Re: [WSG] Opera files antitrust against MS: standards one part
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 interfere, while it's perfectly okay for a private organization, (whose accountability is to its shareholders) to interfere with other people's property. For the most part, yes, healthy competition is a good thing, but the system can get sick, and exploitive, and it's precisely that situation that the government exists for to begin with- to protect the interests of the public. And in this case, getting IE to support standards is to the benefit of the public, because Microsoft is certainly impeding progress in this field, much to the detriment of everyone, but to the benefit of its own business. That my friend is private interfering with public, and that's where your free market utopia falls down. On Dec 17, 2007 1:17 PM, Michael Horowitz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 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 Dreamweaver dominates the web design market. Not every website is developed in Visual Studio, some of us use PHP. Not every email is sent on an exchange server. I use Vista today and believe if MSFT keeps making such bloated OS's someone else will show up one day with a better mousetrap and MSFT will find itself losing market share in that area as well. Ask yourself where have you ever seen government controlled economies beat a free market one. Michael Horowitz Your Computer Consultant http://yourcomputerconsultant.com 561-394-9079 Christian Montoya wrote: 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 copy protection Didn't OOo file a complaint regarding Microsoft's Open XML format? I know they started a petition because Microsoft bucked their ODT format and came up with their own, which has been rammed through the standards approval process instead of ODT. So even Microsoft plays the standards system, and OOo appeals to the same powers-that-be as Opera. Do you follow the news about the companies you support? *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Opera files antitrust against MS: standards one part
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: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Opera files antitrust against MS: standards one part
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 standards discussion, not a political ideologies discussion... Andrew *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
RE: [WSG] Opera files antitrust against MS: standards one part
-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 government controlled economies beat a free market one. Michael Horowitz China? To over-simplify things dramatically, all Communist countries have come into being as a result of gross mis-management by the previous administrations. In the vast majority of cases, the communist regime has turned out to be as corrupt as before, and have given no chance for the economy to flourish. Whether or not that is an inevitable consequence is way off-topic, but is certainly not a valid defence for democratic governments to do nothing. Mike *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Opera files antitrust against MS: standards one part
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 for lemons, the general effect of a free market seems to be to lower quality to the lowest level allowed by law. Where does the impetus for high standards come from in your imagined utopia? Rob *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Opera files antitrust against MS: standards one part
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 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. I'd love Microsoft to follow standards, indeed I'm dealing with a IE bug right now that will probably be based on some standards violation, the question becomes should government be involved. Michael Horowitz Your Computer Consultant http://yourcomputerconsultant.com 561-394-9079 Rob Crowther wrote: 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 for lemons, the general effect of a free market seems to be to lower quality to the lowest level allowed by law. Where does the impetus for high standards come from in your imagined utopia? Rob *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Opera files antitrust against MS: standards one part
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. Then, the quality of the product and its price often bear no relation. In that environment, products are not allowed to thrive on quality - even a remarkably better product can be squashed simply because of the stranglehold of the few or single dominant company/companies. Which, in the end, hurts the general consumer population as a whole, and can have ramifications that go far beyond just the market (politics, for instance). But hey...Atlas shrugged, and so do I, as this isn't the right list for this sort of discussion. I'm just amazed that, for once, this wasn't triggered by the topic of accessibility... P -- Patrick H. Lauke __ re·dux (adj.): brought back; returned. used postpositively [latin : re-, re- + dux, leader; see duke.] www.splintered.co.uk | www.photographia.co.uk http://redux.deviantart.com __ Co-lead, Web Standards Project (WaSP) Accessibility Task Force http://webstandards.org/ __ Take it to the streets ... join the WaSP Street Team http://streetteam.webstandards.org/ __ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Opera files antitrust against MS: standards one part
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 http://yourcomputerconsultant.com 561-394-9079 Patrick H. Lauke wrote: 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. Then, the quality of the product and its price often bear no relation. In that environment, products are not allowed to thrive on quality - even a remarkably better product can be squashed simply because of the stranglehold of the few or single dominant company/companies. Which, in the end, hurts the general consumer population as a whole, and can have ramifications that go far beyond just the market (politics, for instance). But hey...Atlas shrugged, and so do I, as this isn't the right list for this sort of discussion. I'm just amazed that, for once, this wasn't triggered by the topic of accessibility... P *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Opera files antitrust against MS: standards one part
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 something called outsourcing. So, yeah. -- -- Christian Montoya christianmontoya.net *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Opera files antitrust against MS: standards one part
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 copy protection Didn't OOo file a complaint regarding Microsoft's Open XML format? I know they started a petition because Microsoft bucked their ODT format and came up with their own, which has been rammed through the standards approval process instead of ODT. So even Microsoft plays the standards system, and OOo appeals to the same powers-that-be as Opera. Do you follow the news about the companies you support? -- -- Christian Montoya christianmontoya.net *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Opera files antitrust against MS: standards one part
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, the growth of Firefox, or any other such product, would have been difficult if not outright impossible. Of course, the playing field is still far from an idealised free market, but thanks to government checks and balances it's at least not at the level of tight stiffling oligopoly or monopoly. Again, this isn't the right list to discuss libertarian utopia... P -- Patrick H. Lauke __ re·dux (adj.): brought back; returned. used postpositively [latin : re-, re- + dux, leader; see duke.] www.splintered.co.uk | www.photographia.co.uk http://redux.deviantart.com __ Co-lead, Web Standards Project (WaSP) Accessibility Task Force http://webstandards.org/ __ Take it to the streets ... join the WaSP Street Team http://streetteam.webstandards.org/ __ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Opera files antitrust against MS: standards one part
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 Dreamweaver dominates the web design market. Not every website is developed in Visual Studio, some of us use PHP. Not every email is sent on an exchange server. I use Vista today and believe if MSFT keeps making such bloated OS's someone else will show up one day with a better mousetrap and MSFT will find itself losing market share in that area as well. Ask yourself where have you ever seen government controlled economies beat a free market one. Michael Horowitz Your Computer Consultant http://yourcomputerconsultant.com 561-394-9079 Christian Montoya wrote: 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 copy protection Didn't OOo file a complaint regarding Microsoft's Open XML format? I know they started a petition because Microsoft bucked their ODT format and came up with their own, which has been rammed through the standards approval process instead of ODT. So even Microsoft plays the standards system, and OOo appeals to the same powers-that-be as Opera. Do you follow the news about the companies you support? *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Opera files antitrust against MS: standards one part
