Disney's Magical Gatherings - More Crap from Eisner
NoFamilyRideForMe
When I saw the commercial for the first time the other day, I couldn't
believe it.
Disney's Magical Gatherings - Basically, they want you to get everyone
you know and go to Disney. Is there a new ride? No. Are there
discounts? No. Only a vacation planner on their web site you're
supposed to download, and use while you surf Disney.com.
This is exactly why Eisner needs to go.
They don't have anything new, MS is a spin and puke machine. So to do
the ultimate, they roll out commercials telling you to bring everyone
you know, and then they call it Magical Gatherings. WOW!!!!!!!!
Another event where the park has added nothing new, yet they slap a
title on a celebration, and everyone is supposed to come. In the
past years, it was 75 years of this, Mickey's birthday, bla bla bla.
Pile on, Pile on, but this sucks. At least do some discounts, have
a beer party, Mardi Gras, anything. But don't play commercials
saying to bring everyone you know, call it Magical Gatherings, and act
like we're supposed to suck it up. No way.
Put a new fun ride in the MK. It's not like they don't have the money
after spending 100 million on a spin and puke.
Sam Marks
You might as well have been drunk, your complaints make no sense. Disney
doesn't need to offer discounts (even though they are discounting room rates
left and right) Disney consistantly offers more than value on its admission
tickets.
Magical gatherings is simply a marketing attempt to get families to relocate
their reunions, And give them a way to communicate between each other easily,
to pick itineraries, and plan the visit.
>But don't play commercials
>saying to bring everyone you know, call it Magical Gatherings, and act
>like we're supposed to suck it up.
its too bad you have no one to bring, maybe if you sobered up and became a
respectable member of society, people might want to be around you.
This past November I and 5 friends went to Disney World, and had a spectacular
time. hopefully next year we can plan the trip a bit better using the Magical
gatherings programming they offer, and more folks can get in on the fun.
lkng4chubs
So I take it you don't drink Coke because it's "Always the real thing?" Or
McDonalds latest ever-so-cheasy "I'm Loving It."
Drink some coffee before you make stupid posts.
"NoFamilyRideForMe" <JesusWas...@Bla.com> wrote in message
news:42g5vv4vatiq9cd9c...@4ax.com...
Dave Althoff Jr
: I'm typing this in the morning, just so you know, I'm not drunk.
No drinking in the morning?
: When I saw the commercial for the first time the other day, I couldn't
: believe it.
It's taken you this long to see the spot?! I guess that explains why they
have been running the saturation campaign...because some people still haven't
seen it yet.
: Disney's Magical Gatherings - Basically, they want you to get everyone
: you know and go to Disney. Is there a new ride? No. Are there
: discounts? No. Only a vacation planner on their web site you're
: supposed to download, and use while you surf Disney.com.
: This is exactly why Eisner needs to go.
When I try to surf Disney.com I hit a brick wall as soon as I try to go to
the Disney World Resort page. I get a page that says I need to upgrade my
web browser and it suggests that for OS-X I should download Safari. Uh,
yeah. Right. I'm *using* Safari. Pity I can't complain about it to
them, when I click on "contact us" I get their "upgrade your browser"
page. Even changing the user agent doesn't help. Someone should also
point out to them that Chimera is now called Camino, and is technically still
a beta.
Luckily I took my trip there before they re-did the web site. I guess
they don't want me to come back.
: They don't have anything new, MS is a spin and puke machine. So to do
: the ultimate, they roll out commercials telling you to bring everyone
: you know, and then they call it Magical Gatherings. WOW!!!!!!!!
It's worse down at the Disney Compound. "Magical Gatherings" logos on all
the monorail windows, banners on all the light poles in the parking lots,
signs everywhere...Why in the heck are they promoting this "Magical
Gatherings" crap to people who are already in the park, and are either (a)
participating in a "magical gathering," or (b) are already visiting the
park without all their friends, and are thus spending all their money so
that they can't afford to come back for a "magical gathering"?
: Another event where the park has added nothing new, yet they slap a
: title on a celebration, and everyone is supposed to come. In the
: past years, it was 75 years of this, Mickey's birthday, bla bla bla.
: Pile on, Pile on, but this sucks. At least do some discounts, have
: a beer party, Mardi Gras, anything. But don't play commercials
: saying to bring everyone you know, call it Magical Gatherings, and act
: like we're supposed to suck it up. No way.
: Put a new fun ride in the MK. It's not like they don't have the money
: after spending 100 million on a spin and puke.
Maybe that's the problem..........
--Dave Althoff, Jr., who thinks he's got a point on this one...
--
/*\ _ _ _ *** Happy New Year!!! ***
/###\ /X\ /X\_ _ /X\__ _ _ _____
/#####\ /XXX\ _/XXXX\_ /X\ /XXXXX\ /X\ /X\ /XXXXX
_/XXX#XXX\__/XXXXX\/XXXXXXXX\_/XXX\_/XXXXXXX\__/XXX\_/XXX\_/\_/XXXXXX
BloodEsteem
Clay "I's see's the's lights!" Lamanske
tommy
dal...@gcfn.org (Dave Althoff Jr) wrote:
> I get a page that says I need to upgrade my
> web browser and it suggests that for OS-X I should download Safari. Uh,
> yeah. Right. I'm *using* Safari.
haha.. I get that too. It says Safari (greatest browser ever) is
Netscape 6.
/tommy
selo hauoyuf
E-Stop-1
UGH! Thank god that someone else is annoyed with this commerical. I want to
reach though the stereo and slap that bitch.
Estopone
"Where's Tony?"
"Peter Griffin For President in 2005"
Robert Ulrich
>>McDonalds latest ever-so-cheasy "I'm Loving It."
>
>UGH! Thank god that someone else is annoyed with this commerical. I want to
>reach though the stereo and slap that bitch.
This is funny to read because the "I'm Lovin' It" campaign has been
reported to be very successful in it's transplanting to the US - the
campaign originated in Germany if I recall correctly. Insert
reminders of the Barry Manilow jingle days here....
RU
Rastus O'Ginga
wrote:
>NoFamilyRideForMe (JesusWas...@Bla.com) wrote:
>: I'm typing this in the morning, just so you know, I'm not drunk.
>
>No drinking in the morning?
>
>: When I saw the commercial for the first time the other day, I couldn't
>: believe it.
>
>It's taken you this long to see the spot?! I guess that explains why they
>have been running the saturation campaign...because some people still haven't
>seen it yet.
Hell, their Christmas parade this year was a 2 hour commercial for
them. Talk about overkill.
Rastus O'Ginga
Winner of the 2nd Annual C. Montgomery Burns Award for
Outstanding Achievement in the Field of Excellence.
"What an awful dream, 1s and 0s everywhere... I thought I saw a 2." - Bender
ANTI-BED-WETTING-LIBELRAL DISCLAIMER:
The content of this post, and all previous posts made by this user, is 100%
opinion. Any similarity between this post and the truth is purely
coincidental. Anyone who reads this post and draws conclusions about it is
doing so by their choice. How they use those conclusions to direct their
own lives and opinions from that point forward is absolutely a result of
their own cognitive abilities and is in no way related or legally binded to
this poster. NO individual, business entity, or legal authority should use
the content of this post, or any other post by the originator, in whole, or
in part, to assist in making a decision that could affect the lives of any
of the inhabitants of planet Earth, since the content may not be true.
Sam Marks
>them. Talk about overkill.
>
>
>
>Rastus O'Ginga
You were expecting TWEETY?
or SNOOPY?
get a grip idiot
NoFamilyRideForMe
wrote:
>>I'm typing this in the morning, just so you know, I'm not drunk.
>
>You might as well have been drunk, your complaints make no sense.
But my posts get everyone talking. Even Rustas joined in on this one.
And watch out, I'm drinking now before new years. Got off work
early at noon and started slamming. It's 04:25pm est. Going to
dinner and then I'll be back, who knows, maybe I'll tell Jeff to suck
my dick. Opps, I just did. You know, the post count on his message
board has been dropping. Web based message boards are a fad that is
not what it used to be.
I mean, imagine if CP did what Disney is doing? Basically saying,
Hey, we're having a celebration, bring everyone you know, and it's a
magical gathering. It's a ripoff in advertising. It's like
begging for visitors. Hey, our attendance has been dropping, so
we're scraping the bottom of the barrel. Bring gramps and grandma,
and drag them around with you in wheel chairs. Yeah, that's what
families need for a fun vacation.
Let's see, Disney is a kiddie park, wanting little kids aged 4-8. And
now they want all the senior citizens. Just great.
And now, It's a small world, sponsored by Depends.
Sam Marks
about what an ass you are
weidwall
news:bsuplu$cvf$1...@acme.gcfn.org...:
> It's worse down at the Disney Compound. "Magical Gatherings" logos on all
> the monorail windows, banners on all the light poles in the parking lots,
> signs everywhere...Why in the heck are they promoting this "Magical
> Gatherings" crap to people who are already in the park, and are either (a)
> participating in a "magical gathering," or (b) are already visiting the
> park without all their friends, and are thus spending all their money so
> that they can't afford to come back for a "magical gathering"?
I think it's (b), but the Disney take on that is get them thinking about
returning for a "Magical Gathering" while they're in the midst of
"experiencing the magic." (Yes, a lot of Disney fans actually talk like
that!) In terms of not being able to afford a return trip, I am amazed at
how much some people scrimp and save to be able to go every year or two, and
how much money they spend while there. Check out the trip reports on
r.a.d.p. or the DIS boards - definitely a different vibe than your typical
r.r-c TR!
A subset of the "Magical Gatherings" promotion is something called "Grand
Gatherings," where, for an additional fee (of course!) your group of eight
or more can have a special Disney experience. For example, Grand Gathering
groups can book a private Kilimanjaro Safari ride at night with dinner after
at Tusker House restaurant, special character meet-and-greet, etc. At $59.99
for 10 and up, $19.99 for 3-9, not cheap, but I bet they get a lot of people
to sign up.
More info on this stuff is available here:
http://www.mousesavers.com/packages.html#gg
As an aside, MouseSavers.com is a great resource to use when planning a
Disney vacation if you're at all interested in saving money.
Ruth Ann
DeadAndRestless
>we're scraping the bottom of the barrel. Bring gramps and grandma,
>and drag them around with you in wheel chairs. Yeah, that's what
>families need for a fun vacation.
>
LOL
-this is incredible material-
Alan
David H.--REMOVE STOPSPAM to reply
<JesusWas...@Bla.com> wrote:
>They don't have anything new, MS is a spin and puke machine.
They don't have anything new.
Yet they have something new that you don't like.
So do they have something new, or do they not have something new? Which is
it?
Just curious.
David Hamburger, davi...@STOPSPAMbellatlantic.net, Boston, MA
PLEASE remove "STOPSPAM" from my address when replying via e-mail.
"I think that gay marriage is something that
should be between a man and a woman,"
California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger
NoFamilyRideForMe
wrote:
>>But my posts get everyone talking.
>
>about what an ass you are
Dude, just give it up. There are plenty more posts about the subject
because of me. Many of them giving more information than anyone new.
For example, I didn't know Disney was hyping the celebration with
stickers on the monorails. That seems like overkill. I agree,
there's no need to advertise that event in the park. It's like they
expect people to phone others with the news. Duh. Just let them be.
It shows how desperate Disney is.
It's like you're stalking me. WTF is your problem? Are you a CFB
moderator or something?
Remember, my rants never attack individual users, but the park
practices.
I want the parks to do better.
If people like me don't post and write the parks, then they'll fail.
Why? Because they might make a decision that will last TWO years and
not realize it will effect attendance. I'm giving them notice up
front to install FUN RIDES to bring fans back.
Dude, stop attacking me.
Oh, and by the way, I'm drunk right now, and haven't dropped any F
bombs.
You remind me so much of the CFB users. Dude, we're in the real
world here. I can rant anytime I want. Just let it go, my posts
keep the boards talking. Which is why CFB is dying. Why? Because
everyone over there is told to shut up. Here you can't do that.
Sam Marks
>world here. I can rant anytime I want. Just let it go, my posts
>keep the boards talking.
RRC doesn't need a drunken savior to lead it. It needs less anonymity (post
using your name) and more on topic reponses.
As long as you post anonymously, you can expect to be treated as a troll....
Dude, get used to it, or start using your real name.
Sandy A. Nicolaysen
wrote:
>>Dude, we're in the real
Sam: One of the long running jokes here in RRC is that someone can
post anonymously. The fact is that any poster can be tracked down no
matter what methods the poster "thinks" keeps their identity secret.
NoFamilyRideForMe = Robert Viands
Rastus O'Ginga = Jason Burkett
Evil One = Chris Moshella
There are more, but you get the idea.
I agree with you in that if you want to state facts, back it up with
your real name. Fake IDs carry very little weight when it comes to
credibility.
- Sandy "my real name" Nicolaysen
Wolf
Sam, when one is spending a thread ranting about drunken idiots, it's best
if they do not rant *like* a drunk idiot.
-Wolf
Locoboy
> RRC doesn't need a drunken savior to lead it. It needs less anonymity (post
> using your name) and more on topic reponses.
>
> As long as you post anonymously, you can expect to be treated as a troll....
> Dude, get used to it, or start using your real name.
It's all just a phony act anyway.
Sam Marks
>> or SNOOPY?
>>
>> get a grip idiot
>
>Sam, when one is spending a thread ranting about drunken idiots, it's best
>if they do not rant *like* a drunk idiot.
>
>-Wolf
Sorry wolf, but if anyone goes to a parade in a disney park and doesn't expect
to see disney characters, they're DAFT!
SAM
(at least I was sober and on topic:)
NoFamilyRideForMe
>As long as you post anonymously, you can expect to be treated as a troll....
>Dude, get used to it, or start using your real name.
I use the fake names to get my point across. The name appears in the
header of the post, and is seen in the message listing.
NoGodForMe - Letting everyone know it's ok to not believe in god or
practice religion, which is the root of all evil.
In case you haven't noticed, there is a movement in the USA to do away
with Christianity. In the past, Christians shoved religion down the
throats of everyone. If you didn't believe in their god, then you're
going to hell. Well, I'm here to let everyone know that's not true.
People in the USA no longer hide their true feelings about the
subject. If we don't believe, we're not scared to say it.
This is also my screen name when I play online games, and on the
Tribalwar message board.
NoFamilyRideForMe - Self explanatory. The suits don't seem to get
it. They add shows, dark rides, movies, and in the case of Disney,
nothing. I'm here to let them know I won't be flying to visit. And
yes, I know I'm only one, but just go ask Burke of SF about his
dropping attendance. SFWoA is a shell of it's former self. Disney
used to have 15 million visitors, now it's 14. I predict BGT/SWF
will drop or be flat next year becase of no new fun ride.
The other reason I change the names often, is to piss off those who
say they're going to use a kill filter.
I'm not hiding from anyone. Why should I? Everyone knows my name.
I'm not in ACE. I'm already banned from CFB. I'm in no other
coaster clubs. I don't hang out with you people. So why am I here
you ask? Because I want fun rides. And since I was banned from
CFB, I'm gonna keep talking. I'm not like the whinny cry babies who
say they're leaving after they get flamed. Oh no, the exact opposite
happened, I'm here to stay.
Sam Marks
>say they're going to use a kill filter.
yet you somehow assume you'll be treated as legit?
the jokes on you buddy, parks to listen to nameless crackpots(heads)>NoGodForMe
- Letting everyone know it's ok to not believe in god or
>practice religion, which is the root of all evil.
funny, I thought alcohol as the root of all evil hehehe
Flare
> Sam: One of the long running jokes here in RRC is that someone can
> post anonymously. The fact is that any poster can be tracked down no
> matter what methods the poster "thinks" keeps their identity secret.
>
> NoFamilyRideForMe = Robert Viands
>
> Rastus O'Ginga = Jason Burkett
>
> Evil One = Chris Moshella
>
> There are more, but you get the idea.
I'm not sure what Sam's point is or was, considering he's assumed a
mission to kick this guy any chance he gets... If anything, Sam's
obsessive need to engage in repeatedly personally attacking someone
who's already been deemed an obvious goofball is approaching a trollish,
unsavory place, imho. That said, I'll be the first to admit that I'll
always toss my hat in the ring when I see fit...But I also believe
there's a succinct point when your own credibility begins to suffer when
you take the art of "belittling" to the point of ineffectual self
gratification. I just think Sam has a serious issue with this guy, and
that he's dealing with in a "less than" diplomatic way. I mean, the
dude has never actually given Sam the ammunition to be personally
shitting on him the way he (Sam) has been. Just my take.
To preface, Sam's a nice guy; a good guy. I always enjoy seeing him out
and about at parks and such. Yet Sam, like many others, knows I aint'
gonna candy coat my perceptions of reality, or sit back and say
"whatever...big deal...doesn't affect me...". Regardless, Sam's gonna do
whatever the heck he feels compelled to do.
>
> I agree with you in that if you want to state facts, back it up with
> your real name. Fake IDs carry very little weight when it comes to
> credibility.
>
I completely disagree. There are a considerable number of "anonymous"
posters who don't sign their "real" name, yet contribute very positive,
stimulating stuff. If you submit logical, sensical content, why should
you be automatically labelled a troll, just because you're not signing
your real name??
In sum, I gotta say that NoWhateverForMe, with his Terra, Terra Terra,
CFB and myriad of other silly rants has served up more than a few laughs
for me. For that, I actually enjoy his existence. It's entertaining. :-)
Dave (Fraser)
- In fear of trolldom sentencing.
lkng4chubs
all ages. So what you're saying is children ages 4-8 actually enjoy going
to EPCOT? For what? There isn't much there for children of that age.
That's why they bulit MK.
So CP used a stupid slogans a few years ago, "Get to the Po!nt" and it is
basicallt saying the same thing that disney is with "Magical Gatherings."
I'm assuming you only read taglines to make your decision on products to
choose...
Tim Vaughan
Sam. I mean yes, it's their parade, and their network, but it was so
blatantly a two hour Disney commercial. It was pretty funny to watch.
"Sam Marks" <steel...@aol.come2Mypark> wrote in message
news:20040101074711...@mb-m06.aol.com...
William December Starr
tommy <to...@tommy.com> said:
>> I get a page that says I need to upgrade my web browser and it
>> suggests that for OS-X I should download Safari. Uh, yeah.
>> Right. I'm *using* Safari. [Dave Althoff Jr]
>
> haha.. I get that too. It says Safari (greatest browser ever) is
> Netscape 6.
I use Opera and I'm pretty happy with it, but I'm always willing to
hear about something better. What's Safari's story?
-- William December Starr <wds...@panix.com>
Sam Marks
>Sam. I mean yes, it's their parade, and their network, but it was so
>blatantly a two hour Disney commercial. It was pretty funny to watch.
it was heavily thick on the gatherings adverts.... but still, It's "always"
been that way, every year, regis, etc. etc. but hey,
tommy
wds...@panix.com (William December Starr) wrote:
> I use Opera and I'm pretty happy with it, but I'm always willing to
> hear about something better. What's Safari's story?
Safari, http://www.apple.com/safari/ , is Apple's own browser. It's blazing fast, and (up until now) works
perfectly. It has little touches like a 'snap back' feature that will
take you back to the last url that you typed in, and it blocks pop-ups,
resets easily, etc..
Microsoft stopped support for IE for OS X after Safari was released.
/tommy
Worlds Apart...
> Let's see, Disney is a kiddie park, wanting little kids aged 4-8. And
> now they want all the senior citizens. Just great.
> And now, It's a small world, sponsored by Depends.
Well enough sicko mothers and fathers have left enough diapers in the
boats over the decades... I'm sure some sicko old people have too.
Sickos...
Worlds Apart...
> >>But my posts get everyone talking.
> >
> >about what an ass you are
>
> Dude, just give it up. There are plenty more posts about the subject
> because of me. Many of them giving more information than anyone new.
>
> For example, I didn't know Disney was hyping the celebration with
> stickers on the monorails. That seems like overkill. I agree,
> there's no need to advertise that event in the park. It's like they
> expect people to phone others with the news. Duh. Just let them be.
> It shows how desperate Disney is.
Top 10 in attendance parks don't lie.
Disney could do far better and Eisner sucks but the park numbers don't
lie. They don't look too desperate.
> It's like you're stalking me. WTF is your problem?
He loves you..
Don't escape his loving grasp.. look into his eyes.
> Are you a CFB
> moderator or something?
Stop mentioning CB on RRC..
WTF?!?
Are you some lackey, toady or stooge from that site?
> Remember, my rants never attack individual users, but the park
> practices.
> I want the parks to do better.
> If people like me don't post and write the parks, then they'll fail.
> Why? Because they might make a decision that will last TWO years and
> not realize it will effect attendance. I'm giving them notice up
> front to install FUN RIDES to bring fans back.
I think most parks don't care. If people don't show up because what they
are doing now they could always go ALL NUDE! and build up their
fanbases.
> Dude, stop attacking me.
Whiiiiine.
STFU and crack another longneck, Chuckles.
> Oh, and by the way, I'm drunk right now, and haven't dropped any F
> bombs.
Well big fucking fuck..
> You remind me so much of the CFB users.
Stop SPAMMING that site on RRC.
> Dude, we're in the real
> world here.
Bleep, bleep, bleep.
> I can rant anytime I want.
Then stop whining about it and rant.
Do you have to rant about not being able to rant during one of your
rants?
> Just let it go, my posts
> keep the boards talking. Which is why CFB is dying.
Then stop SPAMMING that site, holy shit braincheese.
> Why?
Exactly.. why?
> Because
> everyone over there is told to shut up.
Good.. stop spamming a shitty website.
> Here you can't do that.
Rant on and on.. you sometimes make a lot of sense and are also
entertaining, but stop f'kin repeatedly mentioning other message forums
that suck.
Happy New Year.. get over the fact that Cheesecake Buzz sucks..
Worlds Apart...
> As long as you post anonymously, you can expect to be treated as a troll....
The above is definitely troll bait.
William December Starr
tommy <to...@tommy.com> said:
> Safari, http://www.apple.com/safari/ , is Apple's own browser. It's
> blazing fast, and (up until now) works perfectly. It has little
> touches like a 'snap back' feature that will take you back to the
> last url that you typed in, and it blocks pop-ups, resets easily,
> etc..
Ah, thanks. Well, let me know if they ever release a Windoze
version. (Yes, I use Windows rather than Mac/Apple/whatever (that
is, when I'm doing stuff that involves pictures and the like;
otherwise I live on an old DOS box). No, I'm not going to apologize
for it. :-)
-- William December Starr <wds...@panix.com>
"'Plunkett and Macleane' conducts an experiment: Can a movie be constructed
entirely out of stylistic excess, without the aid of a story or characters
we'd give two farthings for? Answer: Perhaps, but not this time."
