Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Mozilla The Internet Microsoft Software Linux

Hotmail Doesn't Work With Linux Firefox 2.0 396

Posted by kdawson
from the whoa-there-big-feller dept.
An anonymous reader tips a column up at freesoftwaremagazine.com in which the writer discovers that the latest UI enhancements that Hotmail has recently introduced don't work with Firefox 2.0 under Linux. The writer concludes that the webmail interface has been artificially limited by basic user-agent sniffing. The solution is simple enough — spoofing the User Agent that Firefox reports.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Hotmail Doesn't Work With Linux Firefox 2.0

Comments Filter:
  • Kind of Misleading (Score:5, Insightful)

    by eldavojohn (898314) * <eldavojohn AT gmail DOT com> on Friday February 08, 2008 @09:37AM (#22348152) Journal

    Hotmail Doesn't Work With Linux Firefox 2.0
    That's a bit misleading. I used Hotmail on my Linux box last night. It was the regular web interface & worked fine.

    So there must be some new enhancements that maybe only subscribers get to use? Or perhaps these are more office tools that don't work in Firefox. Ok, well, before I go on, I wish someone somewhere would have pointed out that the Google apps are both free and work in Firefox. So that's sounding more and more like an easy choice/solution for Mitch Meyran's problems.

    I would posit, however, that since Google's apps are probably for the most part built using GWT I'd bet that Microsoft's equivalent will be based on Silverlight. I have no idea since I have not used this but I do know that Firefox's Silverlight plugin is in beta [mozillalinks.org]. What does surprise me is that my company allows me to use Outlook Web Interface which 1) works in Linux & 2) works in Firefox 2.0. Most surprisingly it's quite slick!

    So if I may state my opinion, you're probably suffering from Microsoft's attempt to assert its dominance by forcing you to use Explorer in Windows. So if they are forcing you into this ultimatum, you can either respond by bending to their will and falling into their Monopolistic strong arm practices or you can look for another solution that meets your needs. It would be an easy choice for me but you're the consumer with the money, it's your choice.
    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by ewoods (108845)
      I have problems with hotmail on windows with FF2. When the enhanced page first loads, it loops in a javascript and hangs the browser. This happens almost every time. And because the FF people apparently don't know how to show the "stop script" dialog and actually pause the script so I can click the button, it usually takes me several minutes to get into my hotmail with continuous clicking of the "stop script" button. It's made hotmail unusable, so I switched to yahoo... And not microsoft has the opport
      • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

        by Anonymous Coward
        Works fine for me, do you have any addons which may be interfering with it?

        Thats the problem with the world, without knowing the target environment, simple changes affect the end user experience in unpredictable ways. Now I am not saying go use IE, I personally hate IE and haven't used it in years, but without the plugins which can affect any aspect of the end user experience you can guarantee what your end user will see. But people will bitch all the same about things which are within their control to chan
    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by MC Negro (780194) *
      Agreed.

      This is a non-story, and these kind of "stories" are making Slashdot feel more and more like digg. Microsoft leveraging their popular products to artificially limit the functionality of Linux users? SRSLY? SOMEONE ALERT THE INTERNETZ!! WE'VE GOT BREAKING NEWS! Hotmail works fine from Linux + FireFox - I too tried it last night. It's got some deprecated functionality, but that's pretty much par for the course with Microsoft-oriented webapps under Linux.

      Also, exchanges like the following really d
      • by kripkenstein (913150) on Friday February 08, 2008 @10:33AM (#22348878) Homepage

        This is a non-story [...] Hotmail works fine from Linux + FireFox - I too tried it last night. It's got some deprecated functionality, but that's pretty much par for the course with Microsoft-oriented webapps under Linux.
        Um, what? So you're saying that there is nothing wrong with Microsoft serving limited functionality to Linux users, "that's just how it is"?

        This sort of thing is totally unacceptable. First, it might even be illegal as abuse of Microsoft's monopoly (yes, Hotmail 'works' on Linux, but it works better under Microsoft's OS). Second, there is no excuse for this. Last I checked, Gmail and Yahoo mail work perfectly fine, with all functionality, on Windows, OS X and Linux. As Microsoft has more money than both of these rivals, plainly it could support Firefox under Linux. But it prefers to leverage synergy with Windows (I almost choked on the marketspeak there, but you get what I mean).

