Worst Browser Ever, but could be the best.

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
70 messages Options
1234
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Worst Browser Ever, but could be the best.

Wolf K.
On 2017-11-09 10:43, Caver1 wrote:

> On 11/9/17 3:34 AM, PietB wrote:
>> Caver1 wrote:
>>> My mother-in-law doesn't think she has the internet even though she
>>> is constanly on it for Facebook, Instagram, her email, whatever.
>>> Just can't convince her of that fact.
>>
>> If she makes the common mistake "internet = www" she's right.
>>
>> -p
>>
>
> Most people I know don't know the difference and if you try to explain
> the difference they just get more confused.

Do the highway/destination simile:

Internet == highway network
www == restaurant, town, service centre, whatever...

If they ask, "But how do I get there?" answer: "All those li'l electrons
carry the message, and they know where to go. Like a taxi."

Trust me, that works.

And kindly don't go all literalist on me. Metaphor and simile work
because they are _not_ literal.

Have good day,

--
Wolf K
kirkwood40.blogspot.com
"Wanted. Schrödinger’s Cat. Dead and Alive."
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Worst Browser Ever, but could be the best.

Wolf K.
In reply to this post by WaltS48-5
On 2017-11-09 13:11, WaltS48 wrote:

> On 11/9/17 1:03 PM, Ron Hunter wrote:
>> On 11/9/2017 7:40 AM, WaltS48 wrote:
>>> On 11/8/17 11:11 PM, The Real Bev wrote:
>>>> On 11/08/2017 02:33 PM, WaltS48 wrote:
>>>
>>> <snip>
>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Anybody know a Modem/Router that works with Comcast/Xfinity
>>>>> Internet and
>>>>> Voice? Let me know so I can save $10 a month on the modem rental
>>>>> fee. I
>>>>> did do some window shopping, but didn't  find anything at Best Buy or
>>>>> Target.
>>>>
>>>> We've always used standard Motorola cablemodems with Charter, but
>>>> the latest one is a Cisco.  Mostly from yardsales.  What does
>>>> Comcast say is required?
>>>>
>>>
>>> After doing some research last night, it appears I can get the Arris
>>> Model No: SVG2482AC Modem/Router for $239.99 plus tax from Best Buy.
>>>
>>> AIUI from reading the reviews, it is the one I will be renting. I'll
>>> probably buy it next year after I've banked some of that savings.
>>>
>>> I do recall seeing a $239.99 price tag on the shelf at Best Buy, but
>>> didn't look at the product because of the cost.
>>>
>> I would NOT buy a cable modem.  My cable company supplies a modem
>> compatible with their service, and will replace it free should it
>> fail.  I have never been able keep a cable modem working more than two
>> or three years before it fails, or the service upgrades the service,
>> and replaces it with a different model.  At $240, you might get three
>> or four years out of it, then have to replace it out of your own
>> pocket.  I don't pay extra for the modem any more, so I can't see
>> taking on that obligation.
>>
>
> Thanks for the input.
>
> So you are not paying a $10 monthly rental fee?
>
> I don't recall them telling me it was included with the service once the
> promotional period was over.
>

You have to watch the fine print. Promotions change from one version to
the next. Just because they offered X last time doesn't mean they'll
offer X again.

--
Wolf K
kirkwood40.blogspot.com
"Wanted. Schrödinger’s Cat. Dead and Alive."
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Worst Browser Ever, but could be the best.

Lynn McGuire-2
In reply to this post by The Real Bev
On 11/8/2017 2:55 PM, The Real Bev wrote:

> On 11/08/2017 11:49 AM, Lynn McGuire wrote:
>> On 11/7/2017 2:27 PM, Christian Riechers wrote:
>>> On 11/7/17 7:13 PM, Lynn McGuire wrote:
>>>> On 11/6/2017 4:34 PM, Mark12547 wrote:
>>>>> In article <[hidden email]>,
>>>>> lynnmcguire5
>>>>> @gmail.com says...
>>>>>> I filed a bug on the ads burning cpu and ram but nothing has
>>>>>> happened.
>>>>>>       https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1392137
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm the "Mark" that participated in that Bug report (comments 14 &
>>>>> 16).
>>>>>
>>>>> I remember back three decades ago installing an ad blocker because
>>>>> "rich
>>>>> content" ads were consuming too many resources and blocking the
>>>>> rendering of the web page until the "rich content" had finished
>>>>> playing.
>>>>> It's ironic that today ads are still consuming too many resources,
>>>>> even
>>>>> when our Internet connection is 100,000 times faster, as well as
>>>>> faster
>>>>> and larger computer systems.
>>>>>
>>>>> At least that bug report got a priority of P3, which means they
>>>>> haven't
>>>>> forgotten about it yet. I doubt it will get any traction before the
>>>>> teething problems of the Firefox Quantum 57 rollout is complete.
>>>>
>>>> Gotcha.
>>>>
>>>> One of the resolutions might be to include a minimal ad blocker inside
>>>> FireFox.  It is time.
>>>
>>> What prevents you from simply installing an ad blocker?
>>> It's not like there's no choice.
>>
>> Not everyone has the expertise to do so.
>
> That's really hard to believe.

