Treehouse : IE9 - Treehouse

Jump to content

Hide message Show message
Welcome to Treehouse !

Join us now to get access to all our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, get your own private messenger and more.

Support the Sites!


Icon Registration for the Forums

Unfortunately, due to an unreasonable amount of obscene and/or dangerous data being posted by spambots registering for the forums, we have had to disable the automatic registration process. For those wishing to manually register, we ask that you contact the author of Memories from the email provided on his stories, and he will work with you to set up an account manually. Note that he will verify that you are authentic before beginning the process, for the safety of all board members.


Page 1 of 1

IE9 My chance to whine...


#1 User is offline   Narnboy 

  • Branch
  • PipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 110
  • Joined: 01-March 11
  • Location:Green Bay, WI

Posted 06 June 2011 - 12:59 PM

Internet Explorer 9 sucks. As with the transition from WinXP to Vista, everything seems to have been moved, renamed, or deleted without any regards to the 20 years of ‘training’ that Microsoft has given PC users. As an example... where did the search bar go? I had to search Yahoo for ten minutes to find their search page and bookmark that so I can do my searches (which are more common for me than opening bookmarked pages). I mean, their changes may be wonderful and great for a person who is just getting their FIRST PC EVER!, but us folks who have had one more than five years have been trained to find things in a certain spot, to do things a certain way, and to be able to disable things we don’t want on our machines.

For those of you saying I should switch to Firefox... Tell me how to get the displayed font to be larger than the hairs on a fly’s legs and I’ll try using it again. I can’t read a thing on the Treehouse without increasing the font size or grabbing a magnifying glass. (That’s why I always resize the font from the default 2 to 4 when commenting in the forums. I’m not yelling, I just can’t read what I type otherwise, even in IE8.) My only other option (which hasn’t worked the last six times I tried it) is to get my 50” TV to work as my monitor, so I can at least have more space to see things in when I reduce the resolution to something visible.

Sorry for the rant, I just had to vent.




This post has been edited by Narnboy: 06 June 2011 - 01:02 PM

Entertainment should be as far from reality as possible.


#2 User is offline   OllieFranz 

  • Well, I'll be a Fuzzy's uncle
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 306
  • Joined: 31-January 11

Posted 06 June 2011 - 01:34 PM

View PostNarnboy, on 06 June 2011 - 12:59 PM, said:

For those of you saying I should switch to Firefox... Tell me how to get the displayed font to be larger than the hairs on a fly’s legs and I’ll try using it again. I can’t read a thing on the Treehouse without increasing the font size or grabbing a magnifying glass.



I'm assuming from your earlier comment that you are in Windows, and not on a Mac or Unix machine. If you are someone else will have to help you.

To change your default font and font size in Firefox, open the "Options" dialogue box from the menu and click on the "Content" tab. Of course many webpages over-ride this default and display the font and size the webauthor chooses. Unless he has locked in the size, though, you can still increase it "on the fly" by pressing "Control" and "+" Repeat until the text is a comfortable size. If you go into "Size" on the "edit" menu, it will give you this option as a menu item and will also let you toggle between resizing the page as a whole and resizing just the text. I usually resize just the text, but if the text size is locked, I will resize the entire page.

When you move to another page, you may need to undo the size increase. "Control" and "-" will reverse the process, and "Control" and "0" will take you back to the default size.



#3 User is offline   Rilbur 

  • Wordsmith for Hire
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Author
  • Posts: 356
  • Joined: 18-January 11
  • Location:East of Sun, West of Moon

Posted 06 June 2011 - 01:52 PM

Edit: This is a techno-nerds counter rant. Take it for what it's worth... which isn't much.

IE9 had to be redesigned because it was the only way to stay 'competitive' with other browsers. While I understand that some people may have issues with it, (without, I'd like to emphasize, understanding in the least how they can have those issues) the simple fact is that our understanding of good UI practices is evolving. Some of the changes are a good thing, some of them are a tad bit insane (for example, some people are experimenting with getting rid of the address bar entirely, which I'm not sure I like just on principle). I didn't like the redesign of Firefox when Firefox got hit with it... but honestly, a lot of the changes are fairly good, once I reconfigured the stupid thing a bit.