        So no, that this is 'par for the course' with Microsoft does not mean it is ok, and certainly does not mean it is not worthy of a Slashdot story. It is 100% worthy, word needs to get out about this sort of thing.
        • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

          by revlayle (964221)
          NO ONE is saying that this is ok. Just saying that it is "non news" and IS "par for the course". Just because something isn't right, doesn't really make it news-worthy. Also, the artcle is a wee bit of FUD and wee bit of unprofessionalism. While the article write may be correct, they way it is presented should not even be condoned. Crap reporting... crap writing [insert slashdot stories joke here].
      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by NeutronCowboy (896098)

        This is a non-story, and these kind of "stories" are making Slashdot feel more and more like digg.

        I have to say that I've been reading about how slashdot isn't what it used to be ever since 5-digit UIDs were the domain of noobs. First people said people ought to head to The Well, then Kuro5hin, then Ars Technica, then Digg, then Ars Technica again... yet, here we are, still arguing, discussing and talking about what sites are better than Slashdot. I say that's a tremendous statement about how good Slashdot

    • by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 08, 2008 @10:23AM (#22348740)
      Remember when MS skewed pages being viewed by Opera, but if you told Opera to identify as IE, they'd work just fine? Opera won their lawsuit against MS for that. Perhaps another lawsuit should be in the works.
    • Yahoo (Score:5, Insightful)

      by jefu (53450) on Friday February 08, 2008 @10:24AM (#22348750) Homepage Journal

      Makes you wonder what will happen if Microsoft acquires Yahoo.

    • What does surprise me is that my company allows me to use Outlook Web Interface which 1) works in Linux & 2) works in Firefox 2.0. Most surprisingly it's quite slick!

      Meh - I use Evolution to do that (with the exchange-connector package). I still have the corp-issued 'doze laptop, but the only use it gets nowadays is the occasional rdesktop session for some ActiveX-based web tools that some items (e.g. one of our NetApp SAN rigs) stupidly insist on.

      (Now if I can only rig up Pidgin to replace Communicator, I'd be golden... :) )

      /P

    • While they work now, the right click menus in Hotmail never used to work on Firefox. In the same way the right click menus in OWA on Exchange 2003 don't work on Firefox. This article isn't about the whole thing not working - most functionality is still there, it's just less convenient to use, and there isn't a good reason for it these days other than Microsoft not wanting it to work properly in anything but IE.
  • Hotmail? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by rvw (755107) on Friday February 08, 2008 @09:37AM (#22348154)

    The solution is simple enough -- spoofing the User Agent that Firefox reports.
    Another solution is not to use Hotmail at all.
    • Re:Hotmail? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by threeturn (622824) on Friday February 08, 2008 @09:41AM (#22348208)
      Exactly

      ... and don't buy an Iphone and then crack it. If you love open technology don't kludge around products that try to keep you out - find alternatives.

      • Re:Hotmail? (Score:5, Insightful)

        by LKM (227954) on Friday February 08, 2008 @10:53AM (#22349238) Homepage
        There are alternatives to Hotmail. There are none to the iPhone (so far).
        • There is neither an alternative to the iPhone not a pressing need for it.
    • Re:Hotmail? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by eebra82 (907996) on Friday February 08, 2008 @09:41AM (#22348220) Homepage

      Another solution is not to use Hotmail at all.
      Not the easiest thing to do if you have had Hotmail for many years. Besides, Hotmail is not a bad email client at all. It's definitely not better than Gmail, but still versatile enough.
      • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

        by SQLGuru (980662)
        If you have had Hotmail for years, then you probably were grandfathered in to the Outlook plug in....I read my Hotmail in Outlook and have for YEARS. Of course, that's the Windows version of Outlook, so I don't really have the problem with the web client not working, either. But it makes for a much better interface than either web version.

