Disclaimer: Okay, I'm not allowed to defame any corporation or entity, so, I'm going to try to be certain to follow that guideline. Unfortunately, I'm sometimes quick to anger, usually when I recognize some injustice being done, or, my time being wasted unnecessarily. I should know that I need to count to 1000 before I let my feelings be known (flames generally spouting from my mouth like an ill-tempered dragon...), because I have a nasty and long-ingrained habit of biting sarcasm. Anyway, counting to 1000 would solve many things...first, my temper (my hair is kinda Auburn-colored, and, although I don't know more than two generations of my family's history, I think that there's at least a little Irish thrown-in...) and sarcasm would likely be lessened, and, the entire situation might be over, and I wouldn't have been around to bite someone's head off!! Some people might call me a 'jerk', and worse, upon being asked, but, well, they're entitled to their opinions, even though some of them are liars...I might be glossing things over, but, instances of 'the pot calling the kettle black' do still occur, whatever the modern translation. Anyway, I'm composing this page after a good full night's sleep, and my anger from last night is severely dissipated...though I remember it well enough that I'm writing this page....

     I believe that pretty much everyone with a connection to the Internet knows that there is a struggle between Netscape and Microsoft for supremacy in creating Internet browsers. Internet browsers are the way that people 'surf' & search the Internet. The 'winning' browser company will be the one that determines the future standards for Internet browsers, HTML tags, and, extensions. Right now, Netscape is continuing to claim that 80% of Internetizens are using their products, either Navigator or Communicator...which leaves approximately 20% for Microsoft Internet Explorer and other browsers. Netscape and Microsoft are pursuing different strategies, as competitors are wont to do: Netscape is now marketing their browser as shareware (starting with Navigator 3.0 - they didn't charge for Navigator, previously...), which means that you can download and install it from the Internet, but, if you use it, and decide to keep it (usually beyond a 30-day trial period...), you are required to register your copy, and pay $49 for the standard edition / $79 for the professional edition (U.S. ...Olsen & Associates Currency Converter ), or, refusing that, uninstall and delete Netscape, and every copy that you have; Microsoft has always marketed their Internet Explorer for 'Free' (If you bought Windows95...).

     One thing that both browser companies have in-common, however, are their pursuits of different and exclusive HTML tags (like Netscape's <BLINK> and <EMBED SRC> tags, versus Microsoft's <MARQUEE> and <BGSOUND SRC> tags...). In my opinion, the largest diversion between the two was within the version 2 browsers: Navigator 2.0 had a feature called 'Frames' (you'll leave this page -Fast-), and, Internet Explorer 2.0 didn't. This is the point where I was introduced to the browser war. I've had Internet Explorer 2.0 since March 20th, '96...from then, until March 6th, 1997 (when the Internet Explorer security bug was discovered, and patches were only made for version 3.0 browsers...), I came across literally hundreds of pages that I couldn't access because they were written in frames (and, I didn't yet have the knowledge necessary to 'dissect' web pages through looking at their source code...), usually giving me just a link to download Navigator, or, the use of my back button, to leave! I'm curbing my temper because I got really ticked-off when some people apparently didn't want visitors using Internet Explorer reading what they had to say, or, just sent them off for the browser that they preferred. Although I was angry, I am not usually forced into anything via subtle coercion!! Frames are now so widely used in web pages, that the term ubiquitous can almost be applied. Fortunately, Internet Explorer got the ability to view frames in the 3.0 version release, and, seemingly at the same time, people who were writing pages in frames decided to create non-frames versions of their web pages. There are two advantages that I do see in this browser war: First, both Netscape and Microsoft are accommodating each others' HTML tag ideas, in some ways. The biggest of which was Microsoft's adoption of frames (which was really a no-brainer for them, if they wanted to remain in the competition...), and; Secondly, I believe in competition...I think that the browser company that ultimately puts out the better product, overall, can and should win the browser war!

     I really wish that the browser war was over, for the purely selfish reason that I'd rather write web pages that all browsers see equally well, without compensating. I don't really have strong preferences for either browser, the argument for me being merely that I've used one for as long as I've been connected to the Internet, and, I'd need to re-learn a new one. No politics in it, for me. There is a hopeful indication that the browser war will be cooling down a bit...now there's something called WIP, the Web Interoperability Pledge.

     WIP began as an idea at ZDNet, an Internet presence that has the standing and reach for thousands of possible responses. It was then transformed into a web-shaking petition signed by around 35,000 other Internetizens, and sent off to both Netscape and Microsoft. The petition urged Microsoft and Netscape to "...stop pushing incompatible standards that force you..." (that is, YOU, me...!) "...to choose sides.". Both Netscape and Microsoft have agreed to follow WIP. Although I'll be taking a 'wait and see' position, it seems like a positive