Re: egged.co.il works
On Tue, Mar 11, 2003 at 11:35:27PM +0200, Herouth Maoz wrote: > At 18:47 +0200 on 11/3/2003, Alon Altman wrote: > > > > The question is- does it support MSIE 7.0? The answer: They don't know. > > This question is the same for a standards-compliant site, because you > don't know when one of the browsers is going to pick up on a new > standard and ruin everything. This has happened to me lately: I've > always used cookies for sessions, it's as standard as muck. Now > marketing has asked me to put that site within a frame so that "the > location bar will show our domain and nothing else". The frameset is > in domain A, the frame within it is in domain B. So far, no standards > broken, Mozilla works perfectly, MSIE 5.5 works, hunky dory. Frames are evil, evil evil! Anyway, try sticking the following header: P3P: CP="NON" (with quotes). > > But MSIE 6 doesn't accept my cookie. This is because is an early I don't think you losed something from supporting standards so far, you would have hit this wall even while using MSIE's dialect wouldn't you? > So that argument is out the window as well. I wasn't convinced, not by this example anyway. Cheers, --Amos = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: egged.co.il works
Daniel Vainsencher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > The costs above might (or might not. ideas for numbers anyone?) be an > order of magnitude higher than the cost of simply maintaining a site > with good foundations OK, a slightly different angle, but in the good old tradition of stupid back-of-the-envelope calculations: Suppose the company in question is a credit card company. Let's say I have a card of theirs free of charge (due to a special promotion via my employer), and the only revenue the company sees from me is a fixed small percentage of every transaction that retailers pay them. I have no idea what the commission is, but let's assume that it is C per cent, with 1% fiducial value [in fact, I would not be surprised if the commission is something like 4%, but I don't know]. Assume also that on the average my monthly credit card transactions sum up to T, with fiducial value of NIS 5,000 - not too much for a family, is it? The revenue the credit card company has from my transactions over a year can be calculated as R = 12*C*T = 12*0.01*5000*[C/0.01]*[T/5000] = NIS 600*[C/0.01]*[T/5000] How much would a company pay for development of a web site? Rather, how much *more* would the company pay to a qualified experienced web developer instead of a high school dropout? Let's scale the extra *one time* development expense (i.e. not counting maintenance), D, to NIS 15,000. Note that this number has absolutely no foundation, I hope that web developers among us will be able to give a better estimate. Now, let's say that making the site standard-compliant will help the company gain (or retain) N customers like myself who use "alternative" browsers (or are handicapped, or whatever). How large should N be to stick to standards and break even in 1 year? We get [D/15000] N = D/R = 25 -. [*] [C/0.01]*[T/5000] That is, if the company manages to keep 25 customers or gain 25 customers or some combination thereof by sticking to standards, it will recoup the difference in one time initial development investment in 1 year. Of course, if the company stands to lose customers that absolutely must have the latest four-dimentional animation IE trick of the web site that shows them their transactions and maybe allows them to download application forms, then N must be the difference. Most likely, no one will ever complain about that. Also note that there are other operational expenses per customer. These are likely to be relatively small because of economy of scale. You can add that to D if you want. If maintenance of the site over the year is, as we assert, cheaper for a standard-compliant site, the calculation needs to be adjusted by decreasing D accordingly. This does not take into account poorly quantifiable but often surprisingly expensive items like reputation etc. Say they are factored into N somehow. Find out what C really is (note that N is inversely proportional to C), and insert your favourite D and T into [*] to skew the argument either way. Note also how D/T becomes a useful self-similarity parameter in [*] ;-). -- Oleg Goldshmidt | [EMAIL PROTECTED] = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: egged.co.il works
"Nadav Har'El" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Issues of discrimination ("blind people can't use your site", "10%
> of the Israelis can't use your site", "Bank Hapoalim doesn't
> descriminate thus!") and future certainty ("the moment IE 7 comes
> out, your site *may* stop working!") may also mean something to the
> honest, forward-looking, manager.
Correct, but note that all of the above can be translated into money terms
that *any* manager should be able to understand...
> Of course, to a greedy manager with plans to keep his office for only the
> next year and caring just about short-term profits, such arguments will not
> be relevant.
True.
--
Oleg Goldshmidt | [EMAIL PROTECTED]
=
To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command
echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: egged.co.il works
On Wed, Mar 12, 2003, Oleg Goldshmidt wrote about "Re: egged.co.il works":
>...
> Ultimately, the people needed to be convinced are decision-makers, not
> techies. Decision-makers can only be convinced by money arguments. If
>...
> Coming back to Shachar's original request for ammunition, please give
> him economic arguments in favor of standard compliance. No other
> arguments are relevant in the context, IMHO.
This is a good point, but not entirely true. Issues of discrimination
("blind people can't use your site", "10% of the Israelis can't use your
site", "Bank Hapoalim doesn't descriminate thus!") and future certainty
("the moment IE 7 comes out, your site *may* stop working!") may also mean
something to the honest, forward-looking, manager.
Of course, to a greedy manager with plans to keep his office for only the
next year and caring just about short-term profits, such arguments will not
be relevant.
--
Nadav Har'El| Wednesday, Mar 12 2003, 8 Adar II 5763
[EMAIL PROTECTED] |-
Phone: +972-53-245868, ICQ 13349191 |The trouble with political jokes is they
http://nadav.harel.org.il |get elected.
=
To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command
echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: egged.co.il works
The things that make a long term operational system cheap have several levels. Before explaining the rest of this argument, it's important to make sure the person you're talking does see how his website is his banks most important (long term), and fragile channel for selling his services. People will use it more and more, and people that use it can easily switch if they feel the service they get is not trustworthy, because they come to depend on it. So the website is something that needs to always work perfectly. Any failure will cost money (lost customers), and fixing the deviations will also cost a lot of money, because it'll be urgent. And fixing things quickly requires the expensive people, which then are in a position to name their price. The way to avoid this, is not to depend on technologies that will require messing around with. Since MS-specific technology is very fast changing, the more one uses it, the more one will be subject to the above effects. Standards based sites are quite likely to work for as long as possible, with minimal effect from anyone's changing technologies. Even if MS puts out a client technology that breaks with the standard, the bank is less affected, because it'll probably break lots of things, and be (properly) seen as MS's fault. This last part is a little shakey, because MS sure are good at having others pay for their choices, try not to need it. The costs above might (or might not. ideas for numbers anyone?) be an order of magnitude higher than the cost of simply maintaining a site with good foundations, and even worse, they will appear as crises, and be laid at the door of the IT manager in charge whenever they happen. Hiring a few more costly personnel to do a proper site, OTOH, can be presented as a wise investment. If permanently employed, then once the site is stable, they can be used to modify the site to serve whatever business opportunities come up. Occaisonally having opportunities because of a wise investment is a better prospect for an IT manager than occaisonally having crises. Depending on the IQ of higher management, of course, but we're allowed to hope. Daniel > > because the vast majority of web developpers are too used to ASP, dev > > studio, frontpage, wizards and wysiwyg and other ra'ot kholot, tfu tfu > > tfu. They are the cheap workforce. they may know how to read HTML but > > they feel lost in it, and they would never dive into it. > > > > the ones who DO dive in there are too expensive to justify the budget I > > guess. > > Ultimately, the people needed to be convinced are decision-makers, not > techies. Decision-makers can only be convinced by money arguments. If > you decide that it is cheaper for Bank Leumi to offer an > IE5.5SP1889-whatever-specific web site, *taking all the relevant > factors into account*, then you'd better not even raise the issue at > all with Bank Leumi. > > Coming back to Shachar's original request for ammunition, please give > him economic arguments in favor of standard compliance. No other > arguments are relevant in the context, IMHO. > > -- > Oleg Goldshmidt | [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > = > To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with > the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command > echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: egged.co.il works
Ira Abramov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Quoting Oleg Goldshmidt, from the post of Wed, 12 Mar: > > > > 1. Should be cheaper to develop and maintain. > > > > > > Sadly, I think we have reached the conclusion it's not exactly correct > > > anymore. > > > > Why not? > > because the vast majority of web developpers are too used to ASP, dev > studio, frontpage, wizards and wysiwyg and other ra'ot kholot, tfu tfu > tfu. They are the cheap workforce. they may know how to read HTML but > they feel lost in it, and they would never dive into it. > > the ones who DO dive in there are too expensive to justify the budget I > guess. Same argument over and over again. The above is only true if you do not put a price tag on the implications. As I mentioned in one of the previous postings, taking that into account correctly *may* still leave the argument valid, but I suspect that practically no one does any calculations of this kind before making ther IE-only-is-cheaper claim. No do they ask themselves whether they are rich enough to afford "the cheap workforce." Ultimately, the people needed to be convinced are decision-makers, not techies. Decision-makers can only be convinced by money arguments. If you decide that it is cheaper for Bank Leumi to offer an IE5.5SP1889-whatever-specific web site, *taking all the relevant factors into account*, then you'd better not even raise the issue at all with Bank Leumi. Coming back to Shachar's original request for ammunition, please give him economic arguments in favor of standard compliance. No other arguments are relevant in the context, IMHO. -- Oleg Goldshmidt | [EMAIL PROTECTED] = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: egged.co.il works
