Irritating Youtube (about updates)

Tim Slattery wrote in
:

If you wrote and maintained web systems - especially one doing some as
sophisticated as Youtube - you would have an idea what a huge pain in
the ass it is to try to make obsolete browsers behave properly. It
gets to a point where you're spending vast amounts of your time
supported a tiny proportion of your users. Eventually you have to give
up.


That's the excuse, not the reason. Ask yourself why video and images and
JavaScript and Flash and Java have been able to show pretty much everything
you'll ever see on the web, then ask why it is that everything slowed down as
work-round became bloat, and you'll see that people never learned to use the
original methods properly. As space and bandwidth got cheap, all web
'designers' ever did was fill the available capacity to breaking point, as
they always did. Forcing people to upgrade is just another way to pass the
buck, to put people through another ten years of hopeless effort to run just
to keep standing still.

wrote in message
...
Youtube is ****ing me off. It keeps whining and complaining that my
browsers are outdated, such as Seamonkey and Kmeleon. (Using win98se).
So I use Firefox 3.x and now it's whining that my plugins need to be
updated. On EVERY DAMN PAGE I OPEN. I do not get this warning on any
other website. Quite honestly, it's none of their goddamn business what
plugins I use, nor do I give a **** if they need updating. I use what
works, and have no intention to update anything just because they insist
that I do.

Well then, it seems you've made your choice.
If it were me, I'd stop fighting it and just go ahead and update them - what
do you have to lose by updating those plug-ins? Except this pointless
battle.
If you were talking about updating the OS, or some real applications, that
could be another story. But plug-ins, who cares?

Lostgallifreyan wrote:
Tim Slattery wrote in
:

snip

to put people through another ten years of hopeless effort to run just
to keep standing still.

I like that phrase. It often seems to summarize the true essence of
mankind's existence rather brilliantly! (Just replace the "ten years"
above, with a generation or so, and by George you've got it! :-)

In message ,
Lostgallifreyan writes:
"J. P. Gilliver (John)" wrote in
:

Lots of little googles providing competition might be useful, though ...


I wish.. Only one I know of is the absurdly named DuckDuckGo. That actually
worked for me the other day, as it ought, as Google once did.

I was looking for the thinnest multicore audio cable I could find, because I
needed short lenghts of balanced line hookup wire. A metre of 8-way multicore
is cheaper than 8 metres of the same core supplied on its own.

Google was giving me yards of blurp about tablets and notebooks. It TOTALLY
[]
I am most puzzled by this! I have Google Advanced Search
(http://www.google.co.uk/advanced_search?hl=en) as my home page, and put

8-way multicore cable

into the top box ("all these words"), which I always assume is the same
as putting it into the search box on the ordinary Google search page,
and it took me straight to

https://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=e...earch=&as_occt
=any&safe=off&tbs=&as_filetype=&as_rights=
(http://goo.gl/ZGyRF), the first 6 hits on which a
Live Multicore Cables - Thomann UK Cyberstore
Shopping results for 8-way multicore cable
Stage Line Multicore Cable Looms 8 Way XLR-XLR
Loom 8-Way Jack to Jack 6.3mm Multicore "Snake" Cable: Amazon ...
Balanced 8 Way Multicore Cable. Van Damme. Per Metre | eBay
Snake 8 WAY 30m at Studiospares

The word tablet does not appear on the page! (And your Van Damme one is
there, I've just noticed.)

OK, so I'm using XP and Firefox 13.0.1 (up to date, apparently), and
lots of things in a host file and Firefox settings, but I do seem to be
seeing a far more useful Google than you are!

Unless Google UK is vastly different to Google where you are (I'm
assuming US), which seems unlikely ...
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G.5AL-IS-P--Ch++(p)Ar@T0H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

The love that dared not speak its name, has become the love that won't shut
up. - Simon Fanshawe (article on Gay Comedy), Radio Times 25 Sept-1 Oct 2010

Lostgallifreyan wrote:

To keep it legal, I'll omit two things: The patched ESDI_506.PDR
file for 48 bit LBA

There is a free / public domain version of that - no need to mess around
with loew's version.

But then again, I don't see the logic of using IDE drives for any new /
upgraded install of Win-98.