-- Roger Ebert
Worlds Apart...
> Disney is soooo not a little kids park. That park is designed for people of
> all ages. So what you're saying is children ages 4-8 actually enjoy going
> to EPCOT? For what? There isn't much there for children of that age.
Drinking around the world?
> That's why they bulit MK.
MK came first.
> So CP used a stupid slogans a few years ago, "Get to the Po!nt" and it is
> basicallt saying the same thing that disney is with "Magical Gatherings."
Read the Jimhillmedia.com article about "Magic Gatherings". I don't
think CP would go at it quite like the Disney machine is.
> I'm assuming you only read taglines to make your decision on products to
> choose...
...and then the 'wired in' My Pal Mickey interactive plush you rent or
buy tells you which attractions or parades or shows to go see and when
to eat and use the restroom.
Worlds Apart...
Ooozing troll statements at this point..
edandkasey
> NoGodForMe - Letting everyone know it's ok to not believe in god or
> practice religion, which is the root of all evil.
> In case you haven't noticed, there is a movement in the USA to do away
> with Christianity. In the past, Christians shoved religion down the
> throats of everyone. If you didn't believe in their god, then you're
> going to hell. Well, I'm here to let everyone know that's not true.
Then what is true? I find it interesting that you have taken the role that
you accuse Christians of having taken.
It is just as easy to believe as it to not believe.
Dave Althoff Jr
: In article <tommy-90A811....@news.easynews.com>,
: tommy <to...@tommy.com> said:
I use Opera at the office. It's fantastic, and it handles just about
everything just fine, except for the occasional web page that sniffs it
out and decides to play nasty. Try visiting Microsoft's knowledge base
using Opera sometime...enjoy the microscopic text!
At home, I use Safari almost exclusively, although there are a couple of
things that don't work right...to do online banking, for instance, I have
to use Camino (Mozilla), and the Burstnet intersitials on CoasterBuzz are
all screwed up (don't pass URLs correctly) in Safari.
Safari is Apple's web browser. It's fast, it's standards-based, and even
though its user agent string claims it is "like Mozilla", it actually has
more in common with Konqueror. When Safari came out of beta for OS-X,
Microsoft killed Internet Explorer. Good riddance; IE on the Mac was a
slow, bloated, non-compliant, kludgy mess. First thing I did when I
bought my Mac was to download Chimera (now Camino) from mozilla.org and
effectively disable IE on my system.
I'm not totally convinced that Safari is faster than Camino. In my
experience, Camino feels faster. But once I disabled the brushed metal,
Safari quickly became my preferred browser.
--Dave Althoff, Jr.
--
/*\ _ _ _ *** Happy New Year!!! ***
/###\ /X\ /X\_ _ /X\__ _ _ _____
/#####\ /XXX\ _/XXXX\_ /X\ /XXXXX\ /X\ /X\ /XXXXX
_/XXX#XXX\__/XXXXX\/XXXXXXXX\_/XXX\_/XXXXXXX\__/XXX\_/XXX\_/\_/XXXXXX
William December Starr
dal...@gcfn.org (Dave Althoff Jr) said:
> Safari is Apple's web browser. It's fast, it's standards-based,
> and even though its user agent string claims it is "like Mozilla",
> it actually has more in common with Konqueror. When Safari came
> out of beta for OS-X, Microsoft killed Internet Explorer. Good
> riddance; IE on the Mac was a slow, bloated, non-compliant, kludgy
> mess.
Ah. Much like IE on Windows then. (I keep IE around for viewing
the occasional site which by chance or design doesn't work well with
Opera, but that's about it.) (Well, I also keep it around because
there's no really good way of surgically excising it from Win98, but
except for the above I generally ignore its existence.)
Dave Althoff Jr
Actually, IE on Windows has SOME optimization, and it takes minimal time
to launch, since the rendering engine is native to Windows (at least in
XP). None of that applies to the Mac version.
About the only thing that IE does that other browsers don't (on any
supported platform) is ActiveX. These days, the fact that other browsers
don't handle ActiveX is frequently considered a *benefit*.
Chris Simon
> About the only thing that IE does that other browsers don't (on any
> supported platform) is ActiveX. These days, the fact that other browsers
> don't handle ActiveX is frequently considered a *benefit*.
MS's decision to freeze IE development (and basically kill it off) is a
strange one. They are banking on everyone upgrading to Windows 2005
(whatever it's called) where the browsing technology will be completely
integral to the OS, and of course it doesn't matter since they are the
suppliers of the major desktop operating system. But in this 2 or 3
year gap, IE is getting a pretty bad reputation for being buggy and
non-standards compliant and for pushing MS proprietary technology, in
comparison to the other browsers that are in continual development -
will a lot of people abandon IE in the interim, find a browser that they
like and stick with it even if they upgrade to Windows 2005??
(Hopefully, yes!) I saw some recent statistics on browser usage, and IE
holds about 86% of the share. Of course, that's still a commanding
lead, but it wasn't that long ago that it was at about 92%.
The thing is, if Windows 2005 takes off and everyone does use it, MS
will be in an even more dominant position than they are now. Of course,
that's what they are hoping.
--
Chris Simon
osia...@slcszetnet.co.uk
http://www.users.zetnet.co.uk/csimon/
** Get rid of all SLCs to reply directly **
Joe Schwartz
> I saw some recent statistics on browser usage, and IE holds about 86%
> of the share. Of course, that's still a commanding lead, but it wasn't
> that long ago that it was at about 92%.
It depends what audience you're sampling. For instance, 95% of Joyrides
hits come from IE, and about 4% from Netscape/Mozilla.
--
Come visit Joyrides -- www.joyrides.com -- a photo gallery celebrating
the joy and beauty of amusement park rides, especially roller coasters!
lkng4chubs
I do that
> MK came first.
I knew that
> ...and then the 'wired in' My Pal Mickey interactive plush
Didn't know that, I'll have to get one next time I'm there. Does it work
for every park? What's the low-down?
Chester "learned something new about WDW" Bell
"Worlds Apart..." <YouGotMeConfuse...@res.foetus> wrote in
message news:3FF525BE...@res.foetus...
Dave Althoff Jr
: Dave Althoff Jr wrote:
: > About the only thing that IE does that other browsers don't (on any
: > supported platform) is ActiveX. These days, the fact that other browsers
: > don't handle ActiveX is frequently considered a *benefit*.
: MS's decision to freeze IE development (and basically kill it off) is a
: strange one. They are banking on everyone upgrading to Windows 2005
: (whatever it's called) where the browsing technology will be completely
: integral to the OS, and of course it doesn't matter since they are the
: suppliers of the major desktop operating system. But in this 2 or 3
: year gap, IE is getting a pretty bad reputation for being buggy and
: non-standards compliant and for pushing MS proprietary technology, in
: comparison to the other browsers that are in continual development -
: will a lot of people abandon IE in the interim, find a browser that they
: like and stick with it even if they upgrade to Windows 2005??
: (Hopefully, yes!) I saw some recent statistics on browser usage, and IE
: holds about 86% of the share. Of course, that's still a commanding
: lead, but it wasn't that long ago that it was at about 92%.
Question about that browser usage statistic...
Does AOL identify itself as IE? And what happens when AOL switches to
Mozilla?
How many of those IE users are really using Opera but haven't changed the
user agent string?
Joe Schwartz
> Does AOL identify itself as IE?
Yes, and it also adds "AOL" to the user agent string.
> And what happens when AOL switches to Mozilla?
Presumably, it'll change.
> How many of those IE users are really using Opera but haven't changed the
> user agent string?
Good question. Opera includes both "Opera" and "MSIE" in the user agent
string.
Chris Simon
> How many of those IE users are really using Opera but haven't changed the
> user agent string?
This is one slight problem. Opera is IE by default isn't it? Shooting
themselves in the foot there! Mind you, it's to get around sites that
reject browsers other than IE, so I suppose it's swings and roundabouts
(to keep this on topic!) as if people find that Opera is locked out of
certain sites then they'll switch to IE...
The statistics I quoted were from a site called Browser News I think -
it has 4 sources and admittedly they do vary quite a bit, one puts IE
much higher than I stated.
Wolf
>
> Does AOL identify itself as IE? And what happens when AOL switches to
> Mozilla?
>
> How many of those IE users are really using Opera but haven't changed the
> user agent string?
Opera can also spoof Mozilla/Netscape, can't it?
--
|\-/|
<0 0>
=(o)=
-Wolf
Dave Althoff Jr
: > Question about that browser usage statistic...
Yeah, just hit F12 and pick from a list. What I found was that if I left
it to spoof IE, it would frequently crash on ad banners and on sites
trying to do IE-specific stuff. If I told it to identify as Opera, it
generally worked fine, but some sites would assume it couldn't do things
that it could, so occasionally it would do strange things on some dynamic
pages (I remember ebay having some minor rendering issues...) but most of
those problems went away when I told it to spoof Mozilla.
Nice of Opera to let you change the user agent string on the fly. But all
of the user-agent strings also note that they are really Opera. Kind of
like Apple mentioning Mozilla in the Safari user agent string.
Ted Ansley
>Chris Simon <osia...@slcszetnet.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> I saw some recent statistics on browser usage, and IE holds about 86%
>> of the share. Of course, that's still a commanding lead, but it wasn't
>> that long ago that it was at about 92%.
>
>It depends what audience you're sampling. For instance, 95% of Joyrides
>hits come from IE, and about 4% from Netscape/Mozilla.
Wow, that's really sad. I remember when Netscape was over 50%. I rarely
use IE, except of course when a page won't load on Netscape or the other
occasional browser I use. I could get by on my computer now with no MS
software,except for OS, if I so desired. I don't use Outlook Express for
Mail and News, I use Eudora and Free Agent. I also use Netscape,
OpenOffice.org, and other various software packages on a regular basis.
--------------------------
Ted Ansley
ans...@usa.com
RollerCoaster Fan<atic>
Joe Schwartz
> On Sat, 03 Jan 2004 17:20:35 GMT, Joe Schwartz <j...@joyrides.com> wrote:
>
> >Chris Simon <osia...@slcszetnet.co.uk> wrote:
> >
> >> I saw some recent statistics on browser usage, and IE holds about 86%
> >> of the share. Of course, that's still a commanding lead, but it wasn't
> >> that long ago that it was at about 92%.
> >
> >It depends what audience you're sampling. For instance, 95% of Joyrides
> >hits come from IE, and about 4% from Netscape/Mozilla.
>
> Wow, that's really sad. I remember when Netscape was over 50%.
It *is* sad, because Netscape totally blew it. I used Netscape for several
years before switching to IE, and I switched because Netscape crashed on me
several times a day. IE had fewer features than Netscape back then, but at
least it was stable. That's all it took for me to switch, and IE improved
very quickly over the next year or two.
Here's a good blog (from 2000) discussing one of Netscape's fatal mistakes:
http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/fog0000000069.html
Coaster Enthusiasts of Canada
: tommy <to...@tommy.com> said:
: >> I get a page that says I need to upgrade my web browser and it
: >> suggests that for OS-X I should download Safari. Uh, yeah.
: >> Right. I'm *using* Safari. [Dave Althoff Jr]
: >
: > haha.. I get that too. It says Safari (greatest browser ever) is
: > Netscape 6.
*** I dislike websites which say to upgrade to `X' browser. It says to
me "I am too lazy to make this page accessible to everyone." I usually
send them a nasty note telling them to adhere to international
accessibility standards.