Quoting Oleg Goldshmidt, from the post of Wed, 12 Mar: > > > 1. Should be cheaper to develop and maintain. > > > > Sadly, I think we have reached the conclusion it's not exactly correct > > anymore. > > Why not? because the vast majority of web developpers are too used to ASP, dev studio, frontpage, wizards and wysiwyg and other ra'ot kholot, tfu tfu tfu. They are the cheap workforce. they may know how to read HTML but they feel lost in it, and they would never dive into it. the ones who DO dive in there are too expensive to justify the budget I guess. almost nobody edits HTML directly in this market anymore because it's time consuming and expensive compared to Q&D web shops. Ask Reuven Lerner how hard it is to fight the competition in such a market. Being right is not always easy, and people prefer a susita with a fake mercedes body over even the cheapest peugeot. phooey. -- Japanese god of fertility Ira Abramov http://ira.abramov.org/email/ This post is encrypted twice with ROT-13. Documenting or attempting to crack this encryption is illegal. = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: egged.co.il works
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > Quoting Oleg Goldshmidt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > > Sadly, I think we have reached the conclusion it's not exactly correct > > > anymore. > > > > Why not? > > For one reason: if, as you suggested to me, you have to keep your web > programmers informed of new standards all the time, it costs you money. After > all, they have to learn every new shtick on the w3c. HTML4 standard has turned > to XHTML? Update the site. Hours of work, mucho dinero. I don't see why? > > Or you can keep it on the old standard, and risk breaking at some point. Well, it is my impression that standard-defining bodies are quite careful about backwards compatibility: standards break old functionality when there is a really good reason to. Your example sounds like one such case to me: there is a real privacy reason behind this [disclaimer: I am saying this on the basis of what you wrote and a bit of common sense that may be wrong - I am not an expert on this by any measure]. It would seem to me that understanding why it has been decided this should go into the standard is an issue to be discussed between you and the suits. -- Oleg Goldshmidt | [EMAIL PROTECTED] = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: egged.co.il works
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > Quoting Oleg Goldshmidt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > Now your situation only strengthens the agrument for standards. If you > > ignore the standards the IE6 users (and possibly Mozilla 1.4 users in > > a few months, and Opera 9.118 or whatever, etc) will see your site as > > broken. Which it is, because standards are ignored. > > Not exactly. Not having a privacy policy is not "breaking standards" anymore > than "not having DHTML" on the site, or "Not using Unicode character > representations". Quite possibly not. The other side - the browser - does have a privacy policy, or at least may have a privacy policy. Now you are using privacy-related stuff (cookies), and you need to talk to the other guy. The standards define the way two entities with differing policies can talk to each other, even without knowing each other's specific policies. If the policies are incompaticle for non-technical reasons, that's another matter. IIRC, you cannot use, say, the Jerusalem Post site if you don't accept cookies as a matter of privacy policy. Technical standards do not define that. They say, cookies are standard, and one's browser should support them. Whether or not you are wiling to use them vis-a-vis JP is your decision. -- Oleg Goldshmidt | [EMAIL PROTECTED] = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: egged.co.il works
Quoting Oleg Goldshmidt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > Sadly, I think we have reached the conclusion it's not exactly correct > > anymore. > > Why not? For one reason: if, as you suggested to me, you have to keep your web programmers informed of new standards all the time, it costs you money. After all, they have to learn every new shtick on the w3c. HTML4 standard has turned to XHTML? Update the site. Hours of work, mucho dinero. Or you can keep it on the old standard, and risk breaking at some point. Herouth = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: egged.co.il works
Quoting Oleg Goldshmidt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Now your situation only strengthens the agrument for standards. If you > ignore the standards the IE6 users (and possibly Mozilla 1.4 users in > a few months, and Opera 9.118 or whatever, etc) will see your site as > broken. Which it is, because standards are ignored. Not exactly. Not having a privacy policy is not "breaking standards" anymore than "not having DHTML" on the site, or "Not using Unicode character representations". There is something to be said of standards - or usage of standards - which makes them mandatory with no sensible backward-compatibility. One day, having a site without a privacy policy is standard, the next, it isn't? Herouth = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: egged.co.il works
Herouth Maoz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > At 18:47 +0200 on 11/3/2003, Alon Altman wrote: > > > The question is- does it support MSIE 7.0? The answer: They don't know. > > This question is the same for a standards-compliant site, because you > don't know when one of the browsers is going to pick up on a new > standard and ruin everything. If a site is ruined by a new - but existing - standard it cannot really be called compliant, can it? See below... > This has happened to me lately: I've > always used cookies for sessions, it's as standard as muck. Now > marketing has asked me to put that site within a frame so that "the > location bar will show our domain and nothing else". The frameset is > in domain A, the frame within it is in domain B. So far, no standards > broken, Mozilla works perfectly, MSIE 5.5 works, hunky dory. > > But MSIE 6 doesn't accept my cookie. This is because is an early > adopter of a W3C standard called P3P, which is a standard defining > privacy policies. Apparently, in default mode MSIE 6 accepts cookies > from the main domain of a given page (i.e. the frameset), but requires > something called "Compact policy" to be sent over, in order for it to > accept the cookie (which comes from domain B). Darn, now I have to > study the P3P standard, study the part about compact policies, learn > what I have to stick there Well, if you are working for a web development company that crerates web sites on a contract basis, then it looks like a very good investment for you company to let you learn the new standards... > (and nobody in marketing is going to tell > me what our actual privacy policy is, because we don't actually have > one) to make it work. In the meantime, many users can't register to > our service. To them, the site is "broken" (unless we convince them to > change the default security setting, and I don't like doing that). And if you do web development in-house, on a one-time basis, then it is between you and your colleagues in marketing - it's your jobs - to analyze the situation and factor the time you need to spend on learning the new standard to implement the ideas of marketing. You need to get together - geeks, marketeers, and beancounters, and it's your job to spell out what is involved on the technical side, it is the marketeers job to explain why it is needed, and it is the job of the beancounters to figure out if your company can afford doing it. One of the possible solutions may be to outsource it to someone who is already fluent in the stuff and can do it faster and at a lower cost. There will be a hidden component to the cost there becuase your company will not gain in-house expertise. Now your situation only strengthens the agrument for standards. If you ignore the standards the IE6 users (and possibly Mozilla 1.4 users in a few months, and Opera 9.118 or whatever, etc) will see your site as broken. Which it is, because standards are ignored. Again, your suits asked for a feature. The proper way to implement the feature is through standards. It is possible to do it faster breaking the standards, but it will cause problems for some of your clients. The only way to claim out of hand that the quick'n'dirty non-standard way is cheaper is to ignore the cost of lost business and reputation. That's a business decision, and no one can tell the management how to run their company. One can, and should explain the drawbacks - in financial terms - to them. Incidentally, losing a part of the customer base may in some cases be cheaper than keeping it. Thius is what "out of hand" means in the previous paragraph. I suspect the claim is made without proper consideration in the vast majority of cases (can you make a back-of-the-envelope estimate of the cost of your learning P3P vs the cost of losing business because IE6 and likely other stuff will be broken?). > So that argument is out the window as well. Yep. -- Oleg Goldshmidt | [EMAIL PROTECTED] = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: egged.co.il works
Ira Abramov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Quoting Shaul Karl, from the post of Tue, 11 Mar: > > > > 1. Should be cheaper to develop and maintain. > > Sadly, I think we have reached the conclusion it's not exactly correct > anymore. Why not? -- Oleg Goldshmidt | [EMAIL PROTECTED] = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: egged.co.il works