Would your mother know how to ?

I used to help my grandmother with Windows 95.  Now that was a real test
of love as she did not have a clue but she could read email.

Lynn


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

Re: Worst Browser Ever, but could be the best.

caver1-5
In reply to this post by Wolf K.
On 11/9/17 1:46 PM, Wolf K wrote:

> On 2017-11-09 10:43, Caver1 wrote:
>> On 11/9/17 3:34 AM, PietB wrote:
>>> Caver1 wrote:
>>>> My mother-in-law doesn't think she has the internet even though she
>>>> is constanly on it for Facebook, Instagram, her email, whatever.
>>>> Just can't convince her of that fact.
>>>
>>> If she makes the common mistake "internet = www" she's right.
>>>
>>> -p
>>>
>>
>> Most people I know don't know the difference and if you try to explain
>> the difference they just get more confused.
>
> Do the highway/destination simile:
>
> Internet == highway network
> www == restaurant, town, service centre, whatever...
>
> If they ask, "But how do I get there?" answer: "All those li'l electrons
> carry the message, and they know where to go. Like a taxi."
>
> Trust me, that works.
>
> And kindly don't go all literalist on me. Metaphor and simile work
> because they are _not_ literal.
>
> Have good day,
>

Good point. But when the telecom companies (ISPs) advertise it as
internet sometimes it's just not worth it.  :)

--
Caver1
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Worst Browser Ever, but could be the best.

The Real Bev
In reply to this post by Lynn McGuire-2
On 11/09/2017 11:18 AM, Lynn McGuire wrote:

> On 11/8/2017 2:55 PM, The Real Bev wrote:
>> On 11/08/2017 11:49 AM, Lynn McGuire wrote:
>>> On 11/7/2017 2:27 PM, Christian Riechers wrote:
>>>> On 11/7/17 7:13 PM, Lynn McGuire wrote:
>>>>> On 11/6/2017 4:34 PM, Mark12547 wrote:
>>>>>> In article <[hidden email]>,
>>>>>>  lynnmcguire5 @gmail.com says...
>>>>>>> I filed a bug on the ads burning cpu and ram but nothing
>>>>>>> has happened.
>>>>>>> https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1392137
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'm the "Mark" that participated in that Bug report
>>>>>> (comments 14 & 16).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I remember back three decades ago installing an ad blocker
>>>>>> because "rich content" ads were consuming too many
>>>>>> resources and blocking the rendering of the web page until
>>>>>> the "rich content" had finished playing. It's ironic that
>>>>>> today ads are still consuming too many resources, even
>>>>>> when our Internet connection is 100,000 times faster, as
>>>>>> well as faster and larger computer systems.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> At least that bug report got a priority of P3, which means
>>>>>> they haven't forgotten about it yet. I doubt it will get
>>>>>> any traction before the teething problems of the Firefox
>>>>>> Quantum 57 rollout is complete.
>>>>>
>>>>> Gotcha.
>>>>>
>>>>> One of the resolutions might be to include a minimal ad
>>>>> blocker inside FireFox.  It is time.
>>>>
>>>> What prevents you from simply installing an ad blocker? It's
>>>> not like there's no choice.
>>>
>>> Not everyone has the expertise to do so.
>>
>> That's really hard to believe.
>
> Would your mother know how to ?

No, but if I showed her how to install add-ons she'd be able to do it
from then on.

She always regretted not learning to deal with computers while she was
at work (she retired at 78), so she was older than that when we forced
the computer on her.  As I mentioned previously, solitaire is an
excellent introduction to computer usage for seniors.  They get mouse
skills and a higher comfort level.  The value of email is obvious, and a
browser can be used to find recipes for restaurant food etc.

It's really hard to learn something you're not interested in no matter
what age you are.

> I used to help my grandmother with Windows 95.  Now that was a real
> test of love as she did not have a clue but she could read email.

