/prog/ - furfag fox

Name: Anonymous 2010-05-30 12:26

they make a big stink about how their browser is better cuz its open source, yet when i write valid xhtml strict that validates, ff tends to render it wrong wherease even ie gets it right

Name: Anonymous 2010-05-30 12:28

Sure, don't bother posting the page itself. Just bash bash bash, and if that doesn't help, bash more.

Name: Anonymous 2010-05-30 12:30

>>2
#user/bin/bash

Name: Anonymous 2010-05-30 12:35

>>3
u fail
#!/bin/bash

Name: Anonymous 2010-05-30 12:43

>>4
You also fail, both at English and proper compatibility with REAL Unix systems (not that GNAA/Faggot shit).
#!/usr/local/bin/bash

Name: Anonymous 2010-05-30 12:51

#!/bin/cat

Name: Anonymous 2010-05-30 12:54

Two browsers render the same piece of HTML differently
No, really? And you just realized this in 2010? Dear God, have you been living in some fantasy world?

Name: Anonymous 2010-05-30 13:04

>>5
Your idea of ``REAL'' is ENTERPRISE? Fuck your overengineered piece of shit.

Name: Anonymous 2010-05-30 13:15

>>8
How is FreeBSD overengineered?

Name: Anonymous 2010-05-30 19:39

>>9
It puts common utilities in the wrong place three folders down in the hierarchy.

Name: Anonymous 2010-05-30 23:09

>>1
This is because Firefox is a shitty web browser. It implements all kinds of not-yet-standard features like CSS3, advanced DOM features, etc.

Name: Anonymous 2010-05-30 23:11

>>11
It's not too bad as far as ``shitty Web browsers'' go.

Name: Anonymous 2010-05-31 0:37

>>11
Firefox implements PROPRIETARY shit. Rounded corners are not open web standard, god fucking dammit.

ENEMY OF YOUR FREEDOMS AND OPEN WEB STANDARDS

Jesus fucking CHrist, they're called STANDARDS, they dictate how a proper standards web page should look on ALL web browsers, how could you get it wrong?!

Name: Anonymous 2010-05-31 1:02

I like Firefox and its plugins. Good thing I have 800MB of memory to spare!

Name: Anonymous 2010-05-31 1:43

>>13
rounded corners are part of CSS3. but they're different from the firefox ones.

Name: Anonymous 2010-05-31 3:02

>>14
Just wait until Alzheimer's kicks in, then you'll appreciate the efficient joys of a browser that doesn't consume resources as if it was written by SUN rejects.

Name: Anonymous 2010-05-31 11:35

>>13,15
And it's a good thing that web browsers such as Firefox implemented these sorts of things, and did so in their own namespaces (e.g. -moz-) as the standards call for, to demonstrate the usefulness of such features so that they can be implemented into the next standard version.

This is how innovation is supposed to happen, not by cramming undocumented shit into the browser because your office suite just happened to need it.

Name: Anonymous 2013-01-19 23:40

/prog/ will be spammed continuously until further notice. we apologize for any inconvenience this may cause.

furfag fox

1 Name: Anonymous 2010-05-30 12:26

2 Name: Anonymous 2010-05-30 12:28

3 Name: Anonymous 2010-05-30 12:30

4 Name: Anonymous 2010-05-30 12:35

5 Name: Anonymous 2010-05-30 12:43

6 Name: Anonymous 2010-05-30 12:51

7 Name: Anonymous 2010-05-30 12:54

8 Name: Anonymous 2010-05-30 13:04

9 Name: Anonymous 2010-05-30 13:15

10 Name: Anonymous 2010-05-30 19:39

11 Name: Anonymous 2010-05-30 23:09

12 Name: Anonymous 2010-05-30 23:11

13 Name: Anonymous 2010-05-31 0:37

14 Name: Anonymous 2010-05-31 1:02

15 Name: Anonymous 2010-05-31 1:43

16 Name: Anonymous 2010-05-31 3:02

17 Name: Anonymous 2010-05-31 11:35

21 Name: Anonymous 2013-01-19 23:40