You just had to get gewg started on the too often mounted soapbox concerning how many idiots are within the computer complex that lack the knowledge that gewg does, including about Microsoft products and how to deal with them. I am one of those self taught idiots and I have had Internet Explorer (MIE-- abbreviation that gewg dislikes) since 1998 (way back to Version 4) without it producing any major problem and also "adequate for my needs and abilities"---I guess I had better give someone else their sign, and guess this idiot has just been lucky.

Dan

On Thursday, April 20, 2006 at 3:42 pm, bob wells wrote:
>gewg_
>
>Aww C'mon, I was just trying to have a little fun with ya. I knew you'd take the
>bait. I sincerely hope anyone reading over my shoulder got a little laugh out of
>what they read. That was it's purpose. If not, too bad. I did.
>
>I think Mozilla has broad enough shoulders to handle it. Nothing is being said that
>isn't true, maybe out of context, but still true.
>
>Wish I could say the same for the venom being directed at IE. For all it's faults,
>IE seems to be adequate for my needs and abilities. Obviously a number of other people
>agree.
>
>I don't expect that to be true for everyone and I leave that choice to the other
>person, without rancor. Unlike any number of Mozilla suporters whose best, and only
>advice, for IE problems is Mozilla. Only time will tell.
>

Written in response to: re: Firefox security issues -- Not for serious consumption (bob wells: Thursday, April 20, 2006 at 3:42 pm) Responses to this message: re: Firefox security issues -- Not for serious consumption (Larry: Friday, April 21, 2006 at 8:35 am)