David E. Ross wrote:
>some Web sites over-use frames to the point that
>they make Web pages not only annoying but also difficult to use.
>
In the vernacular, "Kill them all; let God sort them out."
The original:
http://google.com/search?q=%22.God.will.know.his.own%22
>Is there a way to cause each
>Paul B. Gallagher wrote:
>They don't want to maintain the car,
>
Oh, but they -ARE- willing to invest large gobs of their time
into learning the fine points of anti-whatever apps
(which aren't necessary on a properly-crafted OS).
>they just want to drive it.
>
...after they've ironed out all the
Hartmut Figge wrote:
>JeffM wrote:
>>My question is: What tasks do these folks actually do
>>that **requires** the easily-infected / needs-anti-whatever-apps OS?
>>
>There *are* games which wine is unable to cope with. :)
>
...which echoes my use of the term "toy
Beauregard T. Shagnasty wrote:
>[...]I've been using Linux for about seven years
>and have never once compiled a single ... anything.
>
...though that does remain an option which is available with FOSS
--unlike the all-closed-source segment
which makes up the majority of the M$ ecosystem.
...despit
Beauregard T. Shagnasty wrote:
>Daniel wrote:
>>[...]BitDefender[...]anti-virus update[...]
>>
I've been reading with great amusement
this thread about a toy OS and the hoops its users jump thru.
>If your b-i-l used Mandriva, he'd not have had this problem! :-)
>
I was thinking along those lines
Stephen Geraghty wrote:
>I recently noticed that [HTML] pages align left
>when Internet Exporer renders them,
>
I *assume* that you have tried this
with only *ONE* version of MICROS~1's junk.
Want an eye-opener?
Try viewing a collection of pages with a multitude of browsers;
be sure to include *se
Frog wrote:
>I am attempting to open a web page at the following address:
>http://www.nps.gov/features/yell/live/live4.htm
>
http://groups.google.com/group/mozilla.support.seamonkey/search?group=mozilla.support.seamonkey&q=nps+gov&qt_g=Search+this+group
_
Anonymous wrote:
>Why cant SM block unwanted sites from Google searches?
>
This was asked (just as poorly) a while back:
http://groups.google.com/group/mozilla.support.seamonkey/browse_frm/thread/8555dcbe93416bdb/1480ad93b0eae5a7#doc_1480ad93b0eae5a7
___
Paul B. Gallagher wrote:
>When replying in plain text to an HTML message, I've noticed
>that SeaMonkey does some peculiar thing with links.
>
The universe is trying to tell you
to stop sending Web pages via SMTP.
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support
BeulahFuentes wrote:
>[SPAM from 184.173.202.26]
Wouldn't nFilter/NewsProxy or Leafnode
(or Hamster on a Windoze server)
eliminate these repeated SPAM posts automatically?
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lis
Paul B. Gallagher wrote:
>a manager's job is to delegate stuff to experts
>who know the nitty-gritty details of things that would just bog him down.
>
Actually, it's his job to make sure that things get done RIGHT.
Getting 100,000 widgets produced on time
--with none of them meeting spec--is called
>>Beauregard T. Shagnasty wrote:
>>>"Scumbag" may be a little strong though,
>>>
>JeffM wrote:
>>Nope. It's right on the mark.
>>
Beauregard T. Shagnasty wrote:
>No, it is not. You can't blame the companies for these problems.
>
>>Beauregard T. Shagnasty wrote:
>>>as most folks/companies simply aren't aware of standards,
>>>
>JeffM wrote:
>>aka incompetents. aka don't know how to do their jobs.
>>
Justin Wood (Callek) wrote:
>* Big-Wigs in company,
>and sometim
Beauregard T. Shagnasty wrote:
>"Scumbag" may be a little strong though,
>
Nope. It's right on the mark.
>as most folks/companies simply aren't aware of standards,
>
aka incompetents. aka don't know how to do their jobs.
