On Tue, Mar 11, 2003 at 11:35:27PM +0200, Herouth Maoz wrote:
> At 18:47 +0200 on 11/3/2003, Alon Altman wrote:
>
>
> > The question is- does it support MSIE 7.0? The answer: They don't know.
>
> This question is the same for a standards-compliant site, because you
> don't know when one of the
Daniel Vainsencher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> The costs above might (or might not. ideas for numbers anyone?) be an
> order of magnitude higher than the cost of simply maintaining a site
> with good foundations
OK, a slightly different angle, but in the good old tradition of
stupid back-of-the
"Nadav Har'El" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Issues of discrimination ("blind people can't use your site", "10%
> of the Israelis can't use your site", "Bank Hapoalim doesn't
> descriminate thus!") and future certainty ("the moment IE 7 comes
> out, your site *may* stop working!") may also mean so
On Wed, Mar 12, 2003, Oleg Goldshmidt wrote about "Re: egged.co.il works":
>...
> Ultimately, the people needed to be convinced are decision-makers, not
> techies. Decision-makers can only be convinced by money arguments. If
>...
> Coming back to Shachar's original
The things that make a long term operational system cheap have several
levels.
Before explaining the rest of this argument, it's important to make sure
the person you're talking does see how his website is his banks most
important (long term), and fragile channel for selling his services.
People
Ira Abramov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Quoting Oleg Goldshmidt, from the post of Wed, 12 Mar:
> > > > 1. Should be cheaper to develop and maintain.
> > >
> > > Sadly, I think we have reached the conclusion it's not exactly correct
> > > anymore.
> >
> > Why not?
>
> because the vast majorit
Quoting Oleg Goldshmidt, from the post of Wed, 12 Mar:
> > > 1. Should be cheaper to develop and maintain.
> >
> > Sadly, I think we have reached the conclusion it's not exactly correct
> > anymore.
>
> Why not?
because the vast majority of web developpers are too used to ASP, dev
studio, front
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> Quoting Oleg Goldshmidt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> > > Sadly, I think we have reached the conclusion it's not exactly correct
> > > anymore.
> >
> > Why not?
>
> For one reason: if, as you suggested to me, you have to keep your web
> programmers informed of new standar
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> Quoting Oleg Goldshmidt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> > Now your situation only strengthens the agrument for standards. If you
> > ignore the standards the IE6 users (and possibly Mozilla 1.4 users in
> > a few months, and Opera 9.118 or whatever, etc) will see your site as
Quoting Oleg Goldshmidt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > Sadly, I think we have reached the conclusion it's not exactly correct
> > anymore.
>
> Why not?
For one reason: if, as you suggested to me, you have to keep your web
programmers informed of new standards all the time, it costs you money. After
al
Quoting Oleg Goldshmidt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Now your situation only strengthens the agrument for standards. If you
> ignore the standards the IE6 users (and possibly Mozilla 1.4 users in
> a few months, and Opera 9.118 or whatever, etc) will see your site as
> broken. Which it is, because sta
Herouth Maoz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> At 18:47 +0200 on 11/3/2003, Alon Altman wrote:
>
> > The question is- does it support MSIE 7.0? The answer: They don't know.
>
> This question is the same for a standards-compliant site, because you
> don't know when one of the browsers is going to p
Ira Abramov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Quoting Shaul Karl, from the post of Tue, 11 Mar:
> >
> > 1. Should be cheaper to develop and maintain.
>
> Sadly, I think we have reached the conclusion it's not exactly correct
> anymore.
Why not?
--
Oleg Goldshmidt | [EMAIL PROTECTED]
===
At 18:47 +0200 on 11/3/2003, Alon Altman wrote:
The question is- does it support MSIE 7.0? The answer: They don't know.
This question is the same for a standards-compliant site, because you
don't know when one of the browsers is going to pick up on a new
standard and ruin everything. This has
On Tue, 11 Mar 2003 07:20:52 +0200
"Reuven M. Lerner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Given that the Web will be an increasingly important part of the
> Leumi infrastructure, it seems to me that Leumi should be pushing
> for a neutral body to define the standards for that
> infrastruct
On Tue, 11 Mar 2003, Ira Abramov wrote:
> > 4. Doesn't force the clients into specific browsers, which enhances
> >the clients freedom.
>
> "Now that's crazy talk! we've tested and it works on MSIE5, 5.5 AND
> 6.0!"
The question is- does it support MSIE 7.0? The answer: They don't know. If
t
Quoting Shaul Karl, from the post of Tue, 11 Mar:
>
> 1. Should be cheaper to develop and maintain.
