In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Ian Semmel
<anyoneNOJUNK@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote
on Tue, 28 Nov 2006 21:05:13 GMT
<dw1bh.73423$rP1.62229@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
>
>
> "Roy Schestowitz" <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> news:1269836.bMKired30X@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> Just when I thought Microsoft was getting better...
>>
>> ,----[ Quote ]
>> | So my epiphany for the day is this, "$100 million dollars can buy a
>> | lot of innovation, but cannot change a culture that fundamentally
>> | is not geared towards respecting users." Google and Yahoo (despite
>> | stiff competition from everyone) seem to have the right balance of
>> | innovation and monetization (they are businesses after all), tempered
>> | with a healthy dose of competition. However, despite those drivers,
>> | they both seem to respect users first and foremost; I know this
>> | first hand from having worked with both. Microsoft, however, can't
>> | seem to shake its old habits.
>> `----
>>
>> http://www.flock.com/blog/just-when-i-thought-microsoft-was-getting-better
>
> What's with these people ?
>
> Why can't you use an IE plugin in FF ?
> Why can't you use a FF plugin in IE ?
>
> Because they are different programs.
>
Not quite that simple. One can, for instance, use an
ActiveX control in Word, Wordpad, and Excel, I would think;
all are containers.
At some point the Mozilla Foundation might consider
allowing ActiveX controls on Firefox when it's running on
a Windows system. Sun might also consider the ability to
include ActiveX controls in Java's javax.swing.JEditorPane
widget.
This way may, however, lie madness. After all, once web
designers utilize this capability to the fullest, non-Microsoft
users will not be able to see these controls.
--
#191, ewill3@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
People think that libraries are safe. They're wrong. They have ideas.
(Also occasionally ectoplasmic slime and cute librarians.)
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
|
|
