RE: alternative browsers

Opera is very fast. It reads web pages and follows the rules of HTML formating to the exception of all else. Since many people use Frontpage to make websites. Opera tends not to display these pages 100% correctly all the time because Frontpage in it’s default setting doesn’t do 100% compliant HTML code. Also, Frontpage on some of its cute functions like glowing links and mouseover functions, sometimes uses Microsofts verson of Java ( not SUNs ) so again some stuff may not read correctly in Opera. Again, same with Javascript snipets. Stuff that you create using Frontpage may not display the way you want unless you use IE.
Database connectivity in Frontpage? for dead simple stuff like connecting to an access database Frontpage will use all kinds of Active X / Visual Basic instead of traditional “com” opjects in ASP. So again expecting Opera to display some of this stuff is more luck than anything. If you want dynamic ASP code that you can read; hand code it.

Opera has a cool pop up stopper that works on the fly. So for myself I use IE and go along with the trend so there is no hassle .. “baaaaaaa ” Just make sure you update your IE at the Microsoft website and get the latest patches. IE has all kinds of security exploits. More and more people are making webpages that are not 100% HTML compliant.

I used to like Netscape but it is screwy now and installs AOL all over the place.

Neoplanet is cool. Haven’t used it in over a year.

Don’t go.. the plants will die…

Relax Hand, This forum always has its ups and downs. If you leave, the French will be outnumbered 🙂 You don’t want Arthur or Geforce running off at the mouth on what they think is good for France do you? 😀 Anyway, I hope you don’t go. Take a break, or vacation from it, but don’t go.

RE: War or no war?

[updated:LAST EDITED ON 25-01-03 AT 10:34 PM (GMT)]I am confused how you say Allied Force ( Yug ) was for “a good cause” and this isnt.

Also,… based on this “its about oil” nonsense, if that is so, France and Russia are against war with Iraq to protect their oil interests?

RE: Trip in London

[updated:LAST EDITED ON 25-01-03 AT 05:13 AM (GMT)]London is great. I loved it. Too many things to mention. One visit won’t do it if you decide you like it. Imperial War Museum was cool. Churchills underground command post. But really, too many things to mention. Just seeing London is neat. I guess it is completely different if you grew up there and don’t find it unique.

John Major when he was a lowly MP gave a group of 10 of us from Alconbury a tour of Parliment in 1985 (fun watching all the tourist slobs wait in line while we went in a different door . }> ) That was incredible ( they show the PMs weekly address over here on TV in the states so I watch it when I can )“Order… Order!…”

RE: Any wide eyed Mac zeolots here

[updated:LAST EDITED ON 25-01-03 AT 05:00 AM (GMT)]4×5 and 8×10 view camera negatives and transperancies. Granted not a common item. Very large files. But as you may know there is less and less need for film as time goes on.

No I don’t know the answer to your second question.

RE: War or no war?

[updated:LAST EDITED ON 25-01-03 AT 04:51 AM (GMT)]Lets go. Horrible thing war. I am now in favor of getting rid of SH once and for all. If the Greens and Socialists and Pacifists are against it, it must be a good thing. As for antagonizing more religous fanantics, so what? Not going now is not going to eliminate that threat. Play time is over. The connection between this and N Korea is retarded. Almost all of the geopolitik is different. Did I miss something or was there all this whining about Allied Force a few years back? If the U.N. can’t handle this problem, they might as well change their name to; “The League of Nations”.

RE: Same old Europe

[updated:LAST EDITED ON 25-01-03 AT 04:18 AM (GMT)]Rabie – looking at your last post do they have an internet connection at your pub ? 😀

Now for one thing I love Germany and I can understand some of the stuff especially since they just lost those soldiers in that terrible helo accident in Afghanistan a while back. So I certainly can sympathize with that view. That was a big loss and is timely to answering the question: Do you want to lose Germany boys in a conflict? Is it worth that kind of sacrifice? The flip side of that is I have nothing but contempt for Greens and Socialists.

———————————–

Here is some entertaining commentary from
http://www.washtimes.com/op-ed/20030124-16809993.htm

Sheryl Crow

Diana West

It’s one thing for a pop star like Sheryl Crow — sorry, an “activist for recording artist’s rights” like Ms. Crow — to wear her gross political naivete across her T-shirted chest in black sequins that spell “WAR IS NOT THE ANSWER.” She had this mini-manifesto “specially made,” as the Associated Press reported, for her appearance last week on the American Music Awards. And why not? Ms. Crow had hardly exhausted the subject with her last rejoinder to the Bush administration’s Iraq policy — another white T-shirt emblazoned with “I DON’T BELIEVE IN YOUR WAR, MR. BUSH!” worn during a December performance on “Good Morning, America.”
And imagine, there was still more to say. “I think war is based in greed and there are huge karmic retributions that will follow,” she explained to the AP. “I think war is never the answer to solving any problems. The best way to solve problems is not to have enemies.”
Ah, so. War is greed (tell the “greatest” generation), war is never the answer (tell George Washington, Adolph Hitler and the emir of Kuwait), and the way to avoid it is not to have enemies (tell the shrink).
Mass politicking by uninformed celebrities is not without harm, but the world isn’t really in trouble until the shallow slogans of the sound stage start to echo and reverb across the world stage. Which’ll never happen, right? Take another sound check. This past week, France and Germany may have appeared to unveil their joint anti-war policy on Iraq, but what La France and its warm up act Germany really did was kick off their 2003 international tour, “War Is Not the Answer.”
It began at the United Nations. In what The Washington Post called “a diplomatic version of an ambush,” France threw itself into the spokes of a Security Council exchange on terrorism to declare its opposition to war on Iraq. Concluding that such a war would bring death, regional instability (the instability of assorted brutal dictatorships?) and an increase in terrorism (more on that below), French Foreign Minister Dominique de Villepin announced that “nothing today justifies envisaging military action.” Germany followed suit and then some: “Do not expect that Germany will agree to a resolution that legitimizes war,” German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder told a crowd in Germany.
Funny how this Franco-German front coincides with the 40th anniversary celebration of the Elysee friendship treaty between the two nations. According to Cybercast News Service, ever-increasing Franco-German chumminess is said to include proposals “for regular joint cabinet meetings and a unified system of citizenship and law for the two countries.” There have even been calls for a “Franco-German Union” with “common foreign, security and economic policies.”
Bienvenue/willkommen to the Franco-German Union …against a war on Iraq. Interesting continental coalition, that. A London Times analysis explains it this way: “For these two countries, what legitimizes a united Europe is the complete rejection of war in all its forms. If you base your whole philosophy as a European Union on that, then ultimately you are going to get into a problem with a world that sees war as an instrument of diplomatic change.”
But is pure pacifism really the “whole philosophy” of these scaly Old World cynics? Only a pop star in sequins could buy that. Still, there’s more of the Crow doctrine in this Franco-German Union than meets the eye. Remember the “huge karmic retributions” Ms. Crow spoke of? Both France and Germany cite a potentially heightened risk of Islamic terrorism as a reason not to go to war in Iraq, a notion that should perplex the average citizen of the Free World now living with an already heightened risk (and reality) of Islamic terrorism—without going to war in Iraq.
And remember Ms. Crow’s secret to peace being “having no enemies”? On this point, it’s worth considering what historian Bat Ye’or reminds us of in “Islam and Dhimmitude”: that France’s historic tilt toward the most radical elements in the Arab world—for example, its role in lending respectability to the PLO, its opposition to the Egyptian-Israeli peace treaty, its historic support of the Ba’ath parties in Syria and Iraq—seems to have deflected much of the Islamic terrorism that has beleaguered the United States and Israel. In other words, France has had “no enemies” likely to fight jihad against her. And she’ll do anything, it seems, to keep it that way. According to the London Telegraph, the French government is now considering trashing a bedrock principal of the French Republic — the separation of church and state — to fund the building of mosques to keep France’s second-largest religion from falling “further” under the sway of radical, foreign (and particularly Saudi Arabian) powers.
Suddenly, Franco-German “pacifism” begins to look like something else: lying down and playing dead. It keeps the karmic retributions away — maybe — but it doesn’t look too good on a T-shirt.

Diana West is a syndicated columnist. Her column appears on Fridays.

…………………………………………………………..

RE: Any wide eyed Mac zeolots here

Hand you would know this ( looking at your flag 🙂 ) Whats the deal with Mandrake? They are now charging for Linux distros?