David E. Ross wrote:
On 6/13/11 5:55 PM, Stan wrote:
Robert Kaiser wrote:
MCBastos schrieb:
Interviewed by CNN on 29/05/2011 16:41, Robert Kaiser told the world:
Paul B. Gallagher schrieb:
For those few sites too stupid to sniff for Gecko, why not just
lie to
them and spoof FF?
That's
Robert Kaiser wrote:
MCBastos schrieb:
Interviewed by CNN on 29/05/2011 16:41, Robert Kaiser told the world:
Paul B. Gallagher schrieb:
For those few sites too stupid to sniff for Gecko, why not just
lie to
them and spoof FF?
That's what 2.1 does. And it's not beta any more, it's RC, which
On 6/13/11 5:55 PM, Stan wrote:
Robert Kaiser wrote:
MCBastos schrieb:
Interviewed by CNN on 29/05/2011 16:41, Robert Kaiser told the world:
Paul B. Gallagher schrieb:
For those few sites too stupid to sniff for Gecko, why not just
lie to
them and spoof FF?
That's what 2.1 does. And it's
Jens Hatlak wrote:
Daniel wrote:
as Firefox 4 and SeaMonkey 2 use the same file format for bookmarks,
so there is no need to import the file, just copy one over the
other.
Not exactly true. FF4 and SM 2.1 use the same file format for bookmarks
(places.sqlite). The same file exists for SM 2.0,
JohnW-Mpls wrote:
On Wed, 01 Jun 2011 03:11:40 +0200, Robert Kaiserka...@kairo.at wrote:
Paul B. Gallagher schrieb:
Keep in mind that the current squabbling doesn't serve the end users,
but resolving it will.
Have you actually looked into SeaMonkey 2.1? It sends Firefox/4.0.1 in
its
Daniel wrote:
as Firefox 4 and SeaMonkey 2 use the same file format for bookmarks,
so there is no need to import the file, just copy one over the
other.
Not exactly true. FF4 and SM 2.1 use the same file format for bookmarks
(places.sqlite). The same file exists for SM 2.0, too, but only
On Wed, 01 Jun 2011 03:11:40 +0200, Robert Kaiser ka...@kairo.at wrote:
Paul B. Gallagher schrieb:
Keep in mind that the current squabbling doesn't serve the end users,
but resolving it will.
Have you actually looked into SeaMonkey 2.1? It sends Firefox/4.0.1 in
its default settings and
MCBastos wrote:
Yes. There is Camino, K-Meleon and Kazehakase, at least, which seem
to be still active (although not always in close parity to Firefox).
Galeon seems to have been abandoned, and Flock is no more.
There is also the Kylo browser, which is optimized for use on a TV screen.
[It
Justin Wood (Callek) wrote:
On 5/29/2011 4:25 PM, W3BNR wrote:
Personally I don't think we should have to lie about our browser.
We (SeaMonkey Council) fully agree with you. That said, our users are
higher priority. KaiRo (longtime project member, and Council member) has
proposed, years ago,
On 5/31/11 11:18 AM, Rostyslaw Lewyckyj wrote:
Justin Wood (Callek) wrote:
On 5/29/2011 4:25 PM, W3BNR wrote:
Personally I don't think we should have to lie about our browser.
We (SeaMonkey Council) fully agree with you. That said, our users are
higher priority. KaiRo (longtime project
Paul B. Gallagher schrieb:
Keep in mind that the current squabbling doesn't serve the end users,
but resolving it will.
Have you actually looked into SeaMonkey 2.1? It sends Firefox/4.0.1 in
its default settings and therefore solves the problem nicely in one of
the ways that fit your
sean bean schrieb:
google's corporate motto is don't be evil
but this is now opposite land...
Well, things always depend on what you define as evil, and they fall
onto one or the other side depending on what your definition is. I
prefer not to entirely throw anyone at either side, as
Robert Kaiser wrote:
Paul B. Gallagher schrieb:
Keep in mind that the current squabbling doesn't serve the end
users, but resolving it will.
Have you actually looked into SeaMonkey 2.1? It sends Firefox/4.0.1
in its default settings and therefore solves the problem nicely in
one of the ways
David E. Ross wrote:
or a request (demand?) that you install the latest version of Flash
even though you already installed the latest version. Even a human
may have trouble recognizing that what he or she sees in the browser
window is the result of invalid sniffing. Think of the software
David E. Ross wrote:
On 5/31/11 11:18 AM, Rostyslaw Lewyckyj wrote:
Justin Wood (Callek) wrote:
On 5/29/2011 4:25 PM, W3BNR wrote:
Personally I don't think we should have to lie about our browser.