The basic fact of the mater is, computers as an industry are less than fifty years old. They are a very modern invention, and it shows. The fact that they've become ubiquitous, despite their many shortcomings, is a very good indicator of just how powerful they are. But at this point in time, change is the only constant you can expect from them. That's why any decent training doesn't focus on the exact process to do task A; it focuses on the ideas behind that process so that you can figure it out for yourself next time something changes -- because it will, and it should, change.

That's why I have a degree in Computer Science, not a bazillion associates in C++, Javascript, HTML, PHP, etc etc. I don't know Python very well, I don't know C# as well as I'd like to, I don't know the new language that's coming out next week that will one day become as canonical as C. What I know is the fundamental processes behind those languages that let me learn them, that means I understand what is happening. I understand, to a degree, how something as simple as <p>text</p> will create something a browser can display. I'm not conversant with the technical details of how a given browser does it... but I can learn to be so, if I ever needed to. (Please, never let that day come!)



#4 User is offline   MotherHusky 

  • Trunk
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 229
  • Joined: 04-February 11
  • Location:Western New York

Posted 06 June 2011 - 11:06 PM

From another techno-nerd viewpoint... and another grain of salt...

I haven't used IE since Windows XP came out, except for a very select few sites that FORCE me to use IE (for which I still use IE6 i.e. KohlerEngines.com) to function. Before Firefox I was using a very old Netscape Navigator left over from my Win98SE days. I switched from that directly to Firefox 2.0. I only recently switched to Firefox 3.6 after the tools to revert the user interface to function like 2.0 became available, and YouTube stopped working with 2.0. Now Google and others want to force users to move to 4 (or 5) by disabling features when you use an "old" browser. My response this time will be to stop using Google and move my e-mail somewhere else when that happens. I hate the user interface "improvements" that have been shoved down people's throats by Vista/Win 7, Firefox 3/4, Chrome, Office 2007 / 2010, Mac OS-X-whatever sub version, etc. I am currently buying only refurb computers with XP Pro licenses when I need additional machines. When those are no longer available, I will probably stop buying "new" hardware altogether, and only repair the machines I have. I have one Vista box, and if I could get my hands on a clean license for XP Media Center for it, that Vista Home Premium would go in the trash bin as well. I'd put Linux on it, but there is NO player software available for Blu-Ray or HD-DVD (the Toshiba blue laser discs that are no longer made, I have about 50 that can currently be played in the Vista machine) under Linux, due to DRM restrictions by Sony, Toshiba, and the studios.

I have been working with computers since before IBM got into the personal computer market, having started with the Radio Shack TRS-80. I have seen a number of improvements to usability over the years, as well as a number of huge gaffs. Anyone remember OS/2? Although the "activation" of Windows XP is/was a real pain for power hardware people, at least it could be tweaked and tuned to work and interact with the user just the same as the Windows 98 SE that most users were upgrading from. MicroS**t hasn't listened to any of the complaints of power users about the interface changes in Vista / 7, or the "ribbon" in Office, and until people stop giving MS money for their garbage interfaces they will continue to ignore the complaints.

I have written my own programs in C, Basic, Fortran, Pascal, VB, and others. I have most of the credits for my degree, and someday, maybe, I'll finish it. I understand that the technology changes. Change for the sake of IMPROVEMENT is welcome, but change just for the sake of change is part of what lead to the demise of the American automobile industry. And it will lead to the end of the American software industry as well. When I was working at Xerox, we couldn't even upgrade IE from 7 to 8, let alone the OS itself, because IE8 would break all the DRM tools on the documentation, and we would be unable to read our service manuals.
Corporate adoption of Vista was non-existent, and adoption of Win 7 has been primarily due to hardware replacement, not direct upgrades. When 50% or more of existing customers refuse to buy a new product or have to be forced to with hardware replacement, because they can't use it or it breaks their existing tools, one really needs to rethink the changes made to the product!

