Internet Explorer 8 first 2 bugs

[GTalbot]

[Followup-to set to alt.html]

Hello all,

Yesterday, I reported a crash bug (credits must go to Alan Gresley,
Antonio Bueno and Brett Merkey for discovering, reporting and figuring
out this bug) to Microsoft people. Later that same day, I got emails
from Microsoft and a few visits from an user agent with the "MSIE 8"
string. I double-checked carefully (Reverse DNS lookup and complete
WHOIS lookup) and I can say with absolute certainty that it was
Microsoft people in Redmond following up on that crash in IE 7
(involving button[value="x"]). In fact, I've got over 400 hits since
January 15th 2008 from such user agent, always with the same first 7
digits as IP addresses. I also checked with some trustworthy people
(at webstandards.org and with D. Massy); the machines used to visit my
IE 7 browser bugs webpage were also very well equiped (SLCC1, .NET
3.5, Origami Experience 2, Windows Vista 64 bits), high-powered ones.

So, even though Internet Explorer 8 is still in alpha or pre-beta
state and not available to the public, I can say with certainty that
IE 8 still has not fixed 2 bugs related to favicon.ico

105 Bugs in Internet Explorer 7 for Windows
http://www.gtalbot.org/BrowserBugsSection/MSIE7Bugs/#bug105

Bugs in Internet Explorer 8 for Windows
http://www.gtalbot.org/BrowserBugsSection/MSIE8Bugs/

Regards, Gérard

[Followup-to set to alt.html]

 

[cwdjrxyz]

[Followup-to set to alt.html]

Hello all,

Yesterday, I reported a crash bug (credits must go to Alan Gresley,
Antonio Bueno and Brett Merkey for discovering, reporting and figuring
out this bug) to Microsoft people. Later that same day, I got emails
from Microsoft and a few visits from an user agent with the "MSIE 8"
string. I double-checked carefully (Reverse DNS lookup and complete
WHOIS lookup) and I can say with absolute certainty that it was
Microsoft people in Redmond following up on that crash in IE 7
(involving button[value="x"]). In fact, I've got over 400 hits since
January 15th 2008 from such user agent, always with the same first 7
digits as IP addresses. I also checked with some trustworthy people
(at webstandards.org and with D. Massy); the machines used to visit my
IE 7 browser bugs webpage were also very well equiped (SLCC1, .NET
3.5, Origami Experience 2, Windows Vista 64 bits), high-powered ones.

So, even though Internet Explorer 8 is still in alpha or pre-beta
state and not available to the public, I can say with certainty that
IE 8 still has not fixed 2 bugs related to favicon.ico

105 Bugs in Internet Explorer 7 for Windowshttp://www.gtalbot.org/BrowserBugsSection/MSIE7Bugs/#bug105

Bugs in Internet Explorer 8 for Windowshttp://www.gtalbot.org/BrowserBugsSection/MSIE8Bugs/

To me the main question is if IE8 will support application/xhtml+xml
at least semi-properly. If not, nothing else matters much - IE is
still hopelessly outdated. Nearly all browsers with much general web
usage have been able to support application/xhtml+xml for quite a
while now, although there are a few bugs for some of them that usually
can be worked around or avoided. It seems that all new browsers should
support everything from W3C html 3.2 through xhtml 1.1 well at the
very least. If Microsoft does not have the talent to do this, they do
have plenty of money as evidenced by the huge amount they are offering
in an attempt to get Yahoo. They could easily hire Opera or the
Mozilla project to write a decent browser for them. or even hire some
programmers away from these organizations to head the Microsoft
browser development. However, I suspect the difference here is that
management at the highest levels in Microsoft thinks they can gain
more control of the ad market by spending a fortune to buy Yahoo, but
are misers when it comes to in house browser development - why should
we spend much, or anything, on browser development when IE browsers
are the most used and browsers do not make money for us type of
attitude.