We (SeaMonkey Council) fully agree with you. That said, our users are
higher priority. KaiRo
Interviewed by CNN on 31/05/2011 22:24, Paul B. Gallagher told the world:
At that point, will all Gecko browsers announce themselves as Firefox,
or will there still be some outstanding? (I couldn't list them from
memory -- are there others besides Firefox proper and SeaMonkey?)
Yes. There
Jan_Galt wrote:
David E. Rossnobody@nowhere.invalid wrote :
No, I was not asking for build:config. I want the user agent (UA)
string that follows Build identifier when you select [Help About
SeaMonkey] on the menu bar.
No build identifier on mine. That's why I sent the other.
Don't
Jan_Galt wrote:
David E. Rossnobody@nowhere.invalid wrote :
No, I was not asking for build:config. I want the user agent (UA)
string that follows Build identifier when you select [Help About
SeaMonkey] on the menu bar.
No build identifier on mine. That's why I sent the other.
anything
JeffM wrote:
Paul B. Gallagher wrote:
And of course a compliant site would get fewer calls, would it
not?
In a perfect world: Yes. In a world where M$ is in the browser
market: Who knows?
In the long term, if enough sites were compliant, M$ would have to shape
up. In the real world, of
MCBastos schrieb:
Interviewed by CNN on 29/05/2011 16:41, Robert Kaiser told the world:
Paul B. Gallagher schrieb:
For those few sites too stupid to sniff for Gecko, why not just lie to
them and spoof FF?
That's what 2.1 does. And it's not beta any more, it's RC, which means
it's as good as
Interviewed by CNN on 30/05/2011 06:49, Paul B. Gallagher told the world:
In the long term, if enough sites were compliant, M$ would have to shape
up. In the real world, of course, the whip is in the other hand. :-(
Actually, I understand that IE9 is reasonably compliant (not 100%, but
near
MCBastos wrote:
Interviewed by CNN on 30/05/2011 06:49, Paul B. Gallagher told the world:
In the long term, if enough sites were compliant, M$ would have to shape
up. In the real world, of course, the whip is in the other hand. :-(
Actually, I understand that IE9 is reasonably compliant
Jan_Galt wrote:
JeffMjef...@email.com wrote :
Jane_Galt wrote:
I keep getting messages from Google search, Adwords and other places
that my browser ( SM ) is no longer supported.
When you encounter idiots who don't know how to build a website
properly,
you have options:
1) Avoid the
JeffM wrote:
JeffM wrote :
[...]idiots who don't know how to build a website properly[...]
Jan_Galt wrote:
You consider Google, one of the biggest sites in the world, to be idiots?
Yup.
This topic has been covered in this group innumerable times.
YOU DON'T NEED TO SNIFF FOR BROWSERS.
David E. Ross nobody@nowhere.invalid wrote :
On 5/29/11 8:22 PM, Jan_Galt wrote:
David E. Ross nobody@nowhere.invalid wrote :
No, I was not asking for build:config. I want the user agent (UA)
string that follows Build identifier when you select [Help About
SeaMonkey] on the menu bar.
Paul B. Gallagher pau...@pbgdashtranslations.com wrote :
Jan_Galt wrote:
David E. Rossnobody@nowhere.invalid wrote :
No, I was not asking for build:config. I want the user agent (UA)
string that follows Build identifier when you select [Help About
SeaMonkey] on the menu bar.
No
I have a small business web site for my home business and make sure it's W3C.
Doesn't seem to make a difference in the search results, but it's satisfying
anyway.
--
- Jane Galt
Without America there is no Free World.
The reason that Progressivism-Socialism-Communism always fail, is that
Paul B. Gallagher wrote:
Rick Merrill wrote:
W3BNR wrote:
On 5/29/2011 3:41 PM Robert Kaiser submitted the following:
Paul B. Gallagher schrieb:
For those few sites too stupid to sniff for Gecko, why not just
lie to
them and spoof FF?
That's what 2.1 does. And it's not beta any more, it's
Jan_Galt wrote:
JeffMjef...@email.com wrote :
Jane_Galt wrote:
I keep getting messages from Google search, Adwords and other places
that my browser ( SM ) is no longer supported.
When you encounter idiots who don't know how to build a website
properly,
you have options:
1) Avoid the
sean bean wrote:
Google is likely telling you your browser is not supported because
Google wants to set all sorts of cookies and location awareness data
in your browser,
Nope.
which SeaMonkey generally doesn't allow by default
Nope.
