[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       mozilla-general
Subject:    Re: P.S. (was: Re: IE6.0 Released)
From:       RV <ramvalle () optonline ! net>
Date:       2001-08-31 22:59:56
[Download RAW message or body]


JTK wrote:

 > Plus, who's going to do the prohibiting?  I thought this project was 
"Open".
 >   Then again, the sign still says "netscape.", doesn't it.  I thought
 >  there were plans to change that....


In the US free speech is guarateed by the constitution, yet the same
constitution makes it a crime to advocate the destruction of the "state"
that is not a contradiction but a way of protecting the very same entity
that guarantees the free speech.



 > It brings a lot of denials from the Faithful and the He-Man 
Micro$oft-Haters
 >  Club, granted.  Such is the price of "Open"ness I guess.


Denial? You are talking about other people being in denial? You bring
to mind Johari's window. .. complete lack of awareness!

http://www.knowmegame.com/Johari_Window/johari_window.html


 >
 >> A pointer to a published report is good,
 >>
 >
 > No it isn't.  Not the ones that get bandied about here anyway (CNET 
etc.).
 >   The only such pointers which would be useful would be ones which point
 >  to reproducable tests, and the only such I know of are those finally
 >  published by Mr. Morrison.



The only problem with your argument is that you always get stuck with
one side pointers, the negative ones, even if when they are
transient,case in point, you obsession with the page loading issue that
was measured in MILLISECONDS months ago. So CNET reported months ago
that N6 was good, but you forgot to mention that later they retracted
that and wrote a very critical article about it. So now they say that
6.1 is very good and they have not retracted that. And 119,132 users
have download N6.1 from downloads.com and the users reviews give it a
~79% approval rating while at the same time IE6 is getting ~70%.
Recently our argument was who the heck would download IE6 from
download.com and not from microsoft? Well  236,982 have downloaded from
download.com as of right now. Is that a big enough sample for you?


 > Don't wade then if it bothers you.



Ehem, Johari's window again? If N6.1 is so pathetically bad and useless
why you bother? Don't wade!  ;-)


 >> Will anybody looking here tomorrow or next week, somebody who might 
contribute to the font problem, choose to filter through the banter?)
 >>Anyway.
 >>
 >
 > Yep, there also needs to be comparisons to NC4.7x in order to release.
 >

Agreed, as long as the loading speed is not the only item for 
comparison. Lets include standard's compliance, page loading speed, 
complex tables amd layouts loading, multiple email profiles loading 
handling, configurability, stability (MTBF) and many others.

 >
 > That will quiet some I'm sure.  Again I ask, to what good end?  If you
 > want to silence people, then you should be trying to get AOL to drop the
 > "Open"ness charade.

And what is your definition of openness? Am I missing something? It is 
not open because they do not accept your points of view? What about the 
rest of the people who disagree with you? Will it be open if they accept 
your points of views and reject the opinions of the others?


 > They haven't stopped me and all my "off topic" contributions to the
 > project.

Humm, now i am completely lost. Are youy saying they AOL all controlling 
entity is allowing you to continue posting messages here? I guess they 
forgot to close that "open" door. ;-)


 >  Yet.
You love to anticipate things so that you can say "i told you so". A 
joke came to mind. "A guy on a dark isolated street ran out of gas. He 
saw a house far away and decided to walk there to ask for help and use 
the phone. As he was walking towards the house he was pondering: What if 
there is no one in the house? And he kept walking .. and what if they 
don't open the door? ... and kept walking .. and what if they refuse to 
listen to me? ... and he kept walking ... and what if they don't let me 
use the phone? and he kept walking until he finally reached the house, 
rang the bell and a sweet looking old lady answered the door. "Yes young 
man, what can I do for you?" He looked at her perpelexed and before the 
woman said anything else he told her "I don't need your help, you can 
stick you f --g phone up your a_ _." and he walked away upset because he 
did not get help. ;-)
 >

 > My hand is firmly down Sam.  The right thing to do here is get
 > repeatable performance comparisons between Mozilla and IE and NC4.7x
 > posted, and let the chips fall where they may.  Frankly just two more
 > lines on Mr. Morrison's charts would be a good start.


Ever done statistical regression test? I would say those lines have 
reached a platau. Reading the graph on a day by day basis like you do 
with the only purpose of saying it's going up (or down) is absurd. It is 
useful for the developers to see how changes in the code impact loading 
time. That is all it is  good for if you want to use it on a day by day 
manner.

 >
 >  and if I can get it to work, I'll do the posting.

How many weeks have you being saying that now?

It's Friday, we will not hear from you over the weekend since you use 
your computer at work to post your messages. ... of couyrse you can 
always use you public library PCs unless they don't allow for anonympous 
postings, which is usually the case.

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]