>or the existence of browsers beyond, say,
>Internet Exploder, Firefox, and
David E. Ross wrote:
>Situations in which an error-free HTML page
>will not be viewable with all browsers include:
>
> * Insufficient contrast between text color and background color.
>
> * [Assumed window sizes]
>
> * Rendering that is garbled when CSS is disabled
>
...a particular favorite of
WLS wrote:
>"Browser Policy Statement
>Verizon recognizes the diverse operating systems and Internet browsers
>our visitors may be using. While we want every visitor to have the best
>possible experience on our Web site, we recognize that it is impossible
>to develop applications that work identica
>JeffM wrote:
>>The anti-whatever guys
>>are always playing catch-up with the black hats.
>>
...and the bad guys are smarter than
MICROS~1 and the anti-whatever guys put together.
>>Updating your band-aid apps
>>*just before* doing something questionable is
>>Paul Bergsagel wrote:
>>>How do we know if this is a Trojan or something equally bad?
>>
You forgot to include what "this" is.
Broad strokes:
Get your apps only from trusted sources.
The repositories of Linux distros are a good example of this.
If "this" is something that appears in your browse
WLS wrote:
>Having peeked my interest,
>
For future reference:
http://google.com/search?q=%22.piqued.my.interest%22
I've seen "peak" used before (incorrectly),
but your use of "peek" is a first for me.
http://google.com/search?q=pique+peek+peak
___
suppo
Jim wrote:
>[...]we have to use the site www.employeeexpress.gov.[...]
>It requires Firefox or IE 7.0 or 8.0.
>
This is one of the most common topics discussed at this group.
The situation is an artifact of massively incompetent "Web developers"
who learned to use ONE tool and stopped their "educat
Lila Holt wrote:
>This research is[...]in no way associated with any forum organization.
>
Duh. That's called Off-Topic, aka SPAM.
>This research is conducted through the University of Tennessee
>
Noted.
>Take a survey
>
Take a hike.
___
support-seamon
>David Wilkinson wrote:
>>Windows 8 will have an entirely new mode of operation called Metro
>>[...]
>>So where does this leave SeaMonkey/FireFox/Thunderbird?
>>
Sailfish wrote:
>I predict they will be as successful with it
>as they were with Kin/Win Phone 7/Vista.
>
The only thing M$ seem to be ab
PhillipJones wrote:
>Adobe absolutely refuses to support Gecko based Browsers on Mac.
>[...][It's] webkit only. Perhaps we should switch to webkit .
>
...or perhaps to Linux.
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://l
>>David E. Ross wrote :
>>>AdBlock Plus
>>>
>Jane--Galt wrote:
>>it doesn't prevent a site from coming up in Google results
>>
As has been noted, that is a COMPLETELY different question
from what you initially asked.
Paul B. Gallagher wrote:
>append -site:yourdomainhere.com to your search string
>>JeffM wrote:
>>>There are operating systems that don't need this
>>>band-aids-pasted-all-over-the-outside nonsense.
>>>
>Ray_Net wrote:
>>You speak about one of the multitude of the lunix distributions crap ?
>>
Rufus wrote:
> ...which don&
Cathy Palmer-Lister wrote:
>[...]Norton [antivirus]
>
There are operating systems that don't need this
band-aids-pasted-all-over-the-outside nonsense.
(Actually, there is only *one* OS vendor that *does* need it.)
Those alternate OSes are available at zero cost
and you can run Windoze in a virtual
Rostyslaw Lewyckyj wrote:
>The forward charge by the bull elephants
>to introduce new features is all well and good.
>But I'd like to see an army with brooms and pooper scoopers
>clean up the field between the charging elephants
>and us the plodding following mass of users.
>So that we can follow w
>JeffM wrote:
>>Hmmm. I've already used this analogy once today (elsewhere).
>>Sometimes it only takes ONE individual to affect a change:
>><http://google.com/search?tbs=dfn:1&q=hung-jury >
>>
Paul B. Gallagher wrote:
>OK, so if I dedicate my life to
>JeffM wrote:
>>Describe more fully "incapable of testing".