: I use Opera and I'm pretty happy with it, but I'm always willing to
: hear about something better. What's Safari's story?
: -- William December Starr <wds...@panix.com>
*** Opera is an excellent browser. I personally use Lynx and Arachne. I
find both stable and to work well.
Richard Bonner
Managing Director:
The Coaster Enthusiasts of Canada
www.CEC.chebucto.org
Coaster Enthusiasts of Canada
: > Safari, http://www.apple.com/safari/, is Apple's own browser.
: Ah, thanks. Well, let me know if they ever release a Windoze
: version. (Yes, I use Windows rather than Mac/Apple/whatever (that
: is, when I'm doing stuff that involves pictures and the like;
: otherwise I live on an old DOS box).
*** Ahh, the DOS window can do pictures, too, William. (-:
: No, I'm not going to apologize for it. :-)
: -- William December Starr
*** Power users need not apologise for anything.
If you like DOS, see my DOS website:
www.chebucto.ns.ca/~ak621/DOS/
Coaster Enthusiasts of Canada
: I use Opera at the office. It's fantastic, and it handles just about
: everything just fine, except for the occasional web page that sniffs it
: out and decides to play nasty. Try visiting Microsoft's knowledge base
: using Opera sometime...enjoy the microscopic text!
*** It is well documenmted that sleazy Microsoft places items on its
webpages to screw up Opera and other browsers.
Want to see other MS prejudices? Enter "Linux" into an MS search
engine, then enter it into, say Google. The number of hits differences is
amazing.
: At home, I use Safari almost exclusively, although there are a couple of
: things that don't work right...to do online banking, for instance, I have
: to use Camino (Mozilla), and the Burstnet intersitials on CoasterBuzz are
: all screwed up (don't pass URLs correctly) in Safari.
:
: --Dave Althoff, Jr.
*** Were those pages made with an MS web page maker?
Coaster Enthusiasts of Canada
: the occasional site which by chance or design doesn't work well with
: Opera, but that's about it.) (Well, I also keep it around because
: there's no really good way of surgically excising it from Win98, but
: except for the above I generally ignore its existence.
: -- William December Starr
*** When I used to use Windoze 98 and Internet Deplorable, I used to
have a lot of problems with both. The two worst IE problems were that
it would regularily dump me right out of the program with no warning. The
program would be closed and the line hung up. (-:
Also, every so often it would try to downlaod something on its own and
I'd see that little letter with wings animation. I could never get rid of
it. I had people try and try. It would appear everytime I started IE. The
solution? Why, *reintall*, of course!
After three reinstalls over the course of a year and a fourth one
looming, I issued my all time favourite DOS command:
DELTREE C:\WINDOWS
Good riddance!
Coaster Enthusiasts of Canada
: MS's decision to freeze IE development (and basically kill it off) is a
: strange one. They are banking on everyone upgrading to Windows 2005
: (whatever it's called) where the browsing technology will be completely
: integral to the OS, and of course it doesn't matter since they are the
: suppliers of the major desktop operating system.
*** Ahh, but it does matter. That system will likely make it virtually
impossible for a user to employ a non-MS browser on such a setup.
: But in this 2 or 3
: year gap, IE is getting a pretty bad reputation for being buggy and
: non-standards compliant and for pushing MS proprietary technology,
*** Of course. That is done to *force* people to use MS products. Is it
any wonder MS-free offices are springing up all over? MS is slowly
shooting themselves in the foot.
At one time MS was compatible with other manfacturers and MS products
could read those other softwares. Now, that is not the case. When I get an
MS document I cannot open, I send a nasty letter telling them to send it
in a *usable* form or don't bother to send it at all.
: in
: comparison to the other browsers that are in continual development -
: will a lot of people abandon IE in the interim, find a browser that they
: like and stick with it even if they upgrade to Windows 2005??
*** Many are still on the MS bandwagon and are too ignorant of what is
going on out there. However, I believe many businesses will adopt
alternatives. Then when they find such alternatives won't run on WIN
2005 (which will require a Pentium 15 running at 2.2 terahertz), they will
drop Windoze.
: (Hopefully, yes!) I saw some recent statistics on browser usage, and IE
: holds about 86% of the share. Of course, that's still a commanding
: lead, but it wasn't that long ago that it was at about 92%.
*** It holds it because it is *included* with every new PC sold! What
happend to consumer choice?
: The thing is, if Windows 2005 takes off and everyone does use it, MS
: will be in an even more dominant position than they are now. Of course,
: that's what they are hoping.
: --
: Chris Simon
*** As per my speculations above, I believe this will not turn out to be
the case. People are finally starting to wise up.
Coaster Enthusiasts of Canada
: How many of those IE users are really using Opera but haven't changed the
: user agent string?
*** I often wondered that, too. Given that all new PCs come with IE,
how many converts think to do that?
Coaster Enthusiasts of Canada
: : > Question about that browser usage statistic...
: : >
: : > Does AOL identify itself as IE? And what happens when AOL switches to
: : > Mozilla?
: : >
: : > How many of those IE users are really using Opera but haven't changed the
: : > user agent string?
: : Opera can also spoof Mozilla/Netscape, can't it?
: Yeah, just hit F12 and pick from a list. What I found was that if I left
: it to spoof IE, it would frequently crash on ad banners and on sites
: trying to do IE-specific stuff.
(Snip)
:
: --Dave Althoff, Jr.
*** Would not a better term be "impersonate"? Does Opera use the word
"spoof"?
Coaster Enthusiasts of Canada
: I used Netscape for several
: years before switching to IE, and I switched because Netscape crashed on me
: several times a day.
*** But was the reason for crashing that Netscape was running under
Windows? I know Mac users whom swear by Netscape.
: IE had fewer features than Netscape back then, but at
: least it was stable.
*** I found IE to not be stable on my old WIN 95 and 98 systems.
Joe Schwartz
> Joe Schwartz (j...@joyrides.com) wrote:
> : I used Netscape for several
> : years before switching to IE, and I switched because Netscape crashed
> : on me several times a day.
>
> *** But was the reason for crashing that Netscape was running under
> Windows?
No, it was crashing because it was written poorly. Despite what you might
think, Windows rarely causes well-written programs to crash. However, it's
very good at exposing poorly written crap.
Joe Schwartz
> Chris Simon (osia...@slcszetnet.co.uk) wrote:
>
> : MS's decision to freeze IE development (and basically kill it off) is a
> : strange one. They are banking on everyone upgrading to Windows 2005
> : (whatever it's called) where the browsing technology will be completely
> : integral to the OS, and of course it doesn't matter since they are the
> : suppliers of the major desktop operating system.
>
> *** Ahh, but it does matter. That system will likely make it virtually
> impossible for a user to employ a non-MS browser on such a setup.
It'll be no harder to use a non-MS browser than it is today. You really
should get a clue before spouting such nonsense.
Pete McCutchen
wrote:
>>I'm typing this in the morning, just so you know, I'm not drunk.
>
>You might as well have been drunk, your complaints make no sense. Disney
>doesn't need to offer discounts (even though they are discounting room rates
>left and right) Disney consistantly offers more than value on its admission
>tickets.
They do? They've got three parks with what, half a dozen good rides
between them?
Sure, if your children are timid and cowardly, or if you have elderly
relatives, maybe Disney is the place to go. But in terms of actual
ride value, all three parks are the functional equivalent of one Six
Flags park.
When the Six Flags park is running the rides, that is.
--
Pete McCutchen
Coaster Enthusiasts of Canada
: c...@chebucto.ns.ca (Coaster Enthusiasts of Canada) wrote:
: > Joe Schwartz (j...@joyrides.com) wrote:
: > : I used Netscape for several
: > : years before switching to IE, and I switched because Netscape crashed
: > : on me several times a day.
: >
: > *** But was the reason for crashing that Netscape was running under
: > Windows?
: No, it was crashing because it was written poorly. Despite what you might
: think, Windows rarely causes well-written programs to crash. However, it's
: very good at exposing poorly written crap.
*** I'm wondering if the Netscape version you were running was made
for one version and then yuu ran it on an upgraded Windows.
Coaster Enthusiasts of Canada
: c...@chebucto.ns.ca (Coaster Enthusiasts of Canada) wrote:
: > Chris Simon (osia...@slcszetnet.co.uk) wrote:
: >
: > : MS's decision to freeze IE development (and basically kill it off) is a
: > : strange one. They are banking on everyone upgrading to Windows 2005
: > : (whatever it's called) where the browsing technology will be completely
: > : integral to the OS, and of course it doesn't matter since they are the
: > : suppliers of the major desktop operating system.
: >
: > *** Ahh, but it does matter. That system will likely make it virtually
: > impossible for a user to employ a non-MS browser on such a setup.
: It'll be no harder to use a non-MS browser than it is today. You really
: should get a clue before spouting such nonsense.
*** I was being speculative. MS seems to do everything it can to make
competing software difficult to run.
I'd be curious to see how it runs any of today's competing browsers.
Will Microsoft force competing manufacturers to re-tool their products?
Microsoft needs to be forced to license Windows to other manufacturers.
They've had their monopoly too long.
SarahP
news:btetb3$eq$2...@News.Dal.Ca...
> Joe Schwartz (j...@joyrides.com) wrote:
> : c...@chebucto.ns.ca (Coaster Enthusiasts of Canada) wrote:
>
> : > Chris Simon (osia...@slcszetnet.co.uk) wrote:
> : >
> : > : MS's decision to freeze IE development (and basically kill it off)
is a
> : > : strange one. They are banking on everyone upgrading to Windows 2005
> : > : (whatever it's called) where the browsing technology will be
completely
> : > : integral to the OS, and of course it doesn't matter since they are
the
> : > : suppliers of the major desktop operating system.
> : >
> : > *** Ahh, but it does matter. That system will likely make it
virtually
> : > impossible for a user to employ a non-MS browser on such a setup.
>
> : It'll be no harder to use a non-MS browser than it is today. You really
> : should get a clue before spouting such nonsense.
>
> *** I was being speculative. MS seems to do everything it can to make
> competing software difficult to run.
>
What, specifically, have they done? I'm not saying they haven't, I'm just
wondering what you are referring to. I hear people make comments like this
all the time, but don't really understand the basis. I work in the software
industry in a technical capacity, so I understand technical explanations,
I've just never really heard one for this argument.
Thanks,
SarahP
David H.--REMOVE STOPSPAM to reply
Enthusiasts of Canada) wrote:
>Joe Schwartz (j...@joyrides.com) wrote:
>: c...@chebucto.ns.ca (Coaster Enthusiasts of Canada) wrote:
>
>: > Joe Schwartz (j...@joyrides.com) wrote:
>: > : I used Netscape for several
>: > : years before switching to IE, and I switched because Netscape crashed
>: > : on me several times a day.
>: >
>: > *** But was the reason for crashing that Netscape was running under
>: > Windows?
>
>: No, it was crashing because it was written poorly. Despite what you might
>: think, Windows rarely causes well-written programs to crash. However, it's
>: very good at exposing poorly written crap.
>
>*** I'm wondering if the Netscape version you were running was made
>for one version and then yuu ran it on an upgraded Windows.
No. It was actually the NETSCAPE upgrade that caused the problems.
When Netscape made the bold move to completely change the structure of
their browser back with the Communicator version (I believe), it worked
HORRIBLY with Windows.
Like Joe, I previously used Netscape for several years, if only to help
keep Micro$oft from dominating the software market. But that version of
Netscape worked HORRIBLY with Windows, and crashed all of the time. They
pretty much took a huge gamble and just about lost the farm.
