Forgot to mention, it's Opera Mini 6.
On Oct 13, 2011, at 5:52 AM, tee wrote:
Yes, it used to be there, but not anymore.
http://bit.ly/qa9GmY
tee
On Oct 13, 2011, at 5:13 AM, Patrick H. Lauke wrote:
settings font size (3rd option down)
or am i missing something?
--
Patrick
settings font size (3rd option down)
or am i missing something?
--
Patrick H. Lauke
On 13 Oct 2011, at 13:55, tee weblis...@gmail.com wrote:
I clearly remember OM used to have this feature, but in my recent upgrade,
it's gone. Anybody knows about this? This list has Opera Inc employee(s),
Yes, it used to be there, but not anymore.
http://bit.ly/qa9GmY
tee
On Oct 13, 2011, at 5:13 AM, Patrick H. Lauke wrote:
settings font size (3rd option down)
or am i missing something?
--
Patrick H. Lauke
On 13 Oct 2011, at 13:55, tee weblis...@gmail.com wrote:
I clearly
On Sep 5, 2010, at 5:30 AM, David Storey wrote:
On 5 Sep 2010, at 13:49, tee wrote:
I have a mobile site (just using media queries) that initially used XHTML
Basic 1.1, the site rendered fine except with a few glitches (bugs!!??) that
I know existed in this browser. Decided to convert
On 5 Sep 2010, at 13:49, tee wrote:
I have a mobile site (just using media queries) that initially used
XHTML Basic 1.1, the site rendered fine except with a few glitches
(bugs!!??) that I know existed in this browser. Decided to convert
the site to HTML5 and all I did was change the
On 9/5/10 7:49 AM, tee wrote:
I have a mobile site (just using media queries) that initially used XHTML Basic 1.1,
the site rendered fine except with a few glitches (bugs!!??) that I know existed in
this browser. Decided to convert the site to HTML5...trimmed
tee
Ah, yes -- fun and
Sometimes next week I maybe able to setup a test site with pages that show
different doctypes and widths.
Just a quick question, shouldn't Opera Mini obeys the rules even when a desktop
doctype is used?
@media screen and (max-device-width: 480px)
meta name=viewport content=width=device-width
Ah, yes -- fun and games on the mobile device funny-farm...
Long-shot on html5, try ?:
@media screen and (max-device-width: 480px), screen and (max-width: 480px) {
} /*for high-end handsets*/
@media (max-width: 240px) {
} /*low-end handsets running OperaMini */
Doesn't make a
On Aug 24, 2010, at 1:51 PM, Patrick H. Lauke wrote:
On 24/08/2010 21:33, tee wrote:
Despite what I have learned from David Story about Opera Mini, media
queries along cannot make a usable mobile version of site that is
truly targets mobile user. Content negotiation and adaption cannot be
On 23 Aug 2010, at 20:28, tee wrote:
Hi David from Opera,
Quote you:
I'm a member of that WG but honestly it is complete useless and out
of date. It was commissioned when 12kb all together was a big deal.
From the Mobile Web Best Practices course class I got an impression
the mobileOK
On Aug 6, 2010, at 6:59 PM, David Storey wrote:
On 7 Aug 2010, at 00:44, tee wrote:
On Aug 5, 2010, at 4:23 PM, David Storey wrote:
Not strictly true. First of all Opera Mini compresses the content and
images (which is one of the reasons for the image quality setting - it will
Duncan Hill wrote:
On Fri, 06 Aug 2010 01:51:17 +0100, David Laakso
da...@chelseacreekstudio.com wrote:
Hmm. Doubt it is Opera Mini. SanyoMiro okay this end. N80 cache
issue? AP from sidebar [digits] and/or header metroedition
display:none; not holding? I will check it out. Thanks for the
On 7 Aug 2010, at 00:44, tee wrote:
On Aug 5, 2010, at 4:23 PM, David Storey wrote:
Not strictly true. First of all Opera Mini compresses the content
and images (which is one of the reasons for the image quality
setting - it will compress it less on high setting) to optimise it
for
Hi David,
Having done 2 full sites+ many exercise mobile sites, I view at Opera Mini
(including the Mobile 10) the Internet Explorer 6+7, it's a browser one will
hate it, curse it more than praise it :-(
I think the problem might be this:
body#p #main img {border: 3px solid red;display:
On Thu, 05 Aug 2010 19:27:24 +0100, David Laakso
da...@chelseacreekstudio.com wrote:
markup
http://chelseacreekstudio.com/site/portfolio/01.php
css
around line 669
http://chelseacreekstudio.com/site/css/sisu.css
The image does not fill the width of the window in
Sanyo Mirro scp3810 for
tee wrote:
Hi David,
I think the problem might be this:
body#p #main img {border: 3px solid red;display: block;
max-width : 96% !important;
height : auto !important;
margin : 20px 0 0 0;
}
Should it not be body#p, #main img?