        Layne
      • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

        by metalcoat (918779)

        I agree with your statement mostly but it is such a pain in the ass to switch if everything worked for you fine. Consider that my credit card company had a web interface that I always used to make payments suddenly added a whole new flash interface that would not work with firefox/linux. It was the correct version of flash, so I figured it was the credit card company's fault

        Long story short, I complained to the company and within a week or two it was fixed without me doing a thing. (no updates)

        P.S. Th

      • by bkr1_2k (237627)
        Changing email addresses is no more difficult than changing underwear. You send a message to all the people you care to receive email from, and you're done. Just like changing jobs gives you a new email address, but the same vendors know how to reach you because you actually want them to be able to reach you.

        Archiving your old mail is certainly more difficult, but not impossible.
    • Re:Hotmail? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by justthinkit (954982) <floyd@just-think-it.com> on Friday February 08, 2008 @10:18AM (#22348678) Homepage Journal
      I think this is what Microsoft wants now. There was a time when they wanted plenty of email eyeballs -- so they bought Hotmail. Now I think it is a profitless headache to them and has no upside -- so time to slowly kill it.

      Furthering my theory is the fact that the invites YahooGroups lists send to msn.com addresses are bounced as spam. Why would Microsoft do this? There is of course no logical reason, nor any civilized reason. One could pretend this is a competitive thing -- reject the competitor's attempt to grow their user base. More realistically msn.com bouncing perfectly reasonable email will simply cause people with msn.com addresses to abandon those addresses -- success from Microsoft's point of view.

      Microsoft doesn't need people who only email. They want to push people "forward", into more "advanced" features like Live -- where they can make some actual cash. Email is passe, so why have hundreds of millions of mailboxes to worry about? Of course, this is why they dispose of user email if said user is unable to access their mailbox for a remarkably short amount of time -- a month, IIRC. I used to set reminders so that this wouldn't happen to my backup hotmail.com accounts but now I just let it happen -- useless hotmail.com mailboxes being toasted by a useless company seems appropriately bizarre.
    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by shawn(at)fsu (447153)
      Yeah I was wondering is this the best solution? I've never spoofed the User Agent in Firefox but if you spoof it to IE then all those sites (net craft) that determine browser usage would see IE as having more market % than it really does. Am I right or do I not know what I'm talking about?
  • by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 08, 2008 @09:39AM (#22348168)
    Just use IE for Linux like anybody else, ok? You bloody geeks..
  • by Highroller (655558) on Friday February 08, 2008 @09:39AM (#22348172)
    It doesn't work with the PlayStation 3's (non-Linux OS mode) browser either.
    • by AmaDaden (794446)
      That browser is using Firefox's Gecko core. Or that's at least what it tells me when I go to http://www.ipchicken.com/ [ipchicken.com]. I forget what version they are using, I think it is the same as the one in FF 2.
  • by Nemilar (173603) on Friday February 08, 2008 @09:39AM (#22348174) Homepage
    Not only does this wreak of desperation on the part of Microsoft, but I have to wonder how in the world they thought this wasn't going to come out? Or they just didn't care?

    "It's our email service, you have to use our browser." Fair enough - you've already driven these users away from your browser, now they're going to go ahead and move their email accounts, too. You're just alienating further those who have already realized that the Microsoft way isn't necessarily the best way.

    And hey, Microsoft - people tell their friends about better services. Your competitor's services. How do you think Firefox is spreading so fast? It ain't 'cause of no "Where do you want to go today" commercials. I'm betting Gmail is going to see a nice surge in new accounts because of this.
    • by gazbo (517111) on Friday February 08, 2008 @09:47AM (#22348302)
      Or alternatively they have a browser sniffing script that whitelists known-good browser setups, and FF2/Linux isn't tested and known to work? Or that their FF detection is too strict and so accidentally excludes UA strings that have slight differences?

      Why assume it's malicious, when this sort of issue is well known to anyone who's ever tried to support multiple browsers through UA sniffing?

    • by SQLGuru (980662)
      Actually, it just says Firefox under Linux. So MS has lost those users on the OS already, they probably don't care if they lose them on the e-mail. Those running Windows (even if using Firefox) are still a source of revenue. Linux Firefox users are probably the most likely group to be blocking advertisments, so even that revenue stream is pretty dry. Why waste resources trying to get blood from that turnip?

