<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Internet Explorer 7</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.bigmouthstrikesagain.com/archives/616/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.bigmouthstrikesagain.com/archives/616</link>
	<description>Freelance writer Gary Marshall on technology, music, Macs and more</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 10 Feb 2012 15:25:25 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: tm</title>
		<link>http://www.bigmouthstrikesagain.com/archives/616/comment-page-1#comment-1578</link>
		<dc:creator>tm</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 04 Feb 2006 16:24:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.bigmouthstrikesagain.com/?p=616#comment-1578</guid>
		<description>&gt;Windows NT 3.5.1.

ahh, that takes me back...

&gt;using 95 at work until a few

well the main thing is - if you don&#039;t connect it to a newtork and (more particularly) if you&#039;re not the person expected to get it to *work* while connected to a network you&#039;ll probably just about get by.  It does suck compared to 98 though (and in fact compared to 3.11 with a decent IP stack on it, but who remembers that? ;-)).  

You&#039;re right though - I always approach software with low expectations - that way I&#039;m so much less disappointed. ;-)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>>Windows NT 3.5.1.</p>
<p>ahh, that takes me back&#8230;</p>
<p>>using 95 at work until a few</p>
<p>well the main thing is &#8211; if you don&#8217;t connect it to a newtork and (more particularly) if you&#8217;re not the person expected to get it to *work* while connected to a network you&#8217;ll probably just about get by.  It does suck compared to 98 though (and in fact compared to 3.11 with a decent IP stack on it, but who remembers that? ;-)).  </p>
<p>You&#8217;re right though &#8211; I always approach software with low expectations &#8211; that way I&#8217;m so much less disappointed. ;-)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Squander Two</title>
		<link>http://www.bigmouthstrikesagain.com/archives/616/comment-page-1#comment-1577</link>
		<dc:creator>Squander Two</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 03 Feb 2006 12:18:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.bigmouthstrikesagain.com/?p=616#comment-1577</guid>
		<description>When I worked for British Gas Services, it was all Win 3.5.  Unbelievable.

I was using 95 at work until a few weeks ago.  I was very pleasantly surprised by how bad it wasn&#039;t.  That&#039;s probably mainly due to very low expectations, mind.  It was insanely slow.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>When I worked for British Gas Services, it was all Win 3.5.  Unbelievable.</p>
<p>I was using 95 at work until a few weeks ago.  I was very pleasantly surprised by how bad it wasn&#8217;t.  That&#8217;s probably mainly due to very low expectations, mind.  It was insanely slow.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: david</title>
		<link>http://www.bigmouthstrikesagain.com/archives/616/comment-page-1#comment-1576</link>
		<dc:creator>david</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 03 Feb 2006 10:03:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.bigmouthstrikesagain.com/?p=616#comment-1576</guid>
		<description>Oh, ME really sucked too.  Windows 98 with additional bugs.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Oh, ME really sucked too.  Windows 98 with additional bugs.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: david</title>
		<link>http://www.bigmouthstrikesagain.com/archives/616/comment-page-1#comment-1575</link>
		<dc:creator>david</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 03 Feb 2006 10:03:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.bigmouthstrikesagain.com/?p=616#comment-1575</guid>
		<description>&gt;&gt;I actually had to go back to supporting W98 for a customer last year and OMG

At my last job we had a business critical system running on little windows 98 network and it was a nightmare.  To get backups even close to working I had to hook up a 2K machine as I couldn&#039;t get the software or drivers working on 98.  And the whole thing fell over on a daily basis.

Prior to that I went to a client site in Ayr that was running Windows NT 3.5.1.  That took a bit of remembering!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>>>I actually had to go back to supporting W98 for a customer last year and OMG</p>
<p>At my last job we had a business critical system running on little windows 98 network and it was a nightmare.  To get backups even close to working I had to hook up a 2K machine as I couldn&#8217;t get the software or drivers working on 98.  And the whole thing fell over on a daily basis.</p>
<p>Prior to that I went to a client site in Ayr that was running Windows NT 3.5.1.  That took a bit of remembering!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tony Kiernan</title>
		<link>http://www.bigmouthstrikesagain.com/archives/616/comment-page-1#comment-1574</link>
		<dc:creator>Tony Kiernan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 03 Feb 2006 09:11:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.bigmouthstrikesagain.com/?p=616#comment-1574</guid>
		<description>&gt;&gt;MSN UK doesn&#039;t look very nice in IE[7] 

