Society/Culture Haha disregard that, Internet Explorer sucks

Remove this Banner Ad

Log in to remove this ad.

clogged said:
Lordy. You purport to be interested in technology yet completely miss its purpose. So what if they didn't support websites with ActiveX? Do you think anyone cared? Do you think that websites that only rendered in IE stayed that way? Or are all websites these days standards compliant?

Technology progresses and legacy apps get left behind. Why should developers continue to support problematic, proprietary technology. Firefox made the decision not to support ActiveX. It was the right one. None of the non-MS browsers that exist today support that technology. Do you think anyone misses it?
Click to expand...
Strawman, I never claimed any such thing. I never made an argument for or against ActiveX, nor did I care what happened to it. And yes many people cared when they could not use a website because it broke in Firefox at the time. You are so mentally deranged your don't even understand what my argument was. All I was arguing was that at the time IE worked on every website and Firefox did not work on 10-15% of them and mentioning ActiveX was only in the context of why it did not work. You can stay in blissful ignorance of the facts and go off and fight your strawman army all you want it has nothing to do with what I was saying.

clogged said:
Duh. Tell me where I asserted otherwise. When you posted your little diatribe MSIE had 90% desktop market share. Now it has only around 20%. How do you think lack of legacy technology support affected other browsers?

If your career is in technology and you make assertions about supporting legacy tech that quickly demises after your assertions then your entire point of view must be called into question. I can only imagine your highest calling is desktop support, because you have very little imagination beyond that.
Click to expand...
You are seriously mentally deranged thinking I was arguing for ActiveX. I was arguing for why certain websites did not work. The point is IE is still beating Firefox in market share.

OK dumbass, what was my "assertion" about Active X? Quote me.

I do not work in desktop support but am a computer analyst. Everything you post should be called into question because you are unable to even comprehend what you read.
 
slicedndiced said:
Enjoying my addictive cones as I watch this unfold on Chrome because IE sucks balls.
Click to expand...
Your pre-2006 rant is dated. Internet Explorer has been highly competitive ever since IE 7 came out in 2006 and IE 11 is very nice, but I use Chrome as well. You have to learn to be a smarter troll.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Poptech said:
No, you are REALLY, REALLY dumb. We are talking Special Olympics level.

What is my last name?
What University did I attend?

Please embarrass yourself trying to find information that does not exist online. I have had Firefox idiots chasing planted information for years now, you can join them.
Click to expand...
Aren't you the special one then.:rolleyes:
I could care less about your internet prowess.
 
Poptech said:
Your pre-2006 rant is dated. Internet Explorer has been highly competitive ever since IE 7 came out in 2006 and IE 11 is very nice, but I use Chrome as well. You have to learn to be a smarter troll.
Click to expand...
IE is utter crap. Most problems on any site I've been involved in can be traced back to the user running IE.

It is so self-admittedly bad it has a feature to use when it breaks a site.
 
Poptech said:
Strawman, I never claimed any such thing. I never made an argument for or against ActiveX, nor did I care what happened to it. And yes many people cared when they could not use a website because it broke in Firefox at the time. You are so mentally deranged your don't even understand what my argument was. All I was arguing was that at the time IE worked on every website and Firefox did not work on 10-15% of them and mentioning ActiveX was only in the context of why it did not work. You can stay in blissful ignorance of the facts and go off and fight your strawman army all you want it has nothing to do with what I was saying.


You are seriously mentally deranged thinking I was arguing for ActiveX. I was arguing for why certain websites did not work. The point is IE is still beating Firefox in market share.

OK dumbass, what was my "assertion" about Active X? Quote me.

I do not work in desktop support but am a computer analyst. Everything you post should be called into question because you are unable to even comprehend what you read.
Click to expand...
Lawl. I think what you're not comprehending, Andrew, is that your belief that not supporting legacy technology is a weakness of software. It never is, ever. You said:

15% of web pages aren't completely compatible with Firefox
Firefox is not 100% Internet Explorer and ActiveX compatible. Web pages that depend on ActiveX or were only tested in Internet Explorer will only render and work properly in Internet Explorer based browsers.
Click to expand...