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 head. They only get the business that company doesn't want. They are sued by their customers for incompetency on a regular basis. The free market does work. It's ugly and messy, kinda like democracy. I'd be against it but nothing else works better. Michael Horowitz Your Computer Consultant http://yourcomputerconsultant.com 561-394-9079 Christian Montoya wrote: 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 something called outsourcing. So, yeah. *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Opera files antitrust against MS: standards one part
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, but only after the blood has been spilt. Government regulation is a necessary evil. It stops companies from taking advantage of a consumers lack of knowledge. Dylan. *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
ADMIN [THREAD CAUTION] Re: [WSG] Opera files antitrust against MS: standards one part
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 *you* stay on toopic! :) warmly, Lea -- Lea de Groot WSG Core Member *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
RE: [WSG] Opera files antitrust against MS: standards one part
To follow up on David's message to us, here's a video from Opera Watch featuring Hakon Wium Lie (co-father of CSS and a principal owner of Opera) on the subject at hand. http://operawatch.com/news/2007/12/opera-cto-talks-about-the-operas-antitrust -complaint-against-microsoft-video.html My apologies to those who have already seen and heard this. Kind regards, Frank M. Palinkas Microsoft M.V.P. - Windows Help M.C.P., M.C.T., M.C.S.E., M.C.D.B.A., A+ W3C HTML Working Group (H.T.M.L.W.G.) - Invited Expert Senior Technical Communicator Web Standards Accessibility 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 this case clear (although I'm not involved in it in any way). The complaint is manly about getting Microsoft to follow accepted web standards more closely, and isn't about money at all. I believe we (Opera) have stated that we don't want to earn any money as a result of this complaint. Hopefully this is not one of the cases where just lawyers win. I'm hoping that IE8 comes out and surprises a lot of people with its level of standards support. That would be a win for everyone. David *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Opera files antitrust against MS: standards one part
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 their old mistakes and maybe a few patches. Just ask the IE7 team - or tear apart IE7 for a closer look. This human factor is in part what's holding back all standard based web development, as most of what's poured out as web sites today is based on old mistakes and not standards. One can take any failing site apart, and find that the main cause for failings in any somewhat standard compliant browser is old and new designer mistakes which has nothing to do with browser-bugs. 1. All browsers will always have some bugs Yes. 2. Some users will always be browsers with an older version Yes. It is for these reasons that all browser makers need to provide developers with a means of eploying targeted workarounds. For (users of) old versions, maybe, but certainly not for new ones - unless one wants bugs to become permanent parts of particular browsers. Since old browsers can't be retrofitted, we'll have to make use of some kind of progressive enhancement or (dis)graceful degradation for those anyway. Nothing new there, regardless of what the future brings. MS has said they want old bugs to stick, apparently because they're afraid they'll break the web otherwise. Thus, they have added ways for us to work around their bugs when necessary ( = most of the time). That's their strategy, and it'll probably work for them - but not necessarily for us. AFAIK: the developers of other major browsers want to find and get rid of the bugs - any and all bugs, and don't want anyone to have to work around them. That's their strategy, and it sounds like a much better one to me - even if human nature will prevent them from ever reaching perfection. In which way is it better to let developers send code specifically for fixing a bug, which creates a dependency of that code on the bug in question, than fixing the bug? If such dependencies are created, they make it harder to actually fix bugs. That's a great philosophy for teachers and parents to have. It does not work so well, however, for businesses. The assumption, again, is that human nature is imperfect. Mistakes will always be made. Mistakes should be corrected at the source - not covered, or else the mistakes risk becoming a permanent part of the source - see IE/win. Whether the source is a browser, or, as is more common: the site and its developer(s), doesn't really matter when dealing with human imperfections. How should one learn of ones mistakes if there's never any need to correct them? So long as there are more than one browser, there will be unique bugs. It's useless to talk about MSIE having lots of bugs because it only takes one bug to keep a developer up at night. The reason I like conditional comments is that once I identify a fix for IE, I can fix it in a fully insulated way and for specific versions. Conditional comments in IE/win are fine, because no-one in their right mind will use them to break that browser. Site-developers would lose their jobs if they did. I'm not so sure that human nature and job-security will save other browsers from being intentionally broken though - plenty of examples around already. Thus, from a browser-developer or browser-user's point of view I'd call built-in targeting-means a death-trap for any serious contender on the browser-market. We all know the use, mis-use and abuse of browser sniffing, which have lead to built-in cloaking of userAgent strings and lost value of an otherwise perfectly good browser-ID. Any other built-in targeting-means would need to have similar off-switches to defend against human nature, which would make the whole targeting just as unreliable. Consequently: I wouldn't go down that road for any price, even if it might look like a good, short-term, solution. I recognize differences of opinion here and am so glad that this discussion remains civil. The object is always better standards support. I can't change Opera's mind and while I disagree with their premise, I can only hope that as this thing runs its course there will be benefits for us web developers and a better window into the web for all users. We agree on the objectives, so exchanging opinions on how to go about it shouldn't lead to any side-tracking. I only want standards to be properly supported across the board of new browsers, so I can develop sites based on standards and not on browser-quirks. Fixing things in old browsers provides enough fun to prevent death caused by boredom. I'm looking forward to the day where we can rely on a perfect piece of software to create the perfect missing link - generated page code - between design and browsers/end-users, but that's probably a bit beyond (X)HTML5, CSS3 and ES4 etc, and
Re: [WSG] Opera files antitrust against MS: standards one part
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 elect them for. Can you imagine a world where car manufacturers, electricans, builders, drivers, etc were not forced to follow standards imposed by the government? -- Regards, Steve Bathurst Computer Solutions URL: www.bathurstcomputers.com.au e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mobile: 0407 224 251 _ ... (0) ... / / \ .. / / . ) .. V_/_ Linux Powered! Registered Linux User #355382 Registered Ubuntu User #19586 *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Opera files antitrust against MS: standards one part
It would be a wonderful world. I can't imagine how government does anything but lower standards in these areas. Lets fire every do nothing government regulator and give us our tax money back. Michael Horowitz Your Computer Consultant http://yourcomputerconsultant.com 561-394-9079 Steve Olive wrote: 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 elect them for. Can you imagine a world where car manufacturers, electricans, builders, drivers, etc were not forced to follow standards imposed by the government? *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Opera files antitrust against MS: standards one part
