Re: Fwd: altBrowser Question and MAC version of altBrowser...
--On Sunday, June 15, 2003 19:06:46 -0700 Dan Shafer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: And I would prefer a product I pay for and which is therefore supported to a free, Open Source solution for which I'd be on my own for support. This is a little off subject but you don't seem to have it very clear about open source software versus payed for, and support. I've been using both free operating system and software for more then I can remember and support was as good as metacard's which is the only not free one with still good support. All the tips we share on this list amount to free software. Most of the web that you use comes from free software: server, server side scripting, databases, browser, email, you name it. Doing some research before repeating Microsoft's mantra may prove beneficial to your mental health. This idea that you get what you pay for is so outdated that I'm surprised some people still remember it. And perhaps you'd benefit by doing a bit of research and careful reading before firing off such a silly comment. First, my observation didn't imply that Open Source software support is poor, only that I'd prefer to pay for software than to end up with a poorly supported Open Source product in this case. Second, you couldn't necessarily know this but I'm one of the beset-known Microsoft attack dogs on the planet. I am not spouting their mantra and I'm sure as hell not backing their strategy. Careful reading is preferable to flames. Regards, Andu Novac ___ metacard mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/metacard ___ metacard mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/metacard
Re: Fwd: altBrowser Question and MAC version of altBrowser...
Dan Shafer a écrit : --On Sunday, June 15, 2003 19:06:46 -0700 Dan Shafer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: And I would prefer a product I pay for and which is therefore supported to a free, Open Source solution for which I'd be on my own for support. This is a little off subject but you don't seem to have it very clear about open source software versus payed for, and support. I've been using both free operating system and software for more then I can remember and support was as good as metacard's which is the only not free one with still good support. All the tips we share on this list amount to free software. Most of the web that you use comes from free software: server, server side scripting, databases, browser, email, you name it. Doing some research before repeating Microsoft's mantra may prove beneficial to your mental health. This idea that you get what you pay for is so outdated that I'm surprised some people still remember it. And perhaps you'd benefit by doing a bit of research and careful reading before firing off such a silly comment. First, my observation didn't imply that Open Source software support is poor, only that I'd prefer to pay for software than to end up with a poorly supported Open Source product in this case. Second, you couldn't necessarily know this but I'm one of the beset-known Microsoft attack dogs on the planet. I am not spouting their mantra and I'm sure as hell not backing their strategy. Careful reading is preferable to flames. Regards, Andu Novac ___ Hi All, Beside MC, i use as my core development tool to build Web's and ERP's apps, all the components i need and use to do my job are free and very well supported pieces of software : Linux (Suse, YellowDog), Apache 1.3 to 2.0, PHP 3/4, PostgreSQL 7.xx, Netscape, Mozilla, HTMLDoc, Javascript, the Bash,... What my clients are waiting for are not only licensied products but mostly development, integration and support and, i'm sure it's the right way a respected client have to pay for : only a small amont of the payments are always about the end-user licensing of my products, just to let all remember that, i hold, to the end, the copyrights on the stuffs i'm designing and developing... -- Bien cordialement, Pierre Sahores Inspection académique de Seine-Saint-Denis Serveurs d'applications et SGBD Web et PGI Penser et produire l'avantage compétitif ___ metacard mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/metacard
Re: Fwd: altBrowser Question and MAC version of altBrowser...
--On Monday, June 16, 2003 00:25:57 -0700 Dan Shafer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: And I would prefer a product I pay for and which is therefore supported to a free, Open Source solution for which I'd be on my own for support. snip First, my observation didn't imply that Open Source software support is poor, only that I'd prefer to pay for software than to end up with a poorly supported Open Source product in this case. What is that I'm missing here? Regards, Andu Novac ___ metacard mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/metacard
Re: Fwd: altBrowser Question and MAC version of altBrowser...