>>
Paul B. Gallagher wrote:
>What I mean is that most end users can demo a program,
>play around for a bit,
>and generally satisfy themselves that "it works" for their favorite tasks.
>
Paul B. Gallagher wrote:
>Inviting end users who are incapable of coding or testing
>is an empty promise.
>
Describe more fully "incapable of testing".
>If the developers want to know what end users think,
>they need to ask them before the code is carved in stone.
>
This overlooks the "scratching
>JeffM wrote:
>>those folks who are prone to complaining
>>*should* be the ones who point out shortcomings
>>**when something can more easily be done about those**
>>i.e. **early** aka **during pre-release**.
>>
Rostyslaw Lewyckyj wrote:
>All right , th
>JeffM wrote:
>>Not complaining about the content; it's the *timing* that bugs me.
>>
Michael Gordon wrote:
>Don't be too harsh on these late posters.
>
Well, as long as they don't get *too* whiney.
>Some of us will not upgrade
>until most of the major
>JeffM wrote:
>>those folks who are prone to complaining
>>*should* be the ones who point out shortcomings
>>**when something can more easily be done about those**
>>i.e. **early** aka **during pre-release**.
>>
Paul B. Gallagher wrote:
>If you want people to c
>JeffM wrote:
>>Whenever I see these long diatribes about SeaMonkey,
>>I note that they never mention the authors' participation
>>in the Release Candidate trial/review process.
>>
Jay Garcia wrote:
>What else is required other than to be a "user",
Graham wrote:
>I'm liking Seamonkey less and less
>[Large amounts of text elided]
>
Whenever I see these long diatribes about SeaMonkey,
I note that they never mention the authors' participation
in the Release Candidate trial/review process.
___
support-s
Charly Brown wrote:
>1)
>
Turn off your Caps Lock key when typing Subject lines.
>Thanks
>
Thank you.
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
>Don DeWitt wrote:
>I've had a variety of problems with Composer as well
>(I believe I read that no one is currently maintaining it)
>
There was some chatter at one point of collaboration with Kaze,
the developer of KompoZer.
I wonder if anything ever come from that?
___
NoOp wrote:
>"Sorry, your browser/program is not supported by Web Dynpro! "
>
I'm completely shocked.
Their developers seem so talented.
http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http://amtrak.com/
374 Errors, 463 warning(s)
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
sup
>JeffM wrote:
>>Slashdot commenters mentioned several times
>>http://news.slashdot.org/story/11/06/27/1442205/Firefox-Is-For-Regular-Users-Not-Businesses
>>that Gecko needs a Long-Term Support version
>>(a concept that Ubuntu has used successfully since June 2006,
&
Cruz, Jaime wrote:
>The add-on authors seem to be having difficulties
>keeping up with the upgrade cycle,
>
Asa Dotzler (who is not authorized to speak for Mozilla)
made a comment that caused even more corps to dump Firefox.
(Having to test for breakage before deploying
then test AGAIN soon afterwa
MCBastos wrote:
>Add-ons (extensions) "hook" into and modify the user interface
>of the program -- sometimes inserting a new module
>in the structure, sometimes replacing the standard module
>with their own customized module, whatever.
>
...then there is Google included an actual API for extensions
Bob Fleischer wrote:
>[...]Mac OS 10.4.
>
Apple: The new Borg.
>I understand that she cannot upgrade to SeaMonkey 2.1,
>and that there will be no further security fixes to SeaMonkey 2.0.
>
>Besides buying a new computer, what alternatives might there be?
>
http://distrowatch.com/search.php?archite
MCBastos wrote:
>Advertising Firefox compatibility
>only helps to get dumb browser-sniffing webpages to load correctly.
>
I call those "Web pages constructed by idiots"
but you're a more kind and gentle soul than I am.
>Extension compatibility is an entirely different subject.
>
I'm a one-step-at-
sean nathan bean wrote:
>it displays no problem,
>but won't let me install the firefox compatible addon...
