🚀 go-pugleaf

On 11/24/2011 1:31 AM, Matt Ferrari wrote:
> a few weeks ago myspace started not working for people using older internet
> explorer browsers and would instead goto an error page asking
> users to update to a newer ie or google chrome.  Just checked on it again
> and guess what? funny now that they came to their senses and made their site
> work again with the old browser.
>
>
> myspace you cant afford to lose any more users , don't do something stupid
> like that again mmkay?

Who the fuck uses MySpace or Internet Explorer? Why don't you just 
randomly throw your debit cards out the car window while driving with 
your PIN scribbled on them?

-- 
smr

"smr" <me@shawnritchie.com> wrote in message 
news:jalvrh$j0h$2@ftupet.ftupet.com...
> On 11/24/2011 1:31 AM, Matt Ferrari wrote:
>> a few weeks ago myspace started not working for people using older 
>> internet
>> explorer browsers and would instead goto an error page asking
>> users to update to a newer ie or google chrome.  Just checked on it again
>> and guess what? funny now that they came to their senses and made their 
>> site
>> work again with the old browser.
>>
>>
>> myspace you cant afford to lose any more users , don't do something 
>> stupid
>> like that again mmkay?
>
> Who the fuck uses MySpace or Internet Explorer? Why don't you just 
> randomly throw your debit cards out the car window while driving with your 
> PIN scribbled on them?
>
> -- 
> smr

oh come on


> 

On 11/25/2011 10:48 PM, Matt Ferrari wrote:
> "smr"<me@shawnritchie.com>  wrote in message
> news:jalvrh$j0h$2@ftupet.ftupet.com...
>> On 11/24/2011 1:31 AM, Matt Ferrari wrote:
>>> a few weeks ago myspace started not working for people using older
>>> internet
>>> explorer browsers and would instead goto an error page asking
>>> users to update to a newer ie or google chrome.  Just checked on it again
>>> and guess what? funny now that they came to their senses and made their
>>> site
>>> work again with the old browser.
>>>
>>>
>>> myspace you cant afford to lose any more users , don't do something
>>> stupid
>>> like that again mmkay?
>>
>> Who the fuck uses MySpace or Internet Explorer? Why don't you just
>> randomly throw your debit cards out the car window while driving with your
>> PIN scribbled on them?
>>
>> --
>> smr
>
> oh come on
>

He's got a point.

Michele <really@areyoukiddingme.net> wrote:
> On 11/25/2011 10:48 PM, Matt Ferrari wrote:
>> "smr"<me@shawnritchie.com>  wrote in message
>> news:jalvrh$j0h$2@ftupet.ftupet.com...
>>> On 11/24/2011 1:31 AM, Matt Ferrari wrote:
>>>> a few weeks ago myspace started not working for people using older
>>>> internet
>>>> explorer browsers and would instead goto an error page asking
>>>> users to update to a newer ie or google chrome.  Just checked on it again
>>>> and guess what? funny now that they came to their senses and made their
>>>> site
>>>> work again with the old browser.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> myspace you cant afford to lose any more users , don't do something
>>>> stupid
>>>> like that again mmkay?
>>>
>>> Who the fuck uses MySpace or Internet Explorer? Why don't you just
>>> randomly throw your debit cards out the car window while driving with your
>>> PIN scribbled on them?
>>>
>>> --
>>> smr
>>
>> oh come on
>>
> 
> He's got a point.

At work, where the goal is to get shit done, I use IE as it doesn't want 
to update or crash every 45 minutes, unlike firefox.

firefox is just netscape all over again.

