Subject:
|
Re: Not at all a pact with the devil...
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Tue, 23 Jan 2001 23:14:46 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
220 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> I'd suggest you continue to ignore it, since if you don't, it leads to
> statements like this one
> > > > LUGNet *does* have an anti-MS bias, and it goes farther than it should.
> > I don't know whether to laugh at this ridiculous statement or simply ignore
> > it. What a steaming cauldron of barf of a statement.
> not exactly unemotional...
I didn't try hard enough not to be non-unemotional. Let me try again...
> LUGNet *does* have an anti-MS bias, and it goes farther than it should.
Obviously I disagree with that opinion. In fact, I don't even know if you
seriously believe it yourself. I think what you perceive as an anti-MS
"bias" is actually an anti-MS predilection and moreso a pro-Unix and pro-
Internet-standards predilection. I also believe that the absence of MS
software "technologies" on LUGNET have helped keep it pure and simple and
maximally available and useful to all. I also am beginning to wonder whether
I am being trolled for sport.
> by the way, were you commenting in an official capacity?
I was commenting in an emotional capacity.
> > > > It goes far enough to color important decisions here, technical decisions
> > > > that may make this site harder to use for users, [...]
> > LOL! Now THAT takes the cake! That's the most ridiculous thing I've ever
> > heard in my entire life. Choice of OS on the server affecting usability for
> > users?
> Fortunately that's not what I said.
If not, then what? Pray tell, what technical decisions have been colored by
this "anti-MS bias" and have made the site harder to use for users?
> > Give me a break. If any predilection affects usability for users,
> > it's that HTML pages don't get tested on Windows browsers as often as they
> > do on Linux and MacOS.
> And why would that be?
Primarily, because there's less need. In my experience, Windows browsers are
more predictable about how they render pages, especially with regard to the
display of fonts. Fortunately for Windows users, LUGNET web pages always look
their best on Windows compared to any other platform. One thing I feel MS
deserves kudos for is having such excellent quality fonts available by default
in TrueType format (Verdana, Arial, Times New Roman). As if the default fonts
on the Mac weren't bad enough, the defaults on Linux distros are even worse.
Secondarily, because I don't run Windows on my main system.
--Todd
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Not at all a pact with the devil...
|
| This is a small subtopic and it is to be hoped that this will be my last post on it. (...) Parser overload, too many negations! :-) (I parsed it by hand but it did throw an exception) (...) I think I believe it. I sincerely believe I've provided one (...) (23 years ago, 23-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Not at all a pact with the devil...
|
| (...) I'd suggest you continue to ignore it, since if you don't, it leads to statements like this one (...) not exactly unemotional... by the way, were you commenting in an official capacity? (...) Fortunately that's not what I said. (...) And why (...) (23 years ago, 23-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
45 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
|
|
|
|
