Calvin Spealman schreef:
> 1) I don't see how this should have anything to do with Microsoft, it
> should be a free and open standard.
ROFL....! Yeah, so should text documents, but as soon as I do any simple
formatting to it (oh, no, not bold text!!!), it's not so free and open
anymore (*.rtf, *.doc). As soon as you have any "standard" that's used
by more that 3 people (making it "mass usage"), Microsoft *is* involved,
and you can't just blow that off like it's not the reality that most
every computer user has find some way to live with.
> 2) If you are going 20, 15, or even only 5 years without upgrading
> your software, then you deserve to be the victim of every single
> exploit and hole discoved in that software and patched within that
> time, if you couldn't be bothered to do a simple upgrade.
Right, because I control every single email client I might ever use.
Suppose I travel a lot for business-- I can't make the hotel or Internet
cafe upgrade.
Suppose I use a company-provided laptop for business and I have no
rights to install or upgrade software. Suppose those responsible for
upgrading the software on my company-provided laptop are slackers, and
it's just all-around better to not submit the forms required to get an
upgrade authorized, since I would then lose the use of the laptop (and
probably have to use an even worse "loaner") for 1.5 months just to get
this "non-essential" upgrade.
*Suppose I live in an underdeveloped country* and I'm lucky to have a
donated 486 that someone richer than me gave to the Peace Corps.
In that case, I may not even have the option to upgrade, as my hardware
doesn't support the upgrade. And there are a lot of people who don't
have good Internet access, so are really limited to whatever software is
on the CD that they got-- if they got a CD at all and the donating
facility didn't just pre-install the PC in the first place.
Really, think. Every single person in the world does not have the
advantages or capabilities that you do-- isn't that punishment enough
without you 1) blaming them further ("it's their fault if they don't
upgrade") and 2) preventing them from becoming better human beings (sic)
by way of your deathless wisdom (sic) by making that wisdom unavailable
to them because you *must* disseminate that wisdom in a format that they
cannot access?
Holly
>
> On 5/7/05, Walter Dnes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>On Sat, May 07, 2005 at 04:56:09PM +0000, Calvin Spealman wrote
>>
>>
>>>then support for it can grow until everyone will have updated just
>>>over time. once you know someone's reader has support for it, because
>>>they send you emails using it, you can send to them without the old
>>>inline-quoted version.
>>
>> AAAAAAAAARRRRRRRRGGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHH NNNNNNNOOOOOOO!!!!!!
>>
>> You know what we'll end up with??? "This email best viewed with
>>Internet Explorer 6.5 at 800X600 resolution and 16,000,000 with Active-X
>>and Schlockwave-Trash enabled". I do *NOT* want to have to go out and
>>buy Windows in order to be able to read email.
>>
>> Secondly, I can read today's text email with a 15 or 20 year old email
>>client. (X)HTML doesn't work that way. It's always changing. Try
>>reading most web pages with a 5-year-old browser and see what I mean. I
>>should *NOT* have to change my email client every few months to keep up
>>with deliberate incompatabilities thrown in by Microsoft.
>>
--
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