Michael Horowitz wrote: RAGE AGAINST THE MACHINE lol .Matthew Cruickshank http://holloway.co.nz/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Opera files antitrust against MS: standards one part
I just one to make one point about this case clear (although I'm not involved in it in any way). The complaint is manly about getting Microsoft to follow accepted web standards more closely, and isn't about money at all. I believe we (Opera) have stated that we don't want to earn any money as a result of this complaint. Hopefully this is not one of the cases where just lawyers win. I'm hoping that IE8 comes out and surprises a lot of people with its level of standards support. That would be a win for everyone. David On 14 Dec 2007, at 00:05, James Ellis wrote: Hi I read this on the Opera feed this morning, I'm not sure how it will proceed but it mentions: The complaint describes how Microsoft is abusing its dominant position by tying its browser, Internet Explorer, to the Windows operating system and by hindering interoperability by not following accepted Web standards http://www.opera.com/pressreleases/en/2007/12/13/ I wonder what the flow on effects of this would be internationally rather than just in the EU ? Of course there is the opinion that only lawyers win out of arguments like this but it would defnitely be a more interesting playground if IE wasn't bundled and supported accepted standards better. Cheers James *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** David Storey Chief Web Opener Opera Software Oslo, Norway W: http://my.opera.com/dstorey ✉ : [EMAIL PROTECTED] ✆ : +47 24 16 42 26 *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
RE: [WSG] Opera files antitrust against MS: standards one part
While I think the Opera complaint has firm ground to stand on, there's one thing in David's announcement to this group I'm unsure about. We think these actions are essential for the evolution of web standards and the open web, which Microsoft is hindering due to it's dominant market share controlling consumer choice in web browsers and trying to force web developers to adopt proprietary technologies and techniques (ie hacks, and things like Silverlight.) Why was Silverlight included? As far as I am aware it's a plug-in much like Flash, so why would it be hindering the open web? Surely web developers have a choice whether to use that plug-in, just as they have the choice to use Flash. I'm not saying the IE/web standards thing is unfounded, but the Silverlight comment raises some concerns in my mind regarding Operas aims with this complaint. Chris -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of David Storey Sent: 14 December 2007 09:16 To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: Re: [WSG] Opera files antitrust against MS: standards one part I just one to make one point about this case clear (although I'm not involved in it in any way). The complaint is manly about getting Microsoft to follow accepted web standards more closely, and isn't about money at all. I believe we (Opera) have stated that we don't want to earn any money as a result of this complaint. Hopefully this is not one of the cases where just lawyers win. I'm hoping that IE8 comes out and surprises a lot of people with its level of standards support. That would be a win for everyone. David On 14 Dec 2007, at 00:05, James Ellis wrote: Hi I read this on the Opera feed this morning, I'm not sure how it will proceed but it mentions: The complaint describes how Microsoft is abusing its dominant position by tying its browser, Internet Explorer, to the Windows operating system and by hindering interoperability by not following accepted Web standards http://www.opera.com/pressreleases/en/2007/12/13/ I wonder what the flow on effects of this would be internationally rather than just in the EU ? Of course there is the opinion that only lawyers win out of arguments like this but it would defnitely be a more interesting playground if IE wasn't bundled and supported accepted standards better. Cheers James *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** David Storey Chief Web Opener Opera Software Oslo, Norway W: http://my.opera.com/dstorey ✉ : [EMAIL PROTECTED] ✆ : +47 24 16 42 26 *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** This message has been scanned for malware by SurfControl plc. www.surfcontrol.com *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Opera files antitrust against MS: standards one part
Al Sparber wrote: From: Michael Horowitz [EMAIL PROTECTED] Personally I'm looking forward to buying computers with virtually nothing pre installed. I always end up deleting most of it anyway. Alot of people start off by reinstalling the OS to get rid of all the junk the PC manufacturers put on. I buy the boxes empty, and install what I want/need from scratch. Since I happen to prefer MS-OSes for the time being, it would be nice if I could get clean ones. Indeed. But to bring it on-topic, I doubt very highly that Opera's motivation is standards. Opera's motivation is unimportant. I don't think they'll get much out of it anyway - apart from maybe a more leveled and standard-based playing-field. How the guardians of a relatively large market like the EU looks at, and reacts to, how the players behave, may be of some importance. Whatever the outcome, I doubt if it'll only affect us in the EU area - and we Norwegians are not even regular EU-members :-) If the unimaginable happened and MSIE8 were as standards-comformant as Opera, it would also be stronger in the marketplace. The best thing that could happen for standards-oriented web developers would be that all computers shipped with a single, extensible browser appliance with a standards-based module, managed and updated by an independent party, being the chief extension. If it was delivered with an excellent standard-support module and were truly extensible beyond that, then we would indeed have something very near what could be described as the ideal platform for web development - for a short while. I'm wondering how an independent party should be defined and organized though, and how such a party should secure progress. I do seriously doubt if such a solution would stay single for long, and even that it is a good idea. It's better that the industry wake up now because eventually someone is going to figure out that a browser is an appliance and the only thing it should be doing is supporting standards and sitting unobtrusively in the background acting as a window to the web. Guess it would have to support plenty of non-standards too, since such a small segment of the web is following standards - any standards. Leaving out the larger part of the web because it isn't standard, isn't a valid option. Standardizing non-standard rendering and behavior as part of the main module, would be necessary, but we may get there too - one day - before someone break too far out of the standards and the whole game starts all over again. regards Georg -- http://www.gunlaug.no *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Opera files antitrust against MS: standards one part
On Dec 14, 2007 8:41 PM, Chris Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Why was Silverlight included? As far as I am aware it's a plug-in much like Flash, so why would it be hindering the open web? Of course I don't know why Opera has included Silverlight, but to speculate... It might be because of something like this, http://weblogs.mozillazine.org/roadmap/archives/2007/10/open_letter_to_chris_wilson.html Silverlight has a subset of .Net's CLR called CoreCLR, and one could argue that Microsoft are intentionally trying to stiffle the open web[tm] while advancing Silverlight. -- .Matthew Cruickshank http://docvert.org/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Opera files antitrust against MS: standards one part