      Layne
    • by Chemicalscum (525689) on Friday February 08, 2008 @10:01AM (#22348480) Journal
      Yes if Microsoft is prepared to to use this deliberate ploy to degrade the usability of Firefox on Hotmail, then it raises the question what is MS likely to do if they manage to acquire Yahoo.

      This sort of behaviour could prove to be counter-productive for Microshaft (I normally disapprove of silly joke name calling of MS, but this is a case where they deserve that epithet). If I worked for Google, I would be carefully documenting this anti-competitive behaviour of MS in web services, in order to build up an anti-trust case against MS's takeover of Yahoo.

      • by boomka (599257)
        No need to build the case, just let MS buy Yahoo, this will be a total financial disaster for MS.
        If they really buy Yahoo for the price they offered, they will suddenly become a few years closer to irrelevance.
        • No need to build the case, just let MS buy Yahoo, this will be a total financial disaster for MS.

          It will be a most stupendous mushroom cloud...
    • Not only does this wreak of desperation on the part of Microsoft

      I don't know anymore. I am starting to think that this just pure incompetence and lack of proper cross-platform testing.
    • I know that it sounds like MS is being pointedly stupid, but if you think about it, what circumstances would be necessary for this to make sense?

      Well, one set of circumstances that I can think of is this: One way that the NSA/CIA/FBI/NewBrownShirts can spy on your internet usage and email is to put a back door in the browser. If the mail service you use forces you to use that browser they also get to look at your mail. The forced browser mode of operation ensures that the spyware also sees what else you do
  • by Ethanol-fueled (1125189) * on Friday February 08, 2008 @09:39AM (#22348178) Homepage Journal
    ...Another article by another clueless user. He could have just used Internet Explorer for Linux.

    Sheesh.
    • Re: (Score:2, Funny)

      ...and a big "WHOOOOOSH!" to the fella who modded that "flamebait" within seconds of its posting. I know it's early, fellas, but can't you at least parse the whole post?
    • Re: (Score:2, Funny)

      by mweather (1089505)
      You joke, but it does work just fine in IE under wine.
  • Shades of Dos ain't done till Lotus won't run.
  • by macsforever2001 (32278) on Friday February 08, 2008 @09:41AM (#22348214) Homepage

    Spoofing the user agent is no solution, even if it does work. That's what Micro$oft wants you to do so that it appears that more people are using IE than actually are. The numbers game is far more important than the number of users who actually use Firefox.

    The best solution is to dump hotmail and move to a better free email client like Gmail or Yahoo.

    • by sholden (12227)
      Except that the work around wasn't to set the User-Agent to claim to be IE, but to claim to be a different flavour if Firefox.
    • At first I thought the $ in 'Micro$oft' was a typo but then I realized it was a cutting, insightful bit of repartee that illuminates the Microsoft Corporation in a way that transcends rhetoric.
    • by McDutchie (151611)

      The best solution is to dump hotmail and move to a better free email client like Gmail or Yahoo.

      No, the best solution is to not use a so-called "free email client" at all, and get a real email account with a real ISP. There is no such thing as a free lunch, you always end up paying for it in one way or another. The difference is that with a so-called "free" email account, you have no control over the way you pay, and you might -- no: will -- eventually end up being fucked over.

  • Not surprising (Score:5, Informative)

    by Oxy the moron (770724) on Friday February 08, 2008 @09:42AM (#22348238)

    IIRC, Outlook Web Access has done this for at least the past 5-6 years. Load OWA in Firefox (Windows or Linux), and it looks all choppy with bad frames and images and such. Change the User Agent, and it magically looks almost identical to the same page in IE!

    I find it funny that Microsoft goes to these ends... what do you gain by doing that? Do they claim it's because other browers don't work?

    • by codepunk (167897)
      I find it funny that Microsoft goes to these ends... what do you gain by doing that?

      Leveraging your market position in one product "Exchange/OWA" to gain market position in
      another "IE"...simple really

       
      • Leveraging your market position in one product "Exchange/OWA" to gain market position in
        another "IE"...simple really

        Back when this OWA issue first came about, Firefox (which wasn't even called Firefox at the time, I don't think) was still mostly relegated to the nerdy group. Most people using Firefox as an alternative to IE actually knew about the User Agent, and were rather apt at changing it so they could still access OWA normally.

