Something interesting to read.

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
34 messages Options
12
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Something interesting to read.

PhillipJones
I 'll preface saying that I know nothing about the subject. But Looks
like Future versions of FF (and maybe SM if they use the technology) and
Chrome will be unwelcome on Windows due to security concerns.

http://www.zdnet.com/blog/bott/microsoft-calls-graphics-technology-in-chrome-and-firefox-harmful/3470?tag=nl.e589

I realize many of you take the particular reporter's  stuff with a Grain
of Salt Probably one of the most well know Mac Haters , and Windows
brown noser's on the planet. At this point he is just the messenger.

Any way I thought I would pass it along for people look at and debate.
If you want to pass it on to the developers of FF/SM feel free to do so.

--
Phillip M. Jones, C.E.T.        "If it's Fixed, Don't Break it"
http://www.phillipmjones.net        mailto:[hidden email]
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Something interesting to read.

Ron Hunter
On 6/17/2011 8:07 PM, PhillipJones wrote:

> I 'll preface saying that I know nothing about the subject. But Looks
> like Future versions of FF (and maybe SM if they use the technology) and
> Chrome will be unwelcome on Windows due to security concerns.
>
> http://www.zdnet.com/blog/bott/microsoft-calls-graphics-technology-in-chrome-and-firefox-harmful/3470?tag=nl.e589
>
>
> I realize many of you take the particular reporter's stuff with a Grain
> of Salt Probably one of the most well know Mac Haters , and Windows
> brown noser's on the planet. At this point he is just the messenger.
>
> Any way I thought I would pass it along for people look at and debate.
> If you want to pass it on to the developers of FF/SM feel free to do so.
>
This from a company whose browser STILL uses Active X.
Face it, ANY internet connected computer is at risk.  There are a lot of
very smart people out there who have nothing better to do, it would
seem, than to figure out ways to cause other people trouble.  Perhaps
hanging a few of them by their sex organs in the town square might deter
them, or maybe not.
Meanwhile, it isn't something I plan to get excited about, especially
since MS refuses to update my video driver software to a release that
will allow this feature to work on Firefox anyway, and HP doesn't seem
interested either.

_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Something interesting to read.

defaria
In reply to this post by PhillipJones
On 6/17/2011 6:07 PM, PhillipJones wrote:
I 'll preface saying that I know nothing about the subject.
Well that's ominous!
But Looks like Future versions of FF (and maybe SM if they use the technology) and Chrome will be unwelcome on Windows due to security concerns.
Has FF/SM or Chrome ever been welcomed on Windows?
--
Andrew DeFaria
Living on Earth may be expensive, but it includes an annual trip around the sun.

_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Something interesting to read.

PhillipJones
In reply to this post by Ron Hunter
Ron Hunter wrote:

> On 6/17/2011 8:07 PM, PhillipJones wrote:
>> I 'll preface saying that I know nothing about the subject. But Looks
>> like Future versions of FF (and maybe SM if they use the technology) and
>> Chrome will be unwelcome on Windows due to security concerns.
>>
>> http://www.zdnet.com/blog/bott/microsoft-calls-graphics-technology-in-chrome-and-firefox-harmful/3470?tag=nl.e589
>>
>>
>>
>> I realize many of you take the particular reporter's stuff with a Grain
>> of Salt Probably one of the most well know Mac Haters , and Windows
>> brown noser's on the planet. At this point he is just the messenger.
>>
>> Any way I thought I would pass it along for people look at and debate.
>> If you want to pass it on to the developers of FF/SM feel free to do so.
>>
> This from a company whose browser STILL uses Active X.
> Face it, ANY internet connected computer is at risk. There are a lot of
> very smart people out there who have nothing better to do, it would
> seem, than to figure out ways to cause other people trouble. Perhaps
> hanging a few of them by their sex organs in the town square might deter
> them, or maybe not.
> Meanwhile, it isn't something I plan to get excited about, especially
> since MS refuses to update my video driver software to a release that
> will allow this feature to work on Firefox anyway, and HP doesn't seem
> interested either.
>
Note : I have no dawg in this hunt. I'm just passing along an article.

