<?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: Has Internet Explorer Just Shot Itself in the Foot?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.disassociated.com/2008/01/26/has-internet-explorer-just-shot-itself-in-the-foot/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.disassociated.com/2008/01/26/has-internet-explorer-just-shot-itself-in-the-foot/</link>
	<description>personal website of John Lampard, Sydney based content producer and link mogul</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 12 Mar 2010 04:14:14 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Dan</title>
		<link>http://www.disassociated.com/2008/01/26/has-internet-explorer-just-shot-itself-in-the-foot/comment-page-1/#comment-5547</link>
		<dc:creator>Dan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 29 Feb 2008 16:33:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.disassociated.com/2008/01/26/has-internet-explorer-just-shot-itself-in-the-foot/#comment-5547</guid>
		<description>I stumbled this using Firefox 3 beta 3 in Ubuntu, and everything looks fine to me.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I stumbled this using Firefox 3 beta 3 in Ubuntu, and everything looks fine to me.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: John</title>
		<link>http://www.disassociated.com/2008/01/26/has-internet-explorer-just-shot-itself-in-the-foot/comment-page-1/#comment-4483</link>
		<dc:creator>John</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 29 Jan 2008 07:26:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.disassociated.com/2008/01/26/has-internet-explorer-just-shot-itself-in-the-foot/#comment-4483</guid>
		<description>Weird display error hey? The code is valid and the page presents as intended in FF for Windows.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Weird display error hey? The code is valid and the page presents as intended in FF for Windows.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Me</title>
		<link>http://www.disassociated.com/2008/01/26/has-internet-explorer-just-shot-itself-in-the-foot/comment-page-1/#comment-4476</link>
		<dc:creator>Me</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 29 Jan 2008 02:40:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.disassociated.com/2008/01/26/has-internet-explorer-just-shot-itself-in-the-foot/#comment-4476</guid>
		<description>Well, the real problem has been IE breaking standards itself, and Microsoft creating new standards (see ActiveX).  Probably in part as a deliberate attempt to degrade the internet experience of Mac and Linux users (as an aside, I&#039;m running Firefox in Ubuntu, Stumle Upon brought up this page, and it fails to display properly...with the right links overwriting a portion of this text box).

Now Firefox is shooting up in users base, and I don&#039;t personally know a single geek (or anyone who knows a geek) who doesn&#039;t prefer it for both quality and security.  Well, there are a few Opera users, and the Mac users on Safari and such as well...but this is general Windows users.  Occasionally you run into a site that uses broken HTML that displays properly in Explorer, or relies on ActiveX (and all the security problems that entails).  But the reaction I tend to see is annoyance with the site itself for being broken, rather than the alternate browsers for sticking to published standards.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Well, the real problem has been IE breaking standards itself, and Microsoft creating new standards (see ActiveX).  Probably in part as a deliberate attempt to degrade the internet experience of Mac and Linux users (as an aside, I&#8217;m running Firefox in Ubuntu, Stumle Upon brought up this page, and it fails to display properly&#8230;with the right links overwriting a portion of this text box).</p>
<p>Now Firefox is shooting up in users base, and I don&#8217;t personally know a single geek (or anyone who knows a geek) who doesn&#8217;t prefer it for both quality and security.  Well, there are a few Opera users, and the Mac users on Safari and such as well&#8230;but this is general Windows users.  Occasionally you run into a site that uses broken HTML that displays properly in Explorer, or relies on ActiveX (and all the security problems that entails).  But the reaction I tend to see is annoyance with the site itself for being broken, rather than the alternate browsers for sticking to published standards.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