I just gonna say a few words... I dont know and i dont care about laws, one thing iam sure if microsoft could they just erase all other companys and all goes by theres rules, i believe all companys do that. The problem is that microsfot dont care about theirs users, dont care if they could can use the software or not, they just want money money money... and this is the problem in legal ways we cant do nothing against, this is the Capitalism in full power. sow lets fight, lets show all that they are and what they care about. Congratz OPERA, u are there... iam gonna spam, iam gonna argue iam gonna blog... u are not alone, for all hours that i lost, many, in try to get a nice render in ie6, with alpha png and many many other things. Thanks On 14/12/2007, Michael Horowitz [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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 Your Computer Consultant http://yourcomputerconsultant.com 561-394-9079 Al Sparber wrote: From: Michael Horowitz [EMAIL PROTECTED] Personally I'm looking forward to buying computers with virtually nothing pre installed. I always end up deleting most of it anyway. Alot of people start off by reinstalling the OS to get rid of all the junk the PC manufacturers put on. Indeed. But to bring it on-topic, I doubt very highly that Opera's motivation is standards. If the unimaginable happened and MSIE8 were as standards-comformant as Opera, it would also be stronger in the marketplace. The best thing that could happen for standards-oriented web developers would be that all computers shipped with a single, extensible browser appliance with a standards-based module, managed and updated by an independent party, being the chief extension. It's better that the industry wake up now because eventually someone is going to figure out that a browser is an appliance and the only thing it should be doing is supporting standards and sitting unobtrusively in the background acting as a window to the web. *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** -- Make it simple for the people -- http://www.artideias.com *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Opera files antitrust against MS: standards one part
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 Your Computer Consultant http://yourcomputerconsultant.com 561-394-9079 Al Sparber wrote: From: Michael Horowitz [EMAIL PROTECTED] Personally I'm looking forward to buying computers with virtually nothing pre installed. I always end up deleting most of it anyway. Alot of people start off by reinstalling the OS to get rid of all the junk the PC manufacturers put on. Indeed. But to bring it on-topic, I doubt very highly that Opera's motivation is standards. If the unimaginable happened and MSIE8 were as standards-comformant as Opera, it would also be stronger in the marketplace. The best thing that could happen for standards-oriented web developers would be that all computers shipped with a single, extensible browser appliance with a standards-based module, managed and updated by an independent party, being the chief extension. It's better that the industry wake up now because eventually someone is going to figure out that a browser is an appliance and the only thing it should be doing is supporting standards and sitting unobtrusively in the background acting as a window to the web. *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
RE: [WSG] Opera files antitrust against MS: standards one part
I presume it is okay with you then if MS starts up their own PC Support business? Sorry 'Computer Consultancy'? Assuming it is, do you mind if they then advertise it heavily, force users to sign up to it before they can use Windows, undercut other operators, etc. etc.? It is precisely because Gov. recognises that it should not regulate every aspect of normal business operations that it only steps in when a de-facto monopoly is seen to be abusing its position. Which MS has already been convicted of, repeatedly. Mike -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Michael Horowitz Sent: Friday, December 14, 2007 2:46 PM To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: Re: [WSG] Opera files antitrust against MS: standards one part Does anyone really believe government officials have a better ability to run your business than you do? *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Opera files antitrust against MS: standards one part
On 14 Dec 2007, at 14:42, Michael Horowitz wrote: A monopoly is when government gives someone the ability to legally ban competitors. That is a specific type of monopoly (a government-granted monopoly). Other types of monopoly exist. It's not difficult to go to http://www.opera.com/download/ and get the opera browser. If consumers choose not to do this I don't see a role for government. In an environment where consumers have perfect information, then this is fine. The merits of the respective browsers would mean that consumers would choose whatever best suits them. The market does not have perfect information though, very large numbers of consumers are either unaware of alternatives to Internet Explorer exist, or that there are benefits to switching. -- David Dorward http://dorward.me.uk/ http://blog.dorward.me.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
RE: [WSG] Opera files antitrust against MS: standards one part
John Faulds wrote: I can't see that flying. Is anyone going to ask Apple to stop shipping their OS with Safari? It may no longer be the case, (since there is no supported version available) but Apple DID include Internet Explorer on all Apple Mac's, even when Safari became available. What's more, it is perfectly possible to remove it completely if required. If Apple were required to do so, then I don't personally believe they would have much objection to including Camino/FireFox as an optional install, and suggestions to the contrary are merely a distraction from the main question, which is whether MS should be allowed to abuse their dominant position to the detriment of the general (un-educated) consumer. 99% of this case has already been tried by the EU, with regard to Media Player(s) so I strongly suspect this will be settled out of court. Mike *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Opera files antitrust against MS: standards one part
On 2007/12/14 09:42 (GMT-0500) Michael Horowitz apparently typed: A monopoly is when government gives someone the ability to legally ban competitors. You've provided a rough definition of a legal monopoly. An entity convicted of the felony of monopolistic predation as M$ has been falls into the different and much more common traditional and illegal class of monopoly. -- Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other. John Adams Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 Felix Miata *** http://mrmazda.no-ip.com/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Opera files antitrust against MS: standards one part
On 2007/12/14 08:19 (GMT-0500) Michael Horowitz apparently typed: I can't see why government should be enforcing standards. Shouldn't that be a decision of private companies, developers and users not government? In the absence of dominating monopoly, sure. -- Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other. John Adams Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 Felix Miata *** http://mrmazda.no-ip.com/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Opera files antitrust against MS: standards one part
That is correct people go into business to make money. They do so by willing sellers selling to willing buyers and a price they willingly agree to. Why do people by certain products, because they decided that product resolves their real world need. The baker doesn't bake bread so you can eat, he bakes bread to make money. You choose to buy the bread because you need to eat, and he needs to make a bread you want eat so you will buy it from him. His motivation though is money and there is nothing wrong with that. Does anyone really believe government officials have a better ability to run your business than you do? Michael Horowitz Your Computer Consultant http://yourcomputerconsultant.com 561-394-9079 Gaspar wrote: I just gonna say a few words... I dont know and i dont care about laws, one thing iam sure if microsoft could they just erase all other companys and all goes by theres rules, i believe all companys do that. The problem is that microsfot dont care about theirs users, dont care if they could can use the software or not, they just want money money money... and this is the problem in legal ways we cant do nothing against, this is the Capitalism in full power. sow lets fight, lets show all that they are and what they care about. Congratz OPERA, u are there... iam gonna spam, iam gonna argue iam gonna blog... u are not alone, for all hours that i lost, many, in try to get a nice render in ie6, with alpha png and many many other things. Thanks On 14/12/2007, Michael Horowitz [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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 Your Computer Consultant http://yourcomputerconsultant.com 561-394-9079 Al Sparber wrote: From: Michael Horowitz [EMAIL PROTECTED] Personally I'm looking forward to buying computers with virtually nothing pre installed. I always end up deleting most of it anyway. Alot of people start off by reinstalling the OS to get rid of all the junk the PC manufacturers put on. Indeed. But to bring it on-topic, I doubt very highly that Opera's motivation is standards. If the unimaginable happened and MSIE8 were as standards-comformant as Opera, it would also be stronger in the marketplace. The best thing that could happen for standards-oriented web developers would be that all computers shipped with a single, extensible browser appliance with a standards-based module, managed and updated by an independent party, being the chief extension. It's better that the industry wake up now because eventually someone is going to figure out that a browser is an appliance and the only thing it should be doing is supporting standards and sitting unobtrusively in the background acting as a window to the web. *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Opera files antitrust against MS: standards one part
