|
Ron Anders wrote: Don't believe me? just wait till you get here.
I believe you, and, yes, I'm there age-wise; I have not had a personal experience of "rejection because of age" that I am aware of, and it has been many years since I have "worked" for anyone but myself.
I have, however, fired myself frequently for various causes: usually, laziness, or not showing up.
cheers, Bill
«To kill an error's as good a service, sometimes better than, establishing new truth or fact.» Charles Darwin in "Prospero's Precepts"
|
|
|
|
|
jgakenhe wrote: because the top managers were running their mouths that they weren't going to promote anyone over 40.
Except themselves.
Marc
|
|
|
|
|
Oh no!
It has over 4000 improvements, dropped support to old (IE only) technologies, like ActiveX and VBScript, no more document modes to support older IE anomalies...
So what?!
For those are looking from the developers point of view:
Microsoft Edge has the exact same support for HTML5/CSS3 as IE11 (390 out of 555/45%)...
(So no support for new, but dropping support for old - what we have left?)
I think renaming a product line is just not enough - you should change the brains!!!
Skipper: We'll fix it.
Alex: Fix it? How you gonna fix this?
Skipper: Grit, spit and a whole lotta duct tape.
|
|
|
|
|
Wrong forum? BTW if you're referring to HTML5test[^], the latest version of IE 11 (11.0.18) only scores 348, not 390.
|
|
|
|
|
Maybe wrong forum...I'm not always sure...
My version of IE11 is 11.0.10011.0 - it suns on Windows 10 , build 10074 and scores 390...
Skipper: We'll fix it.
Alex: Fix it? How you gonna fix this?
Skipper: Grit, spit and a whole lotta duct tape.
|
|
|
|
|
I'm far from being a HTML/CSS expert, but along the few months I faced some web programming, I realized the Htlm5Test site (and others similar) are kinda crappy stuffs. Most of the claimed features aren't officially standardized yet, but for some (censored) reason Chrome put them inside itself.
That's a very bad practice, IMHO, from the programming perspective. However, from the browser-war perspective, is the perfect way to kill the enemies...
Happy to hear from who's more involved than me!
|
|
|
|
|
It is true that most test sites are checking for features that are still in pre-recommendation state at W3C, but I do not see it as a problem - W#C works way too slow, and implementing proposed features gives the community a great tool to provide feedback...
As for IE11/Edge, you should look for the unsupported features that ARE in recommendation state!
Or for the open-source video/audio formats that Microsoft refuses to support!
Skipper: We'll fix it.
Alex: Fix it? How you gonna fix this?
Skipper: Grit, spit and a whole lotta duct tape.
|
|
|
|
|
The "too slow" is a relative assert: someone states "too slow" when he/she wants to beat the concurrency, even paying a lot more after in terms of not-standardization.
There were tons of examples in the past where the ability to push a product than another leaded to a mediocre/obsolete product...I'd call it as "speculation", not good practice.
Pardon my words, but I'm working for a very small lab where the quality is very important and there's no rooms for speculation: either we perform a good product, or we'll die.
Thank you for your answer.
|
|
|
|
|
I agree with you about pushing-to-hard (speculations you called it?) but in the case of W3C it took 15 years to update HTML - I think it is still too slow...
In the case of Microsoft - I'm talking about HTML5 features that ARE recommended, but still not getting Microsoft's attention...
Skipper: We'll fix it.
Alex: Fix it? How you gonna fix this?
Skipper: Grit, spit and a whole lotta duct tape.
|
|
|
|
|
Mario Vernari wrote: I realized the Htlm5Test site (and others similar) are kinda crappy stuffs. Most of the claimed features aren't officially standardized yet, but for some (censored) reason Chrome put them inside itself. That's a very bad practice,
I totally agree. 
You have just been Sharapova'd.
|
|
|
|
|
And as a pointed out somewhere else a few days ago; about 2 years ago Google and Mozilla both realized that prefixed feature implementations were creating a cluster-elephant across the web and stopped doing so for new development. Instead anything new is hidden behind a setting flag that must be explicitly turned on by the user.
HTML5Test isn't loading right for me ATM; but IIRC it does call out the handful of cases where FF/Chome/Etc are still relying on prefixes for something they launched experimentally years ago and never standardized; but that's a small fraction of what IE is getting crushed on.
Did you ever see history portrayed as an old man with a wise brow and pulseless heart, waging all things in the balance of reason?
Is not rather the genius of history like an eternal, imploring maiden, full of fire, with a burning heart and flaming soul, humanly warm and humanly beautiful?
--Zachris Topelius
Training a telescope on one’s own belly button will only reveal lint. You like that? You go right on staring at it. I prefer looking at galaxies.
