Path: news.nzbot.com!not-for-mail
From: "rf" <rf@.invalid>
Newsgroups: alt
References: <bOiIc.73888$WB5.10031@pd7tw2no> <h4mIc.90345$sj4.35523@news-server.bigpond.net.au> <QirIc.77217$WB5.36619@pd7tw2no> <1mnz59v093ivg$.dlg@usenetshit.info> <hSrIc.77343$P7.75229@pd7tw3no> <VlsIc.90706$sj4.61803@news-server.bigpond.net.au>
Subject: Re: Suckerfish CSS drop-down menu problem (major IE inconsistency!)
Lines: 55
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1158
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165
Message-ID: <xZsIc.90759$sj4.72713@news-server.bigpond.net.au>
Date: Mon, 12 Jul 2004 09:37:33 GMT
NNTP-Posting-Host: 144.136.121.161
X-Complaints-To: abuse@bigpond.net.au
X-Trace: news-server.bigpond.net.au 1089625053 144.136.121.161 (Mon, 12 Jul 2004 19:37:33 EST)
NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 12 Jul 2004 19:37:33 EST
Organization: BigPond Internet Services
Xref: news.nzbot.com alt:152
"rf" <rf@.invalid> wrote in message
news:VlsIc.90706$sj4.61803@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
>
> "Neo Geshel" <gotcha@geshel.org> wrote in message
> news:hSrIc.77343$P7.75229@pd7tw3no...
> > brucie wrote:
> > Cleartype was designed to increase legibility on monitors of all types,
> > but was originally designed to produce its maximum effect on flat panel
> > LCD's. A decrease in legibility (especially in small type sizes) is a
> > clear indicator of a malfunctioning monitor or video card. If you have a
> > problem with ClearType's legibility on your computer, the problem lies
> > with your computer, not ClearType.
Oh My &deity; I have just read this statement again and I think I can see
what you are saying.
You are saying that [you think] cleartype is a good thing. You seem to
assume that everybody should have it switched on. Is that right?
You go on to mention that sometimes it does not work, however if it does not
then there is a hardware problem. Is that correct? It is not a clearthype
problem? Right? It's a hardware problem.
For it to be documented then this must happen frequently enough. There are
then quite a number of people out there who, for one reason or another, have
hardware that is not compatible with cleartype. Is this correct?
So, you have a viewer with said hardware problem who stumbles by your site.
She does not know about the hardware problem because she does *not have
cleartype switched on*. She is quite happy with her system, having spent
hours getting it set up Just Right.
Now, your page switches on cleartype and *SUDDENLY* she experiences a
decrease in legibililty. Your web page has fucked up her system for her,
without her consent or even her knowledge. This is bordering on Virus.
However all of this is not *your* fault. It is *her* fault that cleartype
does not work on her system. Is that what you are saying?
Even though it is *you* who has turned it on, it is still *her* fault if it
does not work. Is that correct?
Are you saying that you are quite willing to fuck up somebodys computer and
then blame it on them?
There are words for people like you, however it's against my ISPs TOS to use
them.
--
Cheers
Richard.
|
|