At 18:47 +0200 on 11/3/2003, Alon Altman wrote: The question is- does it support MSIE 7.0? The answer: They don't know. This question is the same for a standards-compliant site, because you don't know when one of the browsers is going to pick up on a new standard and ruin everything. This has happened to me lately: I've always used cookies for sessions, it's as standard as muck. Now marketing has asked me to put that site within a frame so that "the location bar will show our domain and nothing else". The frameset is in domain A, the frame within it is in domain B. So far, no standards broken, Mozilla works perfectly, MSIE 5.5 works, hunky dory. But MSIE 6 doesn't accept my cookie. This is because is an early adopter of a W3C standard called P3P, which is a standard defining privacy policies. Apparently, in default mode MSIE 6 accepts cookies from the main domain of a given page (i.e. the frameset), but requires something called "Compact policy" to be sent over, in order for it to accept the cookie (which comes from domain B). Darn, now I have to study the P3P standard, study the part about compact policies, learn what I have to stick there (and nobody in marketing is going to tell me what our actual privacy policy is, because we don't actually have one) to make it work. In the meantime, many users can't register to our service. To them, the site is "broken" (unless we convince them to change the default security setting, and I don't like doing that). So that argument is out the window as well. Herouth -- EMAIL: [EMAIL PROTECTED] HOME PAGE: http://herouth.port5.com/ = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: egged.co.il works
On Tue, 11 Mar 2003 07:20:52 +0200 "Reuven M. Lerner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Given that the Web will be an increasingly important part of the > Leumi infrastructure, it seems to me that Leumi should be pushing > for a neutral body to define the standards for that > infrastructure, rather than a company with clear commercial > interests. The latest rumors about how Leumi was hit by the "Slammer" just confirm the deep penetration of M$ software into the bank. So they even trust MS-SQL for their infrastructure... should I say more? Shachar, it looks to me the only arguments that may be relevant in this (tough) case, are those that were mentioning lower support headaches by sticking to standards. Oron Peled Voice/Fax: +972-4-8228492 [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.actcom.co.il/~oron Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the universe. [Albert Einstein]. = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: egged.co.il works
On Tue, 11 Mar 2003, Ira Abramov wrote: > > 4. Doesn't force the clients into specific browsers, which enhances > >the clients freedom. > > "Now that's crazy talk! we've tested and it works on MSIE5, 5.5 AND > 6.0!" The question is- does it support MSIE 7.0? The answer: They don't know. If they have built to standard they would have guaranteed it work on all future versions of IE or any other browser out there. Alon -- This message was sent by Alon Altman ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) ICQ:1366540 The RIGHT way to contact me is by e-mail. I am otherwise nonexistent :) -- -=[ Random Fortune ]=- Forsan et haec olim meminisse juvabit. = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: egged.co.il works
Quoting Shaul Karl, from the post of Tue, 11 Mar: > > 1. Should be cheaper to develop and maintain. Sadly, I think we have reached the conclusion it's not exactly correct anymore. but what annoys me is that banks (who for tax reasons are recognised as "Malkar" in Israel!!!) boast multi-million dollar profits, Leumi in particular just launched a 3-4 million $$$ campaign a while ago (remember the "human bridge" ad on TV?), raise the amlot, lower the pakam interest, and yet have the khuzpah to tell us they can't afford another $15K (at a VERY extreme estimate!) to make the damn site standard. > 2. Easier to support multiple languages: Hebrew + Arabic + Russian + >Rumanian + Portugaze (is this what is used in the Philippine)? + >Thai + ... Portuguese is spoken in Macao, Angola, Mozambique, Cape Verde Portugal and a tiny place called Brazil. In the Philippines you may find Ilocano and Filipino. I don't think standard compliance will help porting the site between LTR languages as such though, that's more of a question for the application designers. LTR and RTL support of the same app IS a question for the web designers as well :) > 3. Should be faster and convenient to the clients at the expense of >the site resources since, as far as I understand, delegating more >work to the clients is done in a sub standard ways. huh? > 4. Doesn't force the clients into specific browsers, which enhances >the clients freedom. "Now that's crazy talk! we've tested and it works on MSIE5, 5.5 AND 6.0!" and the excuse of "opera+gecko are only 3 promil, THEY are not the standard" plays into their hands here. ouch. in a world where MSIE is the de facto standard, it's hard to convince any capitalist that the w3c are holier :( -- Refrigerate after opening Ira Abramov http://ira.abramov.org/email/ This post is encrypted twice with ROT-13. Documenting or attempting to crack this encryption is illegal. = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: egged.co.il works
On Mon, Mar 10, 2003 at 03:02:06PM +0200, Shachar Shemesh wrote: > Hi all, > > I am meeting the person in charge of the internet infrastructures for > Leumi Bank in about two weeks. This is someone who seem ready to listen > (though it doesn't sound as if it is going to be easy to convince), and > has the authority to order a change if he is convinced. > > Now I need ammunition. Please help me with a set of reasons why making > the site actually work with Mozilla is in their best interests. > I think you should forget about specific browsers and concentrate on standards compliant. It does sound better. As for ammunition: 1. Should be cheaper to develop and maintain. 2. Easier to support multiple languages: Hebrew + Arabic + Russian + Rumanian + Portugaze (is this what is used in the Philippine)? + Thai + ... 3. Should be faster and convenient to the clients at the expense of the site resources since, as far as I understand, delegating more work to the clients is done in a sub standard ways. 4. Doesn't force the clients into specific browsers, which enhances the clients freedom. Feel free to dismiss any of these arguments. I have next to zero web skills. Hopefully there is something in each of them. >Shachar > > Shachar Shemesh wrote: > > >Of this list, 1yashir, discount and kupat holim seem the most urgent > >to me. That's because they are suppliers that, if you happen to be > >their customer, it is very difficult for you to switch. > > > >I'll let you know what I came up with. > > > > Shachar > > > >Shoshannah Forbes wrote: > > > >> > >>>I am willing to take that one up as a representative of an official > >>>body, and try to get things changed. I would, however, ask you to > >>>help me focuse my efforts. Please give a quick vote of the site > >>>whose lack of support for konq/moz is the most troubling, and let me > >>>know. I think Bank Leumi is the candidate for this. Anyone else? > >> > >> > >> > >>Two places to start: > >>http://tinyurl.com/6u4z (from bugzilla) > >>http://www.mozilla.org.il/evangel.shtml (scroll down to see the list) > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > > > > > > > -- > Shachar Shemesh > Open Source integration consultant > Home page & resume - http://www.shemesh.biz/ > > > > = > To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with > the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command > echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] > -- Shaul Karl, [EMAIL PROTECTED] e t = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: egged.co.il works
Gilad Ben-Yossef wrote: Here is my take for a structured argument: The argument usually presented in regard for making sub-standart sites that only work for a specific browseris that statistics show that the % of users using this product is so big that the economical incentive to make a standart based site that will work with all standart supporting browser is so low. This argument is false because it overlooks the the profile of customers which use these "other" browsers: These people are sophisticated customers. They are often high tech workers and other high paid white collar proffesionals or students that would be such customers in the future. snipped ... Sorry Gilad, but it seems like you're way out of your depth (no offense, so am I) here: such an argument as you wish to make must be based on market data in order to make an impact on decision makers. You say that this "early adopt, high tech" segment has high financial activity indices. Regardless of wether this looks justified to me (not completely), the important numbers are the income and spending expectancies; these you must _know_ in order to make a convincing argument, and not a cathedral-bazaar-like manifesto (no disrespect there either, just that it won't convince managers). I believe that the argument for standard-compliance, backed up by papers regarding its ease of maintainance and its long-time savings, still looks more convincing. -- -- regards +--- + Guy Baruch , Plasma Laboratory, Weizmann Institue. + mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] + phone: 972-8-934-2211 +--- They hang the man and flog the woman That steal the goose from off the common, But let the greater villain loose That steals the common from the goose. -- English folk poem, circa 1764 http://bostonreview.mit.edu/BR27.3/bollier.html = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: egged.co.il works
> "Shachar" == Shachar Shemesh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Shachar> Please help me with a set of reasons why making the site Shachar> actually work with Mozilla is in their best interests. I can think of two arguments: (1) I don't want to see the Leumi site work with Mozilla. I want it to work with established standards. Given that it's just as easy (in most cases) to create sites that work with standards or without them, why not choose the option that works with the maximum number of users? If they were to test on IE/Windows, Mozilla/Windows and Mozilla/Linux, they would quickly discover most (but admittedly not all) of the issues with their site. (2) By creating the site for IE, Leumi is basically letting Microsoft dictate the way in which the Web will work. Leumi will presumably use the Web more and more, and will offer more and more services to Web-based customers -- both to save money by freeing up live staff, and to be more accessible outside of bank hours. Given that the Web will be an increasingly important part of the Leumi infrastructure, it seems to me that Leumi should be pushing for a neutral body to define the standards for that infrastructure, rather than a company with clear commercial interests. Reuven = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bank Leumi website (was- Re: egged.co.il works)
Well, Mozilla =! Linux Mozilla (and other gecko browsers) are used also on Mac and on Windows. As more and more people are getting tired of IE security problems, more and more people, on many platforms, are using Gecko browsers. Also, if the sites is focused on standards, he will not have to rush to fix it when the next version of IE comes out... many good links on resources on this subject can be found here: http://maccaws.org/wiki/index.php?page=ResearchLinks I am also asking in their mailing list for more pointers. On Monday, Mar 10, 2003, at 16:03 Asia/Jerusalem, Shachar Shemesh wrote: The thing is that unless the activex rabbit is pulled, he has no case FOR supporting Linux, except "money saving", to which I can always reply with "standards complient". = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: egged.co.il works
On 2003/03/10 16:03, Shachar Shemesh wrote: > Only about 1% of the people who browse the internet do so from Linux > (http://www.google.com/press/zeitgeist.html). > My site (http://www.shemesh.biz), which was published mostly on Linux > related forums (here through my sig, Wine, Haifux) gets about 50% hit by > Windows machines, and only about 41% by Linux. For all it's worth: haayal.co.il 86% MSIE 3.7% Mozilla 3.0% Netscape fisheye.co.il 90% MSIE 3.4% Mozilla 1.6% Netscape sf-f.org.il 89% MSIE 1.6% Mozilla 1.6% Netscape The rest are mostly crawlers, worms and users behind agent-hiding proxies. The statistics are over the last few million page requests. I should note that the last two sites use visual Hebrew. The first (haayal.co.il) has both visual and logical modes, with an auto-detection heuristic as well as manual override. Eran = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: egged.co.il works
please don't CC: me, I read the first one just fine. [EMAIL PROTECTED], from the post of Mon, 10 Mar: > Quoting Ira Abramov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > users on linux > > blind users > > users on palm > > Is Palm standards-compliant? Last that I heard of it it had terrible Hebrew > problems. it's not, but it's a thought. if the website is planned right, and display is seperated from functionality, you can get where you need. > > sticking to standards means it will work on older browsers as well (MSIE > > 4 and 5 anyone?) > > Which standards do you mean? Clean HTML4? Sure. DHTML based on W3C DOM is > standards-compliant, but will never work on MSIE 4. I'm not sure to this day what DOM is. sounds too BDSM to me, even if I'm a Terantino fan... and what's wrong with supporting MSIE4? > Ah, your advocacy is for a *simpler* site, not a *standard* site. > These two things are different. Do we want to put the effort in > convincing the man to give up his gadgets and toys? I would. I do business with schwab.com and wellsfargo.com and they would never dare to do anything more complex than very basic javascript (if at all) or a frame trick or two. that's it. no Java or flash or ActiveIchs. I'm a little biased at the moment, because I spent the last 3 hours debugging a stupid one-liner in javascript. it appears Mozilla is more leniant than MSIE with certain parameters... grrr. > whatever. If we require simplicity and stark naked HTML, he may > actually have many users who will moan about the "nice toys" that are > gone. if done well, things should look good AND be functional. nice toys are for chat rooms on tapuz, not for financial institutes. > Maybe even some bad publicity in the press, where a blockhead > who happens to write an Internet column will mention "Bank Leumi has > gone several years backwards in its new version of the site. Hello, > technology has advanced since 1995!". then give a "gadgety interface" and a straightforward HTML-only interface as a choice for older computeres/browsers/connections. Oh well... I can dream :) I tried to keep my own page "dehanced for Lynx" but once I installed PHP and Gallery, the road to hell is short :) -- Totaly mental Ira Abramov http://ira.abramov.org/email/ This post is encrypted twice with ROT-13. Documenting or attempting to crack this encryption is illegal. = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: egged.co.il works
Ah, your advocacy is for a *simpler* site, not a *standard* site. These two things are different. Do we want to put the effort in convincing the man to give up his gadgets and toys? IMHO, this is the best thing we have to come with. I would go for "simplicity means business". A bank shouldn't toy around with fancy graphics. Graphics means bandwidth, bandwidth means time, and time is money. No matter what fast internet connection someone has, it always comes to the point where the surfer has to wait until it is all loaded. And the more gadgets there are in there, the greater the chances that something will go wrong. A slim site means it's stable and is more reliable. That's things that a bank want to identify with. In the end of the day, a bank's site should supply infomation when the customer needs it. People don't surf bank sites for fun, but they have something they want to do. All these specialized GUI is not only a source for problems, but it actually makes it harder to use the site. I also suggest pointing at the real internet giants, who usually keep their sites very plain. Plain means that you know what you're doing. And it just so happens, that when everything is in simple HTML, all browsers work. Eli = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: egged.co.il works
On Mon, 10 Mar 2003, Shachar Shemesh wrote: > Hi all, > > I am meeting the person in charge of the internet infrastructures for > Leumi Bank in about two weeks. This is someone who seem ready to listen > (though it doesn't sound as if it is going to be easy to convince), and > has the authority to order a change if he is convinced. > > Now I need ammunition. Please help me with a set of reasons why making > the site actually work with Mozilla is in their best interests. I suggest not talking about "supporing Mozilla" or "supporting Linux", but rather a more general "supporting web standards" approach. The benefits of this approach are apparent even if everybody only uses MSIE. Suppose MSIE descides to drop or change some feature in a later version. This kind of things have already occured and will occur in the future. Building for a specific browser requires constant updating of the site to support changes between versions of that browser. Furthermore, new wireless internet devices are appearing which enable users to browse websites from anywhere. The richest and most connected people will purchase these devices, and will be disappointed to know they cannot wirelessly access their bank account. Some of them will switch banks. Programming to standards lets you write the site once while letting all users enjoy it, with almost no extra work. On the contrary, programming to standards might be even easier. About styling, first - a standards-compliant site can be styled in very appealing ways using Cascading Style Sheets (CSS). The style-sheets may be changed on the user's end if (for example) the user is blind or using a wireless device. Second - People don't access their bank account to see pretty pictures. Look how many people are using ATM machines, which have a very simple text-only interface. A simple design with easy access to all features should be the guiding principle in designing a bank account access site. Another problem is security. The Windows operating system and MSIE web browser are notorious for many security breaches. Combining this fact with a remote access system to a bank account may lead to unpleasant results. Some users do not agree to this kind of compromise, but still want to access their account online. These users use alternate operating systems, and paraodxially, currently cannot access their Leumi bank accounts. Alon -- This message was sent by Alon Altman ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) ICQ:1366540 The RIGHT way to contact me is by e-mail. I am otherwise nonexistent :) -- -=[ Random Fortune ]=- Left to themselves, things tend to go from bad to worse. = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: egged.co.il works
Quoting Ira Abramov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > users on linux > blind users > users on palm Is Palm standards-compliant? Last that I heard of it it had terrible Hebrew problems. > sticking to standards means it will work on older browsers as well (MSIE > 4 and 5 anyone?) Which standards do you mean? Clean HTML4? Sure. DHTML based on W3C DOM is standards-compliant, but will never work on MSIE 4. > less code means less chance of security holes, easier debugging and > overall better speed for the users Ah, your advocacy is for a *simpler* site, not a *standard* site. These two things are different. Do we want to put the effort in convincing the man to give up his gadgets and toys? If we stick to standardisation, we can tell him that everything he has, he can still have, only with W3C DOM, Java instead of ActiveX, whatever. If we require simplicity and stark naked HTML, he may actually have many users who will moan about the "nice toys" that are gone. Maybe even some bad publicity in the press, where a blockhead who happens to write an Internet column will mention "Bank Leumi has gone several years backwards in its new version of the site. Hello, technology has advanced since 1995!". Herouth = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: egged.co.il works