This also happened at the absolute worst time for Netscape because it was
about that time that Internet Explorer got completely intertwined with
Windows.
And as much as I wanted to support Netscape, it wasn't worth the trouble
and CONSTANT hassles. And I never went back.
And a whole lot of people did the same thing, which is one of the big
reasons why Netscape is no longer the dominant web browser.
It's a shame, really. This was a major step towards Microsoft's complete
domination of the software market.
With Windows XP, we now have to call Microsoft and ask permission to use
the operating system we PAID for whenever we do major upgrades. (I just
had to do it this week, and it was a pain in the ass!) When you install
the latest version of Windows media player, you give them permission to do
ANYTHING they deem appropriate to supposedly protect copyrights, including
anything they may choose to do in the future. (It's right there in the
user agreement, if you don't believe me.) When you install MS Office 2003,
you give Microsoft permission to ALTER ANYTHING ON *YOUR* SYSTEM THAT THEY
CHOOSE, without any warning. And with the next version of Windows, any
software you want to use will have to be approved and licensed through
Microsoft to run on Windows. That's not Chicken-Little-like ranting.
That's the official public plan. Hopefully there will be enough of a
public outrage over that that they will stop it, but don't hold your
breath.
David Hamburger, davi...@STOPSPAMbellatlantic.net, Boston, MA
PLEASE remove "STOPSPAM" from my address when replying via e-mail.
"I think that gay marriage is something that
should be between a man and a woman,"
California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger
Wolf
> : > Netscape 6.
>
> *** I dislike websites which say to upgrade to `X' browser. It says to
> me "I am too lazy to make this page accessible to everyone." I usually
> send them a nasty note telling them to adhere to international
> accessibility standards.
Rich, if you had your way, all websites would be pure text and only in
phosphor green!
Joe Schwartz
> Joe Schwartz (j...@joyrides.com) wrote:
>
> : No, it was crashing because it was written poorly. Despite what you
> : might think, Windows rarely causes well-written programs to crash.
> : However, it's very good at exposing poorly written crap.
>
> *** I'm wondering if the Netscape version you were running was made
> for one version and then yuu ran it on an upgraded Windows.
Nope, I was running it on Windows 95, which was the predominant version
when Netscape 3.0 and 4.0 were released (8/96 and 6/97, respectively).
Joe Schwartz
> Joe Schwartz (j...@joyrides.com) wrote:
> : c...@chebucto.ns.ca (Coaster Enthusiasts of Canada) wrote:
>
> : > Chris Simon (osia...@slcszetnet.co.uk) wrote:
> : >
> : > : MS's decision to freeze IE development (and basically kill it off) is a
> : > : strange one. They are banking on everyone upgrading to Windows 2005
> : > : (whatever it's called) where the browsing technology will be completely
> : > : integral to the OS, and of course it doesn't matter since they are the
> : > : suppliers of the major desktop operating system.
> : >
> : > *** Ahh, but it does matter. That system will likely make it virtually
> : > impossible for a user to employ a non-MS browser on such a setup.
>
> : It'll be no harder to use a non-MS browser than it is today. You really
> : should get a clue before spouting such nonsense.
>
> *** I was being speculative.
In other words, you were spouting nonsense without having a clue.
> MS seems to do everything it can to make competing software difficult to run.
Such as?
> I'd be curious to see how it runs any of today's competing browsers.
Probably about as well as they're written to run.
> Will Microsoft force competing manufacturers to re-tool their products?
To run on the next version of Windows? No, Microsoft won't *force* anyone
to retool anything. They will probably try to support as much existing
hardware and software as possible, because they want to sell as many copies
as possible.
> Microsoft needs to be forced to license Windows to other manufacturers.
> They've had their monopoly too long.
Spoken like a true socialist. You imagine force where none exists, and you
advocate using government force to address your imagined force, supposedly
to benefit the "collective good".
Joe Schwartz
wrote:
> And with the next version of Windows, any software you want to use will
> have to be approved and licensed through Microsoft to run on Windows.
Wrong. Like Richard, you're speaking from ignorance.
> That's not Chicken-Little-like ranting. That's the official public plan.
Nope. The next version of Windows will include a new security platform
(formerly code-named Palladium) that will give users the choice to run
trusted applications in a new extra-secure mode. It will not prevent users
from running untrusted applications. More information can be found here:
http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/features/2002/jul02/0724palladiumwp.asp
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/news/NGSCB.asp
Here's a short quote from the second article above:
> Q: I have heard that NGSCB will force people to run only Microsoft-
> approved software.
>
> A: This is simply not true. The nexus-aware security chip (the SSC) and
> other NGSCB features are not involved in the boot process of the operating
> system or in its decision to load an application that does not use the
> nexus. Because the nexus is not involved in the boot process, it cannot
> block an operating system or drivers or any nexus-unaware PC application
> from running. Only the user decides what nexus-aware applications get to
> run. Anyone can write an application to take advantage of new APIs that
> call to the nexus and related components without notifying Microsoft or
> getting Microsoft's approval.
Worlds Apart...
> > Drinking around the world?
> I do that
>
> > MK came first.
> I knew that
>
> > ...and then the 'wired in' My Pal Mickey interactive plush
> Didn't know that, I'll have to get one next time I'm there. Does it work
> for every park? What's the low-down?
>
> Chester "learned something new about WDW" Bell
I really don't know much about it. It's a Mickey Plush or a Pooh Plush
for now I guess.. and it can be programmed somehow to tell you show
times and some other things in the MK. Such as Fast Pass return times,
show times, food reservations, park trivia, kid entertaining stuff too I
guess. It also tracks you around the park for Disney's marketing and
operations/crowd control and future ideas for the park based on Guest
patterns and other graphs of behavior. I'm not sure if it's made for
Epcot, Disney/MGM or DAK yet.
There is probably far proper information on Pal Mickey at Disney.com I
guess. Or ask a few questions in Rec.arts.disney.parks or
alt.disney.disneyworld
JCookRPH
>Date: 1/7/2004 12:43 AM Eastern Standard Time
>I really don't know much about it. It's a Mickey Plush or a Pooh Plush
>for now I guess.. and it can be programmed somehow to tell you show
>times and some other things in the MK. Such as Fast Pass return times,
>show times, food reservations, park trivia, kid entertaining stuff too I
>guess. It also tracks you around the park for Disney's marketing and
>operations/crowd control and future ideas for the park based on Guest
>patterns and other graphs of behavior. I'm not sure if it's made for
>Epcot, Disney/MGM or DAK yet.
>There is probably far proper information on Pal Mickey at Disney.com I
>guess. Or ask a few questions in Rec.arts.disney.parks or
>alt.disney.disneyworld
>
If you don't know, then why did you make something up?
Pal Mickey is available for all 4 parks. He uses Infrared to receive
information about where he is and he will tell you rides that have short lines.
His nose is the infrared sensor. He also tells you when shows are getting
ready to start. There are also games you can play with him, like he will say a
ride, and you have to choose which park it is in by either squeezing his hands
or his tummy.
You can rent him or buy him for $50.
You can play the games even when not in the parks, but some of the games will
play different when he is in a park.
I don't recall seeing a Pooh, but I haven't been there since Dec. and I don't
know if he can be tracked by Disney. I won't speculate on that.
Dave Althoff Jr
: Dave Althoff Jr (dal...@gcfn.org) wrote:
: : Wolf (bus...@adelphia.net) wrote:
: : : > Question about that browser usage statistic...
: : : >
: : : > Does AOL identify itself as IE? And what happens when AOL switches to
: : : > Mozilla?
: : : >
: : : > How many of those IE users are really using Opera but haven't changed the
: : : > user agent string?
: : : Opera can also spoof Mozilla/Netscape, can't it?
: : Yeah, just hit F12 and pick from a list. What I found was that if I left
: : it to spoof IE, it would frequently crash on ad banners and on sites
: : trying to do IE-specific stuff.
: (Snip)
: :
: : --Dave Althoff, Jr.
: *** Would not a better term be "impersonate"? Does Opera use the word
: "spoof"?
In normal standard written english, "impersonate" might be a better term,
although Opera really doesn't impersonate the other browsers, it just
borrows their name tags. From an Internet point of view, Google comes up
with this definition for "spoof":
spoof - 1) To deceive for the purpose of gaining access to
someone else's resources (for example, to fake an
Internet address so that one looks like a certain
kind of Internet user or server)
2) To simulate a communications protocol by a program
that is interjected into a normal sequence of processes
for the purpose of adding some useful function
(www.ncipher.com/investors/glossary.php)
...which is a pretty good description of what Opera is doing...it's
attempting to fool the web server into thinking it is IE or Mozilla or
whatever so that the "only viewable with X browser" pages can be accessed.
Dave Althoff Jr
: > *** I was being speculative. MS seems to do everything it can to make
: > competing software difficult to run.
: >
: What, specifically, have they done? I'm not saying they haven't, I'm just
: wondering what you are referring to. I hear people make comments like this
: all the time, but don't really understand the basis. I work in the software
: industry in a technical capacity, so I understand technical explanations,
: I've just never really heard one for this argument.
The only argument I have heard that makes sense has to do with Microsoft
supplying inaccurate developer kits to Word Perfect back when Windows 3
was being released, so that Word Perfect 5 for Windows was essentially
dead on arrival, and Word Perfect didn't know about it until the product
shipped. That was all fixed in WP 7, but by that time anybody who had
switched to Windows had also switched to MS Word...which compared to Word
Perfect was a lousy program, but at least it worked.
How true is the story? I honestly don't know. It could be an urban
legend. But I have seen first-hand what Microsoft does to Opera users who
visit their web sites, so it is obvious that Microsoft hates competition.
Coaster Enthusiasts of Canada
: On Tue, 6 Jan 2004 18:00:08 +0000 (UTC), c...@chebucto.ns.ca (Coaster
: Enthusiasts of Canada) wrote:
: >Joe Schwartz (j...@joyrides.com) wrote:
: >: c...@chebucto.ns.ca (Coaster Enthusiasts of Canada) wrote:
: >
: >: > Joe Schwartz (j...@joyrides.com) wrote:
: >: > : I used Netscape for several
: >: > : years before switching to IE, and I switched because Netscape crashed
: >: > : on me several times a day.
: >: >
: >*** I'm wondering if the Netscape version you were running was made
: >for one version and then yuu ran it on an upgraded Windows.
: No. It was actually the NETSCAPE upgrade that caused the problems.
: Like Joe, I previously used Netscape for several years, if only to help
: keep Micro$oft from dominating the software market. But that version of
: Netscape worked HORRIBLY with Windows, and crashed all of the time. They
: pretty much took a huge gamble and just about lost the farm.
: This also happened at the absolute worst time for Netscape because it was
: about that time that Internet Explorer got completely intertwined with
: Windows.
*** Yeah, and the governing body did essentially nothing to stop it.
: And as much as I wanted to support Netscape, it wasn't worth the trouble
: and CONSTANT hassles. And I never went back.
*** Have you tried the latest Netscape 7? It seems greatly improved. I
noticed it seems to display tables properly now. What about Netscape's
off-spring, Mozilla?
