Mozilla execs want change to ballot screen proposal

[Treemonkeys]

Incorrect. If you build yourself up with one product in one market, introduce another product in another market then use the success of the first to capitize on the 2nd, then there is a very real possibility that you may be doing something illegal.

Not that it really matters either way, but this is an issue with ONE product - the Windows OS - and what is included with that one product.

No it is not what I, the EU, or anyone else in this thread with comprehension skills are saying, the exact reason has been stated over and over and over, and you still don't get it. So you admit now that what Microsoft has done is illegal, well thats something at least.

In some countries it is illegal for a woman to get a job without asking her husband for permission, just because it is illegal does not make it wrong.

How is it bad? Microsoft offer users a choice between 5 different browsers. The user gets a choice, are you really trying to say that is a bad thing?

Yes because it hurts Microsoft and will eventually destroy them. It hurts progress overall. Microsoft should not have to do extra work for the sake of competing companies just to be able to include a browser with their OS. Opera wants an OS with their browser? They should have to make their own OS or pay someone to do it.

You've never taken economics have you.

Classes? Yes I have, and I have studied it extensively. There are different schools of thought when it comes to economics.

[splur]

Classes? Yes I have, and I have studied it extensively. There are different schools of thought when it comes to economics.

And it seems you believe in the idea of deregulation.

[Treemonkeys]

No, you can be successful without breaking the law. Please stop it with this silly straw man.

The law is your straw man, stop thinking about the law and think about what is right and wrong - what is good and bad for society.

I never said that you can't be successful without breaking the law, I said that when you become the most successful, you will be forced to downgrade your product and help your competitors - that is exactly what is happening to Microsoft right now.

That is not a free market. Really what do you guys even think a free market is?

And it seems you believe in the idea of deregulation.

Yep, what schools of economic thought have you studied?

[d_ralphie]

In some countries it is illegal for a woman to get a job without asking her husband for permission, just because it is illegal does not make it wrong.

Those countries are not western democracies.

Yes because it hurts Microsoft and will eventually destroy them.

It will not destroy them, because if they suddenly lose their monopoly, they will no longer be bound by any restrictions imposed on monopolies.

It hurts progress overall.

Wrong. What hurts progress is Microsoft's monopoly. Notice how the web was basically standing still for several years after IE6 came out? Microsoft even disbanded their IE team! If there had been actual competition, the web would have been much further along.

Microsoft should not have to do extra work for the sake of competing companies just to be able to include a browser with their OS.

Other should not have to do extra work in order to compete on equal grounds.

Opera wants an OS with their browser? They should have to make their own OS or pay someone to do it.

Nonsense. It should not be necessary to create an OS to take part in the browser market.

stop thinking about the law and think about what is right and wrong

This is a red herring, but antitrust laws are right, because they protect the free market. They are good for society.

I said that when you become the most successful, you will be forced to downgrade your product and help your competitors

Wrong. Microsoft doesn't have to "downgrade" because it is successful, but because of its predatory practices. See the runner taking drugs example.

[splur]

Yep, what schools of economic thought have you studied?

In a superficial sense to what we're talking about? Market economy and I'm quite against full deregulation.

[Treemonkeys]

In a superficial sense to what we're talking about? Market economy and I'm quite against full deregulation.

So it sounds like you've only studied one.

Did you know some of them disagree with each other?

[splur]

So it sounds like you've only studied one.

Did you know some of them disagree with each other?

No, but I've chosen a couple I agree with, mainly Keynesian which may be the unpopular choice. You've learned about the flaws of deregulation right? It's also been considered by some as a major contributor to the depression as well as the most recent financial crisis. Although I'm not an economics major, I've found that politics, law, and history interlink a lot with economics.

You seem to think that a company should be rewarded for its product if it's worthy, which in a sense is fair, and they have free reign to do anything they want? I think that consumers have the right to a choice and that competition is essential regardless of whether it's a market economy or free market economy. And you have to admit that if a company takes away its competitors, nothing good will come from that. Microsoft has been rewarded for their good product, they own 90% of the operating system market share and 70% of the browser market share. They're one of the richest and most powerful software companies out there. Trust me... they've been rewarded for their achievements. But they're not above the law, and when they try to wipe out their competitors as they have in the past, they'll have people stop them. It's unfortunate that Opera called this up because they're a **** company and that's all people see.

[d_ralphie]

It's unfortunate that Opera called this up because they're a **** company

How and why, exactly? Opera has been putting hard cash into opening the web for more than a decade. If anyone has the right to complain about abuse in the browser market, it's them.

