In article <dennmac-ya02408000R0709030819280001NNTP.InfoAve.Net>,
[email]dennmacInfoAveExtraneous.Net[/email] (Dennis McGee) wrote:
Actually, Apple and IBM are pretty riendly. I suspect that new HTML> In article <jeffk.nai-34BBBF.21231506092003news06.east.earthlink.net>,
> Jeff <jeffk.naircn.com> wrote:
>>> >IE has been updated numerous times since 5.0. I don't think it's
> >really chronic bloat. eBay isn't all that bad as far as page size.
> I wasn't talking about page size as much as a lot of crazy things going on
> in their code nowadays. Maybe they were forced to do it because of the huge
> amount of people using their site, I don't know. I also see they're
> suddenly "powered by IBM" -- maybe that's the problem. <g>
standards are what's causing the problem.Nope. You'll need the whole shebang. And 8.1 isn't really a whole lot>>> >IMHO, you ought to consider 8.1. 9.x will probably slow you down a
> >bit too much, but 8.1 will allow you to update your browser (and a
> >few other apps along the way). It's also a little more internet
> Yeah I've seriously considered moving up to 8.1 but I've just always
> preferred the System 7-style folders and windows. I've tried installing the
> Appearance Manager (only) under 7.6.1 but that still won't let me run more
> recent Explorer versions.
different as far as appearance goes.Yep. I liked 7.6, but most apps require 8.1 or freater. It's more of a>
> I think the Kaleidescope control panel (which I'm not using now) has an
> option that will let you use the pre-System 8 folders and windows in that
> system and above. I may have to bite the bullet and finally upgrade now
> that a vital site like eBay is suddenly causing fits in both IE and
> Netscape. That would also let me move up from an ancient version of Mac
> Runtime for Java that I have to use now.
functionality issue than an appearance/usability issue. You won't see a
whole lot of change.