I would think that Thunderbird or equivalent would be a much easier way
to read email than gmail on the web (which I loathe and despise) but I
could be wrong -- I started out with Netscape .9 and went on from there,
so it's what I'm used to.

--
Cheers, Bev
    "Not everyone can be above average so why
     shouldn't we be the ones to suck?"
              --Anonymous School Board Member
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Worst Browser Ever, but could be the best.

Ron Hunter
In reply to this post by WaltS48-5
On 11/9/2017 12:11 PM, WaltS48 wrote:

> On 11/9/17 1:03 PM, Ron Hunter wrote:
>> On 11/9/2017 7:40 AM, WaltS48 wrote:
>>> On 11/8/17 11:11 PM, The Real Bev wrote:
>>>> On 11/08/2017 02:33 PM, WaltS48 wrote:
>>>
>>> <snip>
>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Anybody know a Modem/Router that works with Comcast/Xfinity
>>>>> Internet and
>>>>> Voice? Let me know so I can save $10 a month on the modem rental
>>>>> fee. I
>>>>> did do some window shopping, but didn't  find anything at Best Buy or
>>>>> Target.
>>>>
>>>> We've always used standard Motorola cablemodems with Charter, but
>>>> the latest one is a Cisco.  Mostly from yardsales.  What does
>>>> Comcast say is required?
>>>>
>>>
>>> After doing some research last night, it appears I can get the Arris
>>> Model No: SVG2482AC Modem/Router for $239.99 plus tax from Best Buy.
>>>
>>> AIUI from reading the reviews, it is the one I will be renting. I'll
>>> probably buy it next year after I've banked some of that savings.
>>>
>>> I do recall seeing a $239.99 price tag on the shelf at Best Buy, but
>>> didn't look at the product because of the cost.
>>>
>> I would NOT buy a cable modem.  My cable company supplies a modem
>> compatible with their service, and will replace it free should it
>> fail.  I have never been able keep a cable modem working more than two
>> or three years before it fails, or the service upgrades the service,
>> and replaces it with a different model.  At $240, you might get three
>> or four years out of it, then have to replace it out of your own
>> pocket.  I don't pay extra for the modem any more, so I can't see
>> taking on that obligation.
>>
>
> Thanks for the input.
>
> So you are not paying a $10 monthly rental fee?
>
> I don't recall them telling me it was included with the service once the
> promotional period was over.
> Nope.  Used to be $5, but they dropped that, and went up on the monthly
charge...  Wonder why.  Grin.

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

Re: Worst Browser Ever, but could be the best.

PietB-2
In reply to this post by Ron Hunter
Ron Hunter wrote:
> My sister in law, and my wife both consider the internet 'the computer'.
>   My wife will wake me up and tell me 'the computer is down', and I have
> to ask her what she was trying to do, and 'I can't get on email.'  Of
> course the computer isn't down, and a couple of quick tests reveals that
> the Charter email servers are down, again.  Wait an hour or two, and the
> computer is magically fixed...

Sounds like a conspiracy to wake you up.

-p

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

Re: Worst Browser Ever, but could be the best.

Daniel
In reply to this post by The Real Bev
On 10/11/2017 7:46 AM, The Real Bev wrote:

<Snip>

> I would think that Thunderbird or equivalent would be a much easier way
> to read email than gmail on the web (which I loathe and despise) but I
> could be wrong -- I started out with Netscape .9 and went on from there,
> so it's what I'm used to.
>
Back in 1996, when I first got on-line, my ISP gave me two 5.25 inch
floppy disks (Remember them?? Silly question ... of course all us "old
fogies" here remember them!!).

One disk had WinSock type programs, the other had Netscape 0.9 on it. I
think I've still got that disk somewhere hereabouts!!

--
Daniel

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:51.0) Gecko/20100101
SeaMonkey/2.48 Build identifier: 20170329183526

Go Dallas Cowgirls!! .... Err!! ... Um!! .. I mean *Go Dallas Cowboys* !!
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Worst Browser Ever, but could be the best.