So buy advertising. Do you really think government officials are so tech savvy that they can make this type of decision. Are you generally that impressed by the government officials you work with. Yes consumers need to be educated. I typically install firefox on any customer I work with, if for no other reason, as a backup in case IE gets disabled from spyware. It lets them continue to surf the web till I get there. Michael Horowitz Your Computer Consultant http://yourcomputerconsultant.com 561-394-9079 David Dorward wrote: On 14 Dec 2007, at 14:42, Michael Horowitz wrote: A monopoly is when government gives someone the ability to legally ban competitors. That is a specific type of monopoly (a government-granted monopoly). Other types of monopoly exist. It's not difficult to go to http://www.opera.com/download/ and get the opera browser. If consumers choose not to do this I don't see a role for government. In an environment where consumers have perfect information, then this is fine. The merits of the respective browsers would mean that consumers would choose whatever best suits them. The market does not have perfect information though, very large numbers of consumers are either unaware of alternatives to Internet Explorer exist, or that there are benefits to switching. *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Opera files antitrust against MS: standards one part
You mean the way Dell and other PC makers bundle PC repair when they sell computers. I get calls from people who have contracts with Dell for free PC repair. I get the business when they call Dell support and they can't help them, tell them to reinstall the OS or send it back to Dell and they will look at it and get the computer back to them in a few weeks. I can offer my customers I will come out when they call me and fix the problem right the first time. I don't compete with them with building computers. They can do it cheaper than I can. I miss that part of the market but should I sue them to have them increase their prices so I can compete? This lawsuit was filed in Europe and not the US because Europe does micromanage businesses. Microsoft wasn't the only game in town early in the computer race. I remember only using Mac's in college and thinking how I would never use an IBM compatible computer because DOS was so annoying. They received their market position because customers voluntarily bought their product. People can choose to use other products, I'm sure their are people on this list who choose not to use Windows. I am writing this email on Thunderbird not Outlook because I consider it a better email client. I was using firefox prior to IE 7 coming out because I liked tabbed browsing. I still heavily use Firefox as part of web development because it has better tools for me to debug problems in web code which I need as someone newer to standards based web design. My wife programs in Lotus Notes and Cobol not .net I use PHP not .Net because. I host my websites on Unix servers not Windows 2003 Servers. Macintosh is the platform of choice for Visual Design professionals and getting an overall renaissance as a brand recently. All of this without government intervention. Microsoft used to be at almost 90% of the browser market they have dropped to about 77% because of the free choice of users not government intervention http://marketshare.hitslink.com/report.aspx?qprid=0 Perhaps the opera people should ask why Firefox has earned 16% of the market while they have 0.65% Michael Horowitz Your Computer Consultant http://yourcomputerconsultant.com 561-394-9079 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I presume it is okay with you then if MS starts up their own PC Support business? Sorry 'Computer Consultancy'? Assuming it is, do you mind if they then advertise it heavily, force users to sign up to it before they can use Windows, undercut other operators, etc. etc.? It is precisely because Gov. recognises that it should not regulate every aspect of normal business operations that it only steps in when a de-facto monopoly is seen to be abusing its position. Which MS has already been convicted of, repeatedly. Mike -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Michael Horowitz Sent: Friday, December 14, 2007 2:46 PM To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: Re: [WSG] Opera files antitrust against MS: standards one part Does anyone really believe government officials have a better ability to run your business than you do? *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Opera files antitrust against MS: standards one part
Oh, in particular this quote from Brendan Eich, the obvious conflict of interest between the standards-based web and proprietary platforms advanced by Microsoft, and the rationales for keeping the web's language small while the proprietary platforms rapidly evolve support for large languages, does not help maintain the fiction that only clashing high-level philosophies are involved here -- http://weblogs.mozillazine.org/roadmap/archives/2007/10/open_letter_to_chris_wilson.html On Dec 14, 2007 9:01 PM, Matthew Cruickshank [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Dec 14, 2007 8:41 PM, Chris Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Why was Silverlight included? [...] -- .Matthew Cruickshank http://holloway.co.nz/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Opera files antitrust against MS: standards one part
On Dec 14, 2007, at 12:09 PM, Genesis One And One wrote: I want another OS that works like Windoze but is better than Windoze. I wish Mozilla would develop one. Their products are already consumer friendly etc. Imagine a FFOS. I would imagine M$ poor customer support and glitchy software would warp forward. I'd imagine it would become superior. Because that's what a serious competitive market does to companies that want to compete and win. Ummm... There already is... www.apple.com No virus's, no spyware, no adware, the stability of unix at the core, and the GUI of an easy to use interface. They also have great customer service both on the phone, and in person... I've dealt with both. As Confucius says... Our greatest glory is not in never falling, but in rising everytime we do. Which is what apple does :) Just my 2¢ +/- for inflation :) -- Jason Pruim Raoset Inc. Technology Manager MQC Specialist 3251 132nd ave Holland, MI, 49424 www.raoset.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Opera files antitrust against MS: standards one part
Jason Pruim wrote: On Dec 14, 2007, at 12:09 PM, Genesis One And One wrote: I want another OS that works like Windoze but is better than Windoze. I wish Mozilla would develop one. Their products are already consumer friendly etc. Imagine a FFOS. I would imagine M$ poor customer support and glitchy software would warp forward. I'd imagine it would become superior. Because that's what a serious competitive market does to companies that want to compete and win. Ummm... There already is... www.apple.com No virus's Not quite true but quickly fixed: http://www.symantec.com/enterprise/security_response/weblog/2006/07/macinenterprise_mac_os_x_virus.html , no spyware, no adware, the stability of unix at the core I've heard good and bad about the stability of macs, especially since the move to intel chipsets. , and the GUI of an easy to use interface. They also have great customer service both on the phone, and in person... I've dealt with both. I think the reason OSX does well is because apple have complete control over the hardware, I can't remember who said it first but the fact is if microsoft built a microsoft computer specifically for running windows it would probably be at least as good as if not better than a mac. Macs aren't for people on a budget. A PC that is made up of components from umpteen different manufacturers can't really compete when it comes to the overal experience. Plus what's easier to support, a relatively small amount of Mac+OSX (which is a very well defined product) or the vast majority of PC users running Windows on god knows what? Ubuntu is coming along nicely, good for all kinds of development at the very least. It also has the stability of unix. -Rob *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Opera files antitrust against MS: standards one part