Shachar Shemesh wrote: Hi all, I am meeting the person in charge of the internet infrastructures for Leumi Bank in about two weeks. This is someone who seem ready to listen (though it doesn't sound as if it is going to be easy to convince), and has the authority to order a change if he is convinced. First of all good job and good luck! Here is my take for a structured argument: The argument usually presented in regard for making sub-standart sites that only work for a specific browseris that statistics show that the % of users using this product is so big that the economical incentive to make a standart based site that will work with all standart supporting browser is so low. This argument is false because it overlooks the the profile of customers which use these "other" browsers: These people are sophisticated customers. They are often high tech workers and other high paid white collar proffesionals or students that would be such customers in the future. They tend to both have higher income then the average users and quite often have several bank accounts for various needs, like a business account and so forth. They also quite obviously "Early Adopters" kind of customers - risk loving by nature. These are exactly the people that have both significant free fortune and tendency for trying out and using sophisticated finanacel products that generate a lot of income to a bank, a lot more then the average user and by nature they are the perfect customers for Internet based services. These are the kind of people who got the first GSm phones, hooked up to high speed Internet and satelite TV or switched to the First Direct service of Leumi. they are also the kind of people that will want to try to acess their bank account from all sorts of mobile devices, from Internet cafes abroad which quite often don't run a run of the mill Desktop OS and therefore do not offer the "common" broser and so forth. Furthermore, because of these qualities, they are exactly the kind of people which are "trend setters" - they are the first to try out new technologies and products and quite often are the people who their peers, friends and family consult when it comes out to trying and purchasing new products and services. Therefore, their influence is even greater then the actual net financel power that they muster in preson. It is important to note that Bank Leumi web site WAS compatible to some degree with standart supporting browsers for a long time and the complete lack of support is something new. Combined with the fact that switching banks is a complicated decision that is not taken lightly I believe the Bank Leumi has yet to notice the defection of these kind of customers to other banks and even if they did they probably wont be able to pin point it to the bad service which we are now witnessing. But once the trend will be visible - it already will be too late. This is further damaging to the bank in light of the fact that its compitetors, Bank Poalim for example and others, DO support standart based browsers and make a point to preserve services to them, so we have somwhere to move to. In short - the "one person, one vote" system is good for national elections, but it is nothing but misleading when it comes to making decisions of these kinds. Gilad. = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: egged.co.il works
For a person that actually cares about accessing his bank account via the web, being able to do so from the software he uses is very important. I wouldn't change to a bank that forced me to move physically just to get information or give orders. And being exposed to the security concerns related to IE is not an acceptable option, even if you work in Windows. Obviously, for a Linux user, it is very much a deal breaker. Daniel Shachar Shemesh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi all, > > I am meeting the person in charge of the internet infrastructures for > Leumi Bank in about two weeks. This is someone who seem ready to listen > (though it doesn't sound as if it is going to be easy to convince), and > has the authority to order a change if he is convinced. > > Now I need ammunition. Please help me with a set of reasons why making > the site actually work with Mozilla is in their best interests. > > Shachar > > Shachar Shemesh wrote: > > > Of this list, 1yashir, discount and kupat holim seem the most urgent > > to me. That's because they are suppliers that, if you happen to be > > their customer, it is very difficult for you to switch. > > > > I'll let you know what I came up with. > > > >Shachar > > > > Shoshannah Forbes wrote: > > > >> > >>> I am willing to take that one up as a representative of an official > >>> body, and try to get things changed. I would, however, ask you to > >>> help me focuse my efforts. Please give a quick vote of the site > >>> whose lack of support for konq/moz is the most troubling, and let me > >>> know. I think Bank Leumi is the candidate for this. Anyone else? > >> > >> > >> > >> Two places to start: > >> http://tinyurl.com/6u4z (from bugzilla) > >> http://www.mozilla.org.il/evangel.shtml (scroll down to see the list) > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > > > > > > > -- > Shachar Shemesh > Open Source integration consultant > Home page & resume - http://www.shemesh.biz/ > > > > = > To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with > the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command > echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: egged.co.il works
On Mon, 10 Mar 2003, Shachar Shemesh wrote: > I think I will have a case, unless he pulls some activex from the hat > that does authentication. I can still claim that the old site is around, > and that one hole is enough, but that will leave me with a poor case. You mean there might be an activex something that is downloaded to the client does the authentication there and sends it back ? So now it fully trusts anything comming from the client ? If that is the case I am glad I am not their customer. Gabor = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: egged.co.il works
Gabor Szabo wrote: Maybe if you say that: I am NOT a client of Leumi because an important service of the bank is not accessible for me would be more convincing ? Gabor I will certanly say that the Amuta has a bank account at Hapoalim because they support Linux. The thing is that it is clear why that is the case. I am also not sure close the person is to sales considerations. -- Shachar Shemesh Open Source integration consultant Home page & resume - http://www.shemesh.biz/ = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: egged.co.il works
Ok, let me play devil's advocate here, then. Assaf Flatto wrote: here are some 1 ) the market is slowly moving toward Linux and so are the people using the online banking , by blocking the site to the primary browser I that environment - you may be damaging your clients and alienating them . Only about 1% of the people who browse the internet do so from Linux (http://www.google.com/press/zeitgeist.html). My site (http://www.shemesh.biz), which was published mostly on Linux related forums (here through my sig, Wine, Haifux) gets about 50% hit by Windows machines, and only about 41% by Linux. 2 )The first direct bank ( hayashir harishon ) is a subsidiary of the Leumi bank and is main market is Hi tech workers - this is relating to the former argument . So is my rebuttal. those are my two Bits Assaf I think I will have a case, unless he pulls some activex from the hat that does authentication. I can still claim that the old site is around, and that one hole is enough, but that will leave me with a poor case. The thing is that unless the activex rabbit is pulled, he has no case FOR supporting Linux, except "money saving", to which I can always reply with "standards complient". -- Shachar Shemesh Open Source integration consultant Home page & resume - http://www.shemesh.biz/ = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: egged.co.il works
On Mon, 10 Mar 2003, Gleb Natapov wrote: > > > If the fact that I am the client of Leumi Bank and an important service > of the bank is not accessible for me because of some stupid management > decisions doesn't sound convincing enough for him I seriously doubt you > can convince him by any other argument. But it is worth trying > nevertheless. Maybe if you say that: I am NOT a client of Leumi because an important service of the bank is not accessible for me would be more convincing ? Gabor = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: egged.co.il works
> Hi all, > > I am meeting the person in charge of the internet infrastructures for > Leumi Bank in about two weeks. This is someone who seem ready to listen > (though it doesn't sound as if it is going to be easy to convince), and > has the authority to order a change if he is convinced. > > Now I need ammunition. Please help me with a set of reasons why making > the site actually work with Mozilla is in their best interests. > If the fact that I am the client of Leumi Bank and an important service of the bank is not accessible for me because of some stupid management decisions doesn't sound convincing enough for him I seriously doubt you can convince him by any other argument. But it is worth trying nevertheless. > Shachar > > Shachar Shemesh wrote: > > > Of this list, 1yashir, discount and kupat holim seem the most urgent > > to me. That's because they are suppliers that, if you happen to be > > their customer, it is very difficult for you to switch. > > > > I'll let you know what I came up with. > > > >Shachar > > > > Shoshannah Forbes wrote: > > > >> > >>> I am willing to take that one up as a representative of an official > >>> body, and try to get things changed. I would, however, ask you to > >>> help me focuse my efforts. Please give a quick vote of the site > >>> whose lack of support for konq/moz is the most troubling, and let me > >>> know. I think Bank Leumi is the candidate for this. Anyone else? > >> > >> > >> > >> Two places to start: > >> http://tinyurl.com/6u4z (from bugzilla) > >> http://www.mozilla.org.il/evangel.shtml (scroll down to see the list) > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > > > > > > > = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: egged.co.il works
Quoting Shachar Shemesh, from the post of Mon, 10 Mar: > I am meeting the person in charge of the internet infrastructures for > Leumi Bank in about two weeks. This is someone who seem ready to listen > (though it doesn't sound as if it is going to be easy to convince), and > has the authority to order a change if he is convinced. > > Now I need ammunition. Please help me with a set of reasons why making > the site actually work with Mozilla is in their best interests. users on linux blind users users on palm sticking to standards means it will work on older browsers as well (MSIE 4 and 5 anyone?) less code means less chance of security holes, easier debugging and overall better speed for the users usability? humm... eternal gratitude and newspaper headlines: "Leumi pledges to stick to standards". and most important - once Linux users take over the world, they'll need somewhere to manage their accounts at... -- Fun for the whole family Ira Abramov http://ira.abramov.org/email/ This post is encrypted twice with ROT-13. Documenting or attempting to crack this encryption is illegal. = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: egged.co.il works
