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 (17318)	2/9/1998 8:28:00 PM
From: Keith Hankin	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 24154

Yes I do. Why is it that only non-financial programmers don't get this. If the standards body says NSCP is the way to go, and the market says MSFT is the way to go, AMZN has a choice to make if it has limited resources and the technologies diverge. Would you divert 80% of your payroll to write to NSCP DHTML if 90% of your available audience is using the MSFT browser with divergent technology, knowing that Barnes and Nobel is at your throat with superior financial resources. It does not take a huge amount of resources to make sure that AMZN's stuff runs on both Communicator and IE, and it is well worth them making sure that it does. And having the programmers follow the basic published standards tends to make code that works for all platforms. So you really do believe that AMZN would be better off concentrating solely on IE?

To: Reginald Middleton who wrote (17318)	2/9/1998 8:28:00 PM
From: Daniel Schuh	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 24154

Reggie, I know I should just let you go off on the necessity of a proprietary lock ( which isn't a monopoly, of course, and it's a totally new industry anyway, the laws can't possibly apply, and all that)... But this is just nuts. You think everybody starting using netscape because of the table tags? Maybe, but I don't think so. I starting using it because it could load a web page without downloading all the sucky graphics. It worked better, that was all. You think it's too much trouble to fix your web pages? Well, nobody who wasn't a Microsoft true believer would hang out for more than a cursory glance at your site, so I imagine it doesn't make much difference. But most people think that $1000 (or $500, soon enough) PCs are a good idea, and there wouldn't be any of those around if your holy "necessity of a proprietary lock" thing was true. I know, I know, Microsoft will cleverly make use of the entire industry as its proper feudal kingdom, and Microsoft will continue to make Visual C++, in whatever the current guise is. And all those OEMs really love Microsoft and will stick through them through thick or thin. They've been treated so well in the past, I'm sure they have only good things to look forward to in the future. As long as they ship the machines the way Microsoft builds them. And the retail consumers will continue to get what they want, the crummy old retail Win95. It's the best seller! It's what the market has chosen! Cheers, Dan.

To: Reginald Middleton who wrote (17318)	2/9/1998 9:37:00 PM
From: Charles Hughes	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 24154

>>Why is it that only non-financial programmers don't get this.<< Surely you're not confusing your collection of html and excel users with real programmers and engineers? Real software authors are supposed to be crediting their sloppy attitudes? Your ability to string together a load of financial buzzwords into meaningless gobbledygook is not a factor here, surely. You should make sure your software works for all the popular browsers, and absolutely for the standard. Otherwise the knowledgeable users at those financial company clients of yours will give you a bad rep at their companies. The correct response of any professional software author or small businessperson upon being told of a potential error is simple: "Oops, sorry, I'll look into that right away!" And then do anything that can be done. Of course, we tend to be detail people. Chaz