 

[Chaddy2222]

[Followup-to set to alt.html]

Hello all,

Yesterday, I reported a crash bug (credits must go to Alan Gresley,
Antonio Bueno and Brett Merkey for discovering, reporting and figuring
out this bug) to Microsoft people. Later that same day, I got emails
from Microsoft and a few visits from an user agent with the "MSIE 8"
string. I double-checked carefully (Reverse DNS lookup and complete
WHOIS lookup) and I can say with absolute certainty that it was
Microsoft people in Redmond following up on that crash in IE 7
(involving button[value="x"]). In fact, I've got over 400 hits since
January 15th 2008 from such user agent, always with the same first 7
digits as IP addresses. I also checked with some trustworthy people
(at webstandards.org and with D. Massy); the machines used to visit my
IE 7 browser bugs webpage were also very well equiped (SLCC1, .NET
3.5, Origami Experience 2, Windows Vista 64 bits), high-powered ones.

So, even though Internet Explorer 8 is still in alpha or pre-beta
state and not available to the public, I can say with certainty that
IE 8 still has not fixed 2 bugs related to favicon.ico

105 Bugs in Internet Explorer 7 for Windowshttp://www.gtalbot.org/BrowserBugsSection/MSIE7Bugs/#bug105

Bugs in Internet Explorer 8 for Windowshttp://www.gtalbot.org/BrowserBugsSection/MSIE8Bugs/

To me the main question is if IE8 will support application/xhtml+xml
at least semi-properly. If not, nothing else matters much - IE is
still hopelessly outdated. Nearly all browsers with much general web
usage have been able to support application/xhtml+xml for quite a
while now, although there are a few bugs for some of them that usually
can be worked around or avoided. It seems that all new browsers should
support everything  from W3C html 3.2 through xhtml 1.1 well at the
very least. If Microsoft does not have the talent to do this, they do
have plenty of money as evidenced by the huge amount they are offering
in an attempt to get Yahoo. They could easily hire Opera or the
Mozilla project to write a decent browser for them. or even hire some
programmers away from these organizations to head the Microsoft
browser development. However, I suspect the difference here is that
management at the highest levels in Microsoft thinks they can gain
more control of the ad market by spending a fortune to buy Yahoo, but
are misers when it comes to in house browser development - why should
we spend much, or anything, on browser development when IE browsers
are the most used and browsers do not make money for us type of
attitude.

Well lets face it.
XHTML is not really very benificial for most web pages anyway.
Also the W3C from what I know are not going to do any more work on
XHTML they are working on HTML 5 instead.

 

[Toby A Inkster]

Also the W3C from what I know are not going to do any more work on XHTML
they are working on HTML 5 instead.

That is not the case -- although the W3C has now blessed HTML 5, work on
XHTML 2.0 proceeds as planned. Whatsmore, HTML 5 itself does define both
an "HTML syntax" and "XHTML syntax".

 

[Dylan Parry]

So, even though Internet Explorer 8 is still in alpha or pre-beta
state and not available to the public, I can say with certainty that
IE 8 still has not fixed 2 bugs related to favicon.ico

No you can't. You can't even say that there are bugs in browser that
visited your site and claimed to be IE8 as you cannot prove that a bug
exists if you can't even see the software that has the supposed bug.

Even if it were IE8, as you say it's in *alpha*, so there are bound to
be bugs. That's the whole purpose of the alpha stage.


--
Dylan Parry
http://electricfreedom.org | http://webpageworkshop.co.uk

The opinions stated above are not necessarily representative of
those of my cats. All opinions expressed are entirely your own.

 

[Alan Gresley]

So, even though Internet Explorer 8 is still in alpha or pre-beta
state and not available to the public, I can say with certainty that
IE 8 still has not fixed 2 bugs related to favicon.ico

No you can't. You can't even say that there are bugs in browser that
visited your site and claimed to be IE8 as you cannot prove that a bug
exists if you can't even see the software that has the supposed bug. [...]
Dylan Parryhttp://electricfreedom.org|http://webpageworkshop.co.uk

Yes you can. A log file is a log file. The only thing that needs to be
proved is if the UA was IE8. I have had visits from IE8 on my site.
One IP addressed used and when checked give this information.

IP address: 131.107.0.102
Host name: tide532.microsoft.com
Country: UNITED STATES

Location of IP address 131.107.0.102:
Redmond, WA in UNITED STATES (US).