Cydrome Leader wrote:
> Michele<really@areyoukiddingme.net>  wrote:
>> On 11/25/2011 10:48 PM, Matt Ferrari wrote:
>>> "smr"<me@shawnritchie.com>   wrote in message
>>> news:jalvrh$j0h$2@ftupet.ftupet.com...
>>>> On 11/24/2011 1:31 AM, Matt Ferrari wrote:
>>>>> a few weeks ago myspace started not working for people using older
>>>>> internet
>>>>> explorer browsers and would instead goto an error page asking
>>>>> users to update to a newer ie or google chrome.  Just checked on it again
>>>>> and guess what? funny now that they came to their senses and made their
>>>>> site
>>>>> work again with the old browser.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> myspace you cant afford to lose any more users , don't do something
>>>>> stupid
>>>>> like that again mmkay?
>>>>
>>>> Who the fuck uses MySpace or Internet Explorer? Why don't you just
>>>> randomly throw your debit cards out the car window while driving with your
>>>> PIN scribbled on them?
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> smr
>>>
>>> oh come on
>>>
>>
>> He's got a point.
>
> At work, where the goal is to get shit done, I use IE as it doesn't want
> to update or crash every 45 minutes, unlike firefox.
>
> firefox is just netscape all over again.


I liked netscape's newsreader

On 11/26/2011 3:34 AM, Cydrome Leader wrote:
> Michele<really@areyoukiddingme.net>  wrote:
>> On 11/25/2011 10:48 PM, Matt Ferrari wrote:
>>> "smr"<me@shawnritchie.com>   wrote in message
>>> news:jalvrh$j0h$2@ftupet.ftupet.com...
>>>> On 11/24/2011 1:31 AM, Matt Ferrari wrote:
>>>>> a few weeks ago myspace started not working for people using older
>>>>> internet
>>>>> explorer browsers and would instead goto an error page asking
>>>>> users to update to a newer ie or google chrome.  Just checked on it again
>>>>> and guess what? funny now that they came to their senses and made their
>>>>> site
>>>>> work again with the old browser.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> myspace you cant afford to lose any more users , don't do something
>>>>> stupid
>>>>> like that again mmkay?
>>>>
>>>> Who the fuck uses MySpace or Internet Explorer? Why don't you just
>>>> randomly throw your debit cards out the car window while driving with your
>>>> PIN scribbled on them?
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> smr
>>>
>>> oh come on
>>>
>>
>> He's got a point.
>
> At work, where the goal is to get shit done, I use IE as it doesn't want
> to update or crash every 45 minutes, unlike firefox.
>
> firefox is just netscape all over again.
>
>


I don't have issues with FF, but there's always Chrome.  IE bugs the 
shit out of me.

On Sat, 26 Nov 2011 13:38:16 -0600, Michele <really@areyoukiddingme.net>
wrote:

>On 11/26/2011 3:34 AM, Cydrome Leader wrote:
>> Michele<really@areyoukiddingme.net>  wrote:
>>> On 11/25/2011 10:48 PM, Matt Ferrari wrote:
>>>> "smr"<me@shawnritchie.com>   wrote in message
>>>> news:jalvrh$j0h$2@ftupet.ftupet.com...
>>>>> On 11/24/2011 1:31 AM, Matt Ferrari wrote:
>>>>>> a few weeks ago myspace started not working for people using older
>>>>>> internet
>>>>>> explorer browsers and would instead goto an error page asking
>>>>>> users to update to a newer ie or google chrome.  Just checked on it again
>>>>>> and guess what? funny now that they came to their senses and made their
>>>>>> site
>>>>>> work again with the old browser.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> myspace you cant afford to lose any more users , don't do something
>>>>>> stupid
>>>>>> like that again mmkay?
>>>>>
>>>>> Who the fuck uses MySpace or Internet Explorer? Why don't you just
>>>>> randomly throw your debit cards out the car window while driving with your
>>>>> PIN scribbled on them?
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> smr
>>>>
>>>> oh come on
>>>>
>>>
>>> He's got a point.
>>
>> At work, where the goal is to get shit done, I use IE as it doesn't want
>> to update or crash every 45 minutes, unlike firefox.
>>
>> firefox is just netscape all over again.
>>
>>
>
>
>I don't have issues with FF, but there's always Chrome.  IE bugs the 
>shit out of me.

I tried Chrome for a couple of weeks, wasn't impressed. Went back to Firefox.
Never had it crash for me on any of the 5 or 6 boxes I run it on.

core <core-usenet@spamless.spook.homeip.net> wrote:

> I tried Chrome for a couple of weeks, wasn't impressed. Went back to Firefox.
> Never had it crash for me on any of the 5 or 6 boxes I run it on.


