Internet Explorer, Netscape et AOL...

Il y a eu beaucoup de discussions récemment autour de l'avenir supposément morose que Microsoft et AOL réservent à Internet Explorer... et aux éventuels prétendants à la relève.


Celà me rappelle ces discussions aussi enflammées que prématurées autour de XHTML 2.0 il y a quelques temps.


A mon avis la meilleure synthèse est celle de Joel on Software.


=> Quant à moi, je n'ai qu'une chose à dire par rapport à toute cette excitation: quand bien même Microsoft ne prévoierait pas, à ce jour, de sortir de nouvelle version de IE en dehors de la prochaine version de Windows en 2005 (logique, c'est un argument de vente!)... quand bien même donc, quel est selon vous le temps de réaction nécessaire au rouleau compresseur de Redmond pour réagir en cas de montée inoppinée d'un browser concurrent? :?: Même pas trois mois!


=> Les browsers alternatifs ont trois mois pour conquérir le monde! :!:

Java evolution

Cedric reporting from JavaOne:

It seems that after trying to conquer the desktop (J2SE), then the enterprise (J2EE) and failing at both, Sun is now trying to make money in the micro space. J2ME is therefore receiving a huge exposure so far and we have been literally drowned in numbers with six zeros and more since 8:30am this morning.

:|

HTML obsolète

Mise en garde extrêmement pertinente de Tristan sur StandBlog:

Oui, MSIE/Win est plus tolérant sur pour le HTML façon Tag Soup. Et c'est un vrai problème. Pensons à tout le contenu écrit dans une soupe de balise qui tombe en marche dans Internet Explorer. Comment pourra-t-on lire ce contenu dans 5 ou 10 ans, quand IE4, 5 ou 6 ne seront plus disponibles ? Dans quelle mesure disposera-ton de navigateurs ayant implémenté les bogues non documentés, les comportements illogiques qui sont dans les versions actuelles ou passées d'Internet Explorer ? J'en entends certains ricaner... Combien d'entre nous ont quelque part, sur une disquette 5 pouces 1/4, des documents texte au format propriétaires, que nous sommes incapables de relire ? Pensez-y. Sont-ce de bonnes fondations pour le Web que celles que nous sommes en train de construire ?

Unsubscribring from spam *STILL NOT* ;)

Following up on wether or not to unsubscribe from spam, Cédric adds some clarifications:

I am talking about the particular case of a spam email that defeated my filters and ended up in my Inbox. This is the one I want to get rid of. I don't care if more spammers end up getting my email address this way because their spams will most likely join all the others in my Spam folder (I suspect the success rate of my various filters is about 99% these days).

Very interesting point! Unsubscribing from those particular spams that pass the filters makes total sense and may succeed in getting less visible spam... but still, I'm not sure: what if they resell your qualified address to 50 spammers and 10% of them use clever spam filter defeating techniques? You run the risk of replacing one known spammer by 5 new spammers.

But I must admit: I'm far from conviced myself that 10% can really make it through the filters! :.

What puzzles me more is this:

[...] we are fighting a different war on spam these days. The goal is no longer to eradicate spam (this will never happen) but simply to acknowledge that spam is a reality and therefore, do your best so that its nuisance is limited to a minimum. In other words: design excellent spam filters.

=> I think that filtering is only the worst solution we have found so far: all the extra spam we allow to generate but don't see in our inboxes still harms network and mailserver fluidity... sometimes a lot! So replacing 1 unfiltered spam with 50 filtered ones just doesn't feel right to me...

...and I'm so glad I'm not administering mail servers any more :>>

Actually, we're all bearing the costs generated by all that spam on our networks! So we really may want to think twice before we promote any behaviour potentially allowing for (even slow) exponential growth! |-|

Unsubscribring from spam *NOT*

Cédric posted some interesting thoughts about whether or not to unsubscribe from spam.

Cédric advocates that unsubscribing has become less a trap than it used to be, basically because spammers are better off collecting new masses of addresses than preventing their mailers to automatically unsubsribe people who'll never buy from them anyway. And also, because there are legal risks in spamming twice someone who asked to be removed.

Cédric also says:

Another thing I can see coming in the near future is that these "do not spam" lists will one day be forced to be shared among spammers. In other words, any "do not spam" list you are a member of right now might end up in having your email address removed from others as well.

=> Well actually... this is precisely the point: some day spammers will have to share their "do not spam" lists...

Oh... actually they do it already! It's just that they do not share, they resell... and they donto not call them ~do not spam'~ addresses, they call them ~qualified'~ addresses! 8|

The buyer can spam you without worrying too much... after all you haven't yet asked to be removed from this one!

The problem with spammers is that they are dumb and smart at the same time! :crazy: