Just though you gentlemen may be intereted to know that The Metro's "Trip Planner" at kcata.org has been updated: it nolonger has the artificial restriction which limited to Windows+IE, and (seems) to work in Firefox cross OS, and also seems to work. It also seems to work in Konqueror, so I guess it should work in Safari. It seems to be written with ASP.NET, so it is cookie laiden, and it uses AJAX in a way which I personally consider to make it less useful that its previous version. Contrastingly, Time Warner Cable's online chat claims to support Netscape and IE only, so far I've tried it in IE. So unless it really works in Netscape, no cross OS, or even Firefox support. The support-analyst I spoke with, they will be focusing on IE because "Firefox does not come bundled with Windows, so we know that everyone will have Internet Explorer" , which of course presumes that only Windows exists - but the chat service is at least better than their telephone answering service. Peace -- Fedora Core 6 and proud
On 7/3/07, Arthur Pemberton <pemboa@gmail.com> wrote:
Just though you gentlemen may be intereted to know that The Metro's "Trip Planner" at kcata.org has been updated: it nolonger has the artificial restriction which limited to Windows+IE, and (seems) to work in Firefox cross OS, and also seems to work. It also seems to work in Konqueror, so I guess it should work in Safari.
It seems to be written with ASP.NET, so it is cookie laiden, and it uses AJAX in a way which I personally consider to make it less useful that its previous version.
Contrastingly, Time Warner Cable's online chat claims to support Netscape and IE only, so far I've tried it in IE. So unless it really works in Netscape, no cross OS, or even Firefox support. The support-analyst I spoke with, they will be focusing on IE because "Firefox does not come bundled with Windows, so we know that everyone will have Internet Explorer" , which of course presumes that only Windows exists - but the chat service is at least better than their telephone answering service.
Peace
-- Fedora Core 6 and proud _______________________________________________ Kclug mailing list Kclug@kclug.org http://kclug.org/mailman/listinfo/kclug
The question few folks ever raise is what is gained by going to lengths in DELIBERATE rendering of a site as inaccessible to anything but MS software. All the claims of "security" are laughable. Claims of support "costs" ? Tell me truthfully, how many calls for support are generated by a browser NOT being a MS product? Calls avoided perhaps would be more realistic. So we go to the question again of WHY would a company disenfranchise customer base- and even LOSE customers to vendors not so churlish? To be blunt and unambiguous then - can any reasonable explanation for such widespread consistency in discarding the Non-MS browser customer base exist? It seems directly related to nothing I can find to justify such stupidity. But there are no reasons one can think of to not EMBRACE the users of non MS browsers. Or am I missing some grasp of how one profits by excluding or annoying would be customers? Oren Beck " 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 $$ being spent somewhere that lets you use Open Source Software may eventually bear fruit"
On 7/3/07, Oren Beck <orenbeck@gmail.com> wrote:
" New concept- Send an email to the webmaster of each site forcing the use of MS and allowing no alternative browsers. Telling them how much money the policy will cost their site in the form of your $$ being spent somewhere that lets you use Open Source Software may eventually bear fruit"
simply demanding live telephone support should do it; not reason to get weird on them. "I'm sorry but your web site does not work with my standard Firefox web browser, so I have to telephone you. How is your day going? Yes, I had a nice time on hold, the music was pleasant."
On 7/3/07, David Nicol <davidnicol@gmail.com> wrote:
On 7/3/07, Oren Beck <orenbeck@gmail.com> wrote:
" 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"
simply demanding live telephone support should do it; not reason to get weird on them. "I'm sorry but your web site does not work with my standard Firefox web browser, so I have to telephone you. How is your day going? Yes, I had a nice time on hold, the music was pleasant."