I dunno about crashing but it (Firefox) does seem to have a memory problem.

Since we don't run windows around here, the machines are rarely rebooted or
shut down. Leaving FF running, even in the background doing nothing, one
page open, it seems like after 3 or 4 days, it paralyzes the machine. Just
getting it to quit takes a while.

This seems to be from last summer (2010), previous versions were fine but I
guess when they started the ramp up to do "the release of the month",
something was over looked.

I mean I suppose if you are on a laptop or a desktop that is shut down
periodically or normally quit the browser when done, it probably doesn't
make any difference.

But there is something wrong with it, I'm not the only one to make that
observation.

-bruce
bje@ripco.com

Cuthbert Thistlethwaite <nosillygods@myface.net> wrote:

>I liked netscape's newsreader

Barf

On Sun, 27 Nov 2011 11:36:18 +0000 (UTC), Bruce Esquibel <bje@ripco.com>
wrote:

>core <core-usenet@spamless.spook.homeip.net> wrote:
>
>> I tried Chrome for a couple of weeks, wasn't impressed. Went back to Firefox.
>> Never had it crash for me on any of the 5 or 6 boxes I run it on.
>
>
>I dunno about crashing but it (Firefox) does seem to have a memory problem.

I don't think it's FF itself. I think it's addons. The copy that's been up for
over 2 weeks has been memory stable. The copy on this machine does eat memory.
I restart it every few days.

>
>Since we don't run windows around here, the machines are rarely rebooted or
>shut down. Leaving FF running, even in the background doing nothing, one
>page open, it seems like after 3 or 4 days, it paralyzes the machine. Just
>getting it to quit takes a while.

I have 4 tabs up on the stable box. 2 running weather radar shots that update
constatly and the other two watching radio propagation maps that also auto
update regularly.

>
>This seems to be from last summer (2010), previous versions were fine but I
>guess when they started the ramp up to do "the release of the month",
>something was over looked.
>
>I mean I suppose if you are on a laptop or a desktop that is shut down
>periodically or normally quit the browser when done, it probably doesn't
>make any difference.
>
>But there is something wrong with it, I'm not the only one to make that
>observation.

Agreed.

/core

core <core-usenet@spamless.spook.homeip.net> wrote:
>Bruce Esquibel <bje@ripco.com> wrote:
>>core <core-usenet@spamless.spook.homeip.net> wrote:

>>>I tried Chrome for a couple of weeks, wasn't impressed. Went back
>>>to Firefox.  Never had it crash for me on any of the 5 or 6 boxes I
>>>run it on.

>>I dunno about crashing but it (Firefox) does seem to have a memory problem.

>I don't think it's FF itself. I think it's addons. The copy that's been up for
>over 2 weeks has been memory stable. The copy on this machine does eat memory.
>I restart it every few days.

I thought it was goddam instances of Flash that never end; stupid plugin
design. They run outside the browser process.

On 11/27/2011 10:18 PM, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
> core<core-usenet@spamless.spook.homeip.net>  wrote:
>> Bruce Esquibel<bje@ripco.com>  wrote:
>>> core<core-usenet@spamless.spook.homeip.net>  wrote:
>
>>>> I tried Chrome for a couple of weeks, wasn't impressed. Went back
>>>> to Firefox.  Never had it crash for me on any of the 5 or 6 boxes I
>>>> run it on.
>
>>> I dunno about crashing but it (Firefox) does seem to have a memory problem.
>
>> I don't think it's FF itself. I think it's addons. The copy that's been up for
>> over 2 weeks has been memory stable. The copy on this machine does eat memory.
>> I restart it every few days.
>
> I thought it was goddam instances of Flash that never end; stupid plugin
> design. They run outside the browser process.

That's what usually causes a memory leak on my end, especially if I 
leave the page open for a while.  Lazarus used to be an issue until I 
told it to clear the cache more frequently.

