> Subject: <IMAGE>? <TT> == <I>? toHell(NS)
> Date: 26 Oct 1996 17:13:13 +0200
> From: davidp@earthlink.net ("David Perrell")
>
> Charles Peyton Taylor wrote:
> > I've noticed that Netscape honors an <IMAGE> tag, like <IMG>
>
> Peter Flynn wrote:
> > ... IMAGE is quite a good way to
> > show Nutscope users a picture no-one else can see, though :-)
>
> And also a way to put images on their site that don't show up in other
> browsers.
>
> Netscape has implemented MS's <TT> tag -- as functionally equivalent to
> the <I> tag! They use this tag in their latest JavaScript documentation
> (some text <TT>italictext</I> some text) to cause IE to render all text
> beyond a certain point in a fixed-width font.
>
> There is also an undocumented JavaScript method NS uses to trigger an
> error message when IE users try to use the TOC window on the NS
> website.
>
> Here is a company that apparently considers dubious new features an
> acceptable substitute for reliable and consistent functionality... the
> company that gave us FRAMEs and JavaScript but never bothered to
> implement either in complete accordance with their own documentation...
> a company that cries "foul" when a competitor's product gets better
> reviews... and yet they have the time and resources to spend on this
> kind of adolescent crap?
>
> Netscape is bloating a flawed product with functions designed for no
> other purpose than to make their competition look bad. Who gains?
> ..who pays? ...who stinks?
>
> Netscape motto: If you can't make a better product than your
> competition, make your competition look bad at your customers' expense.
>
> David Perrell
>