On 14/12/2007, Al Sparber [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: No offense, but (imo) anyone who believes what you just wrote is extremely naive. While all web developers want standards conformance (whether they admit it or not), an industry with multiple browsers is not a healthy industry. No 2 browsers are alike. Every browser has quirks, anomalies, and bugs. What you (Opera) need to spend your idle time doing is coming up with a means for web developers to deploy fixes for your bugs. Something similar to Microsoft conditional comments. Isn't that effort more well spent in actually fixing those bugs, instead? The goal should IMHO be all browsers supporting the same HTML/XHTML/XML/XSLT/CSS/JS/DOM/SVG/PNG/whatever without having to write something specifically to each browser. Reducing the disparities is a better way to go. Developers don't WANT to send separate style sheets or scripts for ie. Developers want ie to get fixed so that it supports those original style sheets and scripts that are already supported by everyone else. Op is close enough to the standards and to the other browsers that they won't break particularly much code out there by fixing those bugs that are actually bugs. For ie, the situation is different since fixing those bugs would actually break terribly large amounts of present code. That's why ie needs conditional comments and compliance mode switches when other browsers don't. Then spend time convincing your compadres at Mozilla and Apple to do the same thing. Once you admit that you produce bugs, you'll have done a good deed... a noble deed. Then you can go about suing and whining all you want. Or do you believe that your browser is perfect? In which way is it better to let developers send code specifically for fixing a bug, which creates a dependency of that code on the bug in question, than fixing the bug? If such dependencies are created, they make it harder to actually fix bugs. -- David liorean Andersson *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Opera files antitrust against MS: standards one part
From: David Storey [EMAIL PROTECTED] I just one to make one point about this case clear (although I'm not involved in it in any way). The complaint is manly about getting Microsoft to follow accepted web standards more closely, and isn't about money at all. I believe we (Opera) have stated that we don't want to earn any money as a result of this complaint. Hopefully this is not one of the cases where just lawyers win. -- No offense, but (imo) anyone who believes what you just wrote is extremely naive. While all web developers want standards conformance (whether they admit it or not), an industry with multiple browsers is not a healthy industry. No 2 browsers are alike. Every browser has quirks, anomalies, and bugs. What you (Opera) need to spend your idle time doing is coming up with a means for web developers to deploy fixes for your bugs. Something similar to Microsoft conditional comments. Then spend time convincing your compadres at Mozilla and Apple to do the same thing. Once you admit that you produce bugs, you'll have done a good deed... a noble deed. Then you can go about suing and whining all you want. Or do you believe that your browser is perfect? -- Al Sparber - PVII http://www.projectseven.com Extending Dreamweaver - Nav Systems | Galleries | Widgets Authors: 42nd Street: Mastering the Art of CSS Design *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Opera files antitrust against MS: standards one part
From: liorean [EMAIL PROTECTED] On 14/12/2007, Al Sparber [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: No offense, but (imo) anyone who believes what you just wrote is extremely naive. While all web developers want standards conformance (whether they admit it or not), an industry with multiple browsers is not a healthy industry. No 2 browsers are alike. Every browser has quirks.. Isn't that effort more well spent in actually fixing those bugs, instead? The goal should IMHO be all browsers supporting the same HTML/XHTML/XML/XSLT/CSS/JS/DOM/SVG/PNG/whatever without having to write something specifically to each browser. Reducing the disparities is a better way to go. Yes, of course every effort needs to be made to fix and eliminate bugs... but you answered your question in the last sentence of your first paragraph. 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. Developers don't WANT to send separate style sheets or scripts for ie. Developers want ie to get fixed so that it supports those original style sheets and scripts that are already supported by everyone else. Op is close enough to the standards and to the other browsers that they won't break particularly much code out there by fixing those bugs that are actually bugs. For ie, the situation is different since fixing those bugs would actually break terribly large amounts of present code. That's why ie needs conditional comments and compliance mode switches when other browsers don't. One bug is all it takes to break a page. One bug is all it takes to make a client climb all over you. For hobby sites or sites targeted at web developers this is not a big problem. We understand. But when you develop a site for a commercial entity, the rules change. I must go under a couple of assumptions here: 1. All browsers will always have some bugs 2. Some users will always be browsers with an older version It is for these reasons that all browser makers need to provide developers with a means of eploying targeted workarounds. In which way is it better to let developers send code specifically for fixing a bug, which creates a dependency of that code on the bug in question, than fixing the bug? If such dependencies are created, they make it harder to actually fix bugs. That's a great philosophy for teachers and parents to have. It does not work so well, however, for businesses. The assumption, again, is that human nature is imperfect. Mistakes will always be made. So long as there are more than one browser, there will be unique bugs. It's useless to talk about MSIE having lots of bugs because it only takes one bug to keep a developer up at night. The reason I like conditional comments is that once I identify a fix for IE, I can fix it in a fully insulated way and for specific versions. I recognize differences of opinion here and am so glad that this discussion remains civil. The object is always better standards support. I can't change Opera's mind and while I disagree with their premise, I can only hope that as this thing runs its course there will be benefits for us web developers and a better window into the web for all users. -- Al Sparber - PVII http://www.projectseven.com Extending Dreamweaver - Nav Systems | Galleries | Widgets Authors: 42nd Street: Mastering the Art of CSS Design *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
[WSG] Opera files antitrust against MS: standards one part
Hi I read this on the Opera feed this morning, I'm not sure how it will proceed but it mentions: The complaint describes how Microsoft is abusing its dominant position by tying its browser, Internet Explorer, to the Windows operating system and by hindering interoperability by not following accepted Web standards http://www.opera.com/pressreleases/en/2007/12/13/ I wonder what the flow on effects of this would be internationally rather than just in the EU ? Of course there is the opinion that only lawyers win out of arguments like this but it would defnitely be a more interesting playground if IE wasn't bundled and supported accepted standards better. Cheers James *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Opera files antitrust against MS: standards one part
First, it requests the Commission to obligate Microsoft to unbundle Internet Explorer from Windows and/or carry alternative browsers pre-installed on the desktop. I can't see that flying. Is anyone going to ask Apple to stop shipping their OS with Safari? On Fri, 14 Dec 2007 09:05:11 +1000, James Ellis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi I read this on the Opera feed this morning, I'm not sure how it will proceed but it mentions: The complaint describes how Microsoft is abusing its dominant position by tying its browser, Internet Explorer, to the Windows operating system and by hindering interoperability by not following accepted Web standards http://www.opera.com/pressreleases/en/2007/12/13/ I wonder what the flow on effects of this would be internationally rather than just in the EU ? Of course there is the opinion that only lawyers win out of arguments like this but it would defnitely be a more interesting playground if IE wasn't bundled and supported accepted standards better. Cheers James *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** -- Tyssen Design www.tyssendesign.com.au Ph: (07) 3300 3303 Mb: 0405 678 590 *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Opera files antitrust against MS: standards one part