On 2011-11-28, Adam H. Kerman <ahk@chinet.com> wrote:
> core <core-usenet@spamless.spook.homeip.net> wrote:
>>Bruce Esquibel <bje@ripco.com> wrote:
>>>core <core-usenet@spamless.spook.homeip.net> wrote:
>
>>>>I tried Chrome for a couple of weeks, wasn't impressed. Went back
>>>>to Firefox.  Never had it crash for me on any of the 5 or 6 boxes I
>>>>run it on.
>
>>>I dunno about crashing but it (Firefox) does seem to have a memory problem.
>
>>I don't think it's FF itself. I think it's addons. The copy that's been up for
>>over 2 weeks has been memory stable. The copy on this machine does eat memory.
>>I restart it every few days.
>
> I thought it was goddam instances of Flash that never end; stupid plugin
> design. They run outside the browser process.

*cough* FlashBlock *cough*

-- 

Kristian Zoerhoff
kristian.zoerhoff@gmail.com

Kristian M Zoerhoff <kristian.zoerhoff@gmail.com> wrote:
>On 2011-11-28, Adam H. Kerman <ahk@chinet.com> wrote:
>>core <core-usenet@spamless.spook.homeip.net> wrote:
>>>Bruce Esquibel <bje@ripco.com> wrote:
>>>>core <core-usenet@spamless.spook.homeip.net> wrote:

>>>>>I tried Chrome for a couple of weeks, wasn't impressed. Went back
>>>>>to Firefox.  Never had it crash for me on any of the 5 or 6 boxes I
>>>>>run it on.

>>>>I dunno about crashing but it (Firefox) does seem to have a memory problem.

>>>I don't think it's FF itself. I think it's addons. The copy that's
>>>been up for over 2 weeks has been memory stable. The copy on this
>>>machine does eat memory.  I restart it every few days.

>>I thought it was goddam instances of Flash that never end; stupid plugin
>>design. They run outside the browser process.

>*cough* FlashBlock *cough*

One of my most useful add ons, together with Noscript and Redirect
Remover. Also, I don't open pdfs in the browser, ever; those get saved to
a file. But, yes, when I have allowed Flash to run, the instances don't
necessarily end when I leave the Web page or even when I close the browser
application. Flash sucks.

Adam H. Kerman <ahk@chinet.com> wrote:
>Kristian M Zoerhoff <kristian.zoerhoff@gmail.com> wrote:
>>On 2011-11-28, Adam H. Kerman <ahk@chinet.com> wrote:
>>>core <core-usenet@spamless.spook.homeip.net> wrote:
>>>>Bruce Esquibel <bje@ripco.com> wrote:
>>>>>core <core-usenet@spamless.spook.homeip.net> wrote:

>>>>>>I tried Chrome for a couple of weeks, wasn't impressed. Went back
>>>>>>to Firefox.  Never had it crash for me on any of the 5 or 6 boxes I
>>>>>>run it on.

>>>>>I dunno about crashing but it (Firefox) does seem to have a memory
>>>>>problem.

>>>>I don't think it's FF itself. I think it's addons. The copy that's
>>>>been up for over 2 weeks has been memory stable. The copy on this
>>>>machine does eat memory.  I restart it every few days.

>>>I thought it was goddam instances of Flash that never end; stupid plugin
>>>design. They run outside the browser process.

>>*cough* FlashBlock *cough*

>One of my most useful add ons, together with Noscript and Redirect
>Remover. Also, I don't open pdfs in the browser, ever; those get saved to
>a file. But, yes, when I have allowed Flash to run, the instances don't
>necessarily end when I leave the Web page or even when I close the browser
>application. Flash sucks.

Just noticed the problem yesterday. I've got the latest firefox, 8.0
under the new version inflation regime; I was just runing 3.6 in the spring.
I'd shut down firefox. A few hours later, I opened what I expected would
be a new instance of firefox, but it was behaving like an additional window
with an old instance of firefox. I can tell because I had allowed temporary
permission to run javascript under NoScript at a specific Web site and
I didn't have to grant temporary permission again when I next looked at
the same site.

I tried to end the application. In Task Manager process list, there were
two instances of plugin container and one instance of firefox. Even after
ending both plugin container instances, the other firefox process still
didn't terminate nicely, so I ended that as well.

So, no, it's still not fixed. Are these new firefox versions making anything
more than cosmetic changes? Is it all essentially 3.6 technically?