Ah, yes- your method does have a certain sensibility of personal touch. Yet the goal is -or should be at least- to get a minimum result of having all websites seamlessly work with Open Source browsers. And each communication the world not yet awake about Open Source has with one of "us" is potentially what WE are ALL judged by... So we are all literally potentially ambassadors for or against the cause. "All web commerce MUST be compatible with Open Source browsers. Nothing more is required and nothing less is acceptable"
Actually, the way to get these things addressed with any public-sector agency is during the RFP stage. The consultant they selected developed a solution like this is because the RFP didn't specifically call upon them to do something different. The fix - and it's not an immediate fix, but it *is* the one most likely to prevail over the long haul - is to educate KCATA management about the potential market they're impacting and encourage them, during their next system upgrade, to take users of other browsers and systems into account. If you push for an immediate fix, they haven't budgeted for it and it's too easy for them to say no. Greg
On 7/3/07, Greg Brooks <gregb@west-third.com> wrote:
Actually, the way to get these things addressed with any public-sector agency is during the RFP stage. The consultant they selected developed a solution like this is because the RFP didn't specifically call upon them to do something different.
The fix - and it's not an immediate fix, but it *is* the one most likely to prevail over the long haul - is to educate KCATA management about the potential market they're impacting and encourage them, during their next system upgrade, to take users of other browsers and systems into account.
If you push for an immediate fix, they haven't budgeted for it and it's too easy for them to say no.
Greg
_______________________________________________ Kclug mailing list Kclug@kclug.org http://kclug.org/mailman/listinfo/kclug
At one time there were "holy wars" about HTML email too. I am still not sure which school of zealotry was more worthy in the end. The issue of what I shall hence forth suggest we refer to as "Browser Agnosticism" is potentially a landmark point in Open Source gaining universal credence. When will we be vocal enough a market force to demand and receive Browser Agnostic functionality as a minimum standard? Perhaps a logo akin to the Bluetooth logo except denoting "BA" for Browser agnostic? Because in the end it still reeks more of a compulsion to force MS usage than forgivable sloth against bothering to code for low market share browsers. Which is further rendered laughable by a quick search for the % of non MS browser users. And in closing yet again we have the void between cold facts and motivations. Driven by whatever deciding force makes one lightly discard the non MS using base. Lemmings come to mind here.
Browser Agnostic? Wouldn't that be someone who doesn't believe there is proof one way or the other that browsers exist? Browser Omniscient or Browser Apathetic would be more accurate. On 7/4/07, Oren Beck <orenbeck@gmail.com> wrote:
Perhaps a logo akin to the Bluetooth logo except denoting "BA" for Browser agnostic?
On 7/3/07, Greg Brooks <gregb@west-third.com> wrote:
Actually, the way to get these things addressed with any public-sector agency is during the RFP stage. The consultant they selected developed a solution like this is because the RFP didn't specifically call upon them to do something different.
The fix - and it's not an immediate fix, but it *is* the one most likely to prevail over the long haul - is to educate KCATA management about the potential market they're impacting and encourage them, during their next system upgrade, to take users of other browsers and systems into account.
Please re read my message, i tried their trip planner In Windows and XP in three different browsers, and although I did not go through with a complete trip planning, it did not prevent me from attempting (like it did before).
If you push for an immediate fix, they haven't budgeted for it and it's too easy for them to say no.
Greg
_______________________________________________ Kclug mailing list Kclug@kclug.org http://kclug.org/mailman/listinfo/kclug
-- Fedora Core 6 and proud
I'm not so sure that's the right presumption. Their online chat support only works on IE. IE only works on Windows. This could mean two things. They overlooked users of every other operating system. OR, and I think perhaps much more likely, those users don't need helpdesk style support. Given that only Windows users need "help" using their cable modem, I think it only fitting that they not waste money making such support available to people who will never need it. Indeed, the far more perplexing oversight is how Time Warner thought it would be a bright idea to offer support for your Internet connection, OVER THE INTERNET. On 7/3/07, Arthur Pemberton <pemboa@gmail.com> wrote:
Contrastingly, Time Warner Cable's online chat claims to support Netscape and IE only, so far I've tried it in IE. So unless it really works in Netscape, no cross OS, or even Firefox support. The support-analyst I spoke with, they will be focusing on IE because "Firefox does not come bundled with Windows, so we know that everyone will have Internet Explorer" , which of course presumes that only Windows exists.