--On Monday, June 16, 2003 00:25:57 -0700 Dan Shafer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: And I would prefer a product I pay for and which is therefore supported to a free, Open Source solution for which I'd be on my own for support. snip First, my observation didn't imply that Open Source software support is poor, only that I'd prefer to pay for software than to end up with a poorly supported Open Source product in this case. What is that I'm missing here? Simply this: there are a LOT of Open Source products that either never have support or whose support fades into the sunset as the community using them declines and moves on. When that happens, there's no underlying company or organization to provide support, which often renders the product less than useful. I don't speak C or Java or most of the other programming languages in which Open Source products are written. So the fact that they are Open Source is interesting to me, but in the end not very useful. I personally couldn't modify them if I had to. I'd have to hire someone else to do that. I am aware that this also happens with proprietary commercial software, but my experience -- and that is all I have to go by -- is that it is more rare. And very often when it *does* happen, the company finds a way to manage continuing to support its customer base. Microsoft just discontinued development of IE for Windows and for Mac. altBrowser, as I understand it, relies in part on IE as a plugin technology. (I believe it also supports Mozilla, though.) So IE is now a dead-end technology; as Web standards evolve, it won't. That makes it borerline useless to me. If the products on which it is built (like altBrowser) are Open Source and freely distributed, as one list member proposed, there's little incentive for the developer(s) to adapt to that change. OTOH, if it's a source of revenue, they might be motivated to do so. Long-winded answer, and I thought my original comment was pretty self-explanatory, but I guess not. Regards, Andu Novac ___ metacard mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/metacard ___ metacard mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/metacard
RE: Fwd: altBrowser Question and MAC version of altBrowser...
Andu, I think. There are so many free products based on Mozilla that I think this one should be free too. If you like free stuff you can visit our other free offerings at: http://www.altuit.com/webs/altuit2/RunRev/default.htm -Chipp ___ metacard mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/metacard
RE: Fwd: altBrowser Question and MAC version of altBrowser...
Dropped the dll into c, and windows, and system and the desktop (where I have the executable for now). Works fine, even behind a firewall. Spits up cookies though, i.e. won't let me sign into yahoo (I don't regard that as a major problem though). Really, very good job, I'm seriously impressed. There is no way you could do that within metacard, right? It was all in the DLL? While I'm very familiar with macOS classic I'm still figuring out windows, to say nought of unix. My mind is racing... you really blow me away. For a good laugh, my browser is on the http://runrev.com developer download section. Try not to laugh (though mine is all native xTalk). Again, congratulations, I feel like that guy who went to the north pole only to find someone else beat him there first, but then again am elated at your achievement. I think 30 bucks is a fair price, especially for developpers. My Home Page with free online legal information Page perso avec liens juridiques http://www.lexnet.bravepages.com/ind.htm _ FindLaw - Free Case Law, Jobs, Library, Community http://www.FindLaw.com Get your FREE @JUSTICE.COM email! http://mail.Justice.com ___ metacard mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/metacard
Re: Fwd: altBrowser Question and MAC version of altBrowser...
--On Monday, June 16, 2003 12:11:18 +1200 Rodney Tamblyn [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Forwarded posting Chipp Walters, to use-revolution. If members of this list are seriously interested in seeing a Mac external to display web content within a MC window, read on... Something like this would make sense to be based on Mozilla, I think. There are so many free products based on Mozilla that I think this one should be free too. It would be certainly convenient to have such an external but considering metacard can launch urls in browses as it is, I would definitely not pay for it (donations, maybe). I would pay for better integration with a web server and database though. Regards, Andu Novac ___ metacard mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/metacard
Re: Fwd: altBrowser Question and MAC version of altBrowser...
I would absolutely be willing to pay for a multi-platform browser tool like this one accessible from RR/MC. The free access to a browser in MC isn't what I need; launching the user's browser rather than keeping the user in the context of my application isn't acceptable for much of my Web-centric development work. And I would prefer a product I pay for and which is therefore supported to a free, Open Source solution for which I'd be on my own for support. --On Monday, June 16, 2003 12:11:18 +1200 Rodney Tamblyn [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Forwarded posting Chipp Walters, to use-revolution. If members of this list are seriously interested in seeing a Mac external to display web content within a MC window, read on... Something like this would make sense to be based on Mozilla, I think. There are so many free products based on Mozilla that I think this one should be free too. It would be certainly convenient to have such an external but considering metacard can launch urls in browses as it is, I would definitely not pay for it (donations, maybe). I would pay for better integration with a web server and database though. Regards, Andu Novac ___ metacard mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/metacard ___ metacard mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/metacard
Re: Fwd: altBrowser Question and MAC version of altBrowser...
--On Sunday, June 15, 2003 19:06:46 -0700 Dan Shafer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: And I would prefer a product I pay for and which is therefore supported to a free, Open Source solution for which I'd be on my own for support. This is a little off subject but you don't seem to have it very clear about open source software versus payed for, and support. I've been using both free operating system and software for more then I can remember and support was as good as metacard's which is the only not free one with still good support. All the tips we share on this list amount to free software. Most of the web that you use comes from free software: server, server side scripting, databases, browser, email, you name it. Doing some research before repeating Microsoft's mantra may prove beneficial to your mental health. This idea that you get what you pay for is so outdated that I'm surprised some people still remember it. Regards, Andu Novac ___ metacard mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/metacard