Sadly, I think we have reached the conclusion it's not exactly correct
anymore.
but what annoys me is that banks (who for tax reasons are recognised as
"Malkar" in Israel!!!) boast multi-million d
On Mon, Mar 10, 2003 at 03:02:06PM +0200, Shachar Shemesh wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I am meeting the person in charge of the internet infrastructures for
> Leumi Bank in about two weeks. This is someone who seem ready to listen
> (though it doesn't sound as if it is going to be easy to convince), and
Gilad Ben-Yossef wrote:
Here is my take for a structured argument:
The argument usually presented in regard for making sub-standart sites
that only work for a specific browseris that statistics show that the
% of users using this product is so big that the economical incentive
to make a stan
> "Shachar" == Shachar Shemesh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Shachar> Please help me with a set of reasons why making the site
Shachar> actually work with Mozilla is in their best interests.
I can think of two arguments:
(1) I don't want to see the Leumi site work with Mozilla. I want
Well, Mozilla =! Linux
Mozilla (and other gecko browsers) are used also on Mac and on Windows.
As more and more people are getting tired of IE security problems, more
and more people, on many platforms, are using Gecko browsers.
Also, if the sites is focused on standards, he will not have to ru
On 2003/03/10 16:03, Shachar Shemesh wrote:
> Only about 1% of the people who browse the internet do so from Linux
> (http://www.google.com/press/zeitgeist.html).
> My site (http://www.shemesh.biz), which was published mostly on Linux
> related forums (here through my sig, Wine, Haifux) gets about
please don't CC: me, I read the first one just fine.
[EMAIL PROTECTED], from the post of Mon, 10 Mar:
> Quoting Ira Abramov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> > users on linux
> > blind users
> > users on palm
>
> Is Palm standards-compliant? Last that I heard of it it had terrible Hebrew
> problems.
it
Ah, your advocacy is for a *simpler* site, not a *standard* site. These two
things are different. Do we want to put the effort in convincing the man to give
up his gadgets and toys?
IMHO, this is the best thing we have to come with.
I would go for "simplicity means business". A bank shouldn't
On Mon, 10 Mar 2003, Shachar Shemesh wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I am meeting the person in charge of the internet infrastructures for
> Leumi Bank in about two weeks. This is someone who seem ready to listen
> (though it doesn't sound as if it is going to be easy to convince), and
> has the authority to
Quoting Ira Abramov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> users on linux
> blind users
> users on palm
Is Palm standards-compliant? Last that I heard of it it had terrible Hebrew
problems.
> sticking to standards means it will work on older browsers as well (MSIE
> 4 and 5 anyone?)
Which standards do you mean
Shachar Shemesh wrote:
Hi all,
I am meeting the person in charge of the internet infrastructures for
Leumi Bank in about two weeks. This is someone who seem ready to listen
(though it doesn't sound as if it is going to be easy to convince), and
has the authority to order a change if he is convi
For a person that actually cares about accessing his bank account via
the web, being able to do so from the software he uses is very
important. I wouldn't change to a bank that forced me to move physically
just to get information or give orders.
And being exposed to the security concerns related
On Mon, 10 Mar 2003, Shachar Shemesh wrote:
> I think I will have a case, unless he pulls some activex from the hat
> that does authentication. I can still claim that the old site is around,
> and that one hole is enough, but that will leave me with a poor case.
You mean there might be an activ
Gabor Szabo wrote:
Maybe if you say that:
I am NOT a client of Leumi because an important service of the bank
is not accessible for me
would be more convincing ?
Gabor
I will certanly say that the Amuta has a bank account at Hapoalim
because they support Linux. The thing is that it is cl
Ok, let me play devil's advocate here, then.
Assaf Flatto wrote:
here are some
1 ) the market is slowly moving toward Linux and so are the people using
the online banking , by blocking the site to the primary browser I that
environment - you may be damaging your clients and alienating them .
On
On Mon, 10 Mar 2003, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> >
> If the fact that I am the client of Leumi Bank and an important service
> of the bank is not accessible for me because of some stupid management
> decisions doesn't sound convincing enough for him I seriously doubt you
> can convince him by any o
> Hi all,
>
> I am meeting the person in charge of the internet infrastructures for
> Leumi Bank in about two weeks. This is someone who seem ready to listen
> (though it doesn't sound as if it is going to be easy to convince), and
> has the authority to order a change if he is convinced.