        Fast-forward to today, and more people are using Firefox, but could probably just as easily get around the OWA issue but asking the guy that's been doing it for 5-6 years. It just seems

        • by jedidiah (1196)
          ...sounds like we need an extension to set the user agent on a site specific basis (assuming that doesn't exist already). This could work like NoAd and come with a list of sites that need this particular workaround so the end users wouldn't even have to mess with the problem except for installing the extension.

          Even that could be done by distributions like Ubuntu by default.
    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by gad_zuki! (70830)
      >Load OWA in Firefox (Windows or Linux), and it looks all choppy with bad frames and images and such.

      Err no. OWA for non-ie browsers is simplified. OWA for IE is pretty much IE-only. You can change the agent string but then its buggy as all hell. Granted, MS could go out of its way to make the non-ie version more robust, but as a corporation they would be helping their competitors.

      So theyre not claiming other browsers dont work, but that if you dont use their product youre going to get the simplified p
    • by initialE (758110)
      I've tried spoofing IE to OWA on an earlier Firefox maybe about a year back. It wasn't pretty, alot of things broke. Have things changed since then?
  • by spyrochaete (707033) on Friday February 08, 2008 @09:45AM (#22348270) Homepage Journal
    This sounds very much like the Opera issue on msn.com [theregister.co.uk] a few years ago. Opera suddenly couldn't render the site correctly, so the programmers investigated, spoofed the user agent from "Opera" to the nonexistent browser "Oprah", and suddenly the page rendered perfectly well.
  • Nor with Opera (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Badbone (1159483) on Friday February 08, 2008 @09:45AM (#22348276)
    I've found that Hotmail doesn't work too well with Opera either. And a change in the user agent string doesn't help.

    The only way to reply to messages is to choose "plain text" instead of rich text. Rich text is the default, but you are not able to type anything. So, choose plain text. Except that when you do that, a random half of the time, Hotmail erases your entire message.

    In order to use Hotmail with any ability with Opera, Ive had to develop a several step workaround, just to reply to email. Thats one (more) reason why the upcoming Yahoo/MS merger worries me. If Yahoo mail goes the way of Hotmail, my workaround will move from occasional to every single damn time.

  • by blackbirdwork (821859) on Friday February 08, 2008 @09:49AM (#22348320)
    Who uses hotmail anyway?
  • In the story about Linux having .08% on the desktop I commented that there is no way to determine Linux (or any other OSS software) useage since its license says it can be freely distributed, that my one download of Mandriva is now installed on half dozen friends' computers as well as my own.

    It was answered with "User Agent".

    I answered that with "spoofing" noting the number of moronically designed web sites that check the user agent and if it isn't IE on Windows tells you to "upgrade to a modern browser".

    I
    • by codepunk (167897)
      No, I doubt very much that it has anything to do with the developers.

      It is a simple case of marketing driving the development process.

      It is called leveraging your position in one product, in this case hotmail to better
      your position in another in this case "IE"....

      In case you have not been around the last 10-15 years, they are masters at this.
  • The writer concludes that the webmail interface has been artificially limited by basic user-agent sniffing.
    Why would the server need to sniff the network for data thats being sent directly to that server willingly by the browser?
  • by Doc Ruby (173196) on Friday February 08, 2008 @09:57AM (#22348450) Homepage Journal
    This exact disaster is exactly why Microsoft cannot be allowed to extend its monopoly to absorb Yahoo. When Yahoo fails the way Hotmail now has with Firefox, the way Hotmail did when MS tried to cut it over to Windows servers, the Internet will take a major hit. Even if it drives consumers to GMail, that just reinforces Google's dominance, without credible competition.

    The Internet itself is a hothouse for competition. The global environment for megacorps, though, is precisely the opposite. When the business drives the apps, which it always will at that scale, the Internet's flexibility will become a hothouse for monopolies. Since the entire world depends on the Internet, that Internet monoculture must be stopped. That's why people have governments: to stop the ambitious among them from exploiting advantages that hurt everyone else.