-- Sarah Hoyt
|
|
|
|
|
Dan Neely wrote: HTML5Test isn't loading right for me ATM; but IIRC it does call out the handful of cases where FF/Chome/Etc are still relying on prefixes for something they launched experimentally years ago and never standardized; but that's a small fraction of what IE is getting crushed on.
It finally started loading correctly for me again. It took the highest scoring Edge build I saw in the search tab and compared[^] it with Chrome 39. Chrome is a net 99 points ahead. Of those a net 81 came from categories that weren't marked with prefixes; meaning Chrome has a fully standard compliant implementation but Edge doesn't. The full total is likely a bit worse, since in the categories where there were a few prefixes Chrome generally also lead on non-prefix items. But not knowing what the scoring breakout was I didn't count any of that toward the 81. I did the same with FF35: FF has a net edge of 47 points, net 32 for non-prefixed implementations. This comparison was more interesting because there were more cases where Edge either had more points, a different subset implemented, or in two cases had a standard compliant implementation for something FF only had as a prefix.
Did you ever see history portrayed as an old man with a wise brow and pulseless heart, waging all things in the balance of reason?
Is not rather the genius of history like an eternal, imploring maiden, full of fire, with a burning heart and flaming soul, humanly warm and humanly beautiful?
--Zachris Topelius
Training a telescope on one’s own belly button will only reveal lint. You like that? You go right on staring at it. I prefer looking at galaxies.
-- Sarah Hoyt
|
|
|
|
|
Kornfeld Eliyahu Peter wrote: I think renaming a product line is just not enough - you should change the brains!!!
Come on, wouldn't Windows work better if it was renamed Portholes? 
How do you know so much about swallows? Well, you have to know these things when you're a king, you know.
modified 31-Aug-21 21:01pm.
|
|
|
|
|
Do you feel more stressed at work? If your job is in IT then the answer is probably yes, according to a new survey from security and email specialist GFI Software. It's so bad, Bob has pulled all his hair out
|
|
|
|
|
Google now gets more search queries from mobile devices than it does from PCs. Of course, most of the searches were, "Where is my phone?"
|
|
|
|
|
This marks the first version that contains open source code from Microsoft’s CoreCLR project. It also defaults to C# 6, meaning that once again Mono has an RTM version of a new C# compiler before Microsoft. Now that they're ahead, will Microsoft start copying them?
|
|
|
|
|
We may finally have an answer to a question that's bugged us since Microsoft first announced Windows 10: What the heck happened to Windows 9? Someone get their coat
|
|
|
|
|
I thought we'd already answered that one last year?
Microsoft dev here, the internal rumours are that early testing revealed just how many third party products that had code of the form
if(version.StartsWith("Windows 9"))
{
} else {
and that this was the pragmatic solution to avoid that.
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined."
- Homer
|
|
|
|
|
Yup.
Read the story. It's a bad, bad joke answer.
TTFN - Kent
|
|
|
|
|
You mean to say the illuminati weren't involved? 
|
|
|
|
|
How fans of open source will greet Microsoft's move is a question mark. How to work that into the 'Microsoft is evil incarnate' story?
|
|
|
|
|
How fans of open source will greet Microsoft's move is a question mark.
The usual way. By creating hundreds of forks and custom versions each screaming that it's better than the others.
Marc
|
|
|
|
|
Quote: Microsoft is using the OSI-approved MIT license for the .Net core components released to date, which is compatible with licenses that apply to key Mono components, Weinberg observed. It seems reasonable that a merged Mono/.Net project would take the best-in-class elements of both.
That, however, doesn't seem to be the case.
The Microsoft version of open source .Net Core is separate from Mono's, IDC Program Director Al Hilwa told LinuxInsider.
Microsoft apparently will go ahead with its own work.
Although the Mono community "appears to welcome the [open source] announcement by Microsoft," said Black Duck's Weinberg, "I don't imagine they will simply stop development or immediately move to coalesce their project with the new Microsoft release."
Even if they're apparently not doing so in the short term, over the long haul it would make sense for Mono to deprecate their own base class libraries and concentrate on stuff farther up the runtime stack that MS hasn't opensourced, and are unlikely to do so in the future.
Did you ever see history portrayed as an old man with a wise brow and pulseless heart, waging all things in the balance of reason?
Is not rather the genius of history like an eternal, imploring maiden, full of fire, with a burning heart and flaming soul, humanly warm and humanly beautiful?
--Zachris Topelius
Training a telescope on one’s own belly button will only reveal lint. You like that? You go right on staring at it. I prefer looking at galaxies.
-- Sarah Hoyt
|
|
|
|
|
The phrase “nine to five” is becoming an anachronism. "Back on the chain gang"
|
|
|
|
|
Right! I'm working only 32 hours a week for the past 7 years...
Skipper: We'll fix it.
Alex: Fix it? How you gonna fix this?
Skipper: Grit, spit and a whole lotta duct tape.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