tee
#p is the id for the styles specific to the portfolio
Duncan Hill wrote:
On Thu, 05 Aug 2010 19:27:24 +0100, David Laakso
da...@chelseacreekstudio.com wrote:
markup
http://chelseacreekstudio.com/site/portfolio/01.php
Best,
~d
Only an old Nokia N80 to test on.
Messed with Opera Mini settings and the only way to get the image to
display at
I sent you a screenshot taken from Opera Mini directly from iPod using
landscape view
It might go into your junk box. I am quite certain the image is the result of
the max-width declaration in your img and the horizontal scrolling is the
product of EM width with the combination of max-width.
tee wrote:
I sent you a screenshot taken from Opera Mini directly from iPod using
landscape view
It might go into your junk box. I am quite certain the image is the result of
the max-width declaration in your img and the horizontal scrolling is the
product of EM width with the combination of
David Laakso wrote:
tee wrote:
I sent you a screenshot taken from Opera Mini directly from iPod
using landscape view
It might go into your junk box. I am quite certain the image is the
result of the max-width declaration in your img and the horizontal
scrolling is the product of EM width
On 5 Aug 2010, at 21:12, tee wrote:
Hi David,
Having done 2 full sites+ many exercise mobile sites, I view at
Opera Mini (including the Mobile 10) the Internet Explorer 6+7, it's
a browser one will hate it, curse it more than praise it :-(
What are your issues with Opera Mobile (Opera
On Aug 5, 2010, at 2:05 PM, David Storey wrote:
On 5 Aug 2010, at 21:12, tee wrote:
Hi David,
Having done 2 full sites+ many exercise mobile sites, I view at Opera Mini
(including the Mobile 10) the Internet Explorer 6+7, it's a browser one will
hate it, curse it more than praise
1. Pre tag - in portrait view if a line of content is longer than the device
width, it doesn't wrap.
Correction! Not that it doesn't wrap (can pre tag wrap? I thought not), I think
it's the font size (even in % and EM) does not re-adjust like other two do when
you switch from Landscape to
On Thu, 05 Aug 2010 21:41:33 +0100, David Laakso
da...@chelseacreekstudio.com wrote:
Whoops. Hit send too soon. Here's the rest of it...
Got the iPod screenshot, thanks -- will look into it.
The image issue has been resloved in the Opera Mini Simulator and in the
Sany Mirro handset [a
On 6 Aug 2010, at 00:48, tee wrote:
On Aug 5, 2010, at 1:41 PM, David Laakso wrote:
Whoops. Hit send too soon. Here's the rest of it...
Got the iPod screenshot, thanks -- will look into it.