    There is every evidence that Microsoft's control of Yahoo would be a disaster, and no evidence that it would be good for anyone but Microsoft (and maybe the Yahoo shareholders they buy off). If the deal goes through, that's the proof that the people need to change our governments to actually protect us, instead of serving these monopolies.
    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by VisualStim (130062)
      ... Microsoft cannot be allowed to extend its monopoly ...
       
      ... that just reinforces Google's dominance, without credible competition.

      So, um, how do you have dominance over a monopoly?
      • by Doc Ruby (173196)
        Duopoly is effectively monopoly. Oligarchy is the same problem as monarchy from the consumer's point of view.
  • by Tsu Dho Nimh (663417) <abacaxi&hotmail,com> on Friday February 08, 2008 @10:00AM (#22348474)
    Firefox, Ubuntu ... no problem opening it and getting mail. If there were enhancements, I don't care. It's a mail system, not a video game.
    • Not only that, the POP server works too. I've been using Apple mail (and thunderbird on the other machine) to check my hotmail (msn) accounts for a long while..

      Sounds like the article writer should have gotten off his high horse and asked what was involved in getting hotmail to work with Outlook express.

      Instead he throws a tantrum like a little child...

  • by myxiplx (906307) on Friday February 08, 2008 @10:05AM (#22348540)
    Sounds like something else that could do with being pointed out to the EU. Using their web presence to artificially tie people to their desktop monopoly. Yes, we all expect this from Microsoft, but it really shouldn't be allowed.
  • by Thelasko (1196535)
    My fiancée uses Hotmail and has never complained while checking her account on my Ubuntu 64-bit machine. It even worked with the new design (windows live hotmail). I was always amazed when she did so because I figured my computer would burst into flames if it ever went to a Microsoft site. Did this just happen? Like this week?
  • There is absolutely no web control or feature (other than ActiveX controls) that will work on IE but not on FF. They can not possibly be doing something so advanced that it requires a special javascript call that is only possible in IE.

    This is either laziness or maliciousness. They should if nothing else use their user agent sniffing to determine which browser and then send you the appropriate UI... if the BETA UI only works on IE RIGHT NOW but they plan to make it work on FF and others SOON, then this is t
  • "DOS ain't done till Lotus won't run . . ."
  • by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 08, 2008 @10:20AM (#22348696)
    I honestly think that so-called "web developers" should be banned from ever looking at the user-agent string. Example: My bank's website works on every browser I've tried it with, except Firefox on OpenBSD. (Yes, it works on Firefox on Linux.) This is kind of ridiculous, so I sent in an email about it. I got some ignorant tech support email back clearly not understanding the problem.

    Web "developers" are simply dumb. That's all. Yes, this suddenly turns into a huge story because it's Microsoft. But, even in that case, I wouldn't be surprised if this is just somebody they hired in a low level position being ignorant.
  • Hotmail renders badly with Firefox for me. The font is too big the first time I log in. Refreshing the page fixes this but it's quite annoying. It only happens on the Linux build too.

    The point is moot though since I only use Hotmail when I'm signing up for a forum or a competition. I really don't want my email filled up with fake lottery emails and rubbish written in (what appears to be) Spanish.
  • by AppleTwoGuru (830505) on Friday February 08, 2008 @10:40AM (#22348996) Homepage
    Microsoft has not worked well with anyone. Even though they are a company based in the United States and Bill Gates and Steve Ballmer are U.S. citizens, they have a philosophy and mantra that goes against the principles of democracy, against the very foundations of their country that establish freedom and opportunities for ALL people. They simply want to take advantage of numbers, not grow a society in the freedoms many forefathers have fought for, but one that would continue to give them lots and lots of money. They are selfish, greedy, and self-serving. All they care about is getting people to use their software, so they continue their money stream. They don't care who they exclude, they don't have to care about the quality of their services, because they have a monopoly bought from the US-government through the avenues that allow special interests to take power away from the people and give it to the people who have a lot of money, no matter if that money was earned honestly, or not.

