A div is probably better - it's less intrusive. Could you please post the code up when you're done? I may wish to use it sometime (not that I make many sites or anything).
Thanks. On Tue, 30 Oct 2001 18:16:34 +0800, "Franki" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > All very valid points, which is why some action is taken... > > As previously stated, IE is already the prime browser on Mac and windows > platforms.. > > that makes up the far majority of web users.. > > web developers are allready peeved at having to cross browser develop. > > if IE gets to 95% saturation, then developers are not going to consider it > worth > developing for the others,, and they will all write for M$ IE, then they > will > start using IE proprietry tags, whatever they are, move to .net instead of > JAVA where applicable. > > and we are all screwed because its quiet likely that IE will never > materalise for Linux until it > stops becoming a threat to M$, which is very likely never... > > In light of that, I don't think a bit of subtle information is a bad thing.. > > I was recently thinking of a small popup window, that has a cookie to make > sure it only gets put up once, and a timer so that it closes either onBlur > or times out after 10 or so seconds. > > or a div with the same timer that disappears after 10 seconds. > > wouldn't be that hard, only have to code it for one browser type. :-) > > rgds > > Frank > > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Sridhar Dhanapalan > Sent: Tuesday, 30 October 2001 3:30 PM > To: John Hokanson Jr. > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [newbie] My personal response to msn.com and Internet > Explorer. > > > On Mon, 29 Oct 2001 21:32:52 -0800, "John Hokanson Jr." > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > On Monday 29 October 2001 08:25 pm, you wrote: > > > And I'm saying, he should make sure that it can be viewed > > > properly. Not cop out with uncertainty. > > > > > > I agree with you, except Franki explicitly stated that he fears > > > unless people are drawn away from MSIE, they might not ever > > > consider switching to Linux. > > > > > > ====================================================== > > > > > > You missunderstood me again.... > > > > > > I made that point to indicate that if the web becomes IE only (can > > > anyone deny that that > > > is what M$ want?) people won't have the choice,,, I don't actually > > > care if people want > > > to use linux or not... I care that people have the choice to use > > > whatever they want. > > > > What they want, and what they can do are two separate things. > > Controlling the WORLD wide web would be significantly harder than > > their attempts to control the OS market. If the US fails to stop them, > > the European Union, Australia, Asia, and other regions get their > > crack at them. > > The EU is the only body with the clout to stop MS. While they look like > being on > the brink of fining MS billions of dollars for anti-competitive behaviour in > the > server market, they are also set to ratify an act which is not unlike the > DMCA. > > > The Internet will not stand to be controlled by Microsoft. There > > are too many people running Linux. Macs, Amigas, ect. for this to > > happen. > > MS essentially control the Macintosh platform. Apple have to do what MS > wants, > or MS will stop making Office for the Mac. That would kill them. > > Most other OSs, for all practical purposes, are dead. It's sad but true. The > latest addition to this list is BeOS, which was recently bought by Palm and > is > being neglected. > > Free software represents a real and credible threat to Microsoft's plans. > When > the W3C considered RAND licensing earlier this month, the outrage from the > free > software community was so strong that they appointed Bruce Perens and the > FSF's > Eben Moglen to their board, in an effort to prevent Perens's threat of the > community forking the standards from taking place. > > > The WORST that will happen is that third party browsers will > > have to learn how parse Microsoft's proprietary web code. > > Afterall, Star Office can read Word documents..... > > Do you have any idea how long this has taken? Compatibility is still not > 100%, > even after years of painstaking reverse-engineering. Once MS controls web > standards, they are free to do what they like with it. They will push > Windows-only technologies like VBScript and ActiveX over JavaScript and > Java. I > wouldn't be surprised if they introduce binary code, as they have done in > the MS > Word format. They can keep their standards moving, so that by the time they > are > reverse-engineered they are already obsolete. Again, the MS Word file format > is > a prime example here. > > Try reading this article by Robert X. Cringely: > > http://www.pbs.org/cringely/pulpit/pulpit20010802.html > > Of notable mention is this: > > "According to these programmers, Microsoft wants to replace TCP/IP with a > proprietary protocol -- a protocol owned by Microsoft -- that it will tout > as > being more secure. Actually, the new protocol would likely be TCP/IP with > some > of the reserved fields used as pointers to proprietary extensions, quite > similar > to Vines IP, if you remember that product from Banyan Systems." > > It may only be a rumour today, but the fact that so many knowledgeable > people > actually believe it means that it shouldn't be ignored. > > > In fact, if it weren't for Linux, the government's case against > > Microsoft might have come sooner.... > > The DoJ has been closely watching MS since at least 1993, when they were > found > guilty of using stolen code from Digital Research in MS-DOS, and of > deliberately > making DR-DOS incompatible with Windows 3.1. GNU/Linux has only become > prominent > in the past couple of years, but DoJ-MS relations have been going for far > longer > than that. GNU/Linux has absolutely nothing to do with the case, and had no > bearing whatsoever on it. If it was, then why was MS found to be > overwhelmingly > guilty? > > -- > Sridhar Dhanapalan > > The Information Revolution will be fought on the command line. > > > > -- Sridhar Dhanapalan "In short, Microsoft is no more able to build secure products than England's cricket team is able to withstand the bowling of Australia's bowlers." -- Leyden, J., "MS firewall is holier than the Pope", The Register (http://www.theregister.co.uk), 2001-08-20.
Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