The image issue has been resloved in the Opera Mini Simulator and
in the Sany Mirro handset [a
On 5 Aug 2010, at 23:51, tee wrote:
On Aug 5, 2010, at 2:05 PM, David Storey wrote:
On 5 Aug 2010, at 21:12, tee wrote:
Hi David,
Having done 2 full sites+ many exercise mobile sites, I view at
Opera Mini (including the Mobile 10) the Internet Explorer 6+7,
it's a browser one will
Duncan Hill wrote:
On Thu, 05 Aug 2010 21:41:33 +0100, David Laakso
da...@chelseacreekstudio.com wrote:
Having checked in Opera desktop, which does respond to the @media
queries, and the N80, I have a suspicion that there may be something
in your header that is maintaining a side scroll on
tee wrote:
This site may give you a general idea how much it may cost your mobile user per
page.
http://mobiready.com
tee
Granted all 7 images in the portfolio section are heavy, Nevertheless,
the mobile device is SanyoMirro [ a low-end handset-- it is not a
smart-phone ] for
Checked one of a mobile sites I did that has inline image larger than 480px and
no width/height attributes were declared in the CSS and markup, but Opera Mini
is able to resize the image fits in the screen.
I think I have a fine guess what has gone wrong with your inline image-it's
simply too
I forgot to mention, when switching between portrait and landscape, Opera Mini
dosen't auto re-adjust and refresh the layout, you need to refresh it manually
if you try to see the examples from the O browser. This bug gave a false
impression the first time I used Opera Mini, that the media
tee wrote:
Checked one of a mobile sites I did that has inline image larger than 480px
...trimmed, thanks [I think :-) ].
Oh, easy for Leonardo.
-- Dylan Thomas
--
http://chelseacreekstudio.com/
***
List Guidelines:
Forgot one important note.
Even if max/min widths are removed, OM still show the same rendering for table
whether a width is declared in table.
tee
On May 15, 2010, at 7:45 AM, tee wrote:
I'd just discovered that Apple approved Opera Mini browser for iPhone/iPod
(maybe only available for
Luc wrote:
Does anybody know if Opera 10 has problems with access keys? The list
pops up but just shows a blank window.
http://www.dzinelabs.com/sandbox/New_site_layout/maxtest.html
Works fine for me in Opera 10 final - Shift+Esc brings up the list of
2,3,4,5 and 6
Good evening Patrick,
It was foretold that
on 06/10/2009 @ 23:43:05 GMT+0100 (which was 19:43:05 where I live)
Patrick H. Lauke would write:
snipped a bit
PHL Works fine for me in Opera 10 final - Shift+Esc brings up the list of
PHL 2,3,4,5 and 6
Hmm, that's strange on my
On 5 Aug 2009, at 06:31, Bruno Fassino wrote:
ピエール・アンリ・ラヴィン wrote:
I don't understand the following issue with Opera:
Let's set a container to 4000px, and children elements to 12.5%
4000px / 12.5 = 320px.
But for Opera,
* 12.5px = 12px : I can understand
* 12.5% = 12% : I don't understand
This is an automated message from g...@siworks.co.za.
Good day,
I am on currently on leave and will be back in the office on monday the 17th August 2009
Please contact my office on 011 466 3872 and speak to Daniel, alternativly at last resort send me an SMS and I will contact you.
Thanks //
Hi,
I'm not sure why Opera rounds like this, personally I've never seen the
issue,
Just wanted to point out that 12.5% of 4000 == 500 not 320.
e.g. 4000 * 12.5 /100 not 4000 / 12.5
cheers
Luke
2009/8/5 ピエール・アンリ・ラヴィン yakeson_chih...@yahoo.co.jp
Good day,
I don't understand the following
ピエール・アンリ・ラヴィン wrote:
I don't understand the following issue with Opera:
Let's set a container to 4000px, and children elements to 12.5%
4000px / 12.5 = 320px.
But for Opera,
* 12.5px = 12px : I can understand
* 12.5% = 12% : I don't understand
I can only say that this is an old issue
Brett Patterson wrote:
[...] Now I realize where most of my problems have stemmed from.
Note that nearly all such designer bugs will be caught if you follow
WCAG2 recommendations and resize text in a browser to at least 200% of
browser default. (Default is 16px on 96dpi screen resolution in
On Feb 4, 2009, at 3:02 AM, Gunlaug Sørtun wrote:
Brett Patterson wrote:
[...] Now I realize where most of my problems have stemmed from.