Now, as to your original problem. As was already pointed out, you can change the default font size in Firefox Tools-Options-Content. You can also tell Firefox to over-ride sites that try to force their own font size, but it usually causes those sites to be severely distorted at best.

You also should be able to revert to IE8 if you installed IE9 as an upgrade / update to an existing IE8. In the Add/Remove Programs should be a line for IE9. Uninstalling IE9 should revert you to the version you had previously.If your IE9 came pre-installed on a new Win 7 machine, well, all I can say is, I feel for you.

This post has been edited by MotherHusky: 06 June 2011 - 11:10 PM



#5 User is offline   Rilbur 

  • Wordsmith for Hire
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Author
  • Posts: 356
  • Joined: 18-January 11
  • Location:East of Sun, West of Moon

Posted 07 June 2011 - 08:55 AM

Quote

Now Google and others want to force users to move to 4 (or 5) by disabling features when you use an "old" browser. My response this time will be to stop using Google and move my e-mail somewhere else when that happens.


As a web programmer, I can explain exactly why that happens -- and is probably going to happen eventually with whatever site you use.

Old browsers are a pain in the ass to deal with. Seriously, they are a pain. Internet Explorer is the worst, because most corporations still use IE6 so you have to program for it despite it being a complete and utter piece of... <deep breath> When you start working with HTML, it all looks so very, very easy. You put this tag in, browser displays this result. The only problem is, as you start to get fancy, the way different browsers show different results starts to become a problem. When you hit on something that looks good -- oh, so very good! -- in modern browsers, you're happy right up until you discover you have to support IE6, and IE6 doesn't support various technologies you need. IE 8 adn below don't support rounded corners through CSS; IE6 (as mentioned above, still the preferred corporate browser) will turn the transparent part of a .png file to a dull gray!

Supporting older browsers just isn't much fun. There's an entire industry grown around not just building websites, but dealing with cross-browser compatability issues, and Internet Explorer is the worst of the lot. Hell, it actually parses comments, something that is strictly a no-no, because they decided to put IE only code into comments specifically to make it POSSIBLE to deal with IE.

In the long run, if you stick with any one specific browser you are loosing out. The internet is based on a value-added approach. New browsers get better features, and if old browsers can't display them oh well sucks for them. As the median browser level rises, eventually and older browser is left 'out in the cold' as new technologies like Javascript and AJAX go from being interesting tricks to a requirement for the website, as CSS3 and HTML 5 go from being cool tricks to the actual building blocks of websites.


You want to know why corporations didn't upgrade to vista or 7? The same reason they won't upgrade IE: because change costs them money, even when the end result is a better product.



#6 User is online   Silver Wolf 

  • Root
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 675
  • Joined: 21-January 11
  • Location:Montreal

Posted 07 June 2011 - 11:53 AM

Don't I know!!! I've been fighting IE with my music snippets, and believe me, a sixty-line code to get a stupid mp3 to play across platforms is the best I could come up with. I shiver at the idea of playing a .mov (which is due to come online around six months from now...) I've dug myself a nice little brimstone hole in hell with the amount of swearing I've been doing while trying to make the music work. When the .mov gets online, I'll probably have an open pit mine!


#7 User is offline   Rilbur 

  • Wordsmith for Hire
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Author
  • Posts: 356
  • Joined: 18-January 11
  • Location:East of Sun, West of Moon

Posted 07 June 2011 - 06:55 PM

Silver, just to check, your issue ISN'T that you can't get it to show in IE, but rather than you can't find one set of code that will work across all browsers, correct?

If so, the solution I used may help -- in PHP, you can check the user's browser-agent (if provided) and adjust the output accordingly.

It's still a fair chunk of code, but nowhere near as unmanageable once you break it down to specific browsers. You can solve each individual browser's issues independently.



#8 User is offline   psychobunni 

  • Bud
  • Pip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 15
  • Joined: 20-May 11
  • Location:CO

Posted 07 June 2011 - 07:28 PM

I stopped using the Microsoft Internet Explorer when one of their versions had SERIOUS security breach issues. I've since been using Mozilla Firefox and I love it. I didn't even have to change the size of my font for anything.
Life is a lesson in insanity. Only the strongest insane people survive and have fun.


