Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : MSFT Internet Explorer vs. NSCP Navigator -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Reginald Middleton who wrote (16489)	1/21/1998 12:01:00 PM
From: Bill Ulrich	Respond to of 24154

&#147I noticed you failed to answer the second part of the question regarding MSFT replacing Nav icons and links with thier own.&#148 I did not fail to answer it&#151you failed to comprehend. I said Compaq is free to do what they want inre: installing/deinstalling browsers. If you can't understand what that means&#151sorry, comprehension inabilities aren't my problem. It would stop at OS tampering of course.and you can only sell that argument if you can actually prove IE=OS. That hasn't been done yet&#151by you or the Big Guy in Redmond. &#147Maybe you should employ a better browser:-) It works fine for me, try www.msft.IE!&#148 That doens't seem to be the problem. It didn't work last night-period. It opens this morning.albeit so incredibly slow with either browser as to be a completely irritating. Might as well be down. So what is it that I'm supposed to be looking for here? You had implied there's something special going on here which can't be done with NN. Where's the beef? We already know about IE specific and NN specific code&#151so is there a point you're trying to make? &#147I can sing that song as well, over 2,000 html pages written&#148 Maybe I should try one of the other 1999. So far it seems like you forgot the melody. Besides, you're trying to make a point out of me disussing what I do. You'll re-read it of course, and note that I was offering up why I would have a lot of browsers, and why I'm familiar with them in response to your suggestion that I try a different one. I wasn't making an issue of being a web designer. I can see from your page that you aren't making an issue of being one either. -MrB&#153

To: Reginald Middleton who wrote (16489)	1/21/1998 2:01:00 PM
From: Justin Banks	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 24154

Reg - Do you actually think that NN's DHTML implementation is as robust as IE's? Yes, and I've read magazine reviews that thought the same. Is thier OLE methodology as flexible and efficient as IE's object container method? Demonstrably so, and more extensible to other platforms as well. Maybe you should employ a better browser:-) It works fine for me, try www.msft.IE! It looks like the trouble is with the machine that you rely on for name service. You ought to check with your provider to make sure that they're advertising the correct routes. BTW : What will you do when MSFT decides to integrate a Black Scholes Dual Plain Vanilla or Day Trading Adjusted model into the OS? -justinb

To: Reginald Middleton who wrote (16489)	1/21/1998 5:40:00 PM
From: nommedeguerre	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 24154

Reg, >>Compaq is not free to tamper with MSFT's OS. Says who? Its their hardware and if they want to "customize" or install superior DLL's produced by third-parties then that is their business. Microsoft could "void the warranty"; as if there is any kind of warranty on that all-inclusive license they made up. I'm sure if Microsoft "cut off their air supply" Compaq could do some "business is war" of its own with a "special OEM partner" that would resell machines to Compaq with Windows pre-installed. Compaq sells to Standard PC, Standard PC installs Windows and OEM's to Compaq's "consulting/retailing" division. Of course, Standard PC makes nothing on the deal but they do have 100% of Compaq's market-share. Accountants excel at asset transfers and balancing costs between "corporate" units. As long as the paper-work is clean you can do whatever you want in the name of capitalism. Define "free to tamper"? There are no physical barriers to replacing a DLL that supports IE with one that supports Netscape. The consumer who wants Netscape would surely benefit from such action. Personally, I believe there is a market for customized DLLs. Generic bloatware just does not give maximum benefit for the individual user. Games/CAD/Word Processors/SpreadSheets all have slightly different needs which may be better optimized by loading different DLLs when these apps are run. How can you disagree? I can take the showroom radio out of my car if I want to -- we all know how car radios are synonymous with software so you should pick up on this quite easily. Of course, you can have the dealer replace just about anything on a new car before it leaves the showroom. Sort of the way Compaq wants to satisfy its customers by getting rid of unwanted icons and such. So many ways to keep the glove from fitting nowadays.. Cheers, Norm

To: Reginald Middleton who wrote (16489)	1/21/1998 10:31:00 PM
From: Keith Hankin	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 24154

Compaq is not free to tamper with MSFT's OS. I noticed you failed to answer the second part of the question regarding MSFT replacing Nav icons and links with thier own. Reg, once again, NSCP is not a monopoly, therefore the same principles do not apply to it. I know that you think that this is unfair, but that is the way that a truly competitive, capitalist system works. Whining about how unfair it is will get you nowhere. <SOAPBOX> OK, I know you're not whining, but I'm just trying to show how this type of ad hominem attack can be used on either side of the argument and how utterly useless and silly it is.</SOAPBOX>