Note that nearly all such designer bugs will be caught if you follow
WCAG2 recommendations and resize text in a browser to at least 200% of
browser
tee wrote:
IS 200% one time font size increasement or two?
200% is twice the default size, and the number of steps to get there
varies from browser to browsers.
Again: _default_ isn't whatever size you have declared in/for your
document, but the browsers' own defaults. This default font size
On 2009/02/04 09:19 (GMT-0500) Brett Patterson composed:
Okay, one quick question. You say 200% is twice the default size, but in
browsers like Firefox 3, there is only the (shortcut) Ctrl++ to zoom in, and
I cannot find the percentage of that zoom, so is 200% font size increasement
one or
Brett Patterson wrote:
Okay, one quick question. You say 200% is twice the default size, but
in browsers like Firefox 3, there is only the (shortcut) Ctrl++ to
zoom in, and I cannot find the percentage of that zoom, so is 200%
font size increasement one or two clicks?
Much more than that,
Not quite right im afraid. Patrick Lauke sent an email about this in
December that highlighted the Firefox zoom config as shown below:
-- Quote --
toolkit.zoomManager.zoomValues, and this will show the various zoom
factors at each step. In my case (which should be the default) these are:
.3,
Okay, one quick question. You say 200% is twice the default size, but in
browsers like Firefox 3, there is only the (shortcut) Ctrl++ to zoom in, and
I cannot find the percentage of that zoom, so is 200% font size increasement
one or two clicks?
--
Brett P.
On Wed, Feb 4, 2009 at 7:47 AM,
David Dixon wrote:
Not quite right im afraid. Patrick Lauke sent an email about this in
December that highlighted the Firefox zoom config as shown below:
-- Quote --
toolkit.zoomManager.zoomValues, and this will show the various zoom
factors at each step. In my case (which should be the
Gunlaug Sørtun wrote:
Maybe someone can do a control check, measure the actual sizes on
screen for zoom values and mouse-wheel resizing steps for 'text
resizing' vs 'full page zoom' set at shown values, and let us know
the results.
Just to make sure we're resizing the same way: notice that I
On Wed, 4 Feb 2009 03:37:19 -0800, tee wrote:
IS 200% one time font size increasement or two?
While FF 3 does not tell you, Firebug will show you the calculated
font-size in pixels after re-sizing. In the CSS panel, choose Options
Show computed style.
Hope this helps.
Cordially,
David
--
On Wed, 4 Feb 2009 03:37:19 -0800, tee wrote:
IS 200% one time font size increasement or two?
While FF 3 does not tell you, Firebug will show you the calculated
font-size in pixels after re-sizing. In the CSS panel, choose Options
Show computed style.
Hope this helps.
Cordially,
David
--
I do not use conditional comments myself as I have coded a css parser to
handle all these differences... but anyhow.. you could try and get Opera
looking correct and then use conditional comments as needed for the
other browsers. Just a suggestion, I am sure others here will know how
to target
Brett Patterson wrote:
If my site is visited in Firefox or Internet Explorer first, you can
see that everything aligns perfectly.
Not if that browser is called IE8, I'm afraid. IE8 agrees with
Opera10alpha.
http://ttcharriman.edu/TTCH07/iftprojects/brettpatterson/index.html
It's a
On Tue, Feb 3, 2009 at 2:41 PM, Gunlaug Sørtun gunla...@c2i.net wrote:
David Dixon wrote:
Chomping at the bit to dismiss IE7 a little early aren't we Georg? :)
:-)
Look at IE7 from a designer/developer's point of view...
