IE 6,7,8

[Mike Easter]

BoaterDave wrote:

> What type of work might require the use of a browser with so many
> flaws?

This is not a useful question, because it is based on the 'inner'
thoughts and unknown configuration or requirements of this cited person

> "I am still using IE6 and I have no interest in going to IE 7, 8, or
> 9. Mine is hardened to the max and plus and I am extremely happy with
> it. Besides I am not able to do what I need to with any of the newer
> versions. They (MS) took out all the codes from the newer ones that
> is needed for my work"

You can consider this snip from the wiki, which article you have already
cited, so you must be familiar

> IE6 remained more popular than its successor in business use for more
> than a year after IE7 came out.[19] A DailyTech article noted, "A
> Survey found 55.2% of companies still use IE 6 as of December 2007",
> while "IE 7 only has a 23.4 percent adoption rate".[19] - Net
> Applications estimated IE6 market share at almost 39% for September,
> 2008.[20] According to the same source, IE7 users migrate faster to
> IE8 than users of its predecessor IE6 does. This led to IE6 once
> again becoming the most widely used browser version. During the
> summer and fall of 2009, 8 years after its introduction, IE6 still
> held the top spot in terms of browser marketshare.[21]

Consequently, one can assume that many web interfaces may have been more
compatible with IE6 than IE7 and (still) compatible with IE6 and not
other browsers - causing the person who we can't 'fault' or question
because they aren't here - to find his other options unsatisfactory.
Then, when IE8 came out, it was initially less compatible (with those
older cites) than IE7, causing a 'hardening' of his opinions and conviction.

In my opinion -1- if used very carefully, one could use IE6, but it is
dangerous -2- if used judiciously, one can use Fx almost any place you
need to especially as more and more sites became compatible as Fx gained
share -3- by this late date, the same sites which the unknown target IE6
user couldn't use anything else, can now accommodate all kinds of IE and
other browsers, so the original premise is almost entirely gone.

.... which is what makes your question not useful and thus a waste of time.


--
Mike Easter

[David H. Lipman]

From: "Mike Easter" <MikeE@ster.invalid>

| BoaterDave wrote:

>> What type of work might require the use of a browser with so many
>> flaws?

| This is not a useful question, because it is based on the 'inner'
| thoughts and unknown configuration or requirements of this cited person

Like compatibility issues.

My org. bars the use of IE8 due to compatibility and compliance issues.

--
Dave
Multi-AV Scanning Tool - http://www.pctipp.ch/downloads/dl/35905.asp

[Mike Easter]

David H. Lipman wrote:
> "Mike Easter"
>
> | BoaterDave wrote:
>
>>> What type of work might require the use of a browser with so many
>>> flaws?
>
> | This is not a useful question, because it is based on the 'inner'
> | thoughts and unknown configuration or requirements of this cited person
>
> Like compatibility issues.
>
> My org. bars the use of IE8 due to compatibility and compliance issues.

I'm not much of an IE user, but...

.... what about using IE8's Compatibility Mode function? That seems to be
a compatibility advantage of IE8 over IE7.

That is, I don't know how it works with your org. - whether 'barring'
means 'I don't care if you can make it work or not, you are not allowed
to use it IE8 here and you are not in charge of the admin of the
computer (install/update to IE8) you use while in our org.'

Previously I think there was a section in the wikipedia in which it
explained how IE8 was less compatible than IE7, but I can't find that
section now, so it must have been edited away. Could that be because of
compatibility mode advantages?

I think I'll look in the discussion section some more for it - the
missing compatibility issue - so far no go.


--
Mike Easter

[~BD~]

Mike Easter wrote:
> BoaterDave wrote:
>
>> What type of work might require the use of a browser with so many
>> flaws?

[....]

> In my opinion -1- if used very carefully, one could use IE6, but it is
> dangerous -2- if used judiciously, one can use Fx almost any place you
> need to especially as more and more sites became compatible as Fx gained
> share -3- by this late date, the same sites which the unknown target IE6
> user couldn't use anything else, can now accommodate all kinds of IE and
> other browsers, so the original premise is almost entirely gone.
>
> ... which is what makes your question not useful and thus a waste of time.


Have a WAG - What type of work might require the exclusive use of IE6
specifically?

Methinks the OP knows the answer, even if you don't Mike!

[Mike Easter]

~BD~ wrote:

> Have a WAG - What type of work might require the exclusive use of IE6
> specifically?

You can design/write a page so that the page functions will not
cooperate with the browser unless the browser indicates characteristics
which satisfy the 'page'/webserver.

So, then the answer would be any page/work that was designed to only
work/cooperate with browsers which have answers which correspond to IE6
and/or render with errors -error correcting - according to the kinds of
errors that IE6 tolerates.