[Subject Delta]

Probably. If IE was standards compliant, Microsoft actively promoted open standards, and didn't use proprietary techonlogies in a conscious attempt to make sites incompatible with other browsers, they might have a case. On the other hand, being bundled with the dominant OS will always be a huge advantage, and it would probably be very difficult to do it right.

IE8 is the most standards compliant version of IE ever released, and supports most of the important standards now. Mind you Microsoft are really being bitten for what they did back with IE6

[dead.cell]

How and why, exactly? Opera has been putting hard cash into opening the web for more than a decade. If anyone has the right to complain about abuse in the browser market, it's them.

Perhaps he's basing his opinion on the software itself. Take a look around the forums. Everyone isn't exactly bursting with enthusiasm in using Opera, and that's before the whole anti-Opera thing...

[Growled Member]

It's unfortunate that Opera called this up because they're a **** company and that's all people see.

Yeah, I had friend who was hired by Opera few years ago to work on one particular project. I can't remember what it was now. Anyway, at the end of the year when they finished the project he was let go. He was so glad. He said they were a terrible bunch of people to work for. I really don't doubt him because I was heavy into alpha and beta testing for them back in the paid days. They've always have had a chip on their shoulder. I found them for the most part not very likeable, and that did play a small part in me moving to other products. The main reason I switched is because Opera has always had problems on sites other browsers work perfectly fine on and I just got tired of it.

[d_ralphie]

IE8 is the most standards compliant version of IE ever released, and supports most of the important standards now.

That IE8 is the most standards compliant version of IE isn't saying much. It does not support "most of the important standards". It's still light years behind everyone else.

Perhaps he's basing his opinion on the software itself. Take a look around the forums. Everyone isn't exactly bursting with enthusiasm in using Opera

Considering that Opera is the smallest, fastest and most secure browser, this is obviously nonsense. Also, he was referring to the company, not the browser. Nice one, spewing out more bigotry, though.

Yeah, I had friend who was hired by Opera few years ago to work on one particular project. I can't remember what it was now. Anyway, at the end of the year when they finished the project he was let go. He was so glad. He said they were a terrible bunch of people to work for.

:lol:

Yeah, "someone I know was the king of the United States". You wrote it on the internet, so it must be true :D Wow, you Opera haters are getting more and more desperate by the second... If you actually read what Opera employees have to say, they love working there. There's a reason why the number of Opera employees is growing like crazy (check their financial reports).

You are obviously lying. Quite pathetic.

[Subject Delta]

That IE8 is the most standards compliant version of IE isn't saying much. It does not support "most of the important standards". It's still light years behind everyone else.

Name all of the 'important' standards that it doesn't support then.

[Antaris Veteran]

IE8 supports CSS 2.1 completely, and a few features from CSS 3. Now seeing as CSS 3 isn't a ratified standard, what are you on about?

[d_ralphie]

IE8 does not support CSS 2.1 completely, although it has improved. Other comments in this thread have already dealt with IE's poor support for standards, including CSS3, HTML5, DOM3, etc.

[Subject Delta]

IE8 does not support CSS 2.1 completely, although it has improved. Other comments in this thread have already dealt with IE's poor support for standards, including CSS3, HTML5, DOM3, etc.

You mean standards that are either incomplete, not fully ratified, or hardly ever used? oh my, stop the friggin presses. Seriously you go to unbelievable lengths just to throw up an anti-Microsoft argument

As for CSS 2.1... Several sources say you are totally and utterly wrong, here is a small list of them:

Microsoft is applauding the latest iteration of Internet Explorer, a browser once under a barrage of criticism for its failure to play nice with open standards, because it manages to offer a complete implementation of CSS 2.1, the first product in the industry to do so, leaving rivals in the dust.

Source

Windows Internet Explorer 8 is fully compliant with the CSS, Level 2 Revision 1 (CSS 2.1) specification and supports some features of CSS Level 3 (CSS 3)

Source

As mentioned in the overview, IE8 has complete support for CSS2.1. IE8 is the first browser to support all of the W3C CSS2.1 specifications, and currently has the best support of any browser (including Firefox, Safari and Opera) of the CSS 2.1 specifications.

Source

Ready to admit defeat yet?

Edited August 22, 2009 by Frank Fontaine

[Pc_Madness]

IE8 does not support CSS 2.1 completely, although it has improved. Other comments in this thread have already dealt with IE's poor support for standards, including CSS3, HTML5, DOM3, etc.

As far as I'm aware IE 8 supports CSS 2.1 perfectly? Mind providing us with some proof so we can test? I'm sure MS would be interested if theres something not working correctly. As for CSS3 and HTML5, they're not finished, so browsers aren't required to support them.

Theres nothing wrong with IE 8 from a standards viewpoint.