IE7 is dead - meaning: stable,
Ah, well, most people would consider
There are patches for Internet Explorer, though Microsoft calls them several
different things, it could be a Security Update for Internet Explorer, a
Cumulative Security Update for Internet Explorer, or even a Security Update
for Windows (maybe worded differently on the last one). They just update
Christian Montoya wrote:
On Tue, Feb 3, 2009 at 2:41 PM, Gunlaug Sørtun gunla...@c2i.net
IE7 is dead - meaning: stable,
Ah, well, most people would consider dead and stable to be two
entirely different things. Dead is more akin to abandoned or
unsupported.
OK, guess my choice of word
Brett Patterson wrote:
You should rethink the positioning method, and forget about
deviations
between browsers until you have stabilized it in one.
I do not understand this either, unless you are talking about using
margin as the positioning method. I have stabilized it one browser.
This
On 2009/02/03 15:13 (GMT-0500) Brett Patterson composed:
On 2009/02/03 19:54 (GMT+0100) Gunlaug Sørtun composed:
I really don't understand what you mean, when you say:
It's a designer-bug. Vertical position of the navigation relies entirely
on font size, which means it is all over the place
On 3/2/09 20:13, Brett Patterson wrote:
I really don't understand what you mean, when you say:
It's a designer-bug. Vertical position of the navigation relies entirely
on font size, which means it is all over the place in my browsers on
first load.
No two browsers calculate
Oh! I get it. Finally!!! :) It has always been my understanding, from some
books that I have read (like CIW's books, ciwcertified.com, which go into
some detail just not a lot) and a few others, that a pixel (in relation to
size, meaning if you looked at your screen closely the little squares on
Chomping at the bit to dismiss IE7 a little early aren't we Georg? :)
David
Gunlaug Sørtun wrote:
Besides: one should only target/hack dead browsers, like IE7 and older.
Targeting/hacking live browsers like Opera, Firefox, Safari etc. for
real, will only create maintenance-problems as new
I really don't understand what you mean, when you say:
It's a designer-bug. Vertical position of the navigation relies entirely
on font size, which means it is all over the place in my browsers on
first load.
No two browsers calculate font size exactly the same before rendering,
so relying
David Dixon wrote:
Chomping at the bit to dismiss IE7 a little early aren't we Georg? :)
:-)
Look at IE7 from a designer/developer's point of view...
IE7 is dead - meaning: stable, so if it acts up and there isn't a
suitable solution that all browsers can see, there's no harm whatsoever
in
On 2009/02/03 15:18 (GMT-0500) Brett Patterson composed:
There are patches for Internet Explorer, though Microsoft calls them several
different things, it could be a Security Update for Internet Explorer, a
Cumulative Security Update for Internet Explorer, or even a Security Update
for
By the way, the radio buttons on the above page, is exactly what I wrote
about annoying thing about Opera that it inherits the borders from input
element.
Checkbox _is_ an input element. Just like radio – they are all INPUTs only
with different type. If you want to target some type
By the way, the radio buttons on the above page, is exactly what I wrote
about annoying thing about Opera that it inherits the borders from input
element. In my case, adding a class with border none only gotten rid of
top, left, right borders. I actually needed to use !important to get right
Thanks Rachel, Rimantas and Ben,
Well given that radio buttons *are* inputs, that's what should
happen. Granted it is annoying but it's per spec. Anyway, given that
your beef is only with Opera, you can solve it easily with this:
input[type=radio] { border: 0; }
You might need to make the
: 11 September 2008 01:39
To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
Subject: Re: [WSG] Opera not playing nice with checkbox
On Sep 10, 2008, at 4:26 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm not familiar with the issue. Could you send a reduced test case
(will be quicker for us to find the issue), or failing
On Wed, 10 Sep 2008 01:09:38 -0700, tee wrote:
Anybody encounters this?
The checkbox inherits the input declaration, and though I added a class to
overwrite
it, with height and width, still I can't see the 'tick'.