here are some 1 ) the market is slowly moving toward Linux and so are the people using the online banking , by blocking the site to the primary browser I that environment - you may be damaging your clients and alienating them . 2 )The first direct bank ( hayashir harishon ) is a subsidiary of the Leumi bank and is main market is Hi tech workers - this is relating to the former argument . those are my two Bits Assaf > -Original Message- > From: Shachar Shemesh [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Monday, March 10, 2003 3:02 PM > To: Shachar Shemesh > Cc: Shoshannah Forbes; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: egged.co.il works > > > Hi all, > > I am meeting the person in charge of the internet infrastructures for > Leumi Bank in about two weeks. This is someone who seem ready > to listen > (though it doesn't sound as if it is going to be easy to > convince), and > has the authority to order a change if he is convinced. > > Now I need ammunition. Please help me with a set of reasons > why making > the site actually work with Mozilla is in their best interests. > > Shachar > > Shachar Shemesh wrote: > > > Of this list, 1yashir, discount and kupat holim seem the most urgent > > to me. That's because they are suppliers that, if you happen to be > > their customer, it is very difficult for you to switch. > > > > I'll let you know what I came up with. > > > >Shachar > > > > Shoshannah Forbes wrote: > > > >> > >>> I am willing to take that one up as a representative of > an official > >>> body, and try to get things changed. I would, however, ask you to > >>> help me focuse my efforts. Please give a quick vote of the site > >>> whose lack of support for konq/moz is the most troubling, > and let me > >>> know. I think Bank Leumi is the candidate for this. Anyone else? > >> > >> > >> > >> Two places to start: > >> http://tinyurl.com/6u4z (from bugzilla) > >> http://www.mozilla.org.il/evangel.shtml (scroll down to > see the list) > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > > > > > > > -- > Shachar Shemesh > Open Source integration consultant > Home page & resume - http://www.shemesh.biz/ > > > > = > To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run > the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > --- This e-mail message may contain confidential, commercial and privileged information or data that constitute proprietary information of Cellcom Israel Ltd. Any review or distribution by others is strictly prohibited If you are not the intended recipient you are hereby notified that any use of this information or data by any other person is absolutely prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please delete all copies and contact us by e-mailing to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Thank You. To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: egged.co.il works
Hi all, I am meeting the person in charge of the internet infrastructures for Leumi Bank in about two weeks. This is someone who seem ready to listen (though it doesn't sound as if it is going to be easy to convince), and has the authority to order a change if he is convinced. Now I need ammunition. Please help me with a set of reasons why making the site actually work with Mozilla is in their best interests. Shachar Shachar Shemesh wrote: Of this list, 1yashir, discount and kupat holim seem the most urgent to me. That's because they are suppliers that, if you happen to be their customer, it is very difficult for you to switch. I'll let you know what I came up with. Shachar Shoshannah Forbes wrote: I am willing to take that one up as a representative of an official body, and try to get things changed. I would, however, ask you to help me focuse my efforts. Please give a quick vote of the site whose lack of support for konq/moz is the most troubling, and let me know. I think Bank Leumi is the candidate for this. Anyone else? Two places to start: http://tinyurl.com/6u4z (from bugzilla) http://www.mozilla.org.il/evangel.shtml (scroll down to see the list) -- Shachar Shemesh Open Source integration consultant Home page & resume - http://www.shemesh.biz/ = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: egged.co.il works
On Wed, 5 Mar 2003, Vadim Vygonets wrote: > Quoth Alon Altman on Tue, Mar 04, 2003: > > If you want to use egged.co.il on Mozilla, use my interface. It's much > > easier and lighter - http://alon.wox.org/egged.html (ignore the "line no." > > box) > > Great, but please specify Hebrew encoding in the web page headers > (this discussion is about standards, among other things). > > Vadik. Already did. Maybe you've got a cached version. Alon -- This message was sent by Alon Altman ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) ICQ:1366540 The RIGHT way to contact me is by e-mail. I am otherwise nonexistent :) -- -=[ Random Fortune ]=- If something has not yet gone wrong then it would ultimately have been beneficial for it to go wrong. = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: egged.co.il works
Quoth Alon Altman on Tue, Mar 04, 2003: > If you want to use egged.co.il on Mozilla, use my interface. It's much > easier and lighter - http://alon.wox.org/egged.html (ignore the "line no." > box) Great, but please specify Hebrew encoding in the web page headers (this discussion is about standards, among other things). Vadik. -- Time is an illusion. Lunchtime doubly so. -- Ford Prefect = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: egged.co.il works
Nadav Har'El wrote: No, the workaround stopped working a week after you posted it. It now uses an invalid certificate (!) to secure the connection, which makes the site unusable. In that case I agree, it is the most urgent for me as well. also, kindly mail me in private the specifics of the problem. A non-secure workaround is as good as no workaround, in the case of banking... No, it is much, much worse, even for accounts which have only read permission. -- -- regards +--- + Guy Baruch , Plasma Laboratory, Weizmann Institue. + mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] + phone: 972-8-934-2211 +--- They hang the man and flog the woman That steal the goose from off the common, But let the greater villain loose That steals the common from the goose. -- English folk poem, circa 1764 http://bostonreview.mit.edu/BR27.3/bollier.html = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: egged.co.il works
On Wed, Mar 05, 2003, Guy Baruch wrote about "Re: egged.co.il works": > > > Nadav Har'El wrote: > > >Yes. Bank Leumi is the worst as far as I'm concerned. > > > > > but bank leumi has a workaround as the old site, which was posted here > some months back. No, the workaround stopped working a week after you posted it. It now uses an invalid certificate (!) to secure the connection, which makes the site unusable. > let's not open that old discussion again, but if it has a WA, it's not a > show stopper ... A non-secure workaround is as good as no workaround, in the case of banking... -- Nadav Har'El|Wednesday, Mar 5 2003, 1 Adar II 5763 [EMAIL PROTECTED] |- Phone: +972-53-245868, ICQ 13349191 |The meek shall inherit the Earth, for http://nadav.harel.org.il |they are too timid to refuse it. = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: egged.co.il works
Nadav Har'El wrote: Yes. Bank Leumi is the worst as far as I'm concerned. but bank leumi has a workaround as the old site, which was posted here some months back. let's not open that old discussion again, but if it has a WA, it's not a show stopper ... -- -- regards +--- + Guy Baruch , Plasma Laboratory, Weizmann Institue. + mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] + phone: 972-8-934-2211 +--- They hang the man and flog the woman That steal the goose from off the common, But let the greater villain loose That steals the common from the goose. -- English folk poem, circa 1764 http://bostonreview.mit.edu/BR27.3/bollier.html = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: egged.co.il works
Please contact a serious journalist, like Mordechai Gilat, with this info. If it's not exposed, it won't be fixed. Alon Altman wrote: I second discountbank. Kupat Holim Clalit say they will install a new site soon (the rep didn't know about moz support). I have managed to workaround the clalit site with DOM inspector, with the neat "feature" that you can see anybody's lab test results... -- -- regards +--- + Guy Baruch , Plasma Laboratory, Weizmann Institue. + mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] + phone: 972-8-934-2211 +--- They hang the man and flog the woman That steal the goose from off the common, But let the greater villain loose That steals the common from the goose. -- English folk poem, circa 1764 http://bostonreview.mit.edu/BR27.3/bollier.html = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: egged.co.il works
I think a good focus is important markets and monopoly institutes. Banks are a good example, but focusing on a specific bank might be counter productive - if someone there has an interest in the status-quo, there's not much to do about it. However, there are various reasons all banks should want to be standards based - competition with relatively compliant sites (Hapoalim), a piece of a small but growing market, support for the blind. In fact, banks have an oversight body, one of whose interests is the availability of information to the public. Maybe the Bank of Israel would have something to say about this - I don't know how aware they are of the situation. A little policy could replace a lot of convincing... The www.postil.com site is not great either (from galeon, try to view the external links page), and considering I can't go to the competition, that bugs me. Daniel Shachar Shemesh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > >Organize? Maybe create a site or a subsite which contains links of all the > >uncooperative sites, and give them bad rap in the press? Create a nice PDF in > >Hebrew about standardization of a site, and send it to management levels in > >those companies? I'm at a loss. For me it's worse than most of you - my other OS > >is a MacOS... > > > >Herouth > > > > > Maybe we should form some sort of an official body that will try to > advance these concerns that are relevant specifically to users of open > source and free software? Hey, didn't someone say something about and Amuta? > > I am willing to take that one up as a representative of an official > body, and try to get things changed. I would, however, ask you to help > me focuse my efforts. Please give a quick vote of the site whose lack of > support for konq/moz is the most troubling, and let me know. I think > Bank Leumi is the candidate for this. Anyone else? > > Shachar > > -- > Shachar Shemesh > Open Source integration consultant > Home page & resume - http://www.shemesh.biz/ > > > > = > To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with > the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command > echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: egged.co.il works