[Antaris Veteran]

IE8 does not support CSS 2.1 completely, although it has improved. Other comments in this thread have already dealt with IE's poor support for standards, including CSS3, HTML5, DOM3, etc.

What?

CSS3 and HTML5 are a working draft. DOM3 is a recommendation. They are NOT standards yet. Also, where is your source that IE8 doesn't support CSS 2.1 completely??

I can understand some browsers wanting to get ahead of the game, but implementing CSS3/HTML5 and DOM3 before they have been standardised, and while they are still subject to change is a bit foolhardy, as there will be major inconsistencies across browser platforms.

As a web designer, I stick with CSS 2.1, because I can safely bet that the big 5 all support a firm implementation of the standard.

[I am Reid]

IE8 does not support CSS 2.1 completely, although it has improved. Other comments in this thread have already dealt with IE's poor support for standards, including CSS3, HTML5, DOM3, etc.

He said name all the important standards it doesnt support, he wasnt asking for an "ect...".

[d_ralphie]

You mean standards that are either incomplete, not fully ratified, or hardly ever used?

No, I mean the fact that IE8 isn't very standards compliant overall. And the fact that the dominant browser isn't keeping up with stuff like CSS3, HTML5, etc. means that the web is being held back. Of course you will defend Microsoft with your life, so you will keep claiming that all these open standards don't matter. And you will never ask yourself about the reason why, e.g. SVG isn't used more. It's because Microsoft decided to not support it!

It's funny how all the other browsers manage to support all these standards, but not Microsoft.

[brentaal]

Of course you will defend Microsoft with your life, so you will keep claiming that all these open standards don't matter.

You've already been told that those are not yet standards. Why do you keep going in circles?

[Athernar]

You've already been told that those are not yet standards. Why do you keep going in circles?

Don't forget the repeated mentions of SVG as if it's some sort of world-changing technology.

Not to mention the fact Wikipedia uses it fine regardless.

[Subject Delta]

No, I mean the fact that IE8 isn't very standards compliant overall. And the fact that the dominant browser isn't keeping up with stuff like CSS3, HTML5, etc. means that the web is being held back. Of course you will defend Microsoft with your life, so you will keep claiming that all these open standards don't matter. And you will never ask yourself about the reason why, e.g. SVG isn't used more. It's because Microsoft decided to not support it!

It's funny how all the other browsers manage to support all these standards, but not Microsoft.

You have no rebuttal to anything else that I posted though which is an amusing footnote in itself, clearly you are flagging. And its amusing to see you go for the ad hominems when you have no response, something you accuse other members of doing quiet frequently.

The reason there is no support for those standards in IE8 is because most of them are still not completely ratified. They don't matter yet but I am sure that they will be ratified by the next version of IE, but there is no need for them to be implemented at the moment.

Yes, its great that (mainly Opera and Webkit) are involved in an e-penis race to add cutting edge web standards to browsers, but ultimately it doesn't contribute that much to the end user experience until these standards are in wide use, and at the moment they aren't.

Oh and for the record, I use Opera try remembering that before you keep trying to accuse me of being a Microsoft humper

[d_ralphie]

You've already been told that those are not yet standards. Why do you keep going in circles?

You've already been told that Microsoft is preventing them from being used, and holding the web back, in addition to the other standards it doesn't have decent support for.

Don't forget the repeated mentions of SVG as if it's some sort of world-changing technology.

Who said anything about "world-changing"? You Microsoft cheerleaders are becoming more and more desperate by the second the way you always, with no exception, misrepresent people's comments. It's rather pathetic.

Not to mention the fact Wikipedia uses it fine regardless.

No thanks to IE's lack of SVG support.

[d_ralphie]

You have no rebuttal to anything else that I posted though which is an amusing footnote in itself, clearly you are flagging.

Seeing Microsoft cheerleaders running in circles is amusing, but not very useful. Empty claims from Microsoft are useless.

The reason there is no support for those standards in IE8 is because most of them are still not completely ratified. They don't matter yet

Wrong, wrong, wrong. For a W3C recommendation to be published, it requires actual implementations in browsers. And you ignored the part where I explained to you how Microsoft not implementing these standards holds back the web.

there is no need for them to be implemented at the moment

There is, because unless the market leader actively follows up on open standards, they don't have much of a chance of being used.

Yes, its great that (mainly Opera and Webkit) are involved in an e-penis race to add cutting edge web standards to browsers, but ultimately it doesn't contribute that much to the end user experience until these standards are in wide use, and at the moment they aren't.

Your ignorance shines through again. Again, a W3C recommendation requires at least 2 implementations (or 3?) before it is published. Yes, that's right. Implementations are needed before they are "ratified".