#9 User is offline   MotherHusky 

  • Trunk
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 229
  • Joined: 04-February 11
  • Location:Western New York

Posted 07 June 2011 - 09:59 PM

View PostRilbur, on 07 June 2011 - 08:55 AM, said:

In the long run, if you stick with any one specific browser you are loosing out. The internet is based on a value-added
approach. New browsers get better features, and if old browsers can't display them oh well sucks for them. As the median browser level rises, eventually and older browser is left 'out in the cold' as new technologies like Javascript and AJAX go from being interesting tricks to a requirement for the website, as CSS3 and HTML 5 go from being cool tricks to the actual building blocks of websites.

You want to know why corporations didn't upgrade to vista or 7? The same reason they won't upgrade IE: because change costs them money, even when the end result is a better product.


If you're in a corporate environment, or are reasonably security conscious, "new" technologies like Javascript and AJAX (as well as ActiveX, Java, et. al.) are locked down and only allowed on pages from trusted sites. A great example: this morning I was visiting the Ace Hardware site looking for my local store. I run NoScript plug in for Firefox, and I have it VERY tightly configured. Even after allowing Ace Hardware's own domain, and all of the Google (gobble) domains to run Java, Ace's store locator still wouldn't work. So I sent them an e-mail complaining about their site and letting them know that I'll take the ad to Home Depot and have the price comped there. They lost a sale, and gave it to their competitor, merely by insisting on running the (third party no less) code on MY machine instead of their own!

As for the upgrade policies of corporate users, true they aren't likely to spend money unnecessarily. Ho
wever much better the underlying OS is, in the case of Vista / Win 7, the additional processor power required for the imposed Mac Lite user interface "improvements", which are anything BUT improvements, means that not only does it cost money to upgrade, but it creates additional hidden costs such as reduced productivity, additional training requirements, additional software upgrades to other code that may no longer be compatible, and even, in some cases, complete replacement of existing tools that are no longer available and / or canNOT be run on the new OS. This wasn't true when we went from 98SE/ME/2000 to XP. XP offered full support of all the 98SE / 2000 code base (ME being the last millenium's Vista). XP offered a user interface that was essentially the same as its predecessors. XP offered clear security improvements that were of immediate benefit to corporate users AND IT departments. XP was rolled out on any hardware that could run it as quickly as the IT departments could get the licenses and install it. Even end users (consumers) upgraded to it in droves. Any corporation making the move to Win 7 might just as well make the move to Mac or Linux, as the cost is roughly the same for a move to Mac, and probably much lower for a move to Linux. Libre(Open)Office is similar enough to MS Office 2003 (except Access) that most users could make the move in no time, unlike the move from 2003 to 2007 or 10. I have personally been switching anyone who comes to me for support to LibreOffice with even the most computer illiterate having little or no problem transitioning. Which leads me back to my original assertion, when you redesign a product in such a way that your customers have to be coerced to replace / upgrade your old product with the new, you need to re-evaluate your changes. And imposing new "standards" on existing customers / users in the name of "progress" with no actual end user benefit is an equally dumb idea. CSS3, HTML5, Javascript, AJAX, etc. may make the website designer's job easier, but offer no tangible benefit to the end user, and thereby fit into the category of standards being imposed in the name of "progress". And until there is some new "killer" app that needs all these new "bells and whistles", there will continue to be resistance and reluctance from end users to adopt the newer software, be it an OS or a browser. And in this economy, any company that chooses to disenfranchise its "customers" by forcing them to "upgrade", may find themselves running a non-profit, or no company at all.