My log file has:

131.107.0.102 - - [31/Jan/2008:16:23:11 -0700] "GET css-class.com/test/
bugs/ie/ HTTP/1.1" 200 1767 "http://www.gtalbot.org/BrowserBugsSection/
MSIE7Bugs/" "Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 8.0; Windows NT 6.0;
SLCC1; .NET CLR 2.0.50727; Media Center PC 5.0; .NET CLR 3.0.04506)"

131.107.0.102 - - [31/Jan/2008:16:23:12 -0700] "GET css-class.com/
favicon.ico HTTP/1.1" 200 1406 "-" "Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 8.0;
Windows NT 6.0; SLCC1; .NET CLR 2.0.50727; Media Center PC 5.0; .NET
CLR 3.0.04506)"

http://css-class.com/test/bugs/ie/

This directory shows just a list of files. There is no index page here
but IE8 is indeed requesting the favicon icon.

What UA anyway claims to be IE8 and request favicon icons? I would
find it bazaar to suggest that someone is spoofing IE8 for fun.

The first page visited showing the logs:

131.107.0.102 - - [31/Jan/2008:16:23:13 -0700] "GET css-class.com/test/
bugs/ie/body-width.htm HTTP/1.1" 200 1048 "http://css-class.com/test/
bugs/ie/" "Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 8.0; Windows NT 6.0;
SLCC1; .NET CLR 2.0.50727; Media Center PC 5.0; .NET CLR 3.0.04506)"
131.107.0.102 - - [31/Jan/2008:16:23:18 -0700] "GET css-class.com/test/
bugs/ie/body-width.htm HTTP/1.1" 200 1048 "http://css-class.com/test/
bugs/ie/" "Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 8.0; Windows NT 6.0;
SLCC1; .NET CLR 2.0.50727; Media Center PC 5.0; .NET CLR 3.0.04506)"
131.107.0.102 - - [31/Jan/2008:16:23:23 -0700] "GET css-class.com/test/
bugs/ie/body-width.htm HTTP/1.1" 200 1048 "http://css-class.com/test/
bugs/ie/" "Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 8.0; Windows NT 6.0;
SLCC1; .NET CLR 2.0.50727; Media Center PC 5.0; .NET CLR 3.0.04506)"
131.107.0.102 - - [31/Jan/2008:16:23:25 -0700] "GET css-class.com/test/
bugs/ie/body-width.htm HTTP/1.1" 200 1048 "http://css-class.com/test/
bugs/ie/" "Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 8.0; Windows NT 6.0;
SLCC1; .NET CLR 2.0.50727; Media Center PC 5.0; .NET CLR 3.0.04506)"

http://css-class.com/test/bugs/ie/body-width.htm

If a UA passes the test on this page. The page does not have to be
refreshed three times.

Another log:

131.107.0.102 - - [23/Jan/2008:10:58:31 -0700] "GET css-class.com/test/
css/selectors/ie7hacktargetingopera.htm HTTP/1.1" 200 3647 "-"
"Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 7.0; Windows NT 6.0; WOW64; SLCC1; .NET
CLR 2.0.50727; .NET CLR 3.0.04506; .NET CLR 1.1.4322; InfoPath.2; .NET
CLR 3.5.21022)"
131.107.0.75 - - [23/Jan/2008:10:59:24 -0700] "GET css-class.com/test/
css/selectors/ie7hacktargetingopera.htm HTTP/1.1" 200 3647 "-"
"Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 8.0; Windows NT 5.2; .NET CLR
1.1.4322; .NET CLR 2.0.50727)"
131.107.0.104 - - [23/Jan/2008:11:01:05 -0700] "GET css-class.com/test/
css/selectors/ie7hacktargetingopera.htm HTTP/1.1" 200 3647 "-"
"Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.0; en-US; rv:1.9b2) Gecko/
2007121120 Firefox/3.0b2"
131.107.0.102 - - [23/Jan/2008:11:01:38 -0700] "GET css-class.com/test/
css/selectors/ie7hacktargetingopera.htm" "Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U;
Windows NT 6.0; en-US) AppleWebKit/523.15 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/
3.0 Safari/523.15"
131.107.0.104 - - [23/Jan/2008:11:01:50 -0700] "GET css-class.com/test/
css/selectors/ie7hacktargetingopera.htm" "Opera/9.25 (Windows NT 6.0;
U; en)"
131.107.0.104 - - [23/Jan/2008:11:04:35 -0700] "GET css-class.com/test/
css/selectors/ie7hacktargetingopera.htm HTTP/1.1" 200 3647 "-" "Opera/
9.25 (Windows NT 6.0; U; en)"
131.107.0.104 - - [23/Jan/2008:11:04:35 -0700] "GET css-class.com/test/
css/selectors/ie7hacktargetingopera.htm" "Opera/9.25 (Windows NT 6.0;
U; en)"
131.107.0.75 - - [23/Jan/2008:11:17:43 -0700] "GET css-class.com/test/
css/selectors/ie7hacktargetingopera.htm HTTP/1.1" 200 3647 "-" "Opera/
9.50 (Windows NT 5.1; U; en)"
131.107.0.75 - - [23/Jan/2008:11:17:43 -0700] "GET css-class.com/test/
css/selectors/ie7hacktargetingopera.htm" "Opera/9.50 (Windows NT 5.1;
U; en)"
131.107.0.101 - - [23/Jan/2008:20:06:34 -0700] "GET css-class.com/test/
css/selectors/ie7hacktargetingopera.htm HTTP/1.1" 200 3647 "-"
"Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 7.0; Windows NT 6.0; SLCC1; .NET CLR
2.0.50727; .NET CLR 3.0.04506; .NET CLR 1.1.4322; InfoPath.2)"
131.107.0.101 - - [23/Jan/2008:20:33:41 -0700] "GET css-class.com/test/
css/selectors/ie7hacktargetingopera.htm HTTP/1.1" 200 3647 "-"
"Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 7.0; Windows NT 6.0; SLCC1; .NET CLR
2.0.50727; .NET CLR 3.0.04506; .NET CLR 1.1.4322; InfoPath.2)"
131.107.0.102 - - [23/Jan/2008:20:49:47 -0700] "GET css-class.com/test/
css/selectors/ie7hacktargetingopera.htm HTTP/1.1" 200 3647 "-"
"Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 7.0; Windows NT 5.2; .NET CLR
1.1.4322; .NET CLR 2.0.50727; .NET CLR 3.0.04506.30; MS-RTC LM 8; .NET
CLR 3.0.04506.648; .NET CLR 3.5.21022; InfoPath.2)"

From the way this page was visited it would indicate that IE8 has the
same bug as IE7. There even time there (13 minutes and almost 3 hours
gaps) to have a coffee and discuss the implications before moving onto
another machine to test further. The last log has "MS-RTC LM 8." Is
that IE8 in IE7 mode?

Strange that that page was visited the same day that I wrote a private
email to a IE team member suggesting that they may want to test IE8
with this page.

I know of other ways to test IE8 and all by the evidence that I will
get in my log files. It would be so much easier if the IE team and the
development community wasn't playing the game and just worked
together.

Alan Gresley

 

[GTalbot]

No you can't. You can't even say that there are bugs in browser that
visited your site

Dylan,

Requesting /favicon.ico automatically is one bug that web developers,
web authors have been requesting to be fixed as soon as 1997.
Another one is that requesting a file regarding a specific or
restrained location on the server goes against the architecture of the
web. Where is the website icon is a question, an issue that should
fall entirely under the responsibility of the owner/publisher of the
domain name, not Microsoft's decision.
So, the browser which visited my site on February 8th 2008 at 16:12:27
had both bugs.

I did a Reverse DNS lookup and a complete WHOIS lookup and that
browser originated from Microsoft's labs.

Furthermore, only 2 people (besides Microsoft people) knew that I
contacted Microsoft to report that serious crash. So, I add up
everything (notwithstanding all of the previous visits from the same
domain and other info) and I claim certainty regarding the identity of
that browser.

