Subject:
|
Re: A new area of LEGO.com: the Build section
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.lego.direct
|
Date:
|
Fri, 11 May 2001 23:25:06 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1054 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.lego.direct, William R. Ward writes:
> "Sproaticus" <jsproat@io.com> writes:
> > Whatever happened to plain old regular HTML, anyway?
> It's dead. Web sites that just use plain HTML without JS or
> animations or other glitz are just not "cool" enough.
Well, www.lego.com has been "too cool" for me since virtually day one
anyway, so if its webdesigners can't figure out these issues, it'd be no big
loss if I can never access content on it. LUGNET is *much* more friendly
(and more human IMO) than Lego's website could ever be.
Expect me to go ballistic if Lego decided to take S@H off of the phones and
exclusively onto the net, or offer any decent deal for web-only customers.
> I agree with you, don't get me wrong. But the reality is that the
> vast majority of Web users these days are using M$ Internet Exploiter
> and don't have the foggiest idea what risks they might be running.
>
> I'm fairly sure however that JavaScript's security holes were fixed
> years ago, and any modern version of NS or IE should offer very little
> risk with JS turned on. ActiveX, on the other hand ... *shudder*
With an average of 4 months between IE security patches from Microsoft, and
the trend actually *speeding up* as more (untested) features are added, I
seriously doubt that JavaScript (or at least Microsoft's implementation)
will be secure for a long, long time.
And that's just Javascript. I'm not going to get into the gaping security
holes evident in certain plugins -- Flash, Real, etc...
What really grinds me is the ignorance -- or arrogance -- that modern
webmasters (especially those at www.lego.com) exhibit by expecting us users
to restrict ourselves to only one or two browsers, in a very specific
configuration.
Cheers,
- jsproat
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: A new area of LEGO.com: the Build section
|
| (...) The only conclusion I've been able to reach is that AFOLs probably aren't part of the target market at www.lego.com. AFOLs are useful for spreading contagious enthusiasm and giving feedback on the website, but we really don't need to be wowed (...) (23 years ago, 12-May-01, to lugnet.lego.direct)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: A new area of LEGO.com: the Build section
|
| (...) It's dead. Web sites that just use plain HTML without JS or animations or other glitz are just not "cool" enough. I agree with you, don't get me wrong. But the reality is that the vast majority of Web users these days are using M$ Internet (...) (23 years ago, 11-May-01, to lugnet.lego.direct)
|
71 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