: With Windows XP, we now have to call Microsoft and ask permission to use
: the operating system we PAID for whenever we do major upgrades. (I just
: had to do it this week, and it was a pain in the ass!) When you install
: the latest version of Windows media player, you give them permission to do
: ANYTHING they deem appropriate to supposedly protect copyrights, including
: anything they may choose to do in the future. (It's right there in the
: user agreement, if you don't believe me.) When you install MS Office 2003,
: you give Microsoft permission to ALTER ANYTHING ON *YOUR* SYSTEM THAT THEY
: CHOOSE, without any warning. And with the next version of Windows, any
: software you want to use will have to be approved and licensed through
: Microsoft to run on Windows. That's not Chicken-Little-like ranting.
: That's the official public plan. Hopefully there will be enough of a
: public outrage over that that they will stop it, but don't hold your
: breath.
:
: David Hamburger
*** That's what monopoly brings. Microsoft is the robber baron of the
21st century.
Coaster Enthusiasts of Canada
: > : > haha.. I get that too. It says Safari (greatest browser ever) is
: -Wolf
*** Not quite. If I (and many others, by the way*) had my way, all
websites would display properly on all browsers, on all platforms. As for
text browsers, they have a huge number of advantages - so many that I'd
say 80 or more percent of my browsing is done on one.
I should also point out that contrary to popular belief, text browsing
is not necessarily monochrome and is not limited to non-bold text,
non-titled screens.
As for graphics, I have four large *graphical* websites. All of them
display properly on as many browsers as I can find on as many platforms
as I can eek out. The only problem comes with those whom use large text
size as their defaults. Layout problems can occur then. Still, my pages
display for those whom are handicapped, those surfing in graphics-off
mode, and those on pure text browsers. If I, an amateur web page
designer, can do it, why can't others?
Richard Bonner
Managing Director:
The Coaster Enthusiasts of Canada
www.CEC.chebucto.org
(*) You may wish to see: http://www.anybrowser.org
Coaster Enthusiasts of Canada
: c...@chebucto.ns.ca (Coaster Enthusiasts of Canada) wrote:
: > Joe Schwartz (j...@joyrides.com) wrote:
: >
: > : No, it was crashing because it was written poorly. Despite what you
: > : might think, Windows rarely causes well-written programs to crash.
: > : However, it's very good at exposing poorly written crap.
: >
: > *** I'm wondering if the Netscape version you were running was made
: > for one version and then yuu ran it on an upgraded Windows.
: Nope, I was running it on Windows 95, which was the predominant version
: when Netscape 3.0 and 4.0 were released (8/96 and 6/97, respectively).
*** OK. I'm just trying to get a feel for that, becuase I only ever ran
IE, and Opera for a little bit, when I had Windows.
Coaster Enthusiasts of Canada
: > Joe Schwartz (j...@joyrides.com) wrote:
: > : c...@chebucto.ns.ca (Coaster Enthusiasts of Canada) wrote:
: >
(Re: New Windows Version)
: > : > *** That system will likely make it virtually
: > : > impossible for a user to employ a non-MS browser on such a setup.
: >
: > : It'll be no harder to use a non-MS browser than it is today. You really
: > : should get a clue before spouting such nonsense.
: >
: > *** I was being speculative.
: In other words, you were spouting nonsense without having a clue.
*** Well, given MS' past performance, there are clues there. (-:
: > MS seems to do everything it can to make competing software difficult
: > to run.
: Such as?
*** Go back to the early 1990's and open a WP document in WORD. Do the
same thing now. Open a 1-2-3 spreadsheet in Excel - do that now, and on &
on. I even have an ad somewhere where MS *bragged* about being able to
open competing softwares' documents on its systems. Now they constantly
change the codes to make it more & more diffiucult for anyone not using MS
products to deal with any competing softwares' documents. Heck, one can't
even open up old *MS* documents on modern *MS* software.
: > I'd be curious to see how it runs any of today's competing browsers.
: Probably about as well as they're written to run.
: > Will Microsoft force competing manufacturers to re-tool their products?
: To run on the next version of Windows? No, Microsoft won't *force* anyone
: to retool anything. They will probably try to support as much existing
: hardware and software as possible, because they want to sell as many copies
: as possible.
*** I can't agree. They want everyone to use MS software exclusively,
not competing companies' ones.
: > Microsoft needs to be forced to license Windows to other manufacturers.
: > They've had their monopoly too long.
: Spoken like a true socialist. You imagine force where none exists, and you
: advocate using government force to address your imagined force, supposedly
: to benefit the "collective good".
*** Force does exist, Joe. If one wants to buy a competing Windows OS,
it can't be done. They must buy it from MS. I have to see if I can locate
the article which discusses how MS has ruined innovation and steered the
public in one direction - its direction.
Government officials think there is force, but can't break the MS
lobbyists. MS needs to be broken up like ATT.
David H.--REMOVE STOPSPAM to reply
>c...@chebucto.ns.ca (Coaster Enthusiasts of Canada) wrote:
>> Will Microsoft force competing manufacturers to re-tool their products?
>
>To run on the next version of Windows? No, Microsoft won't *force* anyone
>to retool anything. They will probably try to support as much existing
>hardware and software as possible, because they want to sell as many copies
>as possible.
Actually, in order for any software to work in the next version of Windows,
it will have to be licensed to Microsoft. If it isn't, then Windows won't
allow it to run. And there will be a fee involved with the license.
This also means that old software very likely won't work, unless Microsoft
gets enough complaints to include it. After all, if the company goes out
of business, then there is no one to pay the licensing fee. And companies
are not likely to pay the fees for old software that they are no longer
making any money on. And when customers complain, they'll rightfully tell
them to blame Microsoft.
Techies are already warning people to make sure they keep a backup hard
drive with an older version of Windows on it when the next version of it
comes out. (Also, the ability to do this is included in MS Office 2003, in
which you give Microsoft the right to alter your system and hard drive in
any way they desire, including deleting files from it!) Luckily, the next
version won't be out until at least 2006. However, they might try to slip
in into one of the updates, like they did with Media Player, with which you
allow Microsoft to use ANY anti-piracy methods they choose at any time in
the future.
They are claiming that these features are for the purposes of stopping
piracy, But it's also convenient that the software licenses will be a huge
revenue stream for them.
All I can say is that if my Pro Pinball games don't work, I'm gonna be
pissed! ;-)
Oh, and to bring this on-topic, don't expect to be able to play ANY of
today's coaster games on Windows 2006 (or whatever they call it.) Well,
maybe the RCT series, since they've made enough money on those to pay the
license fees. But don't hold your breath on much else.
Chris Simon
> Rich, if you had your way, all websites would be pure text and only in
> phosphor green!
An urban myth! You can have beautiful, graphical web sites and still
have them completely accessible to everyone. IF you follow all the
guidelines.
I'm doing an experiment with my folk dance web site
(http://www.dawnswyrdelyn.org.uk/). Not completely sure of the actual
design - artistic design is not my forte! However, it's done in XHTML
1.1 Strict and CSS2, no tables for layout or frames, and conforms to
Bobby level AAA accessibility. It works flawlessly in all browsers I
have tested (graphical Windows ones, text ones, Atari ones...) except
Netscape 4.79 (all the experts are in agreement that it's time to lay
this one to rest), and strangely enough IE 6.0. That browser doesn't
fully support positioning in CSS2 so I've put in a Javascript hack to
make it at least readable, and it also has a problem with margns on boxes.
--
Chris Simon
osia...@slcszetnet.co.uk
http://www.users.zetnet.co.uk/csimon/
** Get rid of all SLCs to reply directly **
David H.--REMOVE STOPSPAM to reply
Don't be so sure that this is actually what will happen.
They've had a firestorm of controversy in the industry about NGSCB. They
announced their original plans to developers a while back.
For now, they seem to be backing down. But don't be so sure that that will
continue.
Look at the license agreements of both Office 2003 and the latest version
of Media Player (v.9, I believe), where users basically have already given
Microsoft the rights to do what people have claimed that they are planning
to do.
And what about old software that doesn't take this nexus into account?
By the way, Joe, have you yet had the joy of having to spend 10+ minutes on
the phone with Microsoft explaining why you put new hardware in your
computer, and reading off very long series of numbers from and into your
computer? Such a joy. It made me wish I was using a pirated installation
of Windows.
Joe Schwartz
wrote:
> And what about old software that doesn't take this nexus into account?
It will continue to run in an untrusted mode.
> By the way, Joe, have you yet had the joy of having to spend 10+ minutes
> on the phone with Microsoft explaining why you put new hardware in your
> computer, and reading off very long series of numbers from and into your
> computer?
Nope. I've had to activate Windows XP several times after adding new
hardware, but I never had to talk to a live person. Either it activated
over the Internet (5 seconds), or I had to call an automated phone system
(5 minutes at most).
Joe Schwartz
> *** Go back to the early 1990's and open a WP document in WORD. Do the
> same thing now. Open a 1-2-3 spreadsheet in Excel - do that now, and on &
> on. I even have an ad somewhere where MS *bragged* about being able to
> open competing softwares' documents on its systems. Now they constantly
> change the codes to make it more & more diffiucult for anyone not using MS
> products to deal with any competing softwares' documents. Heck, one can't
> even open up old *MS* documents on modern *MS* software.
Seriously, Richard, I don't know where you come up with this stuff. My
installation of Word 2000 can open WordPerfect 5.0 and 6.0 documents, and
Excel 2000 can open 1-2-3 documents, and they can both open documents from
old Microsoft programs. Granted, they don't support *every* old version of
*every* obsolete product, but neither does anyone else.
I'll help you out here. The argument that you should be making is that
Microsoft often makes it difficult for competing programs to open Microsoft
documents. That at least would be a reasonable complaint.
> : > Will Microsoft force competing manufacturers to re-tool their products?
>
> : To run on the next version of Windows? No, Microsoft won't *force* anyone
> : to retool anything. They will probably try to support as much existing
> : hardware and software as possible, because they want to sell as many copies
> : as possible.
>
> *** I can't agree. They want everyone to use MS software exclusively,
> not competing companies' ones.
True enough, but they won't force anyone to do anything. If companies want
to take advantage of new features in Windows, then they will have to decide
whether it's worth their time and money to retool their products. Some may
choose not to. None will be forced to.
> *** Force does exist, Joe. If one wants to buy a competing Windows OS,
> it can't be done. They must buy it from MS.
Let me get this straight. Are you complaining that no competing company
produces the exact same product as Windows? I hope not, because that
complaint would be silly. That would be like me complaining that I can't
buy a 911 Turbo built by anyone but Porsche.
Or are you instead complaining that no competing company produces an OS
with a similar window-based user interface? I guess Mac, Linux, and all
the other UNIX variants don't count?
But hey, let's imagine a world where Microsoft makes the only OS on earth.
They still can't *force* you to use it. Nobody is even forcing you to use
a computer in the first place. When you *choose* to use a computer, you
take into account the expected benefits (time saved, access to info, etc)
and weigh them against the expected costs (time lost, money spent, etc).
You are free to decide that the costs of using a Microsoft OS outweigh the
benefits, and therefore choose not to use a computer at all. Force is not
a factor.
> I have to see if I can locate the article which discusses how MS has
> ruined innovation and steered the public in one direction - its direction.
I've already read it. How does it support your claim that Microsoft uses
force?
> Government officials think there is force, but can't break the MS
> lobbyists. MS needs to be broken up like ATT.
Mainly, it's Microsoft's competitors who complain that there's force. It's
unfortunate that such losers in the marketplace resort to using government
force instead of spending their energy producing better products.
Joe Schwartz
wrote:
> Actually, in order for any software to work in the next version of Windows,
> it will have to be licensed to Microsoft. If it isn't, then Windows won't
> allow it to run. And there will be a fee involved with the license.