Another annoying thing with Opera, is that if I have background or border
On Sep 11, 2008, at 4:43 PM, David Hucklesby wrote:
Yes. A potential client just asked me to add some (more) scripting
to a page. I noticed the same thing - no check mark - in Opera 9.52
on Win XP Pro. Okay on Mac OS X though. This is the page:
http://www.backroads.com/catalog/
Hi David,
Tee:
I haven't seen your code but is it possible this is occurring because both
checkboxes and radios are, in fact, input elements ?
e.g
input {
border : #000;
background-color : #f00;
}
I'd suggest just adding a rule to text fields if that is what you want.
HTH
J
On
On Wednesday 10 September 2008 18:09:38 tee wrote:
Anybody encounters this?
Another annoying thing with Opera, is that if I have background or
border declared for input tag, it inherits it to checkbox and radio
button just like IE does.
I'm not familiar with the issue. Could you send a
On Sep 10, 2008, at 4:26 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm not familiar with the issue. Could you send a reduced test case
(will be quicker for us to find the issue), or failing that ,a link
to the page where it happens.
James and David,
Thanks for your attention.
Here is the page:
On Jul 15, 2008, at 9:58 PM, Frank Palinkas wrote:
Hi Tee,
As James mentioned, what is the Bug Report number (#) you were
issued with? I'll follow up here for you.
Kind regards,
Frank and James, thanks for the response.
I haven't a clue what the Bug Report number is, and I don't
Hi
I guess the first questions are - where is the bug report, do you have an
example url and what is the opacity issue you mention ?
If I remember rightly (and I stand corrected) opera uses Qt 3 as it's
widgeting engine and I think the Konquerer/KHTML developers were running into
similar
Hi Tee,
As James mentioned, what is the Bug Report number (#) you were issued with?
I'll follow up here for you.
Kind regards,
Frank
On Tue, Jul 15, 2008 at 11:58 PM, tee [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I posted a message about Opera bug last december and filed a bug report.
Recently I discovered
:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Behalf Of russ - maxdesign
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 8:24 AM
To: Web Standards Group
Subject: Re: [WSG] Opera files antitrust ... ADMIN
ADMIN:
THREAD CLOSED
This has long ceased to be a discussion on standards and has become a
political debate. Feel free to move
looks ok to me. i'm running the same build and platform. must be something
on their end.
dwain
On 3/13/08, Web Dandy Design [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
We recently built a site for a client and tested across various browsers
including Opera 9.26. The site layout looks fine on our
Hello.
WDD We recently built a site for a client and tested across various
WDD browsers including Opera 9.26. The site layout looks fine on our
WDD machines and we have looked at the site on PC and MAC. However
WDD the client’s French distributor says that the site doesn’t look
WDD right when
Web Dandy Design wrote, On 13.03.2008 12:47:
We recently built a site for a client and tested across various browsers
including Opera 9.26. The site layout looks fine on our machines and we have
looked at the site on PC and MAC. However the client's French distributor
says that the site
Web Dandy Design wrote:
[...] However the client's French distributor says that the site
doesn't look right when they are using Opera v9.26, revision 8835,
Win32, Windows XP.
Has anyone ever come across this problem before?
www.charis.uk.com http://www.charis.uk.com/ .
Breaks the same
Sørtun
Sent: 13 March 2008 16:26
To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
Subject: Re: [WSG] Opera 9.26 Problem
Web Dandy Design wrote:
[...] However the client's French distributor says that the site
doesn't look right when they are using Opera v9.26, revision 8835,
Win32, Windows XP.
Has anyone ever
Web Dandy Design wrote:
Can you advise what would need to be done to the site to 'make it
work' in Opera?
Add...
#left-col {clear: left;}
...and the problem is solved in all browsers and on all resolutions.
The problem was that the left-col got hung up on the horizontal nav's
right edge when
Microsoft is and has undoubtedly used the coercive power of their
market dominance to interfere with OTHER businesses. What you are
presenting here is a double standard. You are saying that governments
(whose accountability is to the benefit of the public at large) should
not be allowed to
Michael Horowitz wrote:
In the free market their tends to be high and low quality products
It's not a free market, it's a market for lemons.
