18 Aug
2004
18 Aug
'04
7:54 a.m.
>> complaining that your 1957 Morris Minor
can't keep up with modern
>> motorway traffic.
> While it may not be very practical for high speed freeway,
> where does one get off suggesting that it be banned from
> city streets?
On Wed, 18 Aug 2004, Gordon JC Pearce wrote:
Didn't say it should be banned from city streets,
did I?
You certainly didn't. Nor anything else objectionable.
But banning the Minor from city streets is an apt analogy
for websites that are for dissemination of text information
that will not permit last week's versions of the browsers.
[YES, that is exaggerated. But why should a textual information
website be inaccessible to TEN YEAR OLD browsers, either?]
Some websites, for no apparent reason, are inaccessible with
"obsolete" versions of Netscrape and Internet Exploiter on Win2K
machines. That isn't old enough to have had a chance to become
"obsolete"!
BTW, have you
ever replaced the brake master cylinder on one?
Yes. Very recently, in fact. The
scratches in my forearm are still Why? I've never understood this obsession with
cookies. I mean, *why*?
Because it is RUDE to store your crap on somebody
else's machine,
without identifying what is in it. And some
companies make browsers that are so demented that the
default settings permit "cookies" that are executable code!
Don't
use them then. Use a proper browser like Firefox or Opera. I know we all like big, clunky, old computers, but
does that mean that
every single piece of software we use has to meet the 10-year-rule too?
The
objection is to websites that set an arbitrary and unreasonable
bar of recency.
--
Grumpy Ol' Fred cisin(a)xenosoft.com