As I mentioned elsewhere in the thread, this is completely false.
Wolf
> supplying inaccurate developer kits to Word Perfect back when Windows 3
> was being released, so that Word Perfect 5 for Windows was essentially
> dead on arrival, and Word Perfect didn't know about it until the product
> shipped. That was all fixed in WP 7, but by that time anybody who had
> switched to Windows had also switched to MS Word...which compared to Word
> Perfect was a lousy program, but at least it worked.
>
> How true is the story? I honestly don't know. It could be an urban
> legend. But I have seen first-hand what Microsoft does to Opera users who
> visit their web sites, so it is obvious that Microsoft hates competition.
Is this that 5 -> 6 version switch thing?
It should be noted that the page in question did work correctly for Opera 5,
which had a buggy CSS render. The snooper failed to detect a version change
and sent Opera 6 to Opera 5's page.
Wolf
> 21st century.
You are aware of who the robber barons were robbing *from*, right? I could
justify Nike as a robber baron, or maybe Wal-Mart, but I'm not sure
Microsoft really fits that bill.
Cut-throat, maybe.
Swervo
> davidhhh...@bellatlantic.net (David H.--REMOVE "STOPSPAM" to reply)
> wrote:
>
>
>>And what about old software that doesn't take this nexus into account?
>
>
> It will continue to run in an untrusted mode.
>
>
>>By the way, Joe, have you yet had the joy of having to spend 10+ minutes
>>on the phone with Microsoft explaining why you put new hardware in your
>>computer, and reading off very long series of numbers from and into your
>>computer?
>
>
> Nope. I've had to activate Windows XP several times after adding new
> hardware, but I never had to talk to a live person. Either it activated
> over the Internet (5 seconds), or I had to call an automated phone system
> (5 minutes at most).
>
Which, in both cases, is something you shouldn't have to do. There's a
reason I still run Win2K on my machine, and won't be going to XP Home
ever. I don't even run the new Media Player, I just use some other
assorted goodies for videos.
I like tinkering with my machine, and regularly change out parts. The
ONLY reason I have Windows is so I can play games, and I don't consider
that important enough to have to contact Microsoft every time I want to
mess with *my* computer.
Swervo
> *** Not quite. If I (and many others, by the way*) had my way, all
> websites would display properly on all browsers, on all platforms. As for
> text browsers, they have a huge number of advantages - so many that I'd
> say 80 or more percent of my browsing is done on one.
>
> I should also point out that contrary to popular belief, text browsing
> is not necessarily monochrome and is not limited to non-bold text,
> non-titled screens.
>
> As for graphics, I have four large *graphical* websites. All of them
> display properly on as many browsers as I can find on as many platforms
> as I can eek out. The only problem comes with those whom use large text
> size as their defaults. Layout problems can occur then. Still, my pages
> display for those whom are handicapped, those surfing in graphics-off
> mode, and those on pure text browsers. If I, an amateur web page
> designer, can do it, why can't others?
>
>
> Richard Bonner
When I first got to my company, I was the only person there not using
IE for browsing. I can't believe how many problems I found with the
site, mostly sloppy code that IE would handle correctly, but any
browser that followed HTML standards would have real issues with.
Thankfully, the rest of webdev and QA have finally installed Firebird
at least, so they can check to see what's going on. Unfortunately,
due to some regulations out of our control, we still have to have
ActiveX on the registration routine, but Moz/Firebird/NS users can
download client software to register instead.
ricky_summersett
<JesusWas...@Bla.com> wrote:
>NoGodForMe - Letting everyone know it's ok to not believe in god
I used to not believe in God. Prior to 1988 I was an atheist, drug
addict and wanted nothing to do with Jesus Christ. Many of my friends
were experimenting with black arts & satanism.
A long story short, God revealed his reality to me in a powerful way
by delivering me of cocaine addiction instantly after just asking him
if he was real.
After that I made lots of open-minded study of the bible to see if
these 66 books could possibly be true. What I found was an
overwhelming amount of evidence that supports the truth of the
scriptures we posess today. Archeological, literary, scientific, and
most importantly, life experiental evidence of millions & millions of
people fully support not only the existence of God, but the truth
which is found in the scriptures concerning the way to eternal &
abundant life through Jesus Christ & what he did on the cross.
>or practice religion, which is the root of all evil.
Personally, religion turns me off. Jesus hated religion. It was normal
for him to be found hanging out with the sinners, tax collectors &
prostitutes, the poor & the destitute. He despised and rebuked the
legalistic religious leaders of his day.
The "root of all evil," a statement borrowed from the bible is, in
fact, loving money. 1 Timothy 6:10 states; "The love of money is the
root of all kinds of evil." (NIV)
I would agree with this whether I was a follower of Jesus or not.
>In case you haven't noticed, there is a movement in the USA to do away
>with Christianity.
Really? They better try hard!
Lets look at this greatly-summarized history lesson from China. In
1949 the nation turned into a communist state. Chairman Mao Zedong
during his Cultural Revolution (66-76) decided that he would
erradicate all religion (christian & other) as well as intelectuals &
anyone else that was decided to be a threat to the countrie's
restructuring. Quickly all missionaries were ejected, churches,
mosques, temples were closed & bulldozed, christians & people of other
religions were murdered by the hundreds of thousands if they would not
turn away from their faith. For a long, long time Mao & his gov. tried
intensively to cleanse China of anything christian or religious. All
people were required to bow down before images and statues of the
"great chairman Mao". The believers had to meet in secret (which they
still do). Guess what? Mao DIED (I've seen his preserved body in
Tienamen Square). His cultural revolution DIED. The comparitively
small number of christians prior to the communist takeover EXPLODED!
Today, an estimated 1/3 of the almost 1.5 billion people of China are
followers of Jesus. A mighty multiplication of the people of God
happened during the dark years of Mao & his "cleansing of the nation."
The number of Christians increased exponentially and continues at an
incredible rate today (estimated 10-30,000 conversions DAILY). In
spite of the oppression of the communist government the church in
China continues to grow & grow. Persecution of christians has
historically caused the numbers of believers to drastically increase,
not just in this example from China, but many other oppressed
countries as well.
Why? Because Jesus said in Matthew 16:18 that "...I will build my
church, and even the gates of hell will not overcome it!"
In the book of acts we see the church growing in spite of severe
efforts to eliminate it.
Surely the movement you describe above in the U.S. to "do away with
christianity" cannot be as intense as the communist takeover of China
described above. Elimination of all religious groups has always been
the ultimate aim of the Marxist government, but the God you say is not
real has other plans when it comes to man's feeble attempts to
eliminate his truth here on the earth.
>In the past, Christians shoved religion down the
>throats of everyone.
Shoving anything down anyone's throat is just wrong. Jesus never did
this and neither should any human being. God wants you to decide for
him or against him. He is pro-choice! Choose his love & salvation or
reject it, but don't shove it down anyone's throat.
>If you didn't believe in their god, then you're
>going to hell. Well, I'm here to let everyone know that's not true.
>People in the USA no longer hide their true feelings about the
>subject. If we don't believe, we're not scared to say it.
Great! I'm glad your not scared to say it! You shouldn't be! You
should stand up for what you believe in! I respect those who take
their beliefs so seriously as to proclaim them boldly!
Way too many who call themselves christians are sheepish and timid
when it comes to the command and commission that Jesus gave to "preach
the gospel to all of creation." (Mark 18)
If you really, really believe something is the truth then you should
be on your rooftops shouting it at the top of you lungs! (Figuratively
speaking)
Don't many of us just start GUSHING when a conversation about our
favorite roller coasters is taking place? I know I do!
The unfortunate thing for you, NoGodForMe, is that what you say you
don't believe about God is the most dangerous & deadly lie any person
will ever be confronted with.
Ricky Summersett
"have a Good Day and be happy go ride a Ride that make you happy and yell." Kenny, June 7th, 2003
Todd Long
I understands how threads drift away slowly from the original subject,
those would be hard to change but this post is entirely about a
different thing.
You changed the subject to read WAY O.T.! Why not change the rest?
This kinda reminds me of the simpsons episode where the boys are at a
fair and the see a booth giving away "Free Trading Cards" The kids
haul ass over all excited and then scream and run cause they are Bible
cards. I'm sure Flanders was manning the booth.
That all said Ricky's testimonial/post was presented well and open
minded.
Todd "what about the dinosaurs?" Long
"You know, there's a million fine looking women
in the world, dude. But they don't all bring you
lasagna at work. Most of 'em just cheat on you."
- Silent Bob
Coaster Enthusiasts of Canada
: "Coaster Enthusiasts of Canada" <c...@chebucto.ns.ca> wrote in message
: > *** MS seems to do everything it can to make
: > competing software difficult to run.
: What, specifically, have they done? I'm not saying they haven't, I'm just
: wondering what you are referring to. I hear people make comments like this
: all the time, but don't really understand the basis. I work in the software
: industry in a technical capacity, so I understand technical explanations,
: I've just never really heard one for this argument.
:
: SarahP
*** I grabbed these URLs from my Bookmark file. I am not sure they are
suitable to answer your question, Sarah, because I have not checked them
out in some time. Have a look, anyway.
http://www.vcnet.com/bms/departments/notinvented.html
http://www.vcnet.com/bms/departments/dirtytricks.shtml
http://www.vcnet.com/bms/features/rohm.shtml
http://www.vcnet.com/bms/features/noinnovation.shtml
http://pub4.ezboard.com/fiwetheyopenforumnew12171999.showMessage?topicID=107.topic
http://www.jas.com/shame/shame/casestudies.html
http://linuxtoday.com/stories/11954.html
Coaster Enthusiasts of Canada
: : Dave Althoff Jr (dal...@gcfn.org) wrote:
: : : Wolf (bus...@adelphia.net) wrote:
: : : Yeah, just hit F12 and pick from a list. What I found was that if
: : : I left it to spoof IE, it would frequently crash on ad banners and
: : : on sites trying to do IE-specific stuff.
: : (Snip)
: : :
: : : --Dave Althoff, Jr.
: : *** Would not a better term be "impersonate"? Does Opera use the word
: : "spoof"?
: In normal standard written english, "impersonate" might be a better term,
: although Opera really doesn't impersonate the other browsers, it just
: borrows their name tags. From an Internet point of view, Google comes up
: with this definition for "spoof":
: spoof - 1) To deceive for the purpose of gaining access to
: someone else's resources (for example, to fake an
: Internet address so that one looks like a certain
: kind of Internet user or server)
: 2) To simulate a communications protocol by a program
: that is interjected into a normal sequence of processes
: for the purpose of adding some useful function
: (www.ncipher.com/investors/glossary.php)
: ...which is a pretty good description of what Opera is doing...it's
: attempting to fool the web server into thinking it is IE or Mozilla or
: whatever so that the "only viewable with X browser" pages can be accessed.
: --Dave Althoff, Jr.
*** OK. It just bothered me because the common usage of "spoof" is to
make fun of a subject, trend, or similar.
Coaster Enthusiasts of Canada
: : > *** ...MS seems to do everything it can to make
: : > competing software difficult to run.
: : What, specifically, have they done?
: The only argument I have heard that makes sense has to do with Microsoft
: supplying inaccurate developer kits to Word Perfect back when Windows 3
: was being released, so that Word Perfect 5 for Windows was essentially
: dead on arrival, and Word Perfect didn't know about it until the product
: shipped. That was all fixed in WP 7, but by that time anybody who had
: switched to Windows had also switched to MS Word...which compared to Word
: Perfect was a lousy program, but at least it worked.