quote who=John Faulds Delivering their OSes with half a dozen pre-installed standard-compliant alternatives to IE/win isn't a technical problem, so why not? I'm no lawyer and I'm also no MS fanboy, but I think 'why?' is as equally a valid question as 'why not?'. My latest computer with Vista came pre-intalled with Windows Mail, Windows Media Player, Microsoft Works and Roxio CD Creator (this one may be more of an HP choice than MS); should I also expect my system to be preinstalled with Eudora/Thunderbird/Lotus Note, RealPlayer/Quicktime, OpenOffice and Nero? Is it reasonable for any OS vendor to have to install any more than one type of any application? For the less savvy users, having more than one option may actually make things more difficult for them. Surely it's any manufacturer's right to choose what components they use in their own product (as long as there aren't health and safety concerns involved)? +1, I just posted the same thing :) Gav... -- Tyssen Design www.tyssendesign.com.au Ph: (07) 3300 3303 Mb: 0405 678 590 *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** -- Gav... *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Opera files antitrust against MS: standards one part
Delivering their OSes with half a dozen pre-installed standard-compliant alternatives to IE/win isn't a technical problem, so why not? I'm no lawyer and I'm also no MS fanboy, but I think 'why?' is as equally a valid question as 'why not?'. My latest computer with Vista came pre-intalled with Windows Mail, Windows Media Player, Microsoft Works and Roxio CD Creator (this one may be more of an HP choice than MS); should I also expect my system to be preinstalled with Eudora/Thunderbird/Lotus Note, RealPlayer/Quicktime, OpenOffice and Nero? Is it reasonable for any OS vendor to have to install any more than one type of any application? For the less savvy users, having more than one option may actually make things more difficult for them. Surely it's any manufacturer's right to choose what components they use in their own product (as long as there aren't health and safety concerns involved)? -- Tyssen Design www.tyssendesign.com.au Ph: (07) 3300 3303 Mb: 0405 678 590 *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Opera files antitrust against MS: standards one part
quote who=Gunlaug Sørtun John Faulds wrote: First, it requests the Commission to obligate Microsoft to unbundle Internet Explorer from Windows and/or carry alternative browsers pre-installed on the desktop. I can't see that flying. Is anyone going to ask Apple to stop shipping their OS with Safari? No, but Apple is hardly in a dominant position, and carrying pre-installed alternatives to Safari can't be much of a problem. Microsoft is in a slightly more dominant position, so a better control of its practices sure wouldn't hurt. Delivering their OSes with half a dozen pre-installed standard-compliant alternatives to IE/win isn't a technical problem, so why not? Where would that end - Should they pre-install alternative mail clients, firewalls, anti-virus programs, web servers too? No, OS suppliers should have the option of providing whatever default packages they want, and leave the options open for users to install their own alternatives. Those that need a better, standards compliant web browser will know they can get one. Just my 0.02 Gav... regards Georg -- http://www.gunlaug.no *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** -- Gav... *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Opera files antitrust against MS: standards one part
but their os should be able to run other optional packages that the customer chooses. Out of all the applications Gav I mentioned previously, all the alternatives are easily installed on Windows (including Vista), and that's certainly the case for other browsers, so I don't really see your point. -- Tyssen Design www.tyssendesign.com.au Ph: (07) 3300 3303 Mb: 0405 678 590 *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Opera files antitrust against MS: standards one part
i guess i stand corrected. dwain On 12/13/07, Adam Martin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: drivers are the responsibility of the vendors. As is the ability of running other software. Vista is essentially a framework for software developers - it is there responsibility to ensure it works - not Microsofts. On Dec 14, 2007 11:01 AM, dwain [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 12/13/07, Gav... [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: No, OS suppliers should have the option of providing whatever default packages they want, and leave the options open for users to install their own alternatives. Those that need a better, standards compliant web browser will know they can get one. but their os should be able to run other optional packages that the customer chooses. vista has little to no support from other software vendors and drivers are another issue all together. cheers, dwain -- dwain alford The artist may use any form which his expression demands; for his inner impulse must find suitable expression. Kandinsky *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** -- - http://myfitness.ning.com A community of people that care about their health and fitness Free fitness videos, recipes, blogs, photos etc. -- *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** -- dwain alford The artist may use any form which his expression demands; for his inner impulse must find suitable expression. Kandinsky *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Opera files antitrust against MS: standards one part
drivers are the responsibility of the vendors. As is the ability of running other software. Vista is essentially a framework for software developers - it is there responsibility to ensure it works - not Microsofts. On Dec 14, 2007 11:01 AM, dwain [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 12/13/07, Gav... [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: No, OS suppliers should have the option of providing whatever default packages they want, and leave the options open for users to install their own alternatives. Those that need a better, standards compliant web browser will know they can get one. but their os should be able to run other optional packages that the customer chooses. vista has little to no support from other software vendors and drivers are another issue all together. cheers, dwain -- dwain alford The artist may use any form which his expression demands; for his inner impulse must find suitable expression. Kandinsky *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** -- - http://myfitness.ning.com A community of people that care about their health and fitness Free fitness videos, recipes, blogs, photos etc. -- *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Opera files antitrust against MS: standards one part
John Faulds wrote: Delivering their OSes with half a dozen pre-installed standard-compliant alternatives to IE/win isn't a technical problem, so why not? I'm no lawyer and I'm also no MS fanboy, but I think 'why?' is as equally a valid question as 'why not?'. Indeed. Which would make any such case valid for testing. [...] Is it reasonable for any OS vendor to have to install any more than one type of any application? I think that would depend on the application in question. AFAIKS only one application is mentioned in the article. For the less savvy users, having more than one option may actually make things more difficult for them. Sure, and the least savvy users may get lost with only one option - especially if it's a weak one. Making choices for users rarely helps, unless the aim is to keep them ignorant. Surely it's any manufacturer's right to choose what components they use in their own product (as long as there aren't health and safety concerns involved)? Don't know about the rest of the world, but in the EU there's also something called ethics involved when products and sales methods are evaluated. Microsoft has been evaluated on ethics before - in the EU, and it didn't pass the tests. The same has happened to other companies - big and small, so it doesn't really matter what name it has and what its products are. regards Georg -- http://www.gunlaug.no *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Opera files antitrust against MS: standards one part