Wolf K.
On 2017-11-10 07:57, Daniel wrote:

> On 10/11/2017 7:46 AM, The Real Bev wrote:
>
> <Snip>
>
>> I would think that Thunderbird or equivalent would be a much easier way
>> to read email than gmail on the web (which I loathe and despise) but I
>> could be wrong -- I started out with Netscape .9 and went on from there,
>> so it's what I'm used to.
>>
> Back in 1996, when I first got on-line, my ISP gave me two 5.25 inch
> floppy disks (Remember them?? Silly question ... of course all us "old
> fogies" here remember them!!).
>
> One disk had WinSock type programs, the other had Netscape 0.9 on it. I
> think I've still got that disk somewhere hereabouts!!
>


Museum fodder. :-)

--
Wolf K
kirkwood40.blogspot.com
"Wanted. Schrödinger’s Cat. Dead and Alive."
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Worst Browser Ever, but could be the best.

WaltS48-5
In reply to this post by Daniel
On 11/10/17 7:57 AM, Daniel wrote:

> On 10/11/2017 7:46 AM, The Real Bev wrote:
>
> <Snip>
>
>> I would think that Thunderbird or equivalent would be a much easier way
>> to read email than gmail on the web (which I loathe and despise) but I
>> could be wrong -- I started out with Netscape .9 and went on from there,
>> so it's what I'm used to.
>>
> Back in 1996, when I first got on-line, my ISP gave me two 5.25 inch
> floppy disks (Remember them?? Silly question ... of course all us "old
> fogies" here remember them!!).
>
> One disk had WinSock type programs, the other had Netscape 0.9 on it. I
> think I've still got that disk somewhere hereabouts!!
>

We used 5.25 inch floppies and punch tape at work for awhile.

Still have an unused 3.5 inch floppy drive in my desktop computer.

--
Go Bills, Steelers, Pitt, Pens and Sabres!
Coexist <https://www.coexist.org/>
National Popular Vote <http://www.nationalpopularvote.com/>
Ubuntu 16.04LTS - Unity Desktop
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Worst Browser Ever, but could be the best.

PietB-2
WaltS48 wrote:
> We used 5.25 inch floppies and punch tape at work for awhile.

#metoo ;-)

-p

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

Re: Worst Browser Ever, but could be the best.

RAV-2
In reply to this post by Daniel
On 11/10/2017 7:57 AM, Daniel wrote:

> On 10/11/2017 7:46 AM, The Real Bev wrote:
>
> <Snip>
>
>> I would think that Thunderbird or equivalent would be a much easier way
>> to read email than gmail on the web (which I loathe and despise) but I
>> could be wrong -- I started out with Netscape .9 and went on from there,
>> so it's what I'm used to.
>>
> Back in 1996, when I first got on-line, my ISP gave me two 5.25 inch
> floppy disks (Remember them?? Silly question ... of course all us "old
> fogies" here remember them!!).
>
> One disk had WinSock type programs, the other had Netscape 0.9 on it. I
> think I've still got that disk somewhere hereabouts!!
>

I still have an 8" IBM floppy disk (type 2D) from the late '70s.  They
hold all of 1.2MB.  They seem ridiculously large but were a vast
improvement over the DC300 204KB tape cartridges we had used previously.
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Worst Browser Ever, but could be the best.

The Real Bev
In reply to this post by PietB-2
On 11/10/2017 07:32 AM, PietB wrote:
> WaltS48 wrote:
>> We used 5.25 inch floppies and punch tape at work for awhile.

8" floppies at home.  Punch cards at work.  HAH-ha!

--
Cheers,Bev
   "It is a matter of regret that many low, mean suspicions
    turn out to be well-founded."       -- Edgar Watson Howe
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Worst Browser Ever, but could be the best.

Balaco
In reply to this post by calmar71
Em 05-11-2017 08:51, [hidden email] escreveu:

> You guys need to do some SERIOUS work on Firefox.
>
> Its SHIT!!
>
> I've never come across ANY browser as slow as this. I get CONSTANT "not responding" messages. I cant even scroll the length of a webpage without it freezing. Hell, I can even post to Facebook half the time. Its always 3 sentences behind, and forgotten half of whats typed by the time it tries to catch up.
>
> It's using FAR TOO MUCH resources. The load on people's computers MUST be reduced, and quickly.
>
> Until then, sorry guys, but its off all 4 of my computers. I do a lot of web development, and cant afford the time wasted waiting on this browser to actually work as it should. Its utter garbage as it is.
>
> Back to Chrome for me. At least it works when you ask it to.
>

Do not use Chrome, it is a browser that uses *much* more resources than
the amount Firefox uses (and I know and agree with you it is much,
bigger than it could be), it does not respect your privacy and is a
basically fake open source project. Fake because we *cannot* have its
sources, and it contains hidden things.

With the same base, which is Chromium, there is the Vivaldi browser,
which I recommend. And there is also Opera, which I do not recommend due
what they abandoned - a very big history with network privacy and other
rare features - after version 12.
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Worst Browser Ever, but could be the best.