:
: How true is the story? I honestly don't know. It could be an urban
: legend.
*** I have heard similar reports regarding MS software for Macintosh
not performing as it should.
: But I have seen first-hand what Microsoft does to Opera users who
: visit their web sites, so it is obvious that Microsoft hates competition.
:
: --Dave Althoff, Jr.
*** I have been trying to locate the website where the sitemaster
opens the site, or at least a sub-page, with a short rant against IE. It
was something about it punishing those not using IE and him not wanting to
bother to try to code the page so it won't cause problems. I think it's
a roller coaster site, actually. If I can locate it again, I will post the
URL here.
Coaster Enthusiasts of Canada
: Wolf wrote:
: > Rich, if you had your way, all websites would be pure text and only in
: > phosphor green!
: An urban myth! You can have beautiful, graphical web sites and still
: have them completely accessible to everyone. IF you follow all the
: guidelines.
*** I agree, Chris, and my four websites prove that. It takes only a few
extra minutes to add code which all browsers can access. Commercial sites
need to take note of that. I have been notified of several sites which
are not accessible at all to the handicapped and their translation
software. I went on them with Lynx and can't view them, either. All I
saw were blank pages. )-: What horrible sites!
: I'm doing an experiment with my folk dance web site
: (http://www.dawnswyrdelyn.org.uk/). Not completely sure of the actual
: design - artistic design is not my forte! However, it's done in XHTML
: 1.1 Strict and CSS2, no tables for layout or frames, and conforms to
: Bobby level AAA accessibility. It works flawlessly in all browsers I
: have tested (graphical Windows ones, text ones, Atari ones...) except
: Netscape 4.79 (all the experts are in agreement that it's time to lay
: this one to rest), and strangely enough IE 6.0. That browser doesn't
: fully support positioning in CSS2 so I've put in a Javascript hack to
: make it at least readable, and it also has a problem with margns on boxes.
: --
: Chris Simon
*** I will give the site a whirl and send you a Lynx report via e-mail.
Todd Long
<long...@XXXearthlink.net> wrote:
>I understands how
I've been around my customers way too long obviously.
Todd "quart of Natty Ice" Long
Coaster Enthusiasts of Canada
: Look at the license agreements of both Office 2003 and the latest version
: of Media Player (v.9, I believe), where users basically have already given
: Microsoft the rights to do what people have claimed that they are planning
: to do.
: And what about old software that doesn't take this nexus into account?
*** ...and those not connected to The Internet? Try to run any of that
stuff without an Internet account and see what happens.
I have a retired friend. He was an accountant and ran a home business.
For security purposes, his Internet machine was separate from anything
else he ran. He was unable to run any of the latest software because the
accounting machines were not on-line. When he installed it on the Internet
machine and saw what was happening, he unplugged the Internet connection,
uninstalled the software and returned it to the store.
: By the way, Joe, have you yet had the joy of having to spend 10+ minutes on
: the phone with Microsoft explaining why you put new hardware in your
: computer, and reading off very long series of numbers from and into your
: computer? Such a joy. It made me wish I was using a pirated installation
: of Windows.
:
: David Hamburger
*** MS crap has made others switch to Linux. See:
http://linux.bryanconsulting.com/stories/storyReader$172
Keith Hopkins
> I have a retired friend. He was an accountant and ran a home business.
> For security purposes, his Internet machine was separate from anything
> else he ran. He was unable to run any of the latest software because the
> accounting machines were not on-line. When he installed it on the Internet
> machine and saw what was happening, he unplugged the Internet connection,
> uninstalled the software and returned it to the store.
Is this common in Canada? In the US, it's damn near impossible to return
software once opened.
--
Keith Hopkins
suss...@visi.comblock (clear the block to reply)
"If Disney had its way, at the end of every DVD the player would
connect to the internet and dump you in a gift shop."
Stolen from a Slashdot thread
Coaster Enthusiasts of Canada
: c...@chebucto.ns.ca (Coaster Enthusiasts of Canada) wrote:
: > *** Go back to the early 1990's and open a WP document in WORD. Do the
: > same thing now. Open a 1-2-3 spreadsheet in Excel - do that now, and on &
: > on. I even have an ad somewhere where MS *bragged* about being able to
: > open competing softwares' documents on its systems. Now they constantly
: > change the codes to make it more & more diffiucult for anyone not using MS
: > products to deal with any competing softwares' documents. Heck, one can't
: > even open up old *MS* documents on modern *MS* software.
: Seriously, Richard, I don't know where you come up with this stuff.
*** It comes from my own experience and from those to whom I have sent
WP documents which they were unable to open. Conversely, I can not open
any newer WORD documents in WordPerfect 5 or 6, nor will any of my file
readers view them properly, if at all.
: My
: installation of Word 2000 can open WordPerfect 5.0 and 6.0 documents, and
: Excel 2000 can open 1-2-3 documents, and they can both open documents from
: old Microsoft programs. Granted, they don't support *every* old version of
: *every* obsolete product, but neither does anyone else.
*** I don't expect that they would. I also understand if an old
program opens a new document with a new feature that that new feature
will not render properly. However, what I am talking about are programs
which refuse to open certain documents at all.
: I'll help you out here. The argument that you should be making is that
: Microsoft often makes it difficult for competing programs to open Microsoft
: documents. That at least would be a reasonable complaint.
*** I also make that argument because I and others have had that
experience. My point is that at the time before MS dominance, that was not
the case.
: > *** They want everyone to use MS software exclusively, not
: > competing companies' ones.
: True enough, but they won't force anyone to do anything. If companies want
: to take advantage of new features in Windows, then they will have to decide
: whether it's worth their time and money to retool their products. Some may
: choose not to. None will be forced to.
*** It's not about new features as it is whether their older versions
will continue to run properly on the new Windows. MS would prefer they
didn't in hopes those users would become MS customers. If other
manufacturers were allowed to make Windows, they would see to it that
this did not happen. MS would have to comply in order to keep its market
share. In the monopoly world, this need not happen.
: > *** Force does exist, Joe. If one wants to buy a competing Windows OS,
: > it can't be done. They must buy it from MS.
: Let me get this straight. Are you complaining that no competing company
: produces the exact same product as Windows? I hope not, because that
: complaint would be silly. That would be like me complaining that I can't
: buy a 911 Turbo built by anyone but Porsche.
*** That is *exactly* my complaint. An operating system is the
basis of computer software. The public can only choose a *Microsoft*
Windows, not a competitor's. It was not that way when DOS was king. Those
DOS competitors kept Microsoft on its toes and thus advanced innovation.
: Or are you instead complaining that no competing company produces an OS
: with a similar window-based user interface? I guess Mac, Linux, and all
: the other UNIX variants don't count?
*** They do count, but they are not an exact clone, and as such do not
and are not allowed to act the exact same way. Those clones run under
other operating systems, and are not the OSes itself.
: But hey, let's imagine a world where Microsoft makes the only OS on earth.
: They still can't *force* you to use it.
*** If one wants to compute, they would be essentially forced to use the
MS product.
: Nobody is even forcing you to use a computer in the first place.
*** Given that the computer is the way of the industrialised world, we
are forced to use one. Computers are in every facet of modern life.
: When you *choose* to use a computer, you
: take into account the expected benefits (time saved, access to info, etc)
: and weigh them against the expected costs (time lost, money spent, etc).
: You are free to decide that the costs of using a Microsoft OS outweigh the
: benefits, and therefore choose not to use a computer at all. Force is not
: a factor.
*** I'm sorry, Joe, I just can't agree.
: > I have to see if I can locate the article which discusses how MS has
: > ruined innovation and steered the public in one direction - its direction.
: I've already read it. How does it support your claim that Microsoft uses
: force?
*** Because by removing choice, users must use the MS product. Now, that
is changing as Linux is gaining ground, but the general public still only
sees Windows software in the computer stores and Windows & its software is
the only thing being taught at comnpyuter schools for the most part. At
one time schools here taught several systems, now I only see MS suystems
in the schools. Where is the choice? My local library went to an MS search
system which is asolutely horrible. The old one was fime but they were
unable to update it and had to go to the MS one.
: > Government officials think there is force, but can't break the MS
: > lobbyists. MS needs to be broken up like ATT.
: Mainly, it's Microsoft's competitors who complain that there's force. It's
: unfortunate that such losers in the marketplace resort to using government
: force instead of spending their energy producing better products.
*** They are losers thanks to MS' sleazy business tactics. I'll see if I
can re-locate a URL to a U.S. senator's office which tried to break the MS
monopoly.
hogfat
> SarahP (sa...@ihatespamchampiondirect.com) wrote:
> : "Coaster Enthusiasts of Canada" <c...@chebucto.ns.ca> wrote in message
> : > *** MS seems to do everything it can to make
> : > competing software difficult to run.
>
> : What, specifically, have they done?
>
> *** I grabbed these URLs from my Bookmark file. I am not sure they are
> suitable to answer your question, Sarah, because I have not checked them
> out in some time. Have a look, anyway.
Quite right, most have cursory, at best, relevance to the question, however . .
.
> http://linuxtoday.com/stories/11954.html
is an excellent example of doing everything one can to make (competing) software
difficult to run -- microsoft being the "(competing) software."
Coaster Enthusiasts of Canada
: > *** That's what monopoly brings. Microsoft is the robber baron of the
: > 21st century.
: Cut-throat, maybe.
: --
: -Wolf
*** I say it's gone beyond cut-throat. As for WalMart, I agree
completely. They are so bad that whole communities are rallying against
the company to keep it out. You can add Home Despot to that, too.
ricky_summersett
<long...@XXXearthlink.net> wrote:
>But what about Disney's Magical Gatherings?
Personally, I've never seen the commercial and I like the rides at
Disney. I don't see the problem with Disney advertising for folks to
hold their family reunions at Disney. NoGodForMe's rants on family
rides are interesting, humorous, but also unfounded. Parks spend lots
and lots of money, time & effort to decide what to install for any
given year. There is a collection of master-degreed (or at leat
bachelored) brains making these decisions that know a lot more than
me, so I really can't comment on any park's ride-choice decision. Hey,
they make mistakes, too, but in large part family rides are needed for
the families to come. Seems simple.
I also have a 2 year old daughter. I want her to ride the fun coasters
that I spend 99% of my time on with me someday, but she will have to
start out on the kiddie & family rides and work her way up.
>I understands how threads drift away slowly from the original subject,
>those would be hard to change but this post is entirely about a
>different thing.
>
>You changed the subject to read WAY O.T.! Why not change the rest?
>This kinda reminds me of the simpsons episode where the boys are at a
>fair and the see a booth giving away "Free Trading Cards" The kids
>haul ass over all excited and then scream and run cause they are Bible
>cards. I'm sure Flanders was manning the booth.
Many "christian" organizations use similar deceptive tactics. This is
so wrong IMO. Lies & deception should never be a part of the
presentation of the gospel.
>That all said Ricky's testimonial/post was presented well and open
>minded.
>
>Todd "what about the dinosaurs?" Long
>
>
>
>"You know, there's a million fine looking women
>in the world, dude. But they don't all bring you
>lasagna at work. Most of 'em just cheat on you."
>- Silent Bob
I kept the old thread title in hopes that "NoGodForMe" will read it
since it was his original post. I am compelled to offer anyone who
adheres to atheism the truth, anywhere, anytime, since I once was also
in that same sinking boat.