    If the way Microsoft did business is very good, right, and moral, then why not teach this to our kids in our schools? Lacking in creativity? getting bad grades? Pay off your teacher. Buy your way through school through manipulation, power, and influence. Isn't that what Microsoft has done in the real world, except they have bought their way through the government enough to dispell public scrutiny? If we let Microsoft do this, are we not doing our kids a disservice because we are not teaching them the way the world is? Maybe the correct way is not democracy, but to make as much money as possible, any way you can, buying your way through life, and forgetting people who have less power than you?

    If we would let Bill Gates and Steve Ballmer take over the world, I would have to say, your free speech would be removed, you would have to pay to post your words here on Slashdot, and your words would of course be censored, and only speech that would glorify Microsoft's cause as long as Bill and Steve could use it propaganda for their empire. They are no different than one country trying to take over the world. There are governments in their way and they will be dealt with accordingly.

    Your choice. Freedom or Bondage. I want freedom. In everything I do, I do those things that promote those ideals. In regards to computing, I use a lot of Open Source software, like Linux and Mac OS X, Open Office, and Firefox (stuff Bill Gates and Steve Ballmer do not want me to use because it does not suit their purposes) not closed source garbage, like MS-Windows, Microsoft Office, or Internet Explorer (stuff that would lock me in to giving Bill Gates and Steve Ballmer perpetual money without them having to earn it from me.)
    • by FudRucker (866063)
      mod parent up ^ insightful...
    • Re: (Score:2, Troll)

      by pandrijeczko (588093)
      I use a lot of Open Source software, like Linux and Mac OS X

      Erm, last time I looked, Mac OS X wasn't Open Source. Apple and "your mate" Steve Jobs may be able to employ hordes of marketing people to give him a more friendly face than Gates or Ballmer, but Apple are still are a corporation that wants to make as much money as possible from the products they sell and, where possible, continue to lock you, the user, into their way of doing things - hence the DRM lock-in of iPod and iTunes and the mobile vendo

  • When looking through the Firehose to select articles, Please, check the source. If something bashes Microsoft or the RIAA or MPAA don't simply mod up. Read the article and verify it. I know this kind of stuff happens occasionally, (I'm not that new here) but this is the second time this week an article has been almost completely wrong. I understand if there are minor inaccuracies, but this is ridiculous.
  • Hotmail doesn't work on firefox 2.0 on linux, so what? Who's loss is that? Isn't that worse for hotmail, less site visitors etc? Does it mean more gmail?
  • Use the "classic" version of Hotmail -- worked fine with Firefox 2.0.0.11 about 2 minutes ago. How useful are these "enhancements" anyway?
  • by pandrijeczko (588093) on Friday February 08, 2008 @11:00AM (#22349374)
    So Firefox has problems with Hotmail? So what's the problem?

    I've sent 20+ Gmail invites to Hotmail-using friends of mine complaining about endless spam, the slowness of it and the sudden removal of POP3 support. Not one of them since has ever sent me an email from a "hotmail.com" email address.

    So start using up those 99 Gmail invites you can send out to "the great unwashed" - once they see Gmail, they won't go back and then Hotmail not working with Firefox won't be a problem any more because Hotmail will be dead.

  • by nguy (1207026) on Friday February 08, 2008 @12:22PM (#22350708)
    Simply don't use Hotmail. Take your traffic to services that don't play such stupid tricks.
  • by AlgorithMan (937244) on Friday February 08, 2008 @01:57PM (#22352166) Homepage
    in may 2007 MS improved maps.live.com (added higher resolution images)
    the service didn't work with firefox under linux either, unless you fooled it by using "user agent switcher"!

    here's the link (in german though)
    http://www.heise.de/newsticker/foren/S-Geht-ueberhaupt-nicht-unter-Linux-grundlos-und-irrefuehrende-Fehlermeldung/forum-117910/msg-12830126/read/

    if you ask me, this cries for a lawsuit for anti-competitive behaviour...
  • by Incster (1002638) on Friday February 08, 2008 @02:20PM (#22352462)
    I am surprised that anyone noticed.

"Well, social relevance is a schtick, like mysteries, social relevance, science fiction..." -- Art Spiegelman

Working...