I was thinking the same thing. Apple thinks Active-X is so insecure they
don't even allow it on Mac's they deemed it far more un-secure than
JavaScript or  Java.

--
Phillip M. Jones, C.E.T.        "If it's Fixed, Don't Break it"
http://www.phillipmjones.net        mailto:[hidden email]
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Something interesting to read.

PhillipJones
In reply to this post by defaria
Andrew DeFaria wrote:

>   On 6/17/2011 6:07 PM, PhillipJones wrote:
>> I 'll preface saying that I know nothing about the subject.
> Well that's ominous!
>> But Looks like Future versions of FF (and maybe SM if they use the
>> technology) and Chrome will be unwelcome on Windows due to security
>> concerns.
> Has FF/SM or Chrome ever been welcomed on Windows?
> --
> Andrew DeFaria <http://defaria.com>
> Living on Earth may be expensive, but it includes an annual trip around
> the sun.

Well the haven't been banned. From what this article say they could
ought right be. this is from the Quoted Material from MS.

--
Phillip M. Jones, C.E.T.        "If it's Fixed, Don't Break it"
http://www.phillipmjones.net        mailto:[hidden email]
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Something interesting to read.

Sailfish-2
In reply to this post by Ron Hunter
My bloviated meandering follows what Ron Hunter graced us with on
6/17/2011 6:19 PM:

> On 6/17/2011 8:07 PM, PhillipJones wrote:
>> I 'll preface saying that I know nothing about the subject. But Looks
>> like Future versions of FF (and maybe SM if they use the technology) and
>> Chrome will be unwelcome on Windows due to security concerns.
>>
>> http://www.zdnet.com/blog/bott/microsoft-calls-graphics-technology-in-chrome-and-firefox-harmful/3470?tag=nl.e589 
>>
>>
>>
>> I realize many of you take the particular reporter's stuff with a Grain
>> of Salt Probably one of the most well know Mac Haters , and Windows
>> brown noser's on the planet. At this point he is just the messenger.
>>
>> Any way I thought I would pass it along for people look at and debate.
>> If you want to pass it on to the developers of FF/SM feel free to do so.
>>
> This from a company whose browser STILL uses Active X.

To be fair, Active-X is to IE as XPI is to Firefox. WebGL really
addresses another deeper area; specifically, security holes that may
exist in various hardware drivers which Microsoft does not develop nor
have code-review access to, no?

> Face it, ANY internet connected computer is at risk.  There are a lot of
> very smart people out there who have nothing better to do, it would
> seem, than to figure out ways to cause other people trouble.  Perhaps
> hanging a few of them by their sex organs in the town square might deter
> them, or maybe not.
> Meanwhile, it isn't something I plan to get excited about, especially
> since MS refuses to update my video driver software to a release that
> will allow this feature to work on Firefox anyway, and HP doesn't seem
> interested either.
>



--
Sailfish - Netscape/Mozilla Champion
Netscape/Mozilla Tips: http://www.ufaq.org/ , http://ilias.ca/
Rare Mozilla Stuff: http://www.projectit.com/
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Something interesting to read.

defaria
In reply to this post by PhillipJones
On 06/17/11 19:23, PhillipJones wrote:
I was thinking the same thing. Apple thinks Active-X is so insecure they don't even allow it on Mac's they deemed it far more un-secure than JavaScript or  Java.
And they are right. Active/X is essentially a program running which has full access to whatever your user can do. As most users still run as administrator that's a lot. At least JavaScript and Java run in sandboxes thus severely limiting what it has access to.
--
Andrew DeFaria
What happens if you get scared half-to-death twice?

_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Something interesting to read.

defaria
In reply to this post by PhillipJones
On 06/17/11 19:25, PhillipJones wrote:
Andrew DeFaria wrote:
  On 6/17/2011 6:07 PM, PhillipJones wrote:
I 'll preface saying that I know nothing about the subject.
Well that's ominous!
But Looks like Future versions of FF (and maybe SM if they use the
technology) and Chrome will be unwelcome on Windows due to security
concerns.
Has FF/SM or Chrome ever been welcomed on Windows?
--
Andrew DeFaria <http://defaria.com>
Living on Earth may be expensive, but it includes an annual trip around
the sun.