All my systems have SATA drives - and much bigger than you could ever
get in IDE format.

And I don't see the logic in developing a "micro" or lite version of
win-98. It's been done before - not that I've ever had a need to try
it.

Get your hands on pretty much any old motherboard with an AGP slot and
Socket-775 Intel CPU, a 1 or 2 TB sata hard drive, Nvidia 6200 video
card, 1 gb ram, and install win-98 on it.

Why putz around with anything less?

In message , 98 Guy writes:
Lostgallifreyan wrote:

To keep it legal, I'll omit two things: The patched ESDI_506.PDR
file for 48 bit LBA

There is a free / public domain version of that - no need to mess around
with loew's version.

(Care to give a link?)

But then again, I don't see the logic of using IDE drives for any new /
upgraded install of Win-98.

All my systems have SATA drives - and much bigger than you could ever
get in IDE format.

Where do you get the (9x) drivers for your SATA hardware?

And I don't see the logic in developing a "micro" or lite version of
win-98. It's been done before - not that I've ever had a need to try
it.

Get your hands on pretty much any old motherboard with an AGP slot and
Socket-775 Intel CPU, a 1 or 2 TB sata hard drive, Nvidia 6200 video
card, 1 gb ram, and install win-98 on it.

Why putz around with anything less?

I think LG's one will be superior to any already-existing one. And more
stable. It won't contain any of the unnecessary material/processes that
your standard install will. It's not just to save disc space - that's
cheap enough (though RAM is less so) - it's a matter (among other
things) of removing processes that are not necessary and may have
undesired consequences.
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G.5AL-IS-P--Ch++(p)Ar@T0H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

Britain is still a class-ridden society. As soon as a man opens his mouth, we
can tell in what sort of school he missed his education. (George Mikes, "How to
be Decadent" [1977].)

98 Guy wrote in :

And I don't see the logic in developing a "micro" or lite version of
win-98. It's been done before - not that I've ever had a need to try
it.


Got any more negatives to lay on that? If you think about all the lives that
have been lived before, by this logic, you might as well die now.

"J. P. Gilliver (John)" wrote in
:

I am most puzzled by this! I have Google Advanced Search
(http://www.google.co.uk/advanced_search?hl=en) as my home page, and put

8-way multicore cable


But that wasn't what I asked Google for. It was only later that I learned
that 8-way cable was the most cost-efficient way to get short lengths of
single cores (after removing the outer jacket).

My original search was for "thinnest multicore audio cable", without quotes.
I amended it to -tablet to reject all the tablets, and Google instead gave me
all the latest consumer notebooks and sponsored links it could find. It
assumed that 'multicore' and 'thinnest' was enough of an excuse to try to ram
a sales pitch up my arse, aimed at selling me multi-cored CPU's in sleek
titanium or magnesium shells, no doubt, despite the presence of the words
'audio' and 'cable' in that order. DickDuckGo did not do this, it gave me
audio cable links as I expected. Instead of making commercially based
assumptions, IT SEARCHED THE WEB.

"Bill in Co" wrote in news:X-
:

Lostgallifreyan wrote:
Tim Slattery wrote in
:

snip

to put people through another ten years of hopeless effort to run just
to keep standing still.

I like that phrase. It often seems to summarize the true essence of
mankind's existence rather brilliantly! (Just replace the "ten years"
above, with a generation or so, and by George you've got it! :-)


Well, it's why I don't be,leive in obsolescence. Nature, and invention, moves
in cycles. So does time. I don't need a TARDIS to tell me that nut no doubt
it would help.

"J. P. Gilliver (John)" wrote in
:

it's a matter (among other
things) of removing processes that are not necessary and may have
undesired consequences.


Exactly so. Also, to add things that have been deveoped since, things that
should have been in the original, if they'd existed then.

It is essential to keep it small, not for the machine's benefit, they don't
care anymore, but for ours. If we can't keep track of it, we're at the mercy
of the machine, and those who try to force us to use it their way.

I think W98 at its most reduced form is a way to renew a cycle. Most of the
really interesting alternatives to Windows were derived this way, so why not
try the same trick with Windows itself?