Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

From Redmond with Love - IE team sends cake for FF4

fredericiana.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 83 posts

Re: From Redmond with Love - IE team sends cake for FF4

#61

Post by cygwin98 »

joshd wrote: post #37
nopassrecover wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a long-standing tradition between Mozilla and Microsoft I believe.

This probably explains Mozilla's target of reaching Firefox 7 by end of 2011. They just really like cake.

I thought you were joking about Firefox 7. From version 4 to 7 in one year, are you kidding? It turns out you're right. For some reasons, I really dislike software companies jack up version numbers: how can you have FOUR MAJOR releases within one year for a relatively complex software? That gives me an impression that they feel insecure of becoming irrelevant, instead of competing on features and usability, they choose to compete on version numbers.

I could be wrong, but I just don't feel like they fall into the same trap Netscape did a decade ago.

Re: From Redmond with Love - IE team sends cake for FF4

#64

Post by ryanwatkins »

cygwin98 wrote: post #61
joshd wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This probably explains Mozilla's target of reaching Firefox 7 by end of 2011. They just really like cake.

I thought you were joking about Firefox 7. From version 4 to 7 in one year, are you kidding? It turns out you're right. For some reasons, I really dislike software companies jack up version numbers: how can you have FOUR MAJOR releases within one year for a relatively complex software? That gives me an impression that they feel insecure of becoming irrelevant, instead of competing on features and usability, they choo…

They've need to do it to reach version number parity with IE and Chrome.

9 and 11 > 4.

Re: From Redmond with Love - IE team sends cake for FF4

#65

Post by mey »

ryanwatkins wrote: post #64
cygwin98 wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I thought you were joking about Firefox 7. From version 4 to 7 in one year, are you kidding? It turns out you're right. For some reasons, I really dislike software companies jack up version numbers: how can you have FOUR MAJOR releases within one year for a relatively complex software? That gives me an impression that they feel insecure of becoming irrelevant, instead of competing on features and usability, they choo…

They've need to do it to reach version number parity with IE and Chrome. 9 and 11 > 4.

Is this important? Do customers actually care? Do you care?

Re: From Redmond with Love - IE team sends cake for FF4

#66

Post by ryanwatkins »

mey wrote: post #65
ryanwatkins wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They've need to do it to reach version number parity with IE and Chrome. 9 and 11 > 4.

Is this important? Do customers actually care? Do you care?

I could care less, but companies have done it several times.

Netscape skipped version 5 (a doomed project).

Microsoft ditched version numbers for years (95, 98, 2000), and then just names -- due to how version number increments on an existing product appear to end users.

To technically savvy it doesnt really matter "is it 5.0 or 4.5?"

But the version number or name is about trying to position the product as a "new one" or even just "mature" to the more typical end user.

Re: From Redmond with Love - IE team sends cake for FF4

#67

Post by RiderOfGiraffes »

ryanwatkins wrote: post #66
mey wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is this important? Do customers actually care? Do you care?

I could care less, but companies have done it several times. Netscape skipped version 5 (a doomed project). Microsoft ditched version numbers for years (95, 98, 2000), and then just names -- due to how version number increments on an existing product appear to end users. To technically savvy it doesnt really matter "is it 5.0 or 4.5?" But the version number or name is about trying to position the product as a "new on…

  > I could care less, ...
I don't want to be "that guy" and I'm not trying to be a grammar Nazi. I know this is now an idiom in the USA, and therefore it doesn't have to make sense.

However ...

I've now heard it said, in four different countries, that this phrase makes the speaker sound like an idiot. I know it's now just "the norm" in the USA, but I wanted to let people here know that saying this makes a bad impression.

If you don't care how you sound to non USAians then don't bother. But if you're wondering what I'm talking about, David Mitchell does an excellent job of explaining "I couldn't care less"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=om7O0MFkmpw#t=0m56s

I now return you to your normal programming.

Re: From Redmond with Love - IE team sends cake for FF4

#70

Post by rbanffy »

mattmanser wrote: post #60
some1else wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nothing will ever bring back hours of IE6 workaround time, or change my mind about using a Windows computer. Cumulatively, developers and clients paid millions in billable hours for their neglect in monopoly. They couldn't warm up to me even if they swapped their board of directors with Sesame Street characters.

And all the man-years you saved users by using XMLHttpRequest? Otherwise known as AJAX? Or have you conveniently forgotten which browser that was introduced in? One day you should download the version of Netscape that was around when IE6 came out.

You must be talking about the Msxml2.XMLHTTP ActiveX object that wasn't called XMLHttpRequest until the fine Mozilla lads decided calling ActiveX objects was not such a good idea (and wouldn't work in more... civilized operating systems), right?

Of course, Microsoft later added the proper XMLHttpRequest support that was lacking in until IE7, IIRC.

Post reply on HN