Well the haven't been banned. From what this article say they could ought right be. this is from the Quoted Material from MS.
I didn't use the word ban. Not that MS has the power to ban anybody anyway.
--
Andrew DeFaria
Lead me not into temptation (I can find the way myself).

_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Something interesting to read.

Terry-21
In reply to this post by Ron Hunter
On Jun 17, 6:19 pm, Ron Hunter <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On 6/17/2011 8:07 PM, PhillipJones wrote:> I 'll preface saying that I know nothing about the subject. But Looks
> > like Future versions of FF (and maybe SM if they use the technology) and
> > Chrome will be unwelcome on Windows due to security concerns.
>
> >http://www.zdnet.com/blog/bott/microsoft-calls-graphics-technology-in...
>
> > I realize many of you take the particular reporter's stuff with a Grain
> > of Salt Probably one of the most well know Mac Haters , and Windows
> > brown noser's on the planet. At this point he is just the messenger.
>
> > Any way I thought I would pass it along for people look at and debate.
> > If you want to pass it on to the developers of FF/SM feel free to do so.
>
> This from a company whose browser STILL uses Active X.

Do the research and report back.

> Face it, ANY internet connected computer is at risk.  There are a lot of
> very smart people out there who have nothing better to do, it would
> seem, than to figure out ways to cause other people trouble.  Perhaps
> hanging a few of them by their sex organs in the town square might deter
> them, or maybe not.

And let's disregard the creator of the OS they run on?

> Meanwhile, it isn't something I plan to get excited about, especially
> since MS refuses to update my video driver software to a release that
> will allow this feature to work on Firefox anyway, and HP doesn't seem
> interested either.

Um, maybe because it's not MS's job to update your video driver?  You
might as well blame Mozilla since it's their browser you're using!

Terry R.
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Something interesting to read.

Terry-21
In reply to this post by PhillipJones
On Jun 17, 7:23 pm, PhillipJones <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Ron Hunter wrote:
> > On 6/17/2011 8:07 PM, PhillipJones wrote:
> >> I 'll preface saying that I know nothing about the subject. But Looks
> >> like Future versions of FF (and maybe SM if they use the technology) and
> >> Chrome will be unwelcome on Windows due to security concerns.
>
> >>http://www.zdnet.com/blog/bott/microsoft-calls-graphics-technology-in...
>
> >> I realize many of you take the particular reporter's stuff with a Grain
> >> of Salt Probably one of the most well know Mac Haters , and Windows
> >> brown noser's on the planet. At this point he is just the messenger.
>
> >> Any way I thought I would pass it along for people look at and debate.
> >> If you want to pass it on to the developers of FF/SM feel free to do so.
>
> > This from a company whose browser STILL uses Active X.
> > Face it, ANY internet connected computer is at risk. There are a lot of
> > very smart people out there who have nothing better to do, it would
> > seem, than to figure out ways to cause other people trouble. Perhaps
> > hanging a few of them by their sex organs in the town square might deter
> > them, or maybe not.
> > Meanwhile, it isn't something I plan to get excited about, especially
> > since MS refuses to update my video driver software to a release that
> > will allow this feature to work on Firefox anyway, and HP doesn't seem
> > interested either.
>
> Note : I have no dawg in this hunt. I'm just passing along an article.
>
> I was thinking the same thing. Apple thinks Active-X is so insecure they
> don't even allow it on Mac's they deemed it far more un-secure than
> JavaScript or  Java.
>
> --
> Phillip M. Jones, C.E.T.        "If it's Fixed, Don't Break it"http://www.phillipmjones.net       mailto:[hidden email]

That's not the reason...

Terry R.
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Something interesting to read.