On 12/13/07, dwain [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 12/13/07, Gav... [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: No, OS suppliers should have the option of providing whatever default packages they want, and leave the options open for users to install their own alternatives. Those that need a better, standards compliant web browser will know they can get one. but their os should be able to run other optional packages that the customer chooses. vista has little to no support from other software vendors and drivers are another issue all together. We are on the verge of getting a worse peanut gallery than when we were discussing the target lawsuit. Windows is known for supporting many drivers and programs out-of-the-box. -- -- Christian Montoya christianmontoya.net *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Opera files antitrust against MS: standards one part
On 12/13/07, John Faulds [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: First, it requests the Commission to obligate Microsoft to unbundle Internet Explorer from Windows and/or carry alternative browsers pre-installed on the desktop. I can't see that flying. Is anyone going to ask Apple to stop shipping their OS with Safari? Your question is perfectly valid, but where have you been? The EU courts just slammed Microsoft with a huge penalty for their bundling practice with Windows Media Player, which came after a complaint from Real. I don't remember who it was specifically, but someone representing the court said that they are very much against Microsoft's market dominance and want to do more to prevent similar practices from Microsoft. So yes, I definitely see this flying. My concern with the complaint is that it is clearly twofold; that Microsoft is holding standards back, and that Microsoft is holding competitors back. One is valid, the other is clearly business. I don't like the fact that these two things go together. I want to see Microsoft get serious about standards support, but I don't think it's fair to apply a double standard when other companies use bundling practices too. Regardless, I think Opera struck when the iron was hot and I can see this having a lot of traction. -- -- Christian Montoya christianmontoya.net *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Opera files antitrust against MS: standards one part
I think Opera considers this to be a slightly different case then that of email clients, cd burning software, etc. The key point in here I think is that Internet Explorer has low standards-compliance, which hinders the development of internet-based projects. I don't think it's so much they it only comes with Internet Explorer, as it is that it only comes with Internet Explorer -which isn't standards compliant-. I think if IE was standards-compliant, we wouldn't be seeing this. Just my 2 cents. -- Christian Snodgrass Azure Ronin Web Design http://www.arwebdesign.net/ http://www.arwebdesign.net Phone: 859.816.7955 *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Opera files antitrust against MS: standards one part
From: Christian Montoya [EMAIL PROTECTED] My concern with the complaint is that it is clearly twofold; that Microsoft is holding standards back, and that Microsoft is holding competitors back. One is valid, the other is clearly business. Here's another way to look at it... Microsoft is a software publisher. It develops an OS that contains a default browser: Internet Explorer. Microcenter makes PowerSpec brand computers. It made my computer. It installed Microsoft Windows on my computer in the flavor I specified. It installed a 1 year subscription NAS, which it does on all of its computers. It also installed Firefox. When I booted up the computer the first time, Windows asked me to set my default programs. One of the choices was for a browser. I could have chosen Firefox. As my logic goes, Opera should be suing Microcenter -- as well as any other computer manufacturer that does not include Opera. Further: Apple is both a computer manufacturer and a software publisher. It develops an OS that contains a default browser: Safari. My iMac comes with neither Firefox nor Opera. Opera, using its logic, should sue Apple, the software publisher. Using my logic, they should sue Apple, the computer manufacturer. If I were Opera, I'd take a long walk along the fjords and do some soul-searching about ethics, EU-style ethics notwithstanding. -- Al Sparber - PVII http://www.projectseven.com Extending Dreamweaver - Nav Systems | Galleries | Widgets Authors: 42nd Street: Mastering the Art of CSS Design *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Opera files antitrust against MS: standards one part
Personally I'm looking forward to buying computers with virtually nothing pre installed. I always end up deleting most of it anyway. Alot of people start off by reinstalling the OS to get rid of all the junk the PC manufacturers put on. Michael Horowitz Your Computer Consultant http://yourcomputerconsultant.com 561-394-9079 Al Sparber wrote: From: Christian Montoya [EMAIL PROTECTED] My concern with the complaint is that it is clearly twofold; that Microsoft is holding standards back, and that Microsoft is holding competitors back. One is valid, the other is clearly business. Here's another way to look at it... Microsoft is a software publisher. It develops an OS that contains a default browser: Internet Explorer. Microcenter makes PowerSpec brand computers. It made my computer. It installed Microsoft Windows on my computer in the flavor I specified. It installed a 1 year subscription NAS, which it does on all of its computers. It also installed Firefox. When I booted up the computer the first time, Windows asked me to set my default programs. One of the choices was for a browser. I could have chosen Firefox. As my logic goes, Opera should be suing Microcenter -- as well as any other computer manufacturer that does not include Opera. Further: Apple is both a computer manufacturer and a software publisher. It develops an OS that contains a default browser: Safari. My iMac comes with neither Firefox nor Opera. Opera, using its logic, should sue Apple, the software publisher. Using my logic, they should sue Apple, the computer manufacturer. If I were Opera, I'd take a long walk along the fjords and do some soul-searching about ethics, EU-style ethics notwithstanding. *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Opera files antitrust against MS: standards one part
How do you legally distinguish standards-compliant from non-compliant anyway? IE is clearly the worst of the bunch, but I'm not aware of a browser that doesn't have any rendering bugs. Would the requirement be be at least as compliant as opera? And if so, how do you measure that? Acid2? Number of CSS selectors understood? And which standard? IE renders HTML 3.2 pretty well, if not perfectly, 4.01 like crap, and XHTML (as xml) not at all. *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Opera files antitrust against MS: standards one part
On 2007/12/13 23:04 (GMT-0500) Christian Snodgrass apparently typed: I think if IE was standards-compliant, we wouldn't be seeing this. Mostly I agree, but also I think another issue is that too many people think IE *is* THE internet, and don't know better, or even any, other options exist for finding www.isawitontv.com with their puter. -- Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other. John Adams Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 Felix Miata *** http://mrmazda.no-ip.com/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Opera files antitrust against MS: standards one part
From: Michael Horowitz [EMAIL PROTECTED] Personally I'm looking forward to buying computers with virtually nothing pre installed. I always end up deleting most of it anyway. Alot of people start off by reinstalling the OS to get rid of all the junk the PC manufacturers put on. Indeed. But to bring it on-topic, I doubt very highly that Opera's motivation is standards. If the unimaginable happened and MSIE8 were as standards-comformant as Opera, it would also be stronger in the marketplace. The best thing that could happen for standards-oriented web developers would be that all computers shipped with a single, extensible browser appliance with a standards-based module, managed and updated by an independent party, being the chief extension. It's better that the industry wake up now because eventually someone is going to figure out that a browser is an appliance and the only thing it should be doing is supporting standards and sitting unobtrusively in the background acting as a window to the web. -- Al Sparber - PVII http://www.projectseven.com Extending Dreamweaver - Nav Systems | Galleries | Widgets Authors: 42nd Street: Mastering the Art of CSS Design *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***