>
The version numbers of SeaMonkey
are at least one integer behind Firefox.
If an extension checks for a version number upon installation,
first, you better assure that the version numbers lin
Francesco Presel wrote:
>[...]where does it get the information from,
>about what program it should use (I'm using linux)?
>
The builder of the site specifies the MIME type.
http://google.com/search?tbs=dfn:1&q=MIME-type
A lot of people who build sites are idiots and do it wrong.
(Kinda like the id
William Morrison wrote:
>that would require me giving out my username and password
>to be of any use to anyone
>and then everyone would have access to my Facebook Account.
>
Ah. Facebook is a really stupid idea IMO.
>use SM 2.1 create a Facebook account of your own then
>
You just lost me.
A site
William Morrison wrote:
>I can't play Golf on Facebook
>
Here's a crazy idea:
When you have a problem with a page,
include a clickable link to that page in your post.
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.moz
>JeffM wrote:
>>The truth is much simpler:
>> 1) Google has embraced Web 2.0.
>> 2) Google employees don't know the *basics* of what they are doing.
>>
sean bean wrote:
>google's corporate motto is "don't be evil"
>but this is now opposi
MCBastos wrote:
>Interviewed by CNN on 30/05/2011 06:49, Paul B. Gallagher told the world:
>
That's cute. 8-)
>>if enough sites were compliant, M$ would have to shape up.
>>
>Actually, I understand that IE9 is reasonably compliant
>
The phrase you seek is *inching upward*
(after YEARS of hobbling
>JeffM wrote:
>>Google is sniffing for browsers
>>and blackballing those it deems unworthy of accessing its pages.
>>Again, sniffing is a stupid practice;
>>using it *incorrectly* is monumentally stupid.
>>
>>It is obvious that the Google employees who
sean bean wrote:
>Google is likely telling you your browser is not supported because
>Google wants to set all sorts of cookies and location awareness data
>in your browser,
>
Nope.
>which SeaMonkey generally doesn't allow by default
>
Nope.
While I laud your suspicion of megacorporations,
your ac
Paul B. Gallagher wrote:
>And of course a compliant site would get fewer calls, would it not?
>
In a perfect world: Yes.
In a world where M$ is in the browser market: Who knows?
You're forgetting that not only is Internet Exploder not W3C-
compliant,
the various versions aren't even compatible wit
>JeffM wrote :
>>[...]idiots who don't know how to build a website properly[...]
>>
Jan_Galt wrote:
>You consider Google, one of the biggest sites in the world, to be idiots?
>
Yup.
This topic has been covered in this group innumerable times.
YOU DON'T NEED TO SNI
Jane_Galt wrote:
>I keep getting messages from Google search, Adwords and other places
>that my browser ( SM ) is no longer supported.
>
When you encounter idiots who don't know how to build a website
properly,
you have options:
1) Avoid the idiots permanently
2) Complain to the idiots that they sh
>doc@ kd4e.com wrote:
>>I have been surprised from time to time when I am on
>>a site in Europe or elsewhere and get an error saying
>>that some resource is not available in my "region".
>>
http://google.com/search?tbs=dfn:1&q=proxy-server
MCBastos wrote:
>[...]the U.S. used to have a
>"28 years f
d...@kd4e.com wrote:
>:[...]Chrome, Firefox, and Safari
>:have vulnerabilities numbering in the hundreds
>:-- far more than Internet Explorer in the same time periods.
>
When M$ starts publishing EVERY bug report it receives,
THEN these trolls can start making those claims with some veracity.
Howev
>>Ant wrote:
>>>http://mafiaafire.com/download.php
>>>Is there one that is compatible with Mozilla's SeaMonkey v2.x?
Ant wrote:
>I will just wait for an official SM2 support if it ever comes out.
>I will contact the developers too for a SM2 support too!
>
The extension in question is based on an i
hapihakr wrote:
>Use the user agent string option to masquerade as Firefox.
>
...or just don't visit sites built by chimps.
