now this is getting interesting - CP/M

This is a discussion on now this is getting interesting - CP/M ; more on the "comp.sys.classic" / "comp.sys.vintage" newsgroup RFD: http://tinyurl.com/27d72h anyone care to give this guy a lesson on classic computers? Jeff http://resumes.hotjobs.com/proteanth...administration http://www.aimpages.com/rtdos/profile.html...

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 12 of 12

Thread: now this is getting interesting

  1. now this is getting interesting

    more on the "comp.sys.classic" / "comp.sys.vintage" newsgroup RFD:

    http://tinyurl.com/27d72h

    anyone care to give this guy a lesson on classic computers?


    Jeff
    http://resumes.hotjobs.com/proteanth...administration
    http://www.aimpages.com/rtdos/profile.html


  2. Re: now this is getting interesting

    Jeff Wood wrote:
    >
    > more on the "comp.sys.classic" / "comp.sys.vintage" newsgroup RFD:
    >
    > http://tinyurl.com/xxxxx
    >
    > anyone care to give this guy a lesson on classic computers?


    Never click on a tinyurl. You have no idea where you are going.

    --


    "A man who is right every time is not likely to do very much."
    -- Francis Crick, co-discover of DNA
    "There is nothing more amazing than stupidity in action."
    -- Thomas Matthews


  3. Re: now this is getting interesting

    *CBFalconer* wrote on Sat, 07-01-20 08:47:
    >Never click on a tinyurl. You have no idea where you are going.


    And? What's the problem? You will *never* get any problems by just
    visiting a page, not unless you do something stupid like allow your
    browser to run Javascript or active-x or whatever.

    And if you should get hit, send the bill to the real perpetrators,
    legitimate sites, who through stupidity or malice make you turn
    Javascript on for them - banks are among the worst here.


  4. Re: now this is getting interesting

    CBFalconer wrote in news:45B1C902.1E73E6F0
    @yahoo.com:

    > Never click on a tinyurl. You have no idea where you are going.


    Not really a problem unless you are using an insecure piece of crap browser
    like IE.

  5. Re: now this is getting interesting

    elaich wrote:
    > CBFalconer wrote in news:45B1C902.1E73E6F0
    > @yahoo.com:
    >
    >
    >>Never click on a tinyurl. You have no idea where you are going.

    >
    >
    > Not really a problem unless you are using an insecure piece of crap browser
    > like IE.

    C'mon, it's not _THAT_ bad. I use IE to download Netscape; it's at least
    good for that!

    Regards,
    Bert

  6. Re: now this is getting interesting

    *Bert Morris* wrote on Wed, 07-01-24 21:53:
    >I use IE to download Netscape


    I hate getting involved hear nearly as much as being positive about
    Gatesware, but this is really unfair. In fact IE is the only browser
    that allows by-site settings without external plugins. With all others
    I can only switch on e.g. Javascript generally with the danger of
    forgetting to switch off again - the concept of individual "trusted
    sites" is much sounder.

    Of course as always the default settings a rubbish, but anyone not
    bothering to configure her software deserves what she gets anyway.

    --
    Tschö wa
    Axel


  7. Re: now this is getting interesting

    On Thu, 25 Jan 2007 08:38:00 +0100, Axel_Berger@b.maus.de (Axel
    Berger) wrote:

    >*Bert Morris* wrote on Wed, 07-01-24 21:53:
    >>I use IE to download Netscape

    >
    >I hate getting involved hear nearly as much as being positive about
    >Gatesware, but this is really unfair. In fact IE is the only browser
    >that allows by-site settings without external plugins. With all others
    >I can only switch on e.g. Javascript generally with the danger of
    >forgetting to switch off again - the concept of individual "trusted
    >sites" is much sounder.
    >
    >Of course as always the default settings a rubbish, but anyone not
    >bothering to configure her software deserves what she gets anyway.


    Why should plug-ins be a problem? Unless you're from the
    computers as toasters, plug 'em in and let 'em run camp.

    Anyway, you can't use microsoft without having to constantly
    plug in fixes and corrections for at least some of the many errors.

    There's appliances, and then there's computers. Programable
    computers. As in, progam them to do what YOU want, not what
    somebody else wants. There is no one size fits all.

    Firefox and NoScript. Go into options and turn off EVERYTHING.
    Then, when you're at a site you really want, turn on only what you
    need. Many have 'google counters', for example You probably don't
    need them. I basically block all third-party java. Also, I deleted ALL
    pre-loaded approved sites. I don't trust anything by default.

    Bill

  8. Re: now this is getting interesting

    "Axel Berger" wrote in message
    news:200701250838.a49920@b.maus.de...
    > In fact IE is the only browser
    > that allows by-site settings without external plugins.


    Opera does this with site preferences.

    I can, for example, enable Javascript for specific sites while having it
    disabled for all others.

    - Bill



  9. Re: now this is getting interesting

    *Bill* wrote on Thu, 07-01-25 20:59:
    >Why should plug-ins be a problem?


    Who said they were? I consider this by-site ability an essential part
    of any browser. IE has it, Firefox doesn't. And for quite some time I
    did not know abot the plugin for Firefox. So the makers of IE did a
    better job than the makers of Firefox.


  10. Re: now this is getting interesting

    On Fri, 26 Jan 2007 08:28:00 +0100, Axel_Berger@b.maus.de (Axel
    Berger) wrote:

    >*Bill* wrote on Thu, 07-01-25 20:59:
    >>Why should plug-ins be a problem?

    >
    >Who said they were? I consider this by-site ability an essential part
    >of any browser. IE has it, Firefox doesn't. And for quite some time I
    >did not know abot the plugin for Firefox. So the makers of IE did a
    >better job than the makers of Firefox.


    ''Makers of IE''? Better job?? Surely you jest.

    IE is put out by a company that sells a CLOSED system.

    While Firefox isn't exactly open source, they do have Linux
    versions. I haven't read the license terms. Maybe it is.

    What matters is that Firefox ENCOURAGES others
    to provide added or altered functionality to their product.

    At last look, there are now over TWO THOUSAND of these
    so-called ''add-ons'' listed on the official Firefox website.

    That ought to tell you something.

    ms didn't HAVE a browser; as usual they 'acquired' one,
    called Spyglass. The reports I've read indicate that the
    creator of Spyglass, like most people dealing with ms,
    got snookered real good. He was supposed to get paid
    out of sales for the first 12 months. But ms didn't HAVE
    any sales - they GAVE IT AWAY. So he got NOTHING!

    And THAT oughta tell you something, too!

    Bill

  11. Re: now this is getting interesting

    On 2007-01-27, Bill wrote:

    > While Firefox isn't exactly open source, they do have Linux
    > versions. I haven't read the license terms. Maybe it is.


    Firefox *IS* (and always has been) open source. It is licensed under the
    Mozilla Public License, which differs from the more common GNU Public
    License (GPL) for open source software. But it is still open source.

    --

    John (john@os2.dhs.org)

  12. Re: now this is getting interesting

    Axel_Berger@b.maus.de (Axel Berger) wrote in news:200701260828.a49979
    @b.maus.de:

    > And for quite some time I
    > did not know abot the plugin for Firefox. So the makers of IE did a
    > better job than the makers of Firefox.
    >


    No, they didn't. You simply did not keep yourself informed.



    --
    A: Because it disturbs the logical flow of the message.
    Q: Why is top posting frowned upon?

+ Reply to Thread