Ron Hunter
In reply to this post by PhillipJones
On 6/17/2011 9:25 PM, PhillipJones wrote:

> Andrew DeFaria wrote:
>> On 6/17/2011 6:07 PM, PhillipJones wrote:
>>> I 'll preface saying that I know nothing about the subject.
>> Well that's ominous!
>>> But Looks like Future versions of FF (and maybe SM if they use the
>>> technology) and Chrome will be unwelcome on Windows due to security
>>> concerns.
>> Has FF/SM or Chrome ever been welcomed on Windows?
>> --
>> Andrew DeFaria <http://defaria.com>
>> Living on Earth may be expensive, but it includes an annual trip around
>> the sun.
>
> Well the haven't been banned. From what this article say they could
> ought right be. this is from the Quoted Material from MS.
>
Another case of the pot calling the kettle black.  ActiveX is at least
as dangerous, if not more.  Javascript is also capable of much the same
unpleasant things.
ANY connection to the internet is an exposure to millions, if not
billions, of people who think it is their mission in life to make a good
thing bad for other people.  In the end, it is each user's
responsibility to protect his/her own computer(s).

_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Something interesting to read.

defaria
On 06/18/11 01:14, Ron Hunter wrote:
On 6/17/2011 9:25 PM, PhillipJones wrote:
Andrew DeFaria wrote:
On 6/17/2011 6:07 PM, PhillipJones wrote:
I 'll preface saying that I know nothing about the subject.
Well that's ominous!
But Looks like Future versions of FF (and maybe SM if they use the
technology) and Chrome will be unwelcome on Windows due to security
concerns.
Has FF/SM or Chrome ever been welcomed on Windows?
--
Andrew DeFaria <http://defaria.com>
Living on Earth may be expensive, but it includes an annual trip around
the sun.

Well the haven't been banned. From what this article say they could
ought right be. this is from the Quoted Material from MS.

Another case of the pot calling the kettle black.  ActiveX is at least as dangerous, if not more.  Javascript is also capable of much the same unpleasant things.
ANY connection to the internet is an exposure to millions, if not billions, of people who think it is their mission in life to make a good thing bad for other people.  In the end, it is each user's responsibility to protect his/her own computer(s).

I told you a million... no a billion times - don't exaggerate! :-)
--
Andrew DeFaria
BUFFERS=20 FILES=15 2nd down, 4th quarter, 5 yards to go!

_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Something interesting to read.

Christian Riechers-3
In reply to this post by Ron Hunter
On 6/17/2011 9:25 PM, PhillipJones wrote:
> On 06/18/2011 10:14 AM, Ron Hunter wrote:
>>> On 6/17/2011 9:25 PM, PhillipJones wrote:

[snip]

>>>> But Looks like Future versions of FF (and maybe SM if they use the
>>>> technology) and Chrome will be unwelcome on Windows due to security
>>>> concerns.
>> Well the haven't been banned. From what this article say they could
>> ought right be. this is from the Quoted Material from MS.
>>
> Another case of the pot calling the kettle black.  ActiveX is at least
> as dangerous, if not more.

Comparing ActiveX and WebGL seems like comparing apples and oranges.
It's rather Silverlight MS should be concerned about.
http://muizelaar.blogspot.com/2011/06/webgl-considered-harmful.html

--
Christian
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Something interesting to read.

Prescience500 (Bugzilla)
In reply to this post by defaria
On 06/17/2011 10:02 PM, Andrew DeFaria wrote:

> On 06/17/11 19:25, PhillipJones wrote:
>> Andrew DeFaria wrote:
>>>   On 6/17/2011 6:07 PM, PhillipJones wrote:
>>>> I 'll preface saying that I know nothing about the subject.
>>> Well that's ominous!
>>>> But Looks like Future versions of FF (and maybe SM if they use the
>>>> technology) and Chrome will be unwelcome on Windows due to security
>>>> concerns.
>>> Has FF/SM or Chrome ever been welcomed on Windows?
>>> --
>>> Andrew DeFaria <http://defaria.com>
>>> Living on Earth may be expensive, but it includes an annual trip around
>>> the sun.
>>
>> Well the haven't been banned. From what this article say they could
>> ought right be. this is from the Quoted Material from MS.
> I didn't use the word ban. Not that MS has the power to ban anybody anyway.
> --
> Andrew DeFaria <http://defaria.com>
> Lead me not into temptation (I can find the way myself).

But I'd like to see them try to ban Firefox, Chrome, and Safari. I can
only imagine how the FTC or DOJ would react.
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Something interesting to read.