#10 User is online   Silver Wolf 

  • Root
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 675
  • Joined: 21-January 11
  • Location:Montreal

Posted 07 June 2011 - 10:36 PM

If software companies were in charge of the road system:

1- You would need to buy a new car every year because they would change the direction of traffic in the name of progress.
2- You would need to learn to drive accordingly.
3- the gas pedal would rotate randomly from left to right to centre along with the clutch and brake pedal.
4- the speedometer would change from one measure of speed to another through downloaded updates.
5- the gear box would suddenly change configuration from car to car.
6- the companies would compete outrageously to force on you improvements you never felt the need for.
7- if you kept your car two years in a row (and survived) you would be forced to buy the previous year's model in order to gain access to this year's
8- Basic things such as windshield wipers would become optional and be incompatible from one year to the next
9- the car would gain gizmos that would make it sluggish on the start, freeze at the most improper moment, and make your so-called top of the line engine feel like its turning on frozen molasses.
10- Everyone would know everything you do, where you go, when you do so, and for how long you visited a place, even if you happen to wear your wife's underwear, and it would be called being on cloud nine!
11- road signs would be changing every week, facing away from you, and they would expect you to guess the sign's significance from its shape
12- if you complained about potholes, they would call them add-on value and undocumented features!



#11 User is offline   Rilbur 

  • Wordsmith for Hire
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Author
  • Posts: 356
  • Joined: 18-January 11
  • Location:East of Sun, West of Moon

Posted 07 June 2011 - 11:21 PM

Quote

XP offered full support of all the 98SE / 2000 code base


Which is part of the problem; we need to dump some of the (really) old crud out of the window. Limits from Windows 3.0 are still in the system, long past the time when they should have been chucked. Windows still has a 16bit limit based on it. (Not memory, I'd have to dig up the reference to remember exactly what it applies to which I am not going to do when I should be heading to bed, but it's part of the file system IIRC).

Quote

And imposing new "standards" on existing customers / users in the name of "progress" with no actual end user benefit is an equally dumb idea. CSS3, HTML5, Javascript, AJAX, etc. may make the website designer's job easier, but offer no tangible benefit to the end user, and thereby fit into the category of standards being imposed in the name of "progress".


Javascript and AJAX both offer massive user benefits. Google's autocomplete only exists because of AJAX. Every time a website tells you the information entered into the form is invalid before you waste time and bandwidth on sending it is a benefit from Javascript. WYSISYG editors are based on Javascript (I think). CSS3 makes a designer's life easier, which reduces costs (which can be reflected in a drop in price, an increase in material done, or getting the material done quicker). HTML5 offers new features that will help reduce the reliance on flash for 'flashy' web-pages, browser-side storage (which won't take off for a good long time, because...) and it won't be 'required' for years yet. It'll be value-added, a better website for those that use it.



#12 User is offline   MotherHusky 

  • Trunk
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 229
  • Joined: 04-February 11
  • Location:Western New York

Posted 08 June 2011 - 10:34 PM

View PostRilbur, on 07 June 2011 - 11:21 PM, said:

Which is part of the problem; we need to dump some of the (really) old crud out of the window. Limits from Windows 3.0 are still in the system, long past the time when they should have been chucked. Windows still has a 16bit limit based on it. (Not memory, I'd have to dig up the reference to remember exactly what it applies to which I am not going to do when I should be heading to bed, but it's part of the file system IIRC).



Javascript and AJAX both offer massive user benefits. Google's autocomplete only exists because of AJAX. Every time a website tells you the information entered into the form is invalid before you waste time and bandwidth on sending it is a benefit from Javascript. WYSISYG editors are based on Javascript (I think). CSS3 makes a designer's life easier, which reduces costs (which can be reflected in a drop in price, an increase in material done, or getting the material done quicker). HTML5 offers new features that will help reduce the reliance on flash for 'flashy' web-pages, browser-side storage (which won't take off for a good long time, because...) and it won't be 'required' for years yet. It'll be value-added, a better website for those that use it.


IIRC, the 16 bit limitation on the file system in XP only applies to FAT32 volumes, and applies to all media cards used in cameras, camcorders, mobile phones, etc, as they are ALL FAT32 as well, regardless of OS used to access them. The 2 TB limit on NTFS is more MS stupidity, but not related to the 16 bit code base.

As for Javascript and AJAX. Google auto-complete is an annoyance, not a benefit. Almost every search I do at work auto-completes to garbage, and slows the machine down to such a crawl that it can't even keep up with my typing, let alone do useful search. I'm not allowed to lock out Java from Google at work so I have to put up with that crap. At home, I default to keep Google from running any code on my machine, as NoScript is set to not allow Google without my manually giving them TEMPORARY permission. (See my example of poor web code from my previous thread post.) I also use Gmail in HTML Only mode. I don't chat, buzz, phone, or any of the other crap they've tried data-mining us with.