>
>
Quoting Shachar Shemesh, from the post of Mon, 10 Mar:
> I am meeting the person in charge of the internet infrastructures for
> Leumi Bank in about two weeks. This is someone who seem ready to listen
> (though it doesn't sound as if it is going to be easy to convince), and
> has the authority t
Forbes; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: egged.co.il works
>
>
> Hi all,
>
> I am meeting the person in charge of the internet infrastructures for
> Leumi Bank in about two weeks. This is someone who seem ready
> to listen
> (though it doe
Hi all,
I am meeting the person in charge of the internet infrastructures for
Leumi Bank in about two weeks. This is someone who seem ready to listen
(though it doesn't sound as if it is going to be easy to convince), and
has the authority to order a change if he is convinced.
Now I need ammun
On Wed, 5 Mar 2003, Vadim Vygonets wrote:
> Quoth Alon Altman on Tue, Mar 04, 2003:
> > If you want to use egged.co.il on Mozilla, use my interface. It's much
> > easier and lighter - http://alon.wox.org/egged.html (ignore the "line no."
> > box)
>
> Great, but please specify Hebrew encoding in th
Quoth Alon Altman on Tue, Mar 04, 2003:
> If you want to use egged.co.il on Mozilla, use my interface. It's much
> easier and lighter - http://alon.wox.org/egged.html (ignore the "line no."
> box)
Great, but please specify Hebrew encoding in the web page headers
(this discussion is about standards
Nadav Har'El wrote:
No, the workaround stopped working a week after you posted it.
It now uses an invalid certificate (!) to secure the connection, which
makes the site unusable.
In that case I agree, it is the most urgent for me as well.
also, kindly mail me in private the specifics of the
On Wed, Mar 05, 2003, Guy Baruch wrote about "Re: egged.co.il works":
>
>
> Nadav Har'El wrote:
>
> >Yes. Bank Leumi is the worst as far as I'm concerned.
> >
> >
> but bank leumi has a workaround as the old site, which was posted here
>
Nadav Har'El wrote:
Yes. Bank Leumi is the worst as far as I'm concerned.
but bank leumi has a workaround as the old site, which was posted here
some months back.
let's not open that old discussion again, but if it has a WA, it's not a
show stopper ...
--
-- regards
+--
Please contact a serious journalist, like Mordechai Gilat, with this info.
If it's not exposed, it won't be fixed.
Alon Altman wrote:
I second discountbank. Kupat Holim Clalit say they will install a new site
soon (the rep didn't know about moz support). I have managed to workaround
the clalit
I think a good focus is important markets and monopoly institutes. Banks
are a good example, but focusing on a specific bank might be counter
productive - if someone there has an interest in the status-quo, there's
not much to do about it.
However, there are various reasons all banks should want
At 17:57 +0200 on 4/3/2003, Shachar Shemesh wrote:
I am willing to take that one up as a representative of an official
body, and try to get things changed. I would, however, ask you to
help me focuse my efforts. Please give a quick vote of the site
whose lack of support for konq/moz is the mo
NH>> Yes. Bank Leumi is the worst as far as I'm concerned.
What is funny - once it was the best. But it looks like some greedy
site-forge managers were in need of some cash so that they succeeded to
convince BL people that they need to break perfectly working system and
erect in its place another
Shachar Shemesh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Maybe we should form some sort of an official body that will try to
> advance these concerns that are relevant specifically to users of open
> source and free software? Hey, didn't someone say something about and
> Amuta?
Indeed, some months ago I sug
On Tue, 4 Mar 2003, Beni Cherniavsky wrote:
> On 2003-03-04, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> > Organize? Maybe create a site or a subsite which contains links of all the
> > uncooperative sites, and give them bad rap in the press? Create a nice PDF in
> > Hebrew about standardization of a site, and s
On Tue, 4 Mar 2003, Shachar Shemesh wrote:
> Of this list, 1yashir, discount and kupat holim seem the most urgent to
> me. That's because they are suppliers that, if you happen to be their
> customer, it is very difficult for you to switch.
>
> I'll let you know what I came up with.
>
I second
On Tue, Mar 04, 2003, Shachar Shemesh wrote about "Re: egged.co.il works":
> me focuse my efforts. Please give a quick vote of the site whose lack of
> support for konq/moz is the most troubling, and let me know. I think
> Bank Leumi is the candidate for this. Anyone else?
On Tue, 2003-03-04 at 00:54, Nadav Har'El wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 04, 2003, Tzafrir Cohen wrote about "Re: egged.co.il works":
> > So another broken site is supported, instead of it being built properly.
>
> Right... And worse, this gives Microsoft a whole new baseline
On 2003-03-04, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Organize? Maybe create a site or a subsite which contains links of all the
> uncooperative sites, and give them bad rap in the press? Create a nice PDF in
> Hebrew about standardization of a site, and send it to management levels in
> those companies? I'm
Of this list, 1yashir, discount and kupat holim seem the most urgent to
me. That's because they are suppliers that, if you happen to be their
customer, it is very difficult for you to switch.