Lucifer Morningstar
In reply to this post by WaltS48-5
On Fri, 10 Nov 2017 09:38:04 -0500, WaltS48 <[hidden email]>
wrote:

>On 11/10/17 7:57 AM, Daniel wrote:
>> On 10/11/2017 7:46 AM, The Real Bev wrote:
>>
>> <Snip>
>>
>>> I would think that Thunderbird or equivalent would be a much easier way
>>> to read email than gmail on the web (which I loathe and despise) but I
>>> could be wrong -- I started out with Netscape .9 and went on from there,
>>> so it's what I'm used to.
>>>
>> Back in 1996, when I first got on-line, my ISP gave me two 5.25 inch
>> floppy disks (Remember them?? Silly question ... of course all us "old
>> fogies" here remember them!!).
>>
>> One disk had WinSock type programs, the other had Netscape 0.9 on it. I
>> think I've still got that disk somewhere hereabouts!!
>>
>
>We used 5.25 inch floppies and punch tape at work for awhile.
>
>Still have an unused 3.5 inch floppy drive in my desktop computer.

I had an IBM System 34 mini computer. It had an autoloader 8"
floppy drive that could hold and load 10 floppy disks.
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Worst Browser Ever, but could be the best.

Luis
In reply to this post by Balaco
Balaco wrote:

> Em 05-11-2017 08:51, [hidden email] escreveu:
>> You guys need to do some SERIOUS work on Firefox.
>>
>> Its SHIT!!
>>
>> I've never come across ANY browser as slow as this. I get CONSTANT
>> "not responding" messages. I cant even scroll the length of a webpage
>> without it freezing. Hell, I can even post to Facebook half the time.
>> Its always 3 sentences behind, and forgotten half of whats typed by
>> the time it tries to catch up.
>>
>> It's using FAR TOO MUCH resources. The load on people's computers MUST
>> be reduced, and quickly.
>>
>> Until then, sorry guys, but its off all 4 of my computers. I do a lot
>> of web development, and cant afford the time wasted waiting on this
>> browser to actually work as it should. Its utter garbage as it is.
>>
>> Back to Chrome for me. At least it works when you ask it to.
>>
>
> Do not use Chrome, it is a browser that uses *much* more resources than
> the amount Firefox uses (and I know and agree with you it is much,
> bigger than it could be), it does not respect your privacy and is a
> basically fake open source project. Fake because we *cannot* have its
> sources, and it contains hidden things.
>
> With the same base, which is Chromium, there is the Vivaldi browser,
> which I recommend. And there is also Opera, which I do not recommend due
> what they abandoned - a very big history with network privacy and other
> rare features - after version 12.
I use Opera as my default browser which last ver 49.0, BTW, has
incorporated an excellent snapshot. But regarding "network privacy":
What network privacy? There is no such a thing nowadays. Every OS, every
App, every mobile phone, tablet and lots of web sites plus Smart TV's,
services providers and of course social networks they all sniff our
lives with impunity. Browsers included particularly those running
Chromium engine and of course Edge and Internet Explorer. There is
nothing we can do about except protecting ourselves the best we can or
throw away anything connected to Internet.
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Worst Browser Ever, but could be the best.

Daniel
In reply to this post by Wolf K.
On 11/11/2017 1:10 AM, Wolf K wrote:

> On 2017-11-10 07:57, Daniel wrote:
>> On 10/11/2017 7:46 AM, The Real Bev wrote:
>>
>> <Snip>
>>
>>> I would think that Thunderbird or equivalent would be a much easier way
>>> to read email than gmail on the web (which I loathe and despise) but I
>>> could be wrong -- I started out with Netscape .9 and went on from there,
>>> so it's what I'm used to.
>>>
>> Back in 1996, when I first got on-line, my ISP gave me two 5.25 inch
>> floppy disks (Remember them?? Silly question ... of course all us "old
>> fogies" here remember them!!).
>>
>> One disk had WinSock type programs, the other had Netscape 0.9 on it.
>> I think I've still got that disk somewhere hereabouts!!
>
> Museum fodder. :-)
>
Yeap!!

--
Daniel

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:51.0) Gecko/20100101
SeaMonkey/2.48 Build identifier: 20170329183526

Go Dallas Cowgirls!! .... Err!! ... Um!! .. I mean *Go Dallas Cowboys* !!
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Worst Browser Ever, but could be the best.