Rob
***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe:
ADMIN:
THREAD CLOSED
This has long ceased to be a discussion on standards and has become a
political debate. Feel free to move it the the WSG forum or off list if you
wish to continue, but no longer on list.
Please do not reply to or continue this thread. If you have an issue with
the closing
On Dec 16, 2007, at 9:17 PM, Michael Horowitz wrote:
Ask yourself where have you ever seen government controlled
economies beat a free market one.
This is not about government CONTROL, but government REGULATION. And
no they are not the same thing.
But this is (supposed to be) a web
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Michael Horowitz
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 2:18 AM
To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
Subject: Re: [WSG] Opera files antitrust against MS: standards one part
Ask yourself where have you ever seen
Michael Horowitz wrote:
It would be a wonderful world.
I can't imagine how government does anything but lower standards in
these areas.
Assuming you're being serious, I would love to hear your reasoning for
this. With most things even remotely technical now happily existing in
a market
Do you forcibly work for the government or do you offer your services in
the free market? Does your company hire the worst developers and
designers or the best it can afford at the salary it is willing to pay.
In the free market their tends to be high and low quality products based
on the
Michael Horowitz wrote:
In the free market their tends to be high and low quality products based
on the price the buyer wishes to pay. You can buy a Lexus or you can by
Kia. All transactions are between a willing buyer and seller.
Only until you get to a situation of oligopoly or monopoly.
Look how Firefox has grown to 16% of the market. I think that shows how
you are not correct. I also suspect that Open Office is going to start
challenging Microsoft as well. Especially is MSFT succeeds with
establishing good copy protection
Michael Horowitz
Your Computer Consultant
On Dec 16, 2007 7:06 PM, Michael Horowitz
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Does your company hire the worst developers and
designers or the best it can afford at the salary it is willing to pay.
I just finished working for a company that would hire the worst
developers and designers. I think it was
On Dec 16, 2007 8:27 PM, Michael Horowitz
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Look how Firefox has grown to 16% of the market. I think that shows how
you are not correct. I also suspect that Open Office is going to start
challenging Microsoft as well. Especially is MSFT succeeds with
establishing good
Michael Horowitz wrote:
Look how Firefox has grown to 16% of the market. I think that shows how
you are not correct.
Aeh..you ARE aware of the various antitrust actions the government took
to prevent MSFT from becoming an actual monopoly, don't you? Without
government action in the past,
Again this isn't about supporting one company over another. It's about
using the coercive power of government to control someone elses private
property (which is what a business is)
I don't like a lot of how MSFT does things. But they don't control the
world. Frontpage died while
And see what happens to the company in the market.
6 months ago I was let go because my boss thought I was a threat to his
job. The company continues a spiral towards bankruptcy. They are the
oldest company in their business and their chief competitor beats them
every time they go head to
Michael Horowitz wrote:
And see what happens to the company in the market.
The damage has already been done however. What happens when rather then
it being a piece of software thats faulty, its a car. or a child's toy,
or an aeroplane. Sure, eventually the company would get its just
deserts,
Guys,
While the thread is interesting, do try to keep it on the topic of *web
standards*.
Some of the points which are either off topic or verging there include:
- is Microsoft the boogey man?
- should the government implement standards.
The thread is still open, and it will stay that way if
Designer/Developer
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of David Storey
Sent: Friday, 14 December, 2007 11:16 AM
To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
Subject: Re: [WSG] Opera files antitrust against MS: standards one part
I just one to make one point about
Al Sparber wrote:
[...]
Reducing the disparities is not the same as eliminating disparities.
It is human nature to make mistakes. It's often the best way to
learn.
Yes, it is. However, it is not human nature to make use of what they
have, or should have learned, if they can get away with
On Sat, 15 Dec 2007 12:19:26 am Michael Horowitz wrote:
I can't see why government should be enforcing standards. Shouldn't
that be a decision of private companies, developers and users not
government?
Michael Horowitz
Governments enforce and specify standards every day, that is what we
1 - 100 of 213 matches
Mail list logo