While I laud your suspicion of megacorporations,
your
JeffM wrote:
Google is sniffing for browsers
and blackballing those it deems unworthy of accessing its pages.
Again, sniffing is a stupid practice;
using it *incorrectly* is monumentally stupid.
It is obvious that the Google employees who implemented this
are unaware that the **proper** way to
JeffM wrote:
Google is sniffing for browsers
and blackballing those it deems unworthy of accessing its pages.
Again, sniffing is a stupid practice;
using it *incorrectly* is monumentally stupid.
It is obvious that the Google employees who implemented this
are unaware that the **proper** way to
JeffM wrote:
sean bean wrote:
Google is likely telling you your browser is not supported because
Google wants to set all sorts of cookies and location awareness data
in your browser,
Nope.
which SeaMonkey generally doesn't allow by default
Nope.
While I laud your suspicion of
On 5/29/2011 4:25 PM, W3BNR wrote:
Personally I don't think we should have to lie about our browser.
We (SeaMonkey Council) fully agree with you. That said, our users are
higher priority. KaiRo (longtime project member, and Council member)
has proposed, years ago, a theoretical solution to
MCBastos wrote:
Interviewed by CNN on 30/05/2011 06:49, Paul B. Gallagher told the world:
That's cute. 8-)
if enough sites were compliant, M$ would have to shape up.
Actually, I understand that IE9 is reasonably compliant
The phrase you seek is *inching upward*
(after YEARS of hobbling the
JeffM wrote:
The truth is much simpler:
1) Google has embraced Web 2.0.
2) Google employees don't know the *basics* of what they are doing.
sean bean wrote:
google's corporate motto is don't be evil
but this is now opposite land...
Web 2.0 is evil??
...or have you wandered off-topic
without
Justin Wood (Callek) wrote:
On 5/29/2011 4:25 PM, W3BNR wrote:
Personally I don't think we should have to lie about our browser.
We (SeaMonkey Council) fully agree with you. That said, our users
are higher priority. KaiRo (longtime project member, and Council
member) has proposed, years
I keep getting messages from Google search, Adwords and other places that my
browser ( SM ) is no longer supported. Is it time to switch from Seamonkey to
FF?
--
- Jane Galt
Without America there is no Free World.
The reason that Progressivism-Socialism-Communism always fail, is that you
On 5/29/11 11:21 AM, Jane_Galt wrote:
I keep getting messages from Google search, Adwords and other places that my
browser ( SM ) is no longer supported. Is it time to switch from Seamonkey to
FF?
On your SeaMonkey menu bar, select [Help About SeaMonkey]. In the
last (5th) bullet in the
Jane_Galt schrieb:
I keep getting messages from Google search, Adwords and other places that my
browser ( SM ) is no longer supported. Is it time to switch from Seamonkey to
FF?
Might just be the time to switch to SeaMonkey 2.1 instead, which 98% of
those sites magically support.
Robert
Robert Kaiser wrote:
Jane_Galt schrieb:
I keep getting messages from Google search, Adwords and other
places that my browser ( SM ) is no longer supported. Is it time to
switch from Seamonkey to FF?
Might just be the time to switch to SeaMonkey 2.1 instead, which 98% of
those sites magically
Paul B. Gallagher schrieb:
For those few sites too stupid to sniff for Gecko, why not just lie to
them and spoof FF?
That's what 2.1 does. And it's not beta any more, it's RC, which means
it's as good as release, with just minor adjustments to be made still.
Robert Kaiser
--
Note that any
On 5/29/2011 3:41 PM Robert Kaiser submitted the following:
Paul B. Gallagher schrieb:
For those few sites too stupid to sniff for Gecko, why not just lie to
them and spoof FF?
That's what 2.1 does. And it's not beta any more, it's RC, which means
it's as good as release, with just minor
Robert Kaiser wrote:
Paul B. Gallagher schrieb:
For those few sites too stupid to sniff for Gecko, why not just lie to
them and spoof FF?
That's what 2.1 does. And it's not beta any more, it's RC, which means
it's as good as release, with just minor adjustments to be made still.
I see. I
W3BNR wrote:
On 5/29/2011 3:41 PM Robert Kaiser submitted the following:
Paul B. Gallagher schrieb:
For those few sites too stupid to sniff for Gecko, why not just lie to
them and spoof FF?
That's what 2.1 does. And it's not beta any more, it's RC, which means
it's as good as release, with
Jane_Galt wrote:
I keep getting messages from Google search, Adwords and other places
that my browser ( SM ) is no longer supported.
