Posted by Bruce Grubb on 04/30/06 02:53

In article
<doraymeRidThis-54BD7F.13585029042006@news-vip.optusnet.com.au>,
dorayme <doraymeRidThis@optusnet.com.au> wrote:

> In article <4bel5sF10l1rlU2@individual.net>,
> Dave Hinz <DaveHinz@spamcop.net> wrote:
>
> > On Fri, 28 Apr 2006 12:23:46 +1000, dorayme
> > <doraymeRidThis@optusnet.com.au>
> > wrote:
> > > In article <bgrubb-06AB7A.19421127042006@news.zianet.com>,
> > > Bruce Grubb <bgrubb@zianet.com> wrote:
> > >
> > >> Carefull as the last version of IE for the Mac had pretty good CSS
> > >> rendering. Just because the Windows team programmed with its toes does
> > >> not
> > >> mean through throw out the standard.
> > >
> > > Please stop! I beg you! You will give Mac users a bad name.
> >
> > How in the world is pointing out that implementations differ, giving
> > _anyone_ a bad name? News flash; he's right, _and_, he couldn't "give
> > Mac users a bad name" regardless of what he says or who he is.
> >
>
> You need to go deeper into the thread to see this. IE Mac is
> basically irrelevant to the trouble with IE. The whole thing
> started with Bruce Grubb saying silly things about not needing to
> worry about making special provisions for IE. IE means IE Win.

In comp.sys.mac.apps? Yeah right. The reason this came here was because
you and other were making really silly comments.

[Back to original message]