I'll let you know what I came up with.
Shachar
Shoshannah Forbes wrote:
I am willing to t
I am willing to take that one up as a representative of an official
body, and try to get things changed. I would, however, ask you to help
me focuse my efforts. Please give a quick vote of the site whose lack of
support for konq/moz is the most troubling, and let me know. I think
Bank Leumi is
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Organize? Maybe create a site or a subsite which contains links of all the
uncooperative sites, and give them bad rap in the press? Create a nice PDF in
Hebrew about standardization of a site, and send it to management levels in
those companies? I'm at a loss. For me it's
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
For me it's worse than most of you - my other OS
is a MacOS...
If you look at the headers of this email, you will notice that this makes two of us... :)
Organize?
That is what I have been pushing for.
Maybe create a site or a subsite which contains links of all the
unc
On Tue, Mar 04, 2003, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote about "Re: egged.co.il works":
> Organize? Maybe create a site or a subsite which contains links of all the
> uncooperative sites, and give them bad rap in the press? Create a nice PDF in
> Hebrew about standardization of a s
Quoting Shoshannah Forbes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> C. complain at the site, and meantime use the phone to call Eggedd
> (that is what I do)
I do that, but it doesn't work. Of all the sites I complained to, the only one
who did anything was yellow pages, which didn't improve its site, merely removed
On Tue, 4 Mar 2003, Beni Cherniavsky wrote:
> On 2003-03-04, Shoshannah Forbes wrote:
>
> > C. complain at the site, and meantime use the phone to call Eggedd
> > (that is what I do)
> >
> I complained and they returned some response thanking me for the
> refernce (to webstandards - which I'm not
On 2003-03-04, Shoshannah Forbes wrote:
> C. complain at the site, and meantime use the phone to call Eggedd
> (that is what I do)
>
I complained and they returned some response thanking me for the
refernce (to webstandards - which I'm not sure they even bothered
chekcing) and generally feeling "w
Hetz Ben Hamo wrote:
Fine, then what should I do next time when I'm coming from my parents city
(Tzfat) to Tel Aviv and want to know the schedule?
A. Use mozilla, see that it doesn't show the web site and simply wait outside
for a bus few hours..
B. Use Konqueror, see the site, schedule my timi
On 2003-03-04, Alon Altman wrote:
> On Tue, 4 Mar 2003, Tzafrir Cohen wrote:
>
> > On Tue, 4 Mar 2003, Alon Altman wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > If you want to use egged.co.il on Mozilla, use my interface. It's much
> > > easier and lighter - http://alon.wox.org/egged.html (ignore the "line no."
> > > bo
On Tue, 4 Mar 2003, Tzafrir Cohen wrote:
> On Tue, 4 Mar 2003, Alon Altman wrote:
>
> >
> > If you want to use egged.co.il on Mozilla, use my interface. It's much
> > easier and lighter - http://alon.wox.org/egged.html (ignore the "line no."
> > box)
>
> Sorry, but the name doesn't resolve from h
On Mon, 3 Mar 2003, Diego Iastrubni wrote:
> Hi all
>
> Just wanted to inform you:
> egged.co.il works in konqui 3.1 Also israrail.co.il.
>
> Lots of new supported IE only sites are working for linux users.
> Good work! and that was before of all the apple patches!
> Go
> This is why Netscape freed the Mozilla sources - to stop Microsoft from
> being able to do that. And this is why Mozilla has very strong opinions on
> not emulated broken IE behaviour.
Fine, then what should I do next time when I'm coming from my parents city
(Tzfat) to Tel Aviv and want to kno
On Tue, Mar 04, 2003, Tzafrir Cohen wrote about "Re: egged.co.il works":
> So another broken site is supported, instead of it being built properly.
Right... And worse, this gives Microsoft a whole new baseline on which they
can create new divergent technology, which gets further and
On Mon, 3 Mar 2003, Diego Iastrubni wrote:
> Hi all
>
> Just wanted to inform you:
> egged.co.il works in konqui 3.1 Also israrail.co.il.
>
> Lots of new supported IE only sites are working for linux users.
> Good work! and that was before of all the apple patches!
> Good
Hi all
Just wanted to inform you:
egged.co.il works in konqui 3.1 Also israrail.co.il.
Lots of new supported IE only sites are working for linux users.
Good work! and that was before of all the apple patches!
Good news indeed
- diego
67 matches
Mail list logo
