From: za kAT on
On Mon, 09 Aug 2010 03:46:18 +0200, socket wrote:

> za kAT wrote:
>>On Sun, 08 Aug 2010 23:16:52 +0200, socket wrote:
>>
>>> I wonder what za kAT's Opera v9.80 scores! lol.
>>
>>Wrong again, I'm not running that, or most probably the person you
>>think is. You are so stupid. Opera's user agent string was modified,
>>and the version frozen at 9.80.
>
> So you are running Opera but the version number shows incorrectly.

No, the version is now just in a different part of the user agent string.
Did you read the link I posted? and the reason why.

Don't forget to add that to the spooky database you maintain on us all
freak.

> Well, it scored quite high on HTML5 according to BB.

I really don't care about HTML 5. At the end of the day most of us have to
program for stuff to work in the lowest common denominator of the popular
browsers, and that is IE6. IE* isn't anywhere near HTML 5 compliant, so by
the time IE10 (maybe) becomes the LCD it will be 7-10 years time. Neither
do I like Opera, or use it apart from testing. It renders worse than Chrome
in many cases.

--
zakAT(a)pooh.the.cat - Sergeant Tech-Com, DN38416.
Assigned to protect you. You've been targeted for denigration!
From: Benedolfus on
Op 08-08-10 22:13, Bear Bottoms schreef:
> Here is a test for your browsers HTML5 capability.
>
> I tested (out of 300 points)
> Chrome (latest): 197 and 7 bonus points
> Fx (latest): 139 and 4 bonus points
> IE8 (latest): 27 and no bonus points
>
> http://www.html5test.com/
>
>
>
Chrome latest only 197 and 7 bonus?

Chromium 6.0.487.0 (55176) gives 217 and 10 bonus.

From: Benedolfus on
Op 08-08-10 22:27, Bear Bottoms schreef:
> Bear Bottoms<bearbottoms1(a)gmai.com> wrote in
> news:Xns9DCE9AE7CC85Bbearbottoms1gmaicom(a)news.albasani.net:
>
>> Here is a test for your browsers HTML5 capability.
>>
>> I tested (out of 300 points)
>> Chrome (latest): 197 and 7 bonus points
>> Fx (latest): 139 and 4 bonus points
>> IE8 (latest): 27 and no bonus points
>>
>> http://www.html5test.com/
>>
>>
>>
>
> Chrome Canary tested 217 and 10 bonus points.
>
Oops, didn't saw this one when i posted about the Chromium score.

From: socket on
"za kAT" scribbled:

>What, that shitty little XP workstation running HFS you mean.

You have NO idea what we're running here other than what I've told you,
some of which may be true! That means your comments are bollix.

However:

1.your denigration of Windows XP is noted.

FYI Windows XP is widely viewed as MS's best op/sys (jury is out on W7)
but that seems to have gone right over your fat head. And coming from
the dork who wrote this (you):

"idiot, in the real world, smart people are using Vista"

...one can see you know little about MS op/systems.


2. your denigration of HFS is also noted.

FYI HFS is without doubt the world's best free file server...there is
nothing that comes close to it. In a sense it is revolutionary s/w in
that it's not only a highly configurable solid file server for
individuals and small enterprises, but also allows small users to host
their own websites directly from their own machines, and supercedes the
need to send attachments with e-mails etc. And it comes in one portable
non-instal executable of ~550KB.

That's probably why it has enjoyed many more than 1 million downloads
and is under active development.

You really don't have a clue what you're shouting about. Go away.

That's enough for now.


-socket

From: za kAT on
On Wed, 11 Aug 2010 01:00:52 +0200, HTH wrote:

> Hey Stubb, don't leave it there. Why don't you let it all hang out and
> show what contempt you *really* *really* have for me

Sure I have contempt for you. It's the /only/ thing you have ever earned
sonny.

--
zakAT(a)pooh.the.cat - Sergeant Tech-Com, DN38416.
Assigned to protect you. You've been targeted for denigration!