Grats on 1k posts :wave:
After that Fx Fodder bomb you just dropped, I have a feeling I'll be congratulating you on 2k posts in this thread as well. :lol:
Printable View
Grats on 1k posts :wave:
After that Fx Fodder bomb you just dropped, I have a feeling I'll be congratulating you on 2k posts in this thread as well. :lol:
Thanks, I hadn't even noticed. I joined this forum back when I was in I.T. school, to help me get through the vb section.
Acctually, if you sit down and write out the logic its not that diffucult, but yeah I can see what your talking about.
Hmm....-thinks-...
How about this run another forum, thats premium user only? Nah, that would never work? Would it?
Anyways, my general prefernce is open source/freeware. If its not open source then I generally don't use it (few exceptions). Like for example Fx, MySQL, and so forth.
I never have a problem with IE to be honest. But, I can't say the same for my dad :p.
I'm Nate (short for Nathan), feelings mutual. :)
And Joe you can probably understand my frustration, when someone tells me to go do something or download something....when the fastest you can download it is at 5kb/s.
Of course I understand. I'm a forum user too. That's how I came to have this job. I configured Dad's IE for him. He didn't want to learn a new browser (he's 79).
We're a big company and I don't get to do much back end stuff here, even though my training is more back end than front. We have separate deptartments for most everything that you can think of, and I'm the forums guy, as far as JM is concerned. I do write the front end hacks, like the ones we have here.
I respect the idea of the open source movement, but I'm coming from the other side of the equation. I've tried FF and thunderbird, and they don't suit me. To each his own. To me, they have poor memory management, and gecko breaks too easily with every bump in the road. I know that's because of poorly coded sites, but the reality is there ARE many badly coded sites on the web and that's not going to be any different tomorrow than it is today. I need a browser that just plows through it all, just like I would need a car (if i had still one) that does the same thing.
If I could afford a lambourghini countach, it wouldn't be of much use to me, even though i LOVE them. I wouldn't be able to drive it around NY. The roads here would destroy it in months, whereas a jeep would plow merrily along. But the roads in NY are what they are, and that won't change anytime soon. Same principle for me with browsers.
Interesting idea, k1ll3rdr4g0n. :thumb:Quote:
Originally Posted by k1ll3rdr4g0n
It actually makes lot of sense... Ads bring revenue if users click on it and they won't if we don't... So, if you wish to get something from someone like me that never clicks on any links unless I was searching for something very specific (or perhaps by accident) then your best shot at me is to make "show ads" optional and charge for that "option" - at least you can get few bucks - better than nothing...
The question, however, is - "Am I willing to pay?". I would experiment - nothing to loose really. :)
Yeah you noitced also fx isn't to good with memory. But damn just because she's fat doesn't mean she's to ugly to date if you know what I mean ;). I was acctually toying with the idea of making a console based web browser or making my own. It would be an intresting project for me, wouldn't be to hard either because it'll just be a html praser basiaclly without any extras like java/flash ect. Hard part would probably be filtering out the colors, but displaying text and tables shouldn't be too hard. But what I like about fx is the option to disable javascript and to disable java, there should be an option for disable flash to :).Quote:
Originally Posted by JPnyc
There is, in the shell I use. You can disable activeX, scripting, Java, sounds, video, images, on a per tab basis, or a global one, from the toolbar with a click. Flash can be disabled from the same place, however it can only be disabled globally, not per tab.
It also has an activeX download blocker that prevents and prompts if any site tries to DL an activeX program. You can also merge it with SP2 to get the protection of both.
Rhino, clicks have nothing to do with it. It's not a pay-per-click deal. As I explained above, we would have much to lose. I like to be able to give the users what they ask for whenever I can, but this isn't something we could do.
I ditched Internet Explorer for Netscape about 4 years ago. I got sick of its repeated crashing. I use Firefox as my main browser. Being a web developer and having installed the web developer extension, it helps a great deal.
I've only read the past couple of replies to this thread but my opinion is, is that browsers must adhere to standards if the web is to attain any kind of consistancy in the future. This way poor design will be punished and will soon disappear.
If you declare a class in C# or VB or Java and try and assign it to an instance of a dfferent class type it will fail. Thats a good thing .... Same should apply to web design.
I thought it was so I guess I missed your explanations somewhere along the "long threads"... Sorry. :ehh:Quote:
Originally Posted by JPnyc
We won't see a 'true' standard for awhile as the web is constantly changing with new addons such as java/flash/shockwave/other. (Just my opinion).Quote:
Originally Posted by visualAd
It's not an either/or proposition though. I think most people would agree that Opera's engine is standard's compliant, but you can't choke it near as easily as you can gecko. It's a hardier engine, more resilient, less fragile.
HTML/XHTML/CSS/js are standardQuote:
We won't see a 'true' standard for awhile as the web is constantly changing with new addons such as java/flash/shockwave/other. (Just my opinion).
I think he means a real world pragmatic standard.
Quote:
Originally Posted by big blue alien
What he said ;).Quote:
Originally Posted by JPnyc
I never really tried Opera, never got the intrest. But, I suppose I shall download it if you insist. :).
LOL, I'm not that pushy. It's free now though, so why they heck not? I have to have most every browser out there, or at least the ones that will run on windows.
sorry for such a late response.... I was at a Java conference last week :)
As to 'pay-to-avoid-ads'....
We've actually tried this as well as full subscription sites. The end results were that the communities (that were big) stated they wanted this, but when we set it up, the communities didn't support it. The results were that very few people took advantage of the subscriptions or the pay-to-avoid features. As a result, we are in the last stages of removing this from a lot of our content sites. On 'file sharing' type sites (like the jupitermedia graphics sites) the subscription model makes sense. On this type of site, it has been shown not to work. I also run jGuru which has a model for paying to remove the ads. We are about to remove that section because the number of people subscirbed is too small to support the added cost of maintaining the secondary look. That site even gives better searching and other features for the subscription fee. While people say that is what they want, what we've found, is that people would rather live with the ads rather then spend a few dollars - regardless of what they say.
So the bottom line is... don't expect a 'subscription to avoid ads' here. Our working with it in the past showed it wasn't worth messing with.
Brad
I personally wouldnt pay to use ANY site.
Ads dont bug me at all.. never had any problem with slowdowns etc...
In fact.. why not add another ad at the bottom... get a little more cash and up us to the newer vBulletin!!! :) teamxbox has it and its cool.. the quickreply is really quick
anyway we SHOULD get it free really since those of you who remember.. we were the giunea (sp?) pigs for all of Jon's testing.....