At 17:57 +0200 on 4/3/2003, Shachar Shemesh wrote: I am willing to take that one up as a representative of an official body, and try to get things changed. I would, however, ask you to help me focuse my efforts. Please give a quick vote of the site whose lack of support for konq/moz is the most troubling, and let me know. I think personal evangelism should, perhaps, be first focused on builders of "site engines", such as the one I mentioned, or telesite, or Nana Shops. When they make a bad decision, it's dozens of sites that get contaminated for the free user. If they make a good decision, dozens of sites become easier to use. Herouth -- EMAIL: [EMAIL PROTECTED] HOME PAGE: http://herouth.port5.com/ = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: egged.co.il works
NH>> Yes. Bank Leumi is the worst as far as I'm concerned. What is funny - once it was the best. But it looks like some greedy site-forge managers were in need of some cash so that they succeeded to convince BL people that they need to break perfectly working system and erect in its place another one that has exactly the same function with one difference - it uses a lot of weird Javascript (which, of course, makes it more expensive - if plain HTML page is $10, "Javascript-enabled Web solution" can be already a $100 or $500...) and doesn't work in many browsers. Win for the said site-forge, lose for us poor linuxers... -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] \/ There shall be counsels taken Stanislav Malyshev /\ Stronger than Morgul-spells phone +972-50-624945/\ JRRT LotR. whois:!SM8333 = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: egged.co.il works
Shachar Shemesh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Maybe we should form some sort of an official body that will try to > advance these concerns that are relevant specifically to users of open > source and free software? Hey, didn't someone say something about and > Amuta? Indeed, some months ago I suggested publishing lists of "bad guys" and "good guys" somewhere in the Amuta web pages. I don't think there is a publicly available archive, but here is my suggestion cut'n'pasted: One suggestion for the future. I think it might be nice listing sites and services, public or commercial, that do and do not work for users of free software, especially if the "bad guys" have competitors that are "good guys". Logs of attempts to contact them and their responses may be an interesting read, showing their attitudes. I have a recent sample that is rather point-blank. Might as well start collecting them. I am sure that many on this list have entries to contribute. I think it is in line with the Amuta's goals. > I am willing to take that one up as a representative of an official > body, and try to get things changed. I would, however, ask you to help > me focuse my efforts. Please give a quick vote of the site whose lack > of support for konq/moz is the most troubling, and let me know. I > think Bank Leumi is the candidate for this. Anyone else? I think that the company I meant in the quoted passage was JobInfo. I have correspondence with them in my archives. Egged still does not work for me in either Mozilla or Konqueror (from kde-base-3.0.3). https://online.leumi-card.co.il/Registration.asp demands IE (4.0 or newer), 800x600 resolution, and a particular Windows font. Sic. -- Oleg Goldshmidt | [EMAIL PROTECTED] = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: egged.co.il works
On Tue, 4 Mar 2003, Beni Cherniavsky wrote: > On 2003-03-04, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > Organize? Maybe create a site or a subsite which contains links of all the > > uncooperative sites, and give them bad rap in the press? Create a nice PDF in > > Hebrew about standardization of a site, and send it to management levels in > > those companies? I'm at a loss. For me it's worse than most of you - my other OS > > is a MacOS... > > > http://mozilla.org.il/evangel.shtml > > I'm really not convinced that this has any impact but then I don't > know what does. Hell, the technion's IT support site had checks that > you use IE, last time I checked :-(. Technion helpdesk works with IE or NS4. They also have an email fallback. http://helpdesk.technion.ac.il/ Alon -- This message was sent by Alon Altman ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) ICQ:1366540 The RIGHT way to contact me is by e-mail. I am otherwise nonexistent :) -- -=[ Random Fortune ]=- A company is known by the men it keeps. = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: egged.co.il works
On Tue, 4 Mar 2003, Shachar Shemesh wrote: > Of this list, 1yashir, discount and kupat holim seem the most urgent to > me. That's because they are suppliers that, if you happen to be their > customer, it is very difficult for you to switch. > > I'll let you know what I came up with. > I second discountbank. Kupat Holim Clalit say they will install a new site soon (the rep didn't know about moz support). I have managed to workaround the clalit site with DOM inspector, with the neat "feature" that you can see anybody's lab test results... Alon -- This message was sent by Alon Altman ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) ICQ:1366540 The RIGHT way to contact me is by e-mail. I am otherwise nonexistent :) -- -=[ Random Fortune ]=- I'm a Lisp variable -- bind me! = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: egged.co.il works
On Tue, Mar 04, 2003, Shachar Shemesh wrote about "Re: egged.co.il works": > me focuse my efforts. Please give a quick vote of the site whose lack of > support for konq/moz is the most troubling, and let me know. I think > Bank Leumi is the candidate for this. Anyone else? Yes. Bank Leumi is the worst as far as I'm concerned. -- Nadav Har'El| Tuesday, Mar 4 2003, 1 Adar II 5763 [EMAIL PROTECTED] |- Phone: +972-53-245868, ICQ 13349191 |Today is the tomorrow you worried about http://nadav.harel.org.il |yesterday, and now you know why. = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: egged.co.il works
On Tue, 2003-03-04 at 00:54, Nadav Har'El wrote: > On Tue, Mar 04, 2003, Tzafrir Cohen wrote about "Re: egged.co.il works": > > So another broken site is supported, instead of it being built properly. > > Right... And worse, this gives Microsoft a whole new baseline on which they > can create new divergent technology, which gets further and further from > W3C standards, while Konqueror continues to chase its tail... I beg to differ (about MS's standards support). At my workplace we have to deal a lot with browsers and their quirks (they are the interface to everything we do) and to how sites are designed to work with them and we see improvements towards the standard support as IE moved from 5.0 to 5.5 and now 6.0. I suspect the problem is less in IE support for standards (which is getting better) and more in education of site builders who got used to the notion that "good looking sites can't be based on standards", something which might have been true years ago but no longer so. > > This is why Netscape freed the Mozilla sources - to stop Microsoft from being > able to do that. And this is why Mozilla has very strong opinions on not > emulated broken IE behaviour. = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: egged.co.il works
On 2003-03-04, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Organize? Maybe create a site or a subsite which contains links of all the > uncooperative sites, and give them bad rap in the press? Create a nice PDF in > Hebrew about standardization of a site, and send it to management levels in > those companies? I'm at a loss. For me it's worse than most of you - my other OS > is a MacOS... > http://mozilla.org.il/evangel.shtml I'm really not convinced that this has any impact but then I don't know what does. Hell, the technion's IT support site had checks that you use IE, last time I checked :-(. -- Beni Cherniavsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> pure virtual static warp shell (TNG++, All Good Things O-=) = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: egged.co.il works
Of this list, 1yashir, discount and kupat holim seem the most urgent to me. That's because they are suppliers that, if you happen to be their customer, it is very difficult for you to switch. I'll let you know what I came up with. Shachar Shoshannah Forbes wrote: I am willing to take that one up as a representative of an official body, and try to get things changed. I would, however, ask you to help me focuse my efforts. Please give a quick vote of the site whose lack of support for konq/moz is the most troubling, and let me know. I think Bank Leumi is the candidate for this. Anyone else? Two places to start: http://tinyurl.com/6u4z (from bugzilla) http://www.mozilla.org.il/evangel.shtml (scroll down to see the list) -- Shachar Shemesh Open Source integration consultant Home page & resume - http://www.shemesh.biz/ = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: egged.co.il works
I am willing to take that one up as a representative of an official body, and try to get things changed. I would, however, ask you to help me focuse my efforts. Please give a quick vote of the site whose lack of support for konq/moz is the most troubling, and let me know. I think Bank Leumi is the candidate for this. Anyone else? Two places to start: http://tinyurl.com/6u4z (from bugzilla) http://www.mozilla.org.il/evangel.shtml (scroll down to see the list) = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: egged.co.il works
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Organize? Maybe create a site or a subsite which contains links of all the uncooperative sites, and give them bad rap in the press? Create a nice PDF in Hebrew about standardization of a site, and send it to management levels in those companies? I'm at a loss. For me it's worse than most of you - my other OS is a MacOS... Herouth Maybe we should form some sort of an official body that will try to advance these concerns that are relevant specifically to users of open source and free software? Hey, didn't someone say something about and Amuta? I am willing to take that one up as a representative of an official body, and try to get things changed. I would, however, ask you to help me focuse my efforts. Please give a quick vote of the site whose lack of support for konq/moz is the most troubling, and let me know. I think Bank Leumi is the candidate for this. Anyone else? Shachar -- Shachar Shemesh Open Source integration consultant Home page & resume - http://www.shemesh.biz/ = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: egged.co.il works
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: For me it's worse than most of you - my other OS is a MacOS... If you look at the headers of this email, you will notice that this makes two of us... :) Organize? That is what I have been pushing for. Maybe create a site or a subsite which contains links of all the uncooperative sites, and give them bad rap in the press? Yep. And start by using what we already have (bugzilla "tech evanglisem" component, and mozilla.org.il web site) Create a nice PDF in Hebrew about standardization of a site, and send it to management levels in those companies? Some work has been started here, we need to finish it (I ran out of time): http://www.mozilla.org.il/board/viewtopic.php?t=103 http://mac.plonter.co.il/plonwiki/OneSiteManyBrowsers = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: egged.co.il works