Thanks for posting to an 11-month old thread.
In addition:
The proper line length length for text in Usenet posts
is also much shorter than your post would indicate.
http://
>Smiles wrote:
>>how do I get rid of the load remote content pop up
>>
Paul B. Gallagher wrote:
>Edit | Preferences | Mail & Newsgroups | Message Display:
>You should be aware that by doing this
>you will be allowing "web beacons"
>
Yet another example that HTML email is a stupid notion.
More on th
Ed Mullen wrote:
>Best practice: Use Add/Remove Programs to uninstall first
>then install new version.
>
With the recent spate of Java-using exploits
(to which even Linux users are susceptible),
some are advising the Remove part WITHOUT the Install part.
http://mrpogson.com/2011/02/18/fate-of-java
David E. Ross wrote:
>As reported yesterday by the original poster in this thread,
>the problem was a setting in Adobe Reader, not in SeaMonkey.
>
What hasn't been stated explicitly, however,
is, apparently, that app handles Internet Exploder
in a different way than it does other browsers.
Good ol
Leroy Tennison wrote:
>[...]in the ASP code[...]
>
What characteristic does that Microsoft technology possess
that you feel that you need?
To get an iteration of M$ tech going,
it seems obvious that you would use a M$ tool.
M$ tools, of course, produce the least compliant, most bloated code.
_
nr wrote:
>JeffM wrote:
>>http://google.com/search?q=%22.Google.Groups%22+cookies+-this-group+-...
>>
>Thanks for the link, but it didn't show me anything usable.
>
The Google cookie(s) on your box
allows Google to access the data they have aggregated about you.
If that c
nr wrote:
>Google groups
>
http://google.com/search?q=%22.Google.Groups%22+cookies+-this-group+-food
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Fred James wrote:
>[...]PRINTER[...]
>
Starting a new thread with each new post
seems very stupid and selfish to me.
Try keeping it all in one thread from now on.
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla
>Jane_Galt wrote:
>>Is anyone else getting a parsing error at this site?:
>>http://www.memory4less.com/
>>
Beauregard T. Shagnasty wrote:
>New problem, eh? I see the same error in several browsers.
>
The only thing surprising here is that someone is surprised:
http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=htt
>JeffM wrote :
>>Finding a service that isn't run by bozos would be a good plan.
>>
Jane_Galt wrote:
>Webshots is it, pretty much, for HD color photo downloading.
>
That pretty much sucks.
Some competition in that segment would be good.
I wonder why there isn't a
>Beauregard T. Shagnasty wrote :
>>looks for "Internet Explorer",
>>"Firefox", "Safari", "Chrome", "Netscape" (!), "Opera", but not
>>"SeaMonkey". (Yet another example of author bungle.)
>>
:David E. Ross wrote:
:another example of why sniffing is generally bad.
:
Jane_Galt wrote:
>kept me from us
>Margo Guda wrote:
>>prefbar [will] just turn off color
>>
When you top-post, it really screws up the flow of the thread
--especially when you are responding to MULTIPLE posts.
David E. Ross wrote:
>There is no "white list" or "black list" capability for color.
>Either you enable it for all Web pa
David E. Ross wrote:
>Such a situation -- works with Firefox but not with SeaMonkey --
>generally indicates that the Web server is doing invalid sniffing.
>
...and the decision tree
for any browser *other* than the **one** horribly broken browser
doesn't need to be as complex as they are making it.
Eric wrote:
>I put it through the validator "http://validator.w3.org/";,
>
What else have you tried?
http://google.com/search?q=cache:HdmyepHTpmoJ:kb.mozillazine.org/Standard_diagnostic_-_SeaMonkey+Many-problems-are-caused-by-incompatible-themes.extensions.or-programming-errors-in-plugins+*-*-new-*
Beauregard T. Shagnasty wrote:
>you didn't "Fall Back"
>
It wasn't his choice. It's a *server* issue.
His *provider* hasn't applied the DST patches
which have been available for years.