As for browser-side storage, I already have several terabytes of it. It's called File>Save As. And for client side data validation, my experience with that has been that lazy programmers write or "buy" scripts that work to validate 95% of truly valid data, and reject about 5% of valid data. In particular, here is a sample valid e-mail address that is almost universally rejected by Javascript validation code:

Somebody+trackingtag@gmail.com.

I use addresses like this all the time to track which websites are spamming me, to sort and delete junk mail from sites I signed up for but then wouldn't let me unsubscribe, and to automatically label e-mails from preferred senders, all done on Google's servers, not my machine and bandwidth. But at least 85 to 90 percent of websites where I try to use this format address reject it as invalid, including long time computer giant Corel Corp and media company Scripps. I turn off Java, resubmit, and most sites take it just fine. LAZY-LAZY-LAZY. And yes, I know that a smart programmer can filter the tag out before sending mail or selling their list. But when they are that lazy to use canned scripts from a dozen third party websites, and can't be bothered to make sure the scripts they do use conform to standards (which do permit the above format address by the way), what makes anyone think they would take the time to try, and why would I want to allow such a programmer to run scripts on MY hardware?

CSS3 may make a web programmer's life much easier, but the implementation should be on the server side, not the client side. Again, why should I be providing the processor power to run your website? Just like PHP runs on the server-side, so should cascading style sheets. Do you also want me to also pay for the electric to run your website? Oh wait, if I'm running the code, I already am paying for some of it. :rolleyes: ( I won't go into a related rant about PayPal, just say that I won't use it.)

As for on-line WYSIWYG editors, an example of which I am using right now to type this, they don't work... I have default settings that always allow The Treehouse to always permit Javascript and have set default format options in my profile. Yet I have to manually reselect those fonts, formats, colors, etc. in every post I make here. That is not a complaint, it is just a fact. My earlier post is an excellent example. That entire message was selected and set to font size three. Yet in the middle of the text, the font size reverted to two, and I finally just left it that way than deal with the hassle of cutting and pasting all the text back in and reformatting it again. As I edit this now the text is white Arial even though my defaults are orange and Tahoma. And if I do a preview without manually changing them, it comes up white Ariel size 2. When I post the message, if I haven't manually reset the format in the editor, color and size changes over-run the entire post, quotes and all. But not to match my settings or yours.

I know you mean well, and I know you fervently believe in the things you were taught in school. I also know that much of what you were taught will make you a very good programmer.
Thirty years ago I drank the Kool-Aid, too. Swallowed hook, line and sinker, but I've been around long enough now to know that the latest and greatest is usually just more bloat. And a new way to force people to replace perfectly good hardware because they can no longer do the jobs that they have been happily doing all along with that very same hardware. My XP laptop (Core Duo 3GB memory) runs rings around my (only) Vista box (Phenom X3 4GB memory) and a friend's new Win 7 HP laptop (i5 and 6GB memory). And, at least on my Vista box (which is NOT internet connected) there is no anti-virus running in the background to steal CPU cycles.

OOP was going to be the salvation of the industry. All OOP really did is make programs that ran lightning fast on 100-400 MHz hardware to now require 2-3 GHz processors just to do the same work at the same speed. And make a lot of Chinese hardware manufacturers and a few software companies very rich in the process. Hell, the interpreted B.A.S.I.C. database on my TRS-80 ( a 4 Mhz Model 4 with 4 DSDD floppy discs ) ran searches ( on floppy ) as fast as the Access 2003 one at work. The biggest difference there is update time and the table sizes we can have today . The TRS-80 database I used was limited to 1000 entries per table, as the sorted ISAM indexes ( 20 character keys and a 16 bit signed integer index ) were loaded into the 64K memory when the table was opened, and always binary searched. The largest table we use at work today is about 3500 entries, so why is it so slow? True, the updates took forever on those floppys, but read only data was just as fast on that as the tools I'm using today. The reason is all those wonderful new, more productive, misused technologies that have been introduced since 1981.