So how am I supposed to complain when my latency sucks? On Tuesday 03 July 2007 22:29, Billy Crook wrote:
I'm not so sure that's the right presumption. Their online chat support only works on IE. IE only works on Windows. This could mean two things. They overlooked users of every other operating system. OR, and I think perhaps much more likely, those users don't need helpdesk style support.
Given that only Windows users need "help" using their cable modem, I think it only fitting that they not waste money making such support available to people who will never need it. Indeed, the far more perplexing oversight is how Time Warner thought it would be a bright idea to offer support for your Internet connection, OVER THE INTERNET.
On 7/3/07, Arthur Pemberton <pemboa@gmail.com> wrote:
Contrastingly, Time Warner Cable's online chat claims to support Netscape and IE only, so far I've tried it in IE. So unless it really works in Netscape, no cross OS, or even Firefox support. The support-analyst I spoke with, they will be focusing on IE because "Firefox does not come bundled with Windows, so we know that everyone will have Internet Explorer" , which of course presumes that only Windows exists.
-- I digitally sign my emails. If you see an attachment with .asc, then that means your email client doesn't support PGP digital signatures. For more info, see: http://www.gnupg.org/documentation/faqs.html#q1.1
US Post. That'll give you a feel for how bad it could be if Time Warner gets cranky. On 7/3/07, Luke-Jr <luke@dashjr.org> wrote:
So how am I supposed to complain when my latency sucks?
On Tuesday 03 July 2007 22:29, Billy Crook wrote:
I'm not so sure that's the right presumption. Their online chat support only works on IE. IE only works on Windows. This could mean two things. They overlooked users of every other operating system. OR, and I think perhaps much more likely, those users don't need helpdesk style support.
Given that only Windows users need "help" using their cable modem, I think it only fitting that they not waste money making such support available to people who will never need it. Indeed, the far more perplexing oversight is how Time Warner thought it would be a bright idea to offer support for your Internet connection, OVER THE INTERNET.
On 7/3/07, Arthur Pemberton <pemboa@gmail.com> wrote:
Contrastingly, Time Warner Cable's online chat claims to support Netscape and IE only, so far I've tried it in IE. So unless it really works in Netscape, no cross OS, or even Firefox support. The support-analyst I spoke with, they will be focusing on IE because "Firefox does not come bundled with Windows, so we know that everyone will have Internet Explorer" , which of course presumes that only Windows exists.
-- I digitally sign my emails. If you see an attachment with .asc, then that means your email client doesn't support PGP digital signatures. For more info, see: http://www.gnupg.org/documentation/faqs.html#q1.1 _______________________________________________ Kclug mailing list Kclug@kclug.org http://kclug.org/mailman/listinfo/kclug
On 7/3/07, Billy Crook <billycrook@gmail.com> wrote:
I'm not so sure that's the right presumption. Their online chat support only works on IE. IE only works on Windows. This could mean two things. They overlooked users of every other operating system. OR, and I think perhaps much more likely, those users don't need helpdesk style support.
Given that only Windows users need "help" using their cable modem, I think it only fitting that they not waste money making such support available to people who will never need it. Indeed, the far more perplexing oversight is how Time Warner thought it would be a bright idea to offer support for your Internet connection, OVER THE INTERNET.
Well I called, for clarifications for issues with my account. In all fairness I doubt even they expect people with internet problems to be coming to the Live Chat
On 7/3/07, Arthur Pemberton <pemboa@gmail.com> wrote:
Contrastingly, Time Warner Cable's online chat claims to support Netscape and IE only, so far I've tried it in IE. So unless it really works in Netscape, no cross OS, or even Firefox support. The support-analyst I spoke with, they will be focusing on IE because "Firefox does not come bundled with Windows, so we know that everyone will have Internet Explorer" , which of course presumes that only Windows exists.