Regards, Gérard

 

[GTalbot]

Another log:

131.107.0.102 - - [23/Jan/2008:10:58:31 -0700] "GET css-class.com/test/
css/selectors/ie7hacktargetingopera.htm HTTP/1.1" 200 3647 "-"
"Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 7.0; Windows NT 6.0; WOW64; SLCC1; .NET
CLR 2.0.50727; .NET CLR 3.0.04506; .NET CLR 1.1.4322; InfoPath.2; .NET
CLR 3.5.21022)"
131.107.0.75 - - [23/Jan/2008:10:59:24 -0700] "GET css-class.com/test/
css/selectors/ie7hacktargetingopera.htm HTTP/1.1" 200 3647 "-"
"Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 8.0; Windows NT 5.2; .NET CLR
1.1.4322; .NET CLR 2.0.50727)"
131.107.0.104 - - [23/Jan/2008:11:01:05 -0700] "GET css-class.com/test/
css/selectors/ie7hacktargetingopera.htm HTTP/1.1" 200 3647 "-"
"Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.0; en-US; rv:1.9b2) Gecko/
2007121120 Firefox/3.0b2"
131.107.0.102 - - [23/Jan/2008:11:01:38 -0700] "GET css-class.com/test/
css/selectors/ie7hacktargetingopera.htm" "Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U;
Windows NT 6.0; en-US) AppleWebKit/523.15 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/
3.0 Safari/523.15"
131.107.0.104 - - [23/Jan/2008:11:01:50 -0700] "GET css-class.com/test/
css/selectors/ie7hacktargetingopera.htm" "Opera/9.25 (Windows NT 6.0;
U; en)"

(...)

Yep! I had visits like that. As if they were comparing rendering and
discussing or something.

131.107.0.102 - - [23/Jan/2008:20:49:47 -0700] "GET css-class.com/test/
css/selectors/ie7hacktargetingopera.htm HTTP/1.1" 200 3647 "-"
"Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 7.0; Windows NT 5.2; .NET CLR
1.1.4322; .NET CLR 2.0.50727; .NET CLR 3.0.04506.30; MS-RTC LM 8; .NET
CLR 3.0.04506.648; .NET CLR 3.5.21022; InfoPath.2)"

From the way this page was visited it would indicate that IE8 has the
same bug as IE7. There even time there (13 minutes and almost 3 hours
gaps) to have a coffee and discuss the implications before moving onto
another machine to test further. The last log has "MS-RTC LM 8." Is
that IE8 in IE7 mode?

Good question...

Strange that that page was visited the same day that I wrote a private
email to a IE team member suggesting that they may want to test IE8
with this page.

Exactly. Why would it be unreasonable to expect to get visits with/
from an IE8 browser on the very same day you report a serious bug in
IE 7 if you email Microsoft's IE team?

Best regards, Gérard

 

[Dylan Parry]

Requesting /favicon.ico automatically is one bug that web developers,
web authors have been requesting to be fixed as soon as 1997

Ah right, I didn't realise that. Possibly because I neither use IE, nor
pay any attention to my logs

--
Dylan Parry
http://electricfreedom.org | http://webpageworkshop.co.uk

The opinions stated above are not necessarily representative of
those of my cats. All opinions expressed are entirely your own.

 

[Travis Newbury]

Furthermore, only 2 people (besides Microsoft people) knew that I
contacted Microsoft to report that serious crash. So, I add up
everything (notwithstanding all of the previous visits from the same
domain and other info) and I claim certainty regarding the identity of
that browser.

Are you not worried that Microsoft will have to "disappear" since you
found (and are spreading rumors) about their browser. You are walking
on thin ice there my man.

Maybe it is a conspiracy?

On a serious note, I am pretty sure Microsoft doesn't give a shit
about you or your site, and I am also pretty sure you did not find
something they did not already know about.

 

[Alan Gresley]

Travis Newbury wrote in reply to GTalbot:

Are you not worried that Microsoft will have to "disappear" since you
found (and are spreading rumors) about their browser. You are walking
on thin ice there my man.

Travis, are you a web developer? If you are, aren't you the lease bit
concern that Microsoft is playing their same old game of secrecy.
Wouldn't it be nice if the IE team could work together with the web
development community to make IE8 a better browser. I don't care
whatever bugs IE8 has since all browsers with new layout engines will
have bugs. If I go to this address.

https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/

I can find many 1000s of bugs. The reporting of IE8 requesting non
existing favicons is not "spreading rumors," it is stating a fact
about what the current IE8 alpha/beta does. So as some of us walk on
thin ice, Microsoft is still play their game of secrecy. Is this
something that you alway want to happen?