Ron Hunter
On 6/18/2011 11:26 AM, Michael B. wrote:

> On 06/17/2011 10:02 PM, Andrew DeFaria wrote:
>> On 06/17/11 19:25, PhillipJones wrote:
>>> Andrew DeFaria wrote:
>>>> On 6/17/2011 6:07 PM, PhillipJones wrote:
>>>>> I 'll preface saying that I know nothing about the subject.
>>>> Well that's ominous!
>>>>> But Looks like Future versions of FF (and maybe SM if they use the
>>>>> technology) and Chrome will be unwelcome on Windows due to security
>>>>> concerns.
>>>> Has FF/SM or Chrome ever been welcomed on Windows?
>>>> --
>>>> Andrew DeFaria <http://defaria.com>
>>>> Living on Earth may be expensive, but it includes an annual trip around
>>>> the sun.
>>>
>>> Well the haven't been banned. From what this article say they could
>>> ought right be. this is from the Quoted Material from MS.
>> I didn't use the word ban. Not that MS has the power to ban anybody
>> anyway.
>> --
>> Andrew DeFaria <http://defaria.com>
>> Lead me not into temptation (I can find the way myself).
>
> But I'd like to see them try to ban Firefox, Chrome, and Safari. I can
> only imagine how the FTC or DOJ would react.
Not to mention a few hundred million Firefox, Chrome, and Safari users.

_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Something interesting to read.

Sailfish-2
In reply to this post by Prescience500 (Bugzilla)
My bloviated meandering follows what Michael B. graced us with on
6/18/2011 9:26 AM:

> On 06/17/2011 10:02 PM, Andrew DeFaria wrote:
>> On 06/17/11 19:25, PhillipJones wrote:
>>> Andrew DeFaria wrote:
>>>>   On 6/17/2011 6:07 PM, PhillipJones wrote:
>>>>> I 'll preface saying that I know nothing about the subject.
>>>> Well that's ominous!
>>>>> But Looks like Future versions of FF (and maybe SM if they use the
>>>>> technology) and Chrome will be unwelcome on Windows due to security
>>>>> concerns.
>>>> Has FF/SM or Chrome ever been welcomed on Windows?
>>>> --
>>>> Andrew DeFaria <http://defaria.com>
>>>> Living on Earth may be expensive, but it includes an annual trip around
>>>> the sun.
>>>
>>> Well the haven't been banned. From what this article say they could
>>> ought right be. this is from the Quoted Material from MS.
>> I didn't use the word ban. Not that MS has the power to ban anybody
>> anyway.
>
> But I'd like to see them try to ban Firefox, Chrome, and Safari. I can
> only imagine how the FTC or DOJ would react.

Anymore, the DOJ turns a blind eye to most of the anti-competitive stuff
that multi-nationals get involved in. It's the EU that gets them to
wake-up and take notice.

--
Sailfish - Netscape/Mozilla Champion
Netscape/Mozilla Tips: http://www.ufaq.org/ , http://ilias.ca/
Rare Mozilla Stuff: http://www.projectit.com/
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Something interesting to read.

PhillipJones
In reply to this post by Prescience500 (Bugzilla)
Michael B. wrote:

> On 06/17/2011 10:02 PM, Andrew DeFaria wrote:
>> On 06/17/11 19:25, PhillipJones wrote:
>>> Andrew DeFaria wrote:
>>>> On 6/17/2011 6:07 PM, PhillipJones wrote:
>>>>> I 'll preface saying that I know nothing about the subject.
>>>> Well that's ominous!
>>>>> But Looks like Future versions of FF (and maybe SM if they use the
>>>>> technology) and Chrome will be unwelcome on Windows due to security
>>>>> concerns.
>>>> Has FF/SM or Chrome ever been welcomed on Windows?
>>>> --
>>>> Andrew DeFaria <http://defaria.com>
>>>> Living on Earth may be expensive, but it includes an annual trip around
>>>> the sun.
>>>
>>> Well the haven't been banned. From what this article say they could
>>> ought right be. this is from the Quoted Material from MS.
>> I didn't use the word ban. Not that MS has the power to ban anybody
>> anyway.
>> --
>> Andrew DeFaria <http://defaria.com>
>> Lead me not into temptation (I can find the way myself).
>
> But I'd like to see them try to ban Firefox, Chrome, and Safari. I can
> only imagine how the FTC or DOJ would react.

the two most powerful software/hardware companies in the world are
Apple/Microsoft (in no particular order). They can do anything they wish
until someone goes to court and spends tons of Money to make them do
otherwise.