That is, you can design a bad page and tweak it until it will cooperate
with IE6's error tolerance (and identification) and no other browser.

Then, even if another browser 'simulated' - called itself - IE6, it
could not perform properly because it would not correct/tolerate the
page's errors satisfactorily.

If you are intending to play a game called "I am thinking of something;
what is it?" that game is as silly as your original premise.


--
Mike Easter

[StevieO]

Your fat assed shemale (jenn) sock puppet uses IE6.


"~BD~" <~BD~@nomail.afraid.org> wrote in message
news:tJadnTcinMk2TkjRnZ2dnUVZ8gmdnZ2d@bt.com...

[~BD~]

Mike Easter wrote:
> BoaterDave wrote:
>
>> What type of work might require the use of a browser with so many
>> flaws?
>
> This is not a useful question, because it is based on the 'inner'
> thoughts and unknown configuration or requirements of this cited person

I'm afraid you are mistaken, Mike! At this link:-

http://groups.google.com/group/micro...8b9b493f?hl=en

The very *same* cited person says ........

"I do pick ups which is a part of my service. All the large Companies
and Corporations trust me and I keep the trust. I sign in with my IP and
sign out when done. Security checks are done randomly at these clients
of mine.

BTW Dave. I am Bonded and have high level Security clearances from
Canada, USA, England, France and Belgium"


>> "I am still using IE6 and I have no interest in going to IE 7, 8, or
>> 9. Mine is hardened to the max and plus and I am extremely happy with
>> it. Besides I am not able to do what I need to with any of the newer
>> versions. They (MS) took out all the codes from the newer ones that is
>> needed for my work"
>
> You can consider this snip from the wiki, which article you have already
> cited, so you must be familiar.

Indeed.

>> IE6 remained more popular than its successor in business use for more
>> than a year after IE7 came out.[19] A DailyTech article noted, "A
>> Survey found 55.2% of companies still use IE 6 as of December 2007",
>> while "IE 7 only has a 23.4 percent adoption rate".[19] - Net
>> Applications estimated IE6 market share at almost 39% for September,
>> 2008.[20] According to the same source, IE7 users migrate faster to
>> IE8 than users of its predecessor IE6 does. This led to IE6 once
>> again becoming the most widely used browser version. During the
>> summer and fall of 2009, 8 years after its introduction, IE6 still
>> held the top spot in terms of browser marketshare.[21]
>
> Consequently, one can assume that many web interfaces may have been more
> compatible with IE6 than IE7 and (still) compatible with IE6 and not
> other browsers - causing the person who we can't 'fault' or question
> because they aren't here

But he *is* here! ;-)

> to find his other options unsatisfactory.
> Then, when IE8 came out, it was initially less compatible (with those
> older cites) than IE7, causing a 'hardening' of his opinions and
> conviction.
>
> In my opinion -1- if used very carefully, one could use IE6, but it is
> dangerous -2- if used judiciously, one can use Fx almost any place you
> need to especially as more and more sites became compatible as Fx gained
> share -3- by this late date, the same sites which the unknown target IE6
> user couldn't use anything else, can now accommodate all kinds of IE and
> other browsers, so the original premise is almost entirely gone.
>
> ... which is what makes your question not useful and thus a waste of time.

As usual, he avoids answering simple questions so I guess you are right.

Always remember, though, that the truth *will* out!

[David H. Lipman]

From: "~BD~" <~BD~@nomail.afraid.org>

Please STOP your childish trolling !

You are supposed to be an adult.

Act like one !


--
Dave
Multi-AV Scanning Tool - http://www.pctipp.ch/downloads/dl/35905.asp

[StevieO]

LOL you would have better luck asking him/her
to stop praying to allah and wear his/her shoes
into the mosque.


"David H. Lipman" <DLipman~nospam~@Verizon.Net> wrote in message
news:ibbd47027lt@news1.newsguy.com...
From: "~BD~" <~BD~@nomail.afraid.org>

Please STOP your childish trolling !

You are supposed to be an adult.

Act like one !


--
Dave
Multi-AV Scanning Tool - http://www.pctipp.ch/downloads/dl/35905.asp

[~BD~]

<SNIP>

Previously, here,

<u4zdkZS0HHA.5160@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl>

You said:

"I tell you why you should "trust" Peter.

Because Peter Foldes *IS* trustworthy ...."

**

Do you still stand by what you said then, Mr Lipman?

In my own experience, Peter Foldes is a prolific liar and a total fraud.

I'd *really* like to know why you are so confident that someone using
IE6 for his /work/ can be trusted. Please advise.