[Info-vax] IE8 got me too :-( Sorry Jeff.

[AEF]

On Jan 18, 3:22 pm, "Richard B. Gilbert" <rgilber... at comcast.net>
wrote:
> Bill Gunshannon wrote:
> > In article <v4adnax7iuzG8cnWnZ2dnUVZ_j2dn... at giganews.com>,
> >    "Richard B. Gilbert" <rgilber... at comcast.net> writes:
> >> Bill Gunshannon wrote:
> >>> In article <4b53ca5d$0$273$14726... at news.sunsite.dk>,
> >>>    Arne Vajhøj <a... at vajhoej.dk> writes:
> >>>> On 14-01-2010 08:07, Bill Gunshannon wrote:
> >>>>> In article<4b4e8718$0$282$14726... at news.sunsite.dk>,
> >>>>>    Arne Vajhøj<a... at vajhoej.dk>  writes:
> >>>>>> On 13-01-2010 21:31, VAXman- @SendSpamHere.ORG wrote:
> >>>>>>> In article<4b4e7946$0$279$14726... at news.sunsite.dk>, =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Arne_Vajh=F8j?=<a... at vajhoej.dk>   writes:
> >>>>>>>> On 13-01-2010 08:50, AEF wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> I actually tried IE8 at work, hoping it would be better than IE6. But
> >>>>>>>>> it was blurrier on the monitor. I checked it on others' machines and
> >>>>>>>>> the blurriness varied, and all the monitors were ViewSonics. (I did
> >>>>>>>>> only check 2 or 3 others, but mine was blurrier than IE6 and that's
> >>>>>>>>> all that really mattered to me.) So I went back to IE6. And I did
> >>>>>>>>> check if you could do that before I tried IE8. It turns out that all
> >>>>>>>>> you have to do is uninstall it, except that a certain OS patch would
> >>>>>>>>> get in the way if you have it and you'd have to uninstall that first,
> >>>>>>>>> then reinstall after expunging IE8 from your machine.
>
> >>>>>>>>> I do have Firefox installed at work and I use that for some sites, but
> >>>>>>>>> others work better on IE6. Hate the spastic Find function in IE6, but
> >>>>>>>>> at least you can use it to highlight a link, or get near it with an
> >>>>>>>>> easier target and then tab to the link, and without the mouse just
> >>>>>>>>> press Return and it works! Safari can't do that, but Safari is better
> >>>>>>>>> with multiple choice items in forms and for printing. Safari puts all
> >>>>>>>>> the print params on a single page! I've never understood why all the
> >>>>>>>>> important things like page size, orientation, number of copies,
> >>>>>>>>> certain things on the Page Setup dialog box and such aren't all in one
> >>>>>>>>> place. WHY THE HELL DON'T THEY PUT THEM ALL IN ONE PLACE LIKE SAFARI
> >>>>>>>>> DOES? Arghhhh.
> >>>>>>>> IE6 is pretty bad in AJAX context due to its deviation
> >>>>>>> >from the standards. IE8 is a lot better. It actually passed
> >>>>>>>> ACID2.
> >>>>>>> Let me know when it can pass ACID3.  AFAIK, only Safari does so.  Firefox is
> >>>>>>> close.  It gets to 93/100.
> >>>>>> Opera 10 also passed.
>
> >>>>>> IE8 will most likely never pass ACID3. It will be IE9.
> >>>>> And if you are writting web pages that use features of ACID3 that IE
> >>>>> doesn't do and you competitor is not who is going to pay the price?
> >>>>> The target should be your desired audience and not some obscure ivory
> >>>>> tower standard.
> >>>> It is very good to follow the standards.
> >>> Only if there is some tangible gain in doing so beyond the desires
> >>> (and profits) of the standards body.
>
> >>>> It may not be good to use all features in the standard.
> >>> Most of the standards I have seen are all or nothing.  If you ignore
> >>> parts of the standard then you are just as non-compliant as if you
> >>> used none of it.
>
> >>> bill
>
> >> And just what is the payoff for "standards compliance"?  If your system
> >> does what you need and want, how much extra would you pay to make it
> >> "standards compliant".  $0.00?  I thought so!
>
> > Which was my point, exactly.  Being standard compliant doesn't pay
> > the mortgage.  Reaching customers does.  Considering all the non-
> > standard stuff that DEC has pushed thru the years, it is really
> > funny to see everyone here screaming "Standards are a must!"
>
> > bill
>
> But just any standard is not sufficient!  A standard must have wide
> acceptance.  It must be clear and unambiguous.  Failing to meet either
> criterion is almost as bad as no standard at all!

Yep, mebibytes and all as I mentioned in my last post!

See

    http://physics.nist.gov/cuu/Units/binary.html

AEF