jail. They own the phone OS that most people use and that acts as a tracking collar. So most people, unless they make an effort, are being spied on by Google almost constantly. Google, perhaps more than anyone, have been pushing the transition of the Internet from webpages and the "information superhighway" to a corporate-owned, ad-and-spyware driven commercial services venue. But it must be noted that Google, for all their power, is not alone. Facebook with their hypnotized Facebookies. Apple with their slavish AppleSeeds. Microsoft, to some extent. Amazon. Hulu and Netflix. ISPs... A lot of big companies are working to cash in on the perceived commercial takeover of the Internet. And it's not like it was Google's idea. They've just been very clever about getting a lot of feet in the door. |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
Microsoft blackballs IE
On 2/10/2019 5:22 PM, mechanic wrote:
On Sun, 10 Feb 2019 14:24:49 -0500, Neil wrote: On 2/10/2019 7:16 AM, mechanic wrote: On Sun, 10 Feb 2019 10:31:18 +0000, Neil was quoted: We're in a downward spiral as a result of the general acceptance of Google's proposed revised structure for the internet. What's that then? Do a web search. It's off-topic for this group. So why mention it then? For those with a genuine interest in the topic that may not be aware of those proposed structural revisions, of course. There is a difference between mentioning something and going off on a tangent in the wrong ng. -- best regards, Neil |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
Microsoft blackballs IE
On 2/10/2019 9:31 PM, Mayayana wrote:
"mechanic" wrote | We're in a downward spiral as a result of the general acceptance | of Google's proposed revised structure for the internet. | | What's that then? | | Do a web search. It's off-topic for this group. | | So why mention it then? I don't know whether he was referring to something or just being glib, but I think there's some truth there. I wasn't being glib, and much of what you wrote in response reflects what I was referring to, but there is also a proposed change to move away from HTML. -- best regards, Neil |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
Microsoft blackballs IE
"Wolf K" wrote
| Do a web search. It's off-topic for this group. | | Can't find "Google's proposed revised structure for the internet." The | hits referred to Google's internal reorganisation. | Typical Neil. Playing hard to get. I'm guessing he's referring to AMP: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accelerated_Mobile_Pages It's not really a replacement of HTML and certainly no more than it's already being replaced by monstrosities like Wix webpages and commercial sites that wrap everything in javascript, so that script is required and the resulting page is more of a push format than pull. (Wix pages consist of script that pulls page data from a central Wix database. There isn't actually any site at somewixcustomer.com.) The general description of AMP sounds to me very much like Microsoft's tricks with IE. They come up with something that they pretty much own. The pages usually come from Google's cache. They use corrupted, custom HTML. At the same time, some of what they're doing makes sense (like sandboxed iframes and quicker rendering for phones) and they welcome everyone else to join in, so long as Google essentially owns it. I think the webmasters are actually more to blame with this stuff. People want to make a buck with ads and they want it easy. They don't to have to learn how to actually have a website. They don't want to figure out HTML and CSS. So the fully "civilian" types, who know nothing, set up on Wordpress or Wix, while the ones who know a little coding load their pages with easy-to-use Google script and ads. Gradually they've come to think it's normal that 3rd parties infest or even host their websites. |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
Microsoft blackballs IE
On 2/9/2019 10:38 PM, Mayayana wrote:
Finally, Microsoft is officially saying IE shouldn't be used: ... Interestingly, the author never even mentions Edge. So the official MS position now is, "please don't use our browsers online"! No problem, folks. There are websites and business applications that's heavily optimized for IE. It's not easy to switch to other browsers (including Edge) without additional programming and hence costs. -- @~@ Remain silent! Drink, Blink, Stretch! Live long and prosper!! / v \ Simplicity is Beauty! /( _ )\ May the Force and farces be with you! ^ ^ (x86_64 Ubuntu 9.10) Linux 2.6.39.3 ¤£*ɶU! ¤£¶BÄF! ¤£½ä¿ú! ¤£´©¥æ! ¤£¥´¥æ! ¤£¥´§T! ¤£¦Û±þ! ¤£¨D¯«! ½Ð¦Ò¼{ºî´© (CSSA): http://www.swd.gov.hk/tc/index/site_...sub_addressesa |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
Microsoft blackballs IE
On 2/10/2019 5:29 PM, Wolf K wrote:
On 2019-02-10 14:24, Neil wrote: On 2/10/2019 7:16 AM, mechanic wrote: On Sun, 10 Feb 2019 10:31:18 +0000, Neil was quoted: We're in a downward spiral as a result of the general acceptance of Google's proposed revised structure for the internet. What's that then? Do a web search. It's off-topic for this group. Can't find "Google's proposed revised structure for the internet." The hits referred to Google's internal reorganisation. So, you think the problem is that you found nothing based on quoting a comment. That is so typical of folks that want someone else to do their homework for them. So, he https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HTTP/3 Perhaps you'll understand why it's OT for this ng. -- best regards, Neil |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
Microsoft blackballs IE
"Neil" wrote
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HTTP/3 | Perhaps you'll explain why, of all the things Google's doing, you think this protocol proposal is a problem. Seeing as how we're not talking about it, we may as well know what we're not talking about. All I see in the descriptions is a plan to increase speed and efficiency by adding UDP to TCP for HTTP. |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
OT: internet panic (Was: Microsoft blackballs IE)
On 2/12/2019 9:24 AM, Wolf K wrote:
On 2019-02-12 05:36, Neil wrote: On 2/10/2019 5:29 PM, Wolf K wrote: On 2019-02-10 14:24, Neil wrote: On 2/10/2019 7:16 AM, mechanic wrote: On Sun, 10 Feb 2019 10:31:18 +0000, Neil was quoted: We're in a downward spiral as a result of the general acceptance of Google's proposed revised structure for the internet. What's that then? Do a web search. It's off-topic for this group. Can't find "Google's proposed revised structure for the internet." The hits referred to Google's internal reorganisation. So, you think the problem is that you found nothing based on quoting a comment. That is so typical of folks that want someone else to do their homework for them. I used the phrase you used. What else? Obviously you didn't use enough care to craft an adequate description. Don't blame me for your laziness. The absurdity of that approach to a web search on a topic is incredible. Who writes comments as a basis for a web search? If I use your comments as one, such as "Obviously you didn't use enough care to craft an adequate description." will I turn up anything useful? You just simply want to argue instead of learn anything, and I really have no time to spend on such people. So, he https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HTTP/3 If your phrase had been an adequate and accurate label for your topic drift, this link should've come up. It didn't. Since it didn't, your phrase was not only useless, it was misleading. Perhaps you'll understand why it's OT for this ng. Nothing is OT for any unmoderated newsgroup. It's polite to signal an OT thread or drift, but that's entirely up to the poster. NB that I've been polite an relabelled this topic drift. Just for you, so you don't get confused. Have a frabjous day, -- best regards, Neil |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
OT: internet panic (Was: Microsoft blackballs IE)
On Tue, 12 Feb 2019 09:47:52 -0500, Neil wrote:
On 2/12/2019 9:24 AM, Wolf K wrote: On 2019-02-12 05:36, Neil wrote: On 2/10/2019 5:29 PM, Wolf K wrote: On 2019-02-10 14:24, Neil wrote: On 2/10/2019 7:16 AM, mechanic wrote: On Sun, 10 Feb 2019 10:31:18 +0000, Neil was quoted: We're in a downward spiral as a result of the general acceptance of Google's proposed revised structure for the internet. What's that then? Do a web search. It's off-topic for this group. Can't find "Google's proposed revised structure for the internet." The hits referred to Google's internal reorganisation. So, you think the problem is that you found nothing based on quoting a comment. That is so typical of folks that want someone else to do their homework for them. I used the phrase you used. What else? Obviously you didn't use enough care to craft an adequate description. Don't blame me for your laziness. The absurdity of that approach to a web search on a topic is incredible. It seemed to be entirely reasonable to me. You made a claim about the Internet being in a downward spiral, and now that you haven't been able to back it up, you're punching back. (IMHO, HTTP/3 doesn't support your claim.) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HTTP/3 Perhaps you'll understand why it's OT for this ng. Much less OT than global climate change. In fact, I'd argue that it's not really OT at all. If there's going to be a major shift in Web protocols, it'll affect Windows users directly, to some extent. Not that I think there's anything to worry about just yet. -- Char Jackson |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|