BTW, as bad as you may think Windows for Workgroups 3.1 was, the three things I do now that I couldn't do then with my computers are:

Edit and burn video [DVD & BluRay] ( I could have done VHS or Beta tapes if I had tons of money, there was expensive hardware and software, but I couldn't afford it )

Huge hard drives ( to hold the video, as well as the ever growing library of ripped CDs )

Long file names ( although I was very creative at 8.3, creating dozens of file "types" for specific purposes, and texts to translate the 8.3 into English descriptions )

I surfed the net back then on Windows 3.1 just fine.Of course, the net was a lot different than today's web. But today's Treehouse would have been much the same back then, just without the avatars, and with text emoticons (as they all originally were). And I could and did burn CD's on an AMD 386DX40 with 387 math coprocessor and 4Meg ram using Windows 3.1, and Himem, on a 2x Phillips SCSI CD burner and software that eventually became Roxio CD Creator, that cost about $800 for the drive plus $125 for the SCSI controller card to run it. But that same card also worked with my Mustek scanner, which came with a crappy dedicated card that couldn't run the CD burner. In fact, the primary hard drive in that machine was only 2.5 Gig, and the motherboard BIOS included the extended interrupt (13? 15?) code that actually allowed me to access the entire drive, just not as one volume. In fact, that drive ended up being C, D, E, and F all by itself (about 800 Meg each, with F reserved strictly as the buffer for the CD images ) So the "dark ages" of "horrible 16 bit code" weren't really all THAT horrible.



#13 User is offline   MotherHusky 

  • Trunk
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 229
  • Joined: 04-February 11
  • Location:Western New York

Posted 08 June 2011 - 10:42 PM

View PostSilver Wolf, on 07 June 2011 - 10:36 PM, said:

If software companies were in charge of the road system:

1- You would need to buy a new car every year because they would change the direction of traffic in the name of progress.
2- You would need to learn to drive accordingly.
3- the gas pedal would rotate randomly from left to right to centre along with the clutch and brake pedal.
4- the speedometer would change from one measure of speed to another through downloaded updates.
5- the gear box would suddenly change configuration from car to car.
6- the companies would compete outrageously to force on you improvements you never felt the need for.
7- if you kept your car two years in a row (and survived) you would be forced to buy the previous year's model in order to gain access to this year's
8- Basic things such as windshield wipers would become optional and be incompatible from one year to the next
9- the car would gain gizmos that would make it sluggish on the start, freeze at the most improper moment, and make your so-called top of the line engine feel like its turning on frozen molasses.
10- Everyone would know everything you do, where you go, when you do so, and for how long you visited a place, even if you happen to wear your wife's underwear, and it would be called being on cloud nine!
11- road signs would be changing every week, facing away from you, and they would expect you to guess the sign's significance from its shape
12- if you complained about potholes, they would call them add-on value and undocumented features!


Too True Silver, Too True!

And ...

13- The parts and service would be discontinued before the first car of that year and model were even delivered to the dealer.

This post has been edited by MotherHusky: 08 June 2011 - 10:46 PM



#14 User is offline   Rilbur 

  • Wordsmith for Hire
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Author
  • Posts: 356
  • Joined: 18-January 11
  • Location:East of Sun, West of Moon

Posted 09 June 2011 - 10:31 PM

Quote

CSS3 may make a web programmer's life much easier, but the implementation should be on the server side, not the client side. Again, why should I be providing the processor power to run your website?


Actually, while I don't have any comparisons handly for a lot of the things CSS3 does, I suspect doing it on your side will take up a comparable amount of time processor wise, and less memory / bandwidth than transfering the image-based 'hacks' that are standard.

Quote

As for on-line WYSIWYG editors, an example of which I am using right now to type this, they don't work...


Don't work or not (and I hate them as well!), users demand them.


Page 1 of 1


Fast Reply

This post will need approval from a moderator before this post is shown.
  

Enter your sign in name and password


Sign in options