Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 18th Dec 2012 00:03 UTC
Microsoft Microsoft has just responded to Google's move regarding Exchange ActiveSync. Sadly, instead of addressing the very real problems consumers are about to face, Microsoft starts talking about switching to Outlook.com.
Thread beginning with comment 546000
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[18]: Comment by shmerl
by Laurence on Fri 21st Dec 2012 00:01 UTC in reply to "RE[17]: Comment by shmerl"
Laurence
Member since:
2007-03-26

You are not that precious to me.

Well that's a pity because the only other excuse you have for making dumb statements is rather less pleasant ;)

Sorry I don't target a browser, I target features of a browser. Writing standards compliant code wins you half the battle.

Well now you're basically saying what I just said but reworded into your own garbled logic.


I have seen so many people complain about IE7 not rendering a page correctly. After putting it through a validator and making them fix it rendered correctly.

Cool story bro. Not everyone is as dumb as your work colleagues.

It totally depends what tools you are using and what you are trying to achieve.

That's what I f--king said from the start.


We have a separate mobile site because our slot games are flash which doesn't work on some smart phones. That is a show stopper.

Thank you for proving my point.

If you load scripts in an intelligent way it doesn't bloat there are numerous techniques. Some are server side (WURFL etc) and others are Client side (Modernizer, YepNodeJS and Media Queries etc).

Yes, I know how to build web sites. We've already established that.


I still think that server side browser detection should be kept to a minimum.

I agree. What I didn't agree with was your sweeping generalisation that it should never happen. Thanks for finally agreeing with me.

I believe in progressive enhancement.

Ideologies are great, but try to explain that to a client who is paying your company a few hundred thousand to be their bitch.

I'm somewhat getting the impressing that you're business is rather small scale from the elitism and generalisations you love to make. If that's not the case, then you really do come off incredibly badly here.

Edited 2012-12-21 00:03 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[19]: Comment by shmerl
by lucas_maximus on Fri 21st Dec 2012 08:25 in reply to "RE[18]: Comment by shmerl"
lucas_maximus Member since:
2009-08-18

This is like every argument on OSNEWS it gets into name calling and I am out.

The fact of the matter is I try to do it right in the first place, so I don't have a maintenance nightmare on my hands in the future.

Calling me names and saying I have garbled logic because you are some old guard web developer (and I have met guys like you) is a load of bollox.

I more than enough explained my stance on the subject.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[20]: Comment by shmerl
by Laurence on Sat 22nd Dec 2012 10:55 in reply to "RE[19]: Comment by shmerl"
Laurence Member since:
2007-03-26

This is like every argument on OSNEWS it gets into name calling and I am out.

The fact of the matter is I try to do it right in the first place, so I don't have a maintenance nightmare on my hands in the future.

Calling me names and saying I have garbled logic because you are some old guard web developer (and I have met guys like you) is a load of bollox.

I more than enough explained my stance on the subject.

Have you never thought that perhaps you're the one in the wrong?

Given I've written web browsers and worked for large international sites with traffic that peaks in the Gbs. I have some idea what I'm talking about ;)

Plus, unlike you, I've developed sites nearly since the conception of the web and have managed to keep up to date with the latest technologies as well. But if keeping up with technology and wanting to push the best of browsers makes me "the old guard" then perhaps you're the one with your logic screwed.

Anyway, I don't need to convince you that you're wrong, the upvotes in this thread speak volumes enough. ;)

Reply Parent Score: 2