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.or
Ant wrote:
>http://comics.com/brevity/2010-11-07/
>Heh.
>
8-) Shades of my youth and the back pages of comic books.
Without the bloated page, that's:
http://c0389161.cdn.cloudfiles.rackspacecloud.com/dyn/str_strip/342251.full.gif
___
support-seamonkey ma
David E. Ross wrote:
>Apparently, Google is "[sniffing]" for what browser you are using.
>Further, Google is "sniffing" INCORRECTLY.
>
It appears they turned things over to the children
who promptly screwed things up 6 ways to Sunday.
http://pogson.6k.ca/2010/10/29/storm-clouds/
___
Acharya Swami Rudra Kali Das wrote:
>I don't usually post, but
>
What would be good is if *before* posting
you looked at the Subject lines of what was posted the last few days.
news://news.mozilla.org:119/ttadnttmlpcgzfvrnz2dnuvz_qudn...@mozilla.org
http://groups.google.com/group/mozilla.support.se
nr wrote:
>[...]Password Manager[...]
>the user name and password won't populate the fields
>when I go to [Monster.com]
>
Similar topics have been discussed here before:
http://groups.google.com/group/mozilla.support.seamonkey/search?group=mozilla.support.seamonkey&q=Password-Manager+some-sites+-3-
>JeffM wrote:
>>Contact the jackass who can't built a proper Web page.
>>Direct your bile at the moron who obviously
>>doesn't do proper testing on the crap pages he produces.
>
Ed Mullen wrote:
>Err, contact, perhaps, a commenter who can get his verb tenses ri
Danny Kile wrote:
>I was not able to play the video when spoofing FF or IE,
>I was however able to play it if I ran IE Tabs.
>
So, to review:
A site that not only requires an Internet Exploder identity reported,
it is actually built to require that broken rendering engine.
Another moron Web develop
Doug Fisher wrote:
>I wish SM could figure get on more compliant lists
> - or figure out a way to work around this.
>
What I wish is that people would stop
blaming a browser that works PERFECTLY on properly-build sites
when that browser encounters a site built by an incompetent bozo
who should be d
doc@ kd4e.com wrote:
>I have tried this on two laptops, one SM 2.0.8
>the other 2.0.9 and it won't play - shows the promo page
>but no streaming video when clicked.
>http://www.syfy.com/rewind/riese/1255985/
>
It would be good if folks would mention having tried the usual
suspects:
Tried user agent
DoctorBill wrote:
>I am finding more and more often,
>that open tabs which are loading just keep on 'loading' forever.
>[...] the circling arrow and progress bar never stop working.
>[. . .]
>I do not understand all the nuances of how the internet works,
>
I note that you haven't mentioned how fast
Doug Fisher wrote:
>With the latest upgrade to 2.09,
>Google docs is now showing in "basic HTML" mode
>and is uneditable.
>SeaMonkey is being detected as a noncompliant browser.
>
Bitch to Google loud and long
about their incompetence doing browser sniffing.
http://groups.google.com/group/mozilla.s
Miroslav Kolar wrote:
>How can checky be made working with Seamonkey?
>
How about requesting that from the author.
http://checky.sourceforge.net/help.html
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/lis
DoctorBill wrote:
>The tech rep (ha!) didn't explain what software password to use.
>
An apt comic from a few days back:
http://xkcd.com/806/
The stuffed penguin was a powerful clue he had the right tech.
http://google.com/images?q=Tux+Larry-Ewing
___
sup
Mark Hansen wrote:
>What you must not realize is that
>people search the subject lines from past posts
>looking for potential solutions.
>By using a nonsense subject line,
>you basically make this really hard.
>
aka "selfish".
___
support-seamonkey mailin
Zeb Carter wrote:
>[...]I am recreating my USENET lists[...]
>
If you're going to be posting to USENET,
avoid using inane Subject lines like "A quick question".
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.o
stango wrote:
>different pages are developed using different software
>
Don't blame the software.