On Tue, Mar 04, 2003, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote about "Re: egged.co.il works": > Organize? Maybe create a site or a subsite which contains links of all the > uncooperative sites, and give them bad rap in the press? Create a nice PDF in > Hebrew about standardization of a site, and send it to management levels in > those companies? I'm at a loss. For me it's worse than most of you - my other OS > is a MacOS... Maybe it's time we (any lawyer in the house?) try to find out whether any of these sites actually break any laws - e.g., by virtue of discriminating against consumers based on irrelevant criteria, descriminating against blind consumers, and so on. If it's not illegal, it still stinks, and maybe we can get some pro-consumer organization or newspaper, or something, on this issue. Companies should be made to understand that making their site look "less nice" in Mozilla is perfectly acceptable, but making them completely inaccessible because of stupidity - while all the W3C standards are all with strong emphasis on backward compatibility and accessibility - is simply inexcusable. -- Nadav Har'El| Tuesday, Mar 4 2003, 30 Adar I 5763 [EMAIL PROTECTED] |- Phone: +972-53-245868, ICQ 13349191 |Spelling mistakes left in for people who http://nadav.harel.org.il |feel the need to correct others. = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: egged.co.il works
Quoting Shoshannah Forbes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > C. complain at the site, and meantime use the phone to call Eggedd > (that is what I do) I do that, but it doesn't work. Of all the sites I complained to, the only one who did anything was yellow pages, which didn't improve its site, merely removed the blocking of non-MSIE browsers. I am currently in a series of e-mails with BuildAGate, who have a site-generation software, written in PHP, but not supporting Mozilla and Konqueror very well. (Try www.hayadan.org.il in Konqueror, and try www.dynonon.com in both). It's funny that people who write in PHP should do things this way, like dirtying the entire site with Javascript where there should be no Javascript (a Javascript to put an item in the basket? Good grief!). At least they were serious enough to install the latest version of Netscape - although they gave me the answers regarding Hebrew and compatibility in general which were true two years ago. Amazing how old information sticks. Would anybody else beside me try to influence them? http://www.buildagate.com/ Another site to whine about is the Knesset site. Anyway, in general, the "convince the site" approach just doesn't work. We are left frustrated with letters that say "thank you for your information", or "you are a minority, shut up", or "We don't support Netscape, bla bla bla circa 1999". We need a different approach in a hurry, because bad web sites really flood Israel, what with commercial bodies hiring cheap programmers who are willing to work for food, and who grew up in ASP city (John Bryce courses...) Organize? Maybe create a site or a subsite which contains links of all the uncooperative sites, and give them bad rap in the press? Create a nice PDF in Hebrew about standardization of a site, and send it to management levels in those companies? I'm at a loss. For me it's worse than most of you - my other OS is a MacOS... Herouth = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: egged.co.il works
On Tue, 4 Mar 2003, Beni Cherniavsky wrote: > On 2003-03-04, Shoshannah Forbes wrote: > > > C. complain at the site, and meantime use the phone to call Eggedd > > (that is what I do) > > > I complained and they returned some response thanking me for the > refernce (to webstandards - which I'm not sure they even bothered > chekcing) and generally feeling "we don't care for this" (I don't > remember the details). As for the phone - you mean a real phone, and > talk to a human? :-) Yes. The site was probably meant to decreas the support cost of Egged (allow them to keep less folks answering phones). When you call them mention that you could not use the site... -- Tzafrir Cohen mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.technion.ac.il/~tzafrir = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: egged.co.il works
On 2003-03-04, Shoshannah Forbes wrote: > C. complain at the site, and meantime use the phone to call Eggedd > (that is what I do) > I complained and they returned some response thanking me for the refernce (to webstandards - which I'm not sure they even bothered chekcing) and generally feeling "we don't care for this" (I don't remember the details). As for the phone - you mean a real phone, and talk to a human? :-) -- Beni Cherniavsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> pure virtual static warp shield (TNG++, All Good Things O-=) = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: egged.co.il works
Hetz Ben Hamo wrote: Fine, then what should I do next time when I'm coming from my parents city (Tzfat) to Tel Aviv and want to know the schedule? A. Use mozilla, see that it doesn't show the web site and simply wait outside for a bus few hours.. B. Use Konqueror, see the site, schedule my timing to go with the next bus and only leave the house 2 minutes before it comes? Real case, real example C. complain at the site, and meantime use the phone to call Eggedd (that is what I do) = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: egged.co.il works
On 2003-03-04, Alon Altman wrote: > On Tue, 4 Mar 2003, Tzafrir Cohen wrote: > > > On Tue, 4 Mar 2003, Alon Altman wrote: > > > > > > > > If you want to use egged.co.il on Mozilla, use my interface. It's much > > > easier and lighter - http://alon.wox.org/egged.html (ignore the "line no." > > > box) > > > > Sorry, but the name doesn't resolve from here. What's the IP? > > alon1.dhs.org or 132.69.253.140 > Great, now I can stop VNC-ing into a close windows box just to check egged :-). Thanks, Alon! -- Beni Cherniavsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> pure virtual static warp shield (TNG++, All Good Things O-=) = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: egged.co.il works
On Tue, 4 Mar 2003, Tzafrir Cohen wrote: > On Tue, 4 Mar 2003, Alon Altman wrote: > > > > > If you want to use egged.co.il on Mozilla, use my interface. It's much > > easier and lighter - http://alon.wox.org/egged.html (ignore the "line no." > > box) > > Sorry, but the name doesn't resolve from here. What's the IP? alon1.dhs.org or 132.69.253.140 > Anyway, is this page linked from mozilla.org.il ? Yes, it is. > It should be, provided that it blocks access to browsers that are > supoprted by the official page (so they won't conplain you take away their > add viewers). I posted something about this to linux-il a hwile ago. > > If bandwidth is any problem, I wouldn't mmind giving as much as I can > (iglu, if that's OK with everybody, or my own connection, or > tzafrir.org.il). Attached the HTML file. -- This message was sent by Alon Altman ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) ICQ:1366540 The RIGHT way to contact me is by e-mail. I am otherwise nonexistent :) -- -=[ Random Fortune ]=- Do what you can to prolong your life, in the hope that someday you'll learn what it's for. -- Binary/unsupported file stripped by Listar -- -- Type: TEXT/html -- File: egged.html = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: egged.co.il works
On Mon, 3 Mar 2003, Diego Iastrubni wrote: > Hi all > > Just wanted to inform you: > egged.co.il works in konqui 3.1 Also israrail.co.il. > > Lots of new supported IE only sites are working for linux users. > Good work! and that was before of all the apple patches! > Good news indeed > If you want to use egged.co.il on Mozilla, use my interface. It's much easier and lighter - http://alon.wox.org/egged.html (ignore the "line no." box) Alon -- This message was sent by Alon Altman ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) ICQ:1366540 The RIGHT way to contact me is by e-mail. I am otherwise nonexistent :) -- -=[ Random Fortune ]=- Half a mind is a terrible thing to waste! = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: egged.co.il works
> This is why Netscape freed the Mozilla sources - to stop Microsoft from > being able to do that. And this is why Mozilla has very strong opinions on > not emulated broken IE behaviour. Fine, then what should I do next time when I'm coming from my parents city (Tzfat) to Tel Aviv and want to know the schedule? A. Use mozilla, see that it doesn't show the web site and simply wait outside for a bus few hours.. B. Use Konqueror, see the site, schedule my timing to go with the next bus and only leave the house 2 minutes before it comes? Real case, real example... Thanks, Hetz = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: egged.co.il works
On Tue, Mar 04, 2003, Tzafrir Cohen wrote about "Re: egged.co.il works": > So another broken site is supported, instead of it being built properly. Right... And worse, this gives Microsoft a whole new baseline on which they can create new divergent technology, which gets further and further from W3C standards, while Konqueror continues to chase its tail... This is why Netscape freed the Mozilla sources - to stop Microsoft from being able to do that. And this is why Mozilla has very strong opinions on not emulated broken IE behaviour. -- Nadav Har'El| Tuesday, Mar 4 2003, 30 Adar I 5763 [EMAIL PROTECTED] |- Phone: +972-53-245868, ICQ 13349191 |Life is what happens to you while you're http://nadav.harel.org.il |busy making other plans. - John Lennon = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: egged.co.il works
On Mon, 3 Mar 2003, Diego Iastrubni wrote: > Hi all > > Just wanted to inform you: > egged.co.il works in konqui 3.1 Also israrail.co.il. > > Lots of new supported IE only sites are working for linux users. > Good work! and that was before of all the apple patches! > Good news indeed Indeed, egged works here. Takes a constant toll on my CPU with its silly marquees. Though the egged site is badly broken. IIRC some versions of IE don't show the some of the marquees well. They have a "detect.js" that looks for a browser that is either IE4 or NS4. And other goodies. And they really don't seem to care about this. So another broken site is supported, instead of it being built properly. -- Tzafrir Cohen mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.technion.ac.il/~tzafrir = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
