<br><br><div><span class="gmail_quote">On 7/3/07, <b class="gmail_sendername">Arthur Pemberton</b> <<a href="mailto:pemboa@gmail.com">pemboa@gmail.com</a>> wrote:</span><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
Just though you gentlemen may be intereted to know that The Metro's<br>"Trip Planner" at <a href="http://kcata.org">kcata.org</a> has been updated: it nolonger has the<br>artificial restriction which limited to Windows+IE, and (seems) to
<br>work in Firefox cross OS, and also seems to work. It also seems to<br>work in Konqueror, so I guess it should work in Safari.<br><br>It seems to be written with <a href="http://ASP.NET">ASP.NET</a>, so it is cookie laiden, and it
<br>uses AJAX in a way which I personally consider to make it less useful<br>that its previous version.<br><br>Contrastingly, Time Warner Cable's online chat claims to support<br>Netscape and IE only, so far I've tried it in IE. So unless it really
<br>works in Netscape, no cross OS, or even Firefox support. The<br>support-analyst I spoke with, they will be focusing on IE because<br>"Firefox does not come bundled with Windows, so we know that everyone<br>will have Internet Explorer" , which of course presumes that only
<br>Windows exists - but the chat service is at least better than their<br>telephone answering service.<br><br>Peace<br><br>--<br>Fedora Core 6 and proud<br>_______________________________________________<br>Kclug mailing list
<br><a href="mailto:Kclug@kclug.org">Kclug@kclug.org</a><br><a href="http://kclug.org/mailman/listinfo/kclug">http://kclug.org/mailman/listinfo/kclug</a><br></blockquote></div><br>The question few folks ever raise is what is gained by going to lengths in
<br>DELIBERATE rendering of a site as inaccessible to anything but MS software.<br><br>All the claims of "security" are laughable. Claims of support "costs" ?<br>Tell me truthfully, how many calls for support are generated by a browser
<br>NOT being a MS product? Calls avoided perhaps would be more realistic.<br>So we go to the question again of WHY would a company disenfranchise<br>customer base- and even LOSE customers to vendors not so churlish?<br><br>
To be blunt and unambiguous then - can any reasonable explanation for such <br>widespread consistency in discarding the Non-MS browser customer base exist?<br><br>It seems directly related to nothing I can find to justify such stupidity.
<br>But there are no reasons one can think of to not EMBRACE the users of non MS browsers.<br><br>Or am I missing some grasp of how one profits by excluding or annoying would be customers?<br><br>Oren Beck <br><br>" New concept- Send an email to the webmaster of each site forcing the use of MS and allowing no alternative browsers. Telling them how much money the policy will cost their site in the form of your $$ being spent somewhere that lets you use Open Source Software may eventually bear fruit"
<br>