httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Marc Slemko <ma...@worldgate.com>
Subject Re: Compression via content negotiation
Date Thu, 03 Dec 1998 18:21:59 GMT
On Thu, 3 Dec 1998 TOKILEY@aol.com wrote:

> As usual... I was only trying to help out here
> and you get it back in the face.
> As you are so fond of telling people yourself...
> If you don't like it... don't use it... other people do.
> 

Erm... no.

First, your message was entirely advertising spew with little basis in
reality.  I would like to see your "client independent" solution work with
lynx.  Heck, your "client independent" solution won't even work with my
version of Netscape of IE!

Second, you have to learn not to shout.  Writing half of your ad in ALL
CAPS makes it look really cheap.

Third, you make it sound like this is just some company you happened
across and you liked their products.  This doesn't seem to likely to me. 
Interesting that the "CTO" of this company is listed as being Kevin J.
Kiley and your email address is tokiley@aol.com.  It is beyond rude to
pretend to be a third party that just happened across a product when, in
fact, you have some relationship to the company.

Fourth, this compression scheme doesn't appear to be as efficient as gzip.

Fifth, you claim that this removes the need to store two copies on the
server, elimiates all problems with search engines, etc.  Bullshit.  It
only works if the client happens to support the crap it needs to decode
it, plus you are missing the fact that few search engines will index a
page based only on META tags any more.  All your compression scheme does
is declare "all clients will support this, period".  Gee, I can do that
today without any need for some silly program.

So, to summarize: now you know that this false testimonial crap isn't
wanted here.  This is not a public forum, and if you can't live with it
then get out.


Mime
View raw message