MS has sued Apple to allow Active-X. Apple hasn't sued MS to allow
WMA/WMV files to work within an intermediary Plug. MS use to Make
Windows MediPlayer for Mac and just stopped. There was a year or two
where Mac user could not even view  WMV's or listen to WMA's.

MS might not take the route of banning it. They could make so they
simply won't run. Simply with the security measures they take.

--
Phillip M. Jones, C.E.T.        "If it's Fixed, Don't Break it"
http://www.phillipmjones.net        mailto:[hidden email]
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Something interesting to read.

Ron Hunter
On 6/18/2011 6:02 PM, PhillipJones wrote:

> Michael B. wrote:
>> On 06/17/2011 10:02 PM, Andrew DeFaria wrote:
>>> On 06/17/11 19:25, PhillipJones wrote:
>>>> Andrew DeFaria wrote:
>>>>> On 6/17/2011 6:07 PM, PhillipJones wrote:
>>>>>> I 'll preface saying that I know nothing about the subject.
>>>>> Well that's ominous!
>>>>>> But Looks like Future versions of FF (and maybe SM if they use the
>>>>>> technology) and Chrome will be unwelcome on Windows due to security
>>>>>> concerns.
>>>>> Has FF/SM or Chrome ever been welcomed on Windows?
>>>>> --
>>>>> Andrew DeFaria <http://defaria.com>
>>>>> Living on Earth may be expensive, but it includes an annual trip
>>>>> around
>>>>> the sun.
>>>>
>>>> Well the haven't been banned. From what this article say they could
>>>> ought right be. this is from the Quoted Material from MS.
>>> I didn't use the word ban. Not that MS has the power to ban anybody
>>> anyway.
>>> --
>>> Andrew DeFaria <http://defaria.com>
>>> Lead me not into temptation (I can find the way myself).
>>
>> But I'd like to see them try to ban Firefox, Chrome, and Safari. I can
>> only imagine how the FTC or DOJ would react.
>
> the two most powerful software/hardware companies in the world are
> Apple/Microsoft (in no particular order). They can do anything they wish
> until someone goes to court and spends tons of Money to make them do
> otherwise.
>
> MS has sued Apple to allow Active-X. Apple hasn't sued MS to allow
> WMA/WMV files to work within an intermediary Plug. MS use to Make
> Windows MediPlayer for Mac and just stopped. There was a year or two
> where Mac user could not even view WMV's or listen to WMA's.
>
> MS might not take the route of banning it. They could make so they
> simply won't run. Simply with the security measures they take.
>
I can imagine a few million faxes to Congress would get their attention.
  How many users does FF have in the US?  How many for Chrome?  I don't
think MS is quite that stupid.
Of course, if Apple can endeavor to snatch 30% of the profits on in-app
purchases through Apple App Store applications, maybe MS IS that stupid
also.

_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Something interesting to read.

defaria
In reply to this post by PhillipJones
On 06/18/11 16:02, PhillipJones wrote:
Michael B. wrote:
On 06/17/2011 10:02 PM, Andrew DeFaria wrote:
On 06/17/11 19:25, PhillipJones wrote:
Andrew DeFaria wrote:
On 6/17/2011 6:07 PM, PhillipJones wrote:
I 'll preface saying that I know nothing about the subject.
Well that's ominous!
But Looks like Future versions of FF (and maybe SM if they use the
technology) and Chrome will be unwelcome on Windows due to security
concerns.
Has FF/SM or Chrome ever been welcomed on Windows?
--
Andrew DeFaria <http://defaria.com>
Living on Earth may be expensive, but it includes an annual trip around
the sun.

Well the haven't been banned. From what this article say they could
ought right be. this is from the Quoted Material from MS.
I didn't use the word ban. Not that MS has the power to ban anybody
anyway.
--
Andrew DeFaria <http://defaria.com>
Lead me not into temptation (I can find the way myself).

