Regarding the standards, i didn't state that microsoft was perfect, but getting better. The current state i believe is that microsoft acknowledge they are not CSS 2.0 complient but implement certain elements.
With reference to the Box model criticism, on www.positioniseverything.net im afraid to say that for this one i am with Microsoft if i create the instance of a Div and i set its width then i want the div to be x pixels in width not x pixels + the padding etc.
Regarding the articles comment of "It might just be a mis-guided attempt to "make it simple" for newbie coders". I agree it probably is and i would argue that this is a good thing too.
The vast majority of people do not have indepth knowledge of HTML standards, nor do they care or maybe are they able. Does that mean that they shouldnt be able to communicate their message, or does that mean that what they have to say is not interesting ?
Even if every browser was 100% standards complient then we are still going to have to muck about with the layout due to cross-platform minor differences in width of a check box, is there a google bar loaded, does the browser have a side bar ?
Again im not singing Microsofts praises or saying that IE is the best browser in the world i couldn't give a toss. Its just a browser I only want to surf the web. I want to view web pages, many of which have been created by people with little or no knowledge care of programming or standards.
Yes IE is ingrained into the operating system, yes most hacks are expolits of ActiveX technology. As far as other browsers go im not aware if they implement ActiveX technology so of course the vunerablilities will be reduced.
Where there is a will there is a way, if MS disapear of the planet tommorow i bet by next week a new virus is out, exploiting the new technology.
The twats who are creating these virus's / exploites are the one's who should be persecuted. Just becasue I may leave my door open does it make it right to burgle me.
I understand why the possibly ill concieved security has been employed and that is due to accesability. I also understand the complexity of un-doing this error.
I think we have alot to thank accesibility in technology for. Every time i sit and eat i can do so because of the popularity and the spread of personal computing. This is due to an accesable and easy to use platform. If this means that we have to endure a rough ride from time to time so be it.
I love the net and i hope it has a long life. We do have a choice, I dont have to use MS platforms browsers etc. But the fact is that people don't care they just want to surf. That is the problem not price, not because one particular company is producing shite software.
If i someone crashes into my bike and I'm hurt.
Is that BMW's fault for not ensuring adequate protection or for restricting the speed ?
Or is it maybe mine for not being aware of danger enough, or the person who harms me ?
Instead of spending millions of pounds complaining and twisting about anti - competition, and attacks due to lax security, requirements for nanny treatment of users.
Consider the damage a ruling that a software provider is responsible for the uses inability / irresponsibility would do for open source software.
Why don't we spend more time and energy on education and policing. I for one would like the hackers and spammers locked up.
|| | |||||| |||||||||| || ||||