So. ****ing. What? Just like the original iMac not supporting the floppy disk or iOS not supporting flash, the developers at Firefox made a design decision not to support ActiveX. Which was the right call. What you perceive as a weakness was actually a strength. The world moved on. Those 15% of websites that couldn't render in Firefox had to be redeveloped, because as Firefox, Chrome, Safari etc did not support it.

Point to any website developed after your post was made that was developed using ActiveX and you will have made your point.

But you can't see this because you are sperglord. Your pathology is writ large all over the internet. Seek help, bro.
 
Chief said:
IE is utter crap. Most problems on any site I've been involved in can be traced back to the user running IE.

It is so self-admittedly bad it has a feature to use when it breaks a site.
Click to expand...
It is good to know you next to nothing about the subject then and like most who don't know any better spread urban legends based on unsubstantiated anecdotes. Maybe you should comment in subjects where you have actual expertise, unlike this?
 
clogged said:
Lawl. I think what you're not comprehending, Andrew, is that your belief that not supporting legacy technology is a weakness of software. It never is, ever.
Click to expand...
It is quite clear you have no remote IT experience with computer illiterate comments like this as legacy support was one of the major reasons Microsoft was so successful on the desktop.

It is not a belief but reality that 10-15% of websites at that time did not work properly with Firefox and one of those reasons was lack of ActiveX support. Your mental derrangement took that as an endorsement of ActiveX when I simply made a factual statement. Arguing idiot ideology with people who do not know how to get things done in life like yourself is always entertaining. The fact is if someone went to do banking online and they could not in Firefox, that was a problem. Being a Firefox fanboy and preaching irrelevant nonsense about the problem does not change the reality for the consumer using the product that things were broke. Consumers don't care why it is broke, they just want it to work.

clogged said:
You said:
15% of web pages aren't completely compatible with Firefox
Firefox is not 100% Internet Explorer and ActiveX compatible. Web pages that depend on ActiveX or were only tested in Internet Explorer will only render and work properly in Internet Explorer based browsers.
Click to expand...
So. *******. What? Just like the original iMac not supporting the floppy disk or iOS not supporting flash, the developers at Firefox made a design decision not to support ActiveX. Which was the right call. What you perceive as a weakness was actually a strength. The world moved on. Those 15% of websites that couldn't render in Firefox had to be redeveloped, because as Firefox, Chrome, Safari etc did not support it.
Click to expand...
All irrelevant strawman arguments as nothing I said was an endorsement of ActiveX in anyway. It was a statement of fact that consumers needed to be aware of.

If a browser does not work with 10-15% of websites is that a weakness or a strength? (Yes or No)

clogged said:
Point to any website developed after your post was made that was developed using ActiveX and you will have made your point.
Click to expand...
Perpetual Strawman, it wasn't my argument. Are you still on drugs? I was never an ActiveX advocate but your previous drug use has apparently melted your brain's ability to read the actual context of what someone wrote.

You are like a clown flailing around stabbing at a strawman.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Society/Culture Haha disregard that, Internet Explorer sucks

Similar threads

Aristotle Pickett
Vic The joke that is the Victorian Liberal Party.
4 5 6 7 8
Replies
182
Views
10K
The Punter
The Punter
Geoff
The Joke that is the West Australian Liberal Party
2 3 4
Replies
75
Views
5K
E Shed
E Shed
Ohitsthatguy
Is it cool that Stokes, Murdoch and Costello own Australian media?
2 3
Replies
51
Views
3K
Gough
Gough
Alite
Pollies have Police that report to .. the same Pollies
Replies
13
Views
991
spinynorman
spinynorman
Chief
Admin Announcement Drug talk: No thanks. It's always been that way on BigFooty
Replies
0
Views
411
Chief
Chief
HurleyHepsHird
Allegations that Hillsong engaged in large scale money laundering, tax fraud and misuse of Jobkeeper to buy assets.
Replies
18
Views
1K
Ice-Wolf
Ice-Wolf

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top