-- Fedora Core 6 and proud
Exactly. When mine is down, it is all the way down. _____ From: On Behalf Of Billy Crook Sent: Tuesday, July 03, 2007 10:30 PM To: Arthur Pemberton I'm not so sure that's the right presumption. Their online chat support only works on IE. IE only works on Windows. This could mean two things. They overlooked users of every other operating system. OR, and I think perhaps much more likely, those users don't need helpdesk style support. Given that only Windows users need "help" using their cable modem, I think it only fitting that they not waste money making such support available to people who will never need it. Indeed, the far more perplexing oversight is how Time Warner thought it would be a bright idea to offer support for your Internet connection, OVER THE INTERNET.
Consider the scenario of your home Internet connection being down, but your work connection remains functional. You use the latter to converse with the helpful tech support people about your home problem (Yes, I rebooted. Yes, I checked the cables. Yes, the cable modem is plugged into the power...Oh, there's a problem in my neighborhood, and you expect it fixed today? Thanks!). On 7/5/07, Kelsay, Brian - Kansas City, MO <brian.kelsay@kcc.usda.gov> wrote:
Exactly. When mine is down, it is all the way down. Indeed, the far more perplexing oversight is how Time Warner thought it would be a bright idea to offer support for your Internet connection, OVER THE INTERNET.
Except in my experience, they want you to power cycle and look for lights while you are on the phone and while they watch. I don't want to wait til I get to work to chat with them about my home Internet problem. Made me sort of cross over to thinking of what you would do if your only phone line was Skype or Vonage and your Internet goes down. I doubt this is the case in very many situations, but surely someone has this setup and no cell or home phone. Talk about a Catch-22. Now that I wake up and think about it, you work from home, so both your lines are in the same place. For most of us, this is not true, but I see where you are coming from. Briand _____ From: Monty J. Harder Sent: Thursday, July 05, 2007 8:38 AM Consider the scenario of your home Internet connection being down, but your work connection remains functional. You use the latter to converse with the helpful tech support people about your home problem (Yes, I rebooted. Yes, I checked the cables. Yes, the cable modem is plugged into the power...Oh, there's a problem in my neighborhood, and you expect it fixed today? Thanks!). On 7/5/07, Kelsay, Brian - Kansas City, MO wrote: Exactly. When mine is down, it is all the way down. BillyCrook wrote: Indeed, the far more perplexing oversight is how Time Warner thought it would be a bright idea to offer support for your Internet connection, OVER THE INTERNET.
On 7/5/07, Kelsay, Brian - Kansas City, MO <brian.kelsay@kcc.usda.gov> wrote:
Now that I wake up and think about it, you work from home, so both your lines are in the same place. For most of us, this is not true, but I see where you are coming from.
But my work uses my home Internet connection and a Sonicwall to establish a VPN between my office and the corporate network, so that doesn't help either. I know how to connect to my firewall and get the status on the connection to the cable 'modem'. I know how to power-cycle my equipment, and if that doesn't work, I go in the other room and check the TV to see if the cable is good. If it isn't, I call Time-Warner, and if there's a long estimated wait time, I assume it's a wide area problem they already know about. The problem is fundamentally no different from calling AT&T to tell them you have a problem with your phone service. That's not going to be from the line having trouble. I have 3 land lines here, (two paid for by the company) plus cell service on the Sprint network if none of those are good.
On Thursday 05 July 2007 11:09:48 am Monty J. Harder wrote:
The problem is fundamentally no different from calling AT&T to tell them you have a problem with your phone service. That's not going to be from the line having trouble.
I've had phone service here for 17 years from Bell, now AT&t (again). I've called them once, to find out when they'd have the lines back up from the big ice storm. There may be things I don't like about them, but service availability ain't one of 'em. I laugh at the cable guys every time they try to sell me phone service.
participants (10)
-
Arthur Pemberton -
Billy Crook -
David Nicol -
Greg Brooks -
Jeremy Fowler -
Jonathan Hutchins -
Kelsay, Brian - Kansas City, MO -
Luke-Jr -
Monty J. Harder -
Oren Beck