But I'd like to see them try to ban Firefox, Chrome, and Safari. I can
only imagine how the FTC or DOJ would react.

the two most powerful software/hardware companies in the world are Apple/Microsoft (in no particular order). They can do anything they wish until someone goes to court and spends tons of Money to make them do otherwise.
Sorry but this is quite simply, and totally bullshit! How exactly can MS stop me for performing an install of a software product, any software I frigging want, onto my machine? Will the send goons to my house to break my kneecaps? No they can't do that. What if I simply tell MS "fuck you"? What exactly are they gonna do? Answer: Nothing - because they can't.
MS has sued Apple to allow Active-X. Apple hasn't sued MS to allow WMA/WMV files to work within an intermediary Plug. MS use to Make Windows MediPlayer for Mac and just stopped. There was a year or two where Mac user could not even view  WMV's or listen to WMA's.
Man WFT are you talking about?
MS might not take the route of banning it.
MS can't ban it. They cannot enforce such things. Force is solely in the domain of the government, not MS.
They could make so they simply won't run. Simply with the security measures they take.
WTF are you talking about?
--
Andrew DeFaria
A truly wise man never plays leapfrog with a unicorn.

_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Something interesting to read.

Jay Garcia
On 18.06.2011 21:25, Andrew DeFaria wrote:

 --- Original Message ---

> On 06/18/11 16:02, PhillipJones wrote:
>> Michael B. wrote:
>>> On 06/17/2011 10:02 PM, Andrew DeFaria wrote:
>>>> On 06/17/11 19:25, PhillipJones wrote:
>>>>> Andrew DeFaria wrote:
>>>>>> On 6/17/2011 6:07 PM, PhillipJones wrote:
>>>>>>> I 'll preface saying that I know nothing about the subject.
>>>>>> Well that's ominous!
>>>>>>> But Looks like Future versions of FF (and maybe SM if they use the
>>>>>>> technology) and Chrome will be unwelcome on Windows due to security
>>>>>>> concerns.
>>>>>> Has FF/SM or Chrome ever been welcomed on Windows?
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Andrew DeFaria <http://defaria.com>
>>>>>> Living on Earth may be expensive, but it includes an annual trip around
>>>>>> the sun.
>>>>>
>>>>> Well the haven't been banned. From what this article say they could
>>>>> ought right be. this is from the Quoted Material from MS.
>>>> I didn't use the word ban. Not that MS has the power to ban anybody
>>>> anyway.
>>>> --
>>>> Andrew DeFaria <http://defaria.com>
>>>> Lead me not into temptation (I can find the way myself).
>>>
>>> But I'd like to see them try to ban Firefox, Chrome, and Safari. I can
>>> only imagine how the FTC or DOJ would react.
>>
>> the two most powerful software/hardware companies in the world are
>> Apple/Microsoft (in no particular order). They can do anything they wish until
>> someone goes to court and spends tons of Money to make them do otherwise.
> Sorry but this is quite simply, and totally bullshit! How exactly can MS stop me
> for performing an install of a software product, any software I frigging want,
> onto my machine? Will the send goons to my house to break my kneecaps? No they
> can't do that. What if I simply tell MS "fuck you"? What exactly are they gonna
> do? Answer: Nothing - because they can't.
>> MS has sued Apple to allow Active-X. Apple hasn't sued MS to allow WMA/WMV
>> files to work within an intermediary Plug. MS use to Make Windows MediPlayer
>> for Mac and just stopped. There was a year or two where Mac user could not
>> even view  WMV's or listen to WMA's.
> Man WFT are you talking about?
>> MS might not take the route of banning it.
> MS can't ban it. They cannot enforce such things. Force is solely in the domain
> of the government, not MS.
>> They could make so they simply won't run. Simply with the security measures
>> they take.
> WTF are you talking about?
> --
> Andrew DeFaria <http://defaria.com>
> A truly wise man never plays leapfrog with a unicorn.

Man-o-Man you really fell outta your tree in this reply.

--
*Jay Garcia - Netscape Champion*
www.ufaq.org
Netscape - Firefox - SeaMonkey - Thunderbird
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
12