Maybe it is a conspiracy?

Yes and it is working and making people like you play their merry
game.

On a serious note, I am pretty sure Microsoft doesn't give a shit
about you or your site, and I am also pretty sure you did not find
something they did not already know about.

Can you prove that? Facts please? By that statement it appears that
you are just blindly walking in the dark. Another list of bugs that I
sent to a IE team member was greeted with great enthusiasm. The person
thanked me and said please forward further bugs to them and another
team member. I know things about IE8 which no one outside of the
Microsoft knows and in respect from certain people this information
will remains unknown at this point in time if not forever.

So Travis, instead of saying "Microsoft doesn't give a sh*t about you
or your site," please tell me what is really bothering you?. You whole
reply to Gérard is just a slag off and an insult. I know which of you
two already that I have more respect for. Can you offer something
constructive to this discussion?

Alan Gresley

 

[Travis Newbury]

Travis, are you a web developer? If you are, aren't you the lease bit
concern that Microsoft is playing their same old game of secrecy.
Wouldn't it be nice if the IE team could work together with the web
development community to make IE8 a better browser. I don't care
whatever bugs IE8 has since all browsers with new layout engines will
have bugs.

I do not consider myself a web developer, but more a web applications
specialist (cool title I just though up). And no I am not concerned
with what Microsoft does. They can be as secretive as they like.
they can make their browser anyway they like, this is a free market.
If they do things that the population doesn't like, then the
population will move away from their products.

I completely believe in letting the free market system work.
Microsoft (or any other company) is more than welcome to do what ever
they like. The users will be the ultimate judge on if it is right or
not.

I can find many 1000s of bugs. The reporting of IE8 requesting non
existing favicons is not "spreading rumors,"

Did you read the line where I said "Now on a serious note"? That
implied that I was not being serious with the statement above.

about what the current IE8 alpha/beta does. So as some of us walk on
thin ice, Microsoft is still play their game of secrecy. Is this
something that you alway want to happen?

It doesn't matter to me how Microsoft manages their business or
products. Other than their operating system I don't use any Microsoft
products.

Yes and it is working and making people like you play their merry
game.

Maybe you completely missed the point of my post. (actually it is
obvious you missed the point)

So Travis, instead of saying "Microsoft doesn't give a sh*t about you
or your site," please tell me what is really bothering you?.

Nothing bothers me. Don't you get it? I care about microsoft as much
as they care about me or you.

 

[Alan Gresley]

I do not consider myself a web developer, but more a web applications
specialist (cool title I just though up). And no I am not concerned
with what Microsoft does. They can be as secretive as they like.
they can make their browser anyway they like, this is a free market.
If they do things that the population doesn't like, then the
population will move away from their products.

The general population are just ignorant of browsers, which is OK. The
world full of web developers/designers who applaud browsers like FF
and Safari. One reason is that their engines are built in an open
development community. The Europeon Union is described as a free
market. The countries in the EU do not compete against each other but
work together. What is the "this" you are referring to where you say
"this is a free market." I do care about or am concerned byt the
practices of Enterprise, Government, etc, etc. I don't believe there
should be monopolies and there is one monopoly which is holding back
the open web. Is that how you would want your government of your
country to work?

Did you read the line where I said "Now on a serious note"? That
implied that I was not being serious with the statement above.

By your whole contribution to this thread, I don't know when your
being serious, giving ridicule, basing an opinion on informed facts or
not or just being plain ignorant.

Maybe you completely missed the point of my post. (actually it is
obvious you missed the point)

No I have not missed your point. I ask you directory what is really
bothering you because it seems that your initial contribution to this
thread was to just put down Gérard Talbot and his efforts. This is one
question which I would expected to have been answered.

Nothing bothers me. Don't you get it? I care about microsoft as much
as they care about me or you.

So if you don't give a dam about Microsoft, why are you even
commenting in this thread? Please go and dump on some other thread
elsewhere.

 

[Travis Newbury]

So if you don't give a dam about Microsoft, why are you even
commenting in this thread? Please go and dump on some other thread
elsewhere.

This thread is not Microsoft is it?