When you encounter idiots who don't know how to build a website
properly,
you have options:
1) Avoid the idiots permanently
2) Complain to the idiots that they
Rick Merrill wrote:
W3BNR wrote:
On 5/29/2011 3:41 PM Robert Kaiser submitted the following:
Paul B. Gallagher schrieb:
For those few sites too stupid to sniff for Gecko, why not just
lie to
them and spoof FF?
That's what 2.1 does. And it's not beta any more, it's RC, which means
it's as
JeffM wrote:
Jane_Galt wrote:
I keep getting messages from Google search, Adwords and other places
that my browser ( SM ) is no longer supported.
When you encounter idiots who don't know how to build a website
properly,
you have options:
1) Avoid the idiots permanently
2) Complain to the
David E. Ross nobody@nowhere.invalid wrote :
On 5/29/11 11:21 AM, Jane_Galt wrote:
I keep getting messages from Google search, Adwords and other places
that my browser ( SM ) is no longer supported. Is it time to switch
from Seamonkey to FF?
On your SeaMonkey menu bar, select [Help
JeffM jef...@email.com wrote :
Jane_Galt wrote:
I keep getting messages from Google search, Adwords and other places
that my browser ( SM ) is no longer supported.
When you encounter idiots who don't know how to build a website
properly,
you have options:
1) Avoid the idiots permanently
Robert Kaiser ka...@kairo.at wrote :
Jane_Galt schrieb:
I keep getting messages from Google search, Adwords and other places
that my browser ( SM ) is no longer supported. Is it time to switch
from Seamonkey to FF?
Might just be the time to switch to SeaMonkey 2.1 instead, which 98% of
Jan_Galt wrote:
You consider Google, one of the biggest sites in the world, to be
idiots?
Size is no measure of intelligence. Some of the biggest people I know
are idiots. For that matter, some of the smallest ones are idiots, too.
It cuts across all demographics.
--
War doesn't determine
Interviewed by CNN on 29/05/2011 16:41, Robert Kaiser told the world:
Paul B. Gallagher schrieb:
For those few sites too stupid to sniff for Gecko, why not just lie to
them and spoof FF?
That's what 2.1 does. And it's not beta any more, it's RC, which means
it's as good as release, with
JeffM wrote :
[...]idiots who don't know how to build a website properly[...]
Jan_Galt wrote:
You consider Google, one of the biggest sites in the world, to be idiots?
Yup.
This topic has been covered in this group innumerable times.
YOU DON'T NEED TO SNIFF FOR BROWSERS.
Just make your stupid
Jan_Galt wrote:
Robert Kaiserka...@kairo.at wrote :
Jane_Galt schrieb:
I keep getting messages from Google search, Adwords and other places
that my browser ( SM ) is no longer supported. Is it time to switch
from Seamonkey to FF?
Might just be the time to switch to SeaMonkey 2.1 instead,
On 5/29/11 4:04 PM, Jan_Galt wrote:
David E. Ross nobody@nowhere.invalid wrote :
On 5/29/11 11:21 AM, Jane_Galt wrote:
I keep getting messages from Google search, Adwords and other places
that my browser ( SM ) is no longer supported. Is it time to switch
from Seamonkey to FF?
On your
On 5/29/11 4:08 PM, Jan_Galt wrote:
JeffM jef...@email.com wrote :
Jane_Galt wrote:
I keep getting messages from Google search, Adwords and other places
that my browser ( SM ) is no longer supported.
When you encounter idiots who don't know how to build a website
properly,
you have
WLS wls15...@yahooremove.com wrote :
Jan_Galt wrote:
Robert Kaiserka...@kairo.at wrote :
Jane_Galt schrieb:
I keep getting messages from Google search, Adwords and other places
that my browser ( SM ) is no longer supported. Is it time to switch
from Seamonkey to FF?
Might just be the
David E. Ross nobody@nowhere.invalid wrote :
No, I was not asking for build:config. I want the user agent (UA)
string that follows Build identifier when you select [Help About
SeaMonkey] on the menu bar.
No build identifier on mine. That's why I sent the other.
--
- Jane Galt
Without
On 5/29/11 8:22 PM, Jan_Galt wrote:
David E. Ross nobody@nowhere.invalid wrote :
No, I was not asking for build:config. I want the user agent (UA)
string that follows Build identifier when you select [Help About
SeaMonkey] on the menu bar.
No build identifier on mine. That's why I
60 matches
Mail list logo