Does this mean that all the folk that only ever tested their sites in IE are gonna have to learn to be standards compliant?  Let&#039;s hope so.  Also, that all them crap &#039;fixes&#039; for ie can get tae fuck.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>>>MSN UK doesn&#8217;t look very nice in IE[7] </p>
<p>Does this mean that all the folk that only ever tested their sites in IE are gonna have to learn to be standards compliant?  Let&#8217;s hope so.  Also, that all them crap &#8216;fixes&#8217; for ie can get tae fuck.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: russ</title>
		<link>http://www.bigmouthstrikesagain.com/archives/616/comment-page-1#comment-1573</link>
		<dc:creator>russ</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 02 Feb 2006 22:43:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.bigmouthstrikesagain.com/?p=616#comment-1573</guid>
		<description>oops that was me</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>oops that was me</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Anonymous</title>
		<link>http://www.bigmouthstrikesagain.com/archives/616/comment-page-1#comment-1572</link>
		<dc:creator>Anonymous</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 02 Feb 2006 22:42:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.bigmouthstrikesagain.com/?p=616#comment-1572</guid>
		<description>&gt; 2000 wasn&#039;t even as good as 98.

I&#039;m sure you must mean ME wasn&#039;t as good as 98?  2000 rocked.  Many people still use it because XP is only a slight improvement on 2k (faster boots, uglier Luna theme, Roll back).</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>> 2000 wasn&#8217;t even as good as 98.</p>
<p>I&#8217;m sure you must mean ME wasn&#8217;t as good as 98?  2000 rocked.  Many people still use it because XP is only a slight improvement on 2k (faster boots, uglier Luna theme, Roll back).</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: tm</title>
		<link>http://www.bigmouthstrikesagain.com/archives/616/comment-page-1#comment-1571</link>
		<dc:creator>tm</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 02 Feb 2006 18:51:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.bigmouthstrikesagain.com/?p=616#comment-1571</guid>
		<description>Wow! Glad Joe had such a good experince of 98 - someone had to! ;-)

But give it it&#039;s due - 98 SE is easily the best of the 9X family.  ME surely must be MS&#039;s worst operating system ever?  I&#039;d rather re-install Windows 95 over the top of my XP box than use it for five minutes.

Perception changes with time though - I actually had to go back to supporting W98 for a customer last year and OMG! you don&#039;t realise how much things have moved on.  It was *so* much worse than I remembered (and i didn&#039;t like it that much first time around).</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Wow! Glad Joe had such a good experince of 98 &#8211; someone had to! ;-)</p>
<p>But give it it&#8217;s due &#8211; 98 SE is easily the best of the 9X family.  ME surely must be MS&#8217;s worst operating system ever?  I&#8217;d rather re-install Windows 95 over the top of my XP box than use it for five minutes.</p>
<p>Perception changes with time though &#8211; I actually had to go back to supporting W98 for a customer last year and OMG! you don&#8217;t realise how much things have moved on.  It was *so* much worse than I remembered (and i didn&#8217;t like it that much first time around).</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Gary</title>
		<link>http://www.bigmouthstrikesagain.com/archives/616/comment-page-1#comment-1570</link>
		<dc:creator>Gary</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 02 Feb 2006 18:27:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.bigmouthstrikesagain.com/?p=616#comment-1570</guid>
		<description>&gt;  I&#039;d imagine finding bugs is a good thing.

Oh, absolutely. The problem with public betas IMO, though, is that people tend to ignore the &quot;beta&quot; bit :)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>>  I&#8217;d imagine finding bugs is a good thing.</p>
<p>Oh, absolutely. The problem with public betas IMO, though, is that people tend to ignore the &#8220;beta&#8221; bit :)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ronnie</title>
		<link>http://www.bigmouthstrikesagain.com/archives/616/comment-page-1#comment-1569</link>
		<dc:creator>Ronnie</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 02 Feb 2006 15:37:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.bigmouthstrikesagain.com/?p=616#comment-1569</guid>
		<description>I meant IE7 obviously...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I meant IE7 obviously&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: paul</title>
		<link>http://www.bigmouthstrikesagain.com/archives/616/comment-page-1#comment-1568</link>
		<dc:creator>paul</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 02 Feb 2006 14:33:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.bigmouthstrikesagain.com/?p=616#comment-1568</guid>
		<description>&lt;i&gt;they&#039;ve found a security vulnerability already.&lt;/i&gt;

Well, it is a beta, so I&#039;d imagine finding bugs is a good thing.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><i>they&#8217;ve found a security vulnerability already.</i></p>
<p>Well, it is a beta, so I&#8217;d imagine finding bugs is a good thing.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Gary</title>
		<link>http://www.bigmouthstrikesagain.com/archives/616/comment-page-1#comment-1567</link>
		<dc:creator>Gary</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 02 Feb 2006 14:02:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.bigmouthstrikesagain.com/?p=616#comment-1567</guid>
		<description>Ugh.

According to (I think) The Reg, they&#039;ve found a security vulnerability already.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Ugh.</p>
<p>According to (I think) The Reg, they&#8217;ve found a security vulnerability already.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