Ed Mullen-10
In reply to this post by Lucifer Morningstar
On 11/10/2017 at 4:41 PM, Lucifer Morningstar created this epitome of
digital genius:

> On Fri, 10 Nov 2017 09:38:04 -0500, WaltS48 <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
>> On 11/10/17 7:57 AM, Daniel wrote:
>>> On 10/11/2017 7:46 AM, The Real Bev wrote:
>>>
>>> <Snip>
>>>
>>>> I would think that Thunderbird or equivalent would be a much easier way
>>>> to read email than gmail on the web (which I loathe and despise) but I
>>>> could be wrong -- I started out with Netscape .9 and went on from there,
>>>> so it's what I'm used to.
>>>>
>>> Back in 1996, when I first got on-line, my ISP gave me two 5.25 inch
>>> floppy disks (Remember them?? Silly question ... of course all us "old
>>> fogies" here remember them!!).
>>>
>>> One disk had WinSock type programs, the other had Netscape 0.9 on it. I
>>> think I've still got that disk somewhere hereabouts!!
>>>
>>
>> We used 5.25 inch floppies and punch tape at work for awhile.
>>
>> Still have an unused 3.5 inch floppy drive in my desktop computer.
>
> I had an IBM System 34 mini computer. It had an autoloader 8"
> floppy drive that could hold and load 10 floppy disks.
>

You personally had a System 34?!!! A company I worked for from 1978 to
1986 got one to run the business in 1979.  Inventory, payroll, and some
marketing tasks.

--
Ed Mullen
http://edmullen.net/
If you believe in telekinesis, raise my hand.
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Worst Browser Ever, but could be the best.

Ron Hunter
On 11/11/2017 11:17 AM, Ed Mullen wrote:

> On 11/10/2017 at 4:41 PM, Lucifer Morningstar created this epitome of
> digital genius:
>> On Fri, 10 Nov 2017 09:38:04 -0500, WaltS48 <[hidden email]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On 11/10/17 7:57 AM, Daniel wrote:
>>>> On 10/11/2017 7:46 AM, The Real Bev wrote:
>>>>
>>>> <Snip>
>>>>
>>>>> I would think that Thunderbird or equivalent would be a much easier
>>>>> way
>>>>> to read email than gmail on the web (which I loathe and despise) but I
>>>>> could be wrong -- I started out with Netscape .9 and went on from
>>>>> there,
>>>>> so it's what I'm used to.
>>>>>
>>>> Back in 1996, when I first got on-line, my ISP gave me two 5.25 inch
>>>> floppy disks (Remember them?? Silly question ... of course all us "old
>>>> fogies" here remember them!!).
>>>>
>>>> One disk had WinSock type programs, the other had Netscape 0.9 on it. I
>>>> think I've still got that disk somewhere hereabouts!!
>>>>
>>>
>>> We used 5.25 inch floppies and punch tape at work for awhile.
>>>
>>> Still have an unused 3.5 inch floppy drive in my desktop computer.
>>
>> I had an IBM System 34 mini computer. It had an autoloader 8"
>> floppy drive that could hold and load 10 floppy disks.
>>
>
> You personally had a System 34?!!! A company I worked for from 1978 to
> 1986 got one to run the business in 1979.  Inventory, payroll, and some
> marketing tasks.
>
I took an RPG programming language course on one, I think.

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

Re: Worst Browser Ever, but could be the best.

responder-2
In reply to this post by WaltS48-5
On 11/10/2017 9:38 AM, WaltS48 wrote:

> On 11/10/17 7:57 AM, Daniel wrote:
>> On 10/11/2017 7:46 AM, The Real Bev wrote:
>>
>> <Snip>
>>
>>> I would think that Thunderbird or equivalent would be a much easier way
>>> to read email than gmail on the web (which I loathe and despise) but I
>>> could be wrong -- I started out with Netscape .9 and went on from there,
>>> so it's what I'm used to.
>>>
>> Back in 1996, when I first got on-line, my ISP gave me two 5.25 inch
>> floppy disks (Remember them?? Silly question ... of course all us "old
>> fogies" here remember them!!).
>>
>> One disk had WinSock type programs, the other had Netscape 0.9 on it.
>> I think I've still got that disk somewhere hereabouts!!
>>
>
> We used 5.25 inch floppies and punch tape at work for awhile.
>
> Still have an unused 3.5 inch floppy drive in my desktop computer.
>
And our first Stromberg-Carlson  DCO telecom switch recorded the call
records on 20" Winchester tape drives
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
1234