Ultimately it's the human's responsibility
to assure that the work he produces isn't crap.
>and for different browsers,
>
Mostly, this refers to pages built by fools and incompetents
who use Micros~1
robert.ga...@att.net wrote:
>links on Yahoo Finance that used to work in Seamonkey
>but won't display with 2.0.8.
>
The page is crap.
http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http://finance.yahoo.com
When the page is crap, the browser has to GUESS.
The old browser guessed correctly; the newer one doesn't.
DoctorBill wrote:
>If I use Google Images,[]very often Seamonkey 1.1 binds up
>and then an error message pops up
>about some "Unresponsive Script"
>
I note that you didn't mention what kind of bandwidth you have.
If scripts bog down your system, don't run those.
http://noscript.net/
__
DSF wrote:
>There are many other web sites where I save pages this way.
>
I'll bet when you check those other pages for crappiness
they look more like this
http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http://www.webstandards.org/2008/10/02/dowehaveawinner/
than like this
http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http
Stephan Mahieu wrote:
>cc-numbers imho are just the tip of the iceberg.
>What about the information you type in
>when doing online private banking?
>
The suckage of financial institutions (especially in the USA)
is just phenomenal.
http://it.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/05/08/1226243&mode=nocomme
Ray_Net wrote:
>Who is paying you to stress people using linux ?
>
It's called "sharing".
As the user of a Free Software online suite,
you should be familiar with the concept.
People who mention a 12-year-old M$ OS
(which is always running as root)
often have experienced being pwned by a drive-by
David E. Ross wrote:
>My wife uses SeaMonkey 1.1.19.
>Her old PC does not have the capacity for Windows XP,
>so she still uses Windows 98.
>However, her PC is starting to get cranky;
>
Can you narrow it down to the hardware or the software?
(Tried to boot to a Linux CD?)
>so I think I might get he
DoctorBill wrote:
>[...]an E-Mail[...]I wanted to print it to a file
>so that I could print it out with a word processor.
>Tried to "Print to File" when I clicked the Print Button.
>
Your expectations are so far off, it's humorous.
The file format will be "your printer's language" (gibberish).
Not
Popichak, Robert wrote:
>I would prefer to use MS Outlook
>
Maybe you should take your questions
about Internet Exploder and Outbreaks In Excess
to groups that specialize in those fourth-rate softwares.
>Is there a setting I can change to default IE8 to Outlook?
>
Everyone *assumes* that you know
Arnie Goetchius wrote:
>With Seamonkey (1.16 or 2.08), Firefox or Google Chrome,
>I get an a "Start Up Error" when trying to access the above site.
>
For kicks, I tried feeding the URL into the validator.
http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=https://www.uhcretiree.com/
I got a 500 error. (Server doe
>doc@ kd4e.com wrote:
>>I am using 2.0.8 in Limux.
>>
Beauregard T. Shagnasty wrote:
>Limux? :-)
>
Well, he might not be using it, but it's a real thing.
It's a spin of Debian produced by the City of Munich
with an eye on mass migration off of Windoze
and other closed-source payware.
http://en.wi
>JeffM wrote:
>>Now for the $64,000 question:
>>How much RAM is in that box?
>>
Daniel wrote:
>375MByte
>
384MB would be the number commonly reported for that.
So, your box is atypical for someone who is *still* using Win9x.
Mostly such folks will never alter the origi
>JeffM wrote:
>>A distro built around KDE or GNOME
>>is likely a non-starter for gear of that vintage.
>>
Daniel wrote:
>Wrong!! My desktop is a dual boot Win98 (upgraded to SE, I think)
>and Mandriva Linux 2007.1.
>Part of the Mandrive install is KDE desktop.
>
JeffM wrote:
>>If a newbie can do damage
>>without any prompt that what he is doing is dangerous,
>>he gets a fowl impression of "Linux"
>>--because Puppy is a poor implementation of Linux.
>>
>>Again, with Puppy, it's too easy for a n00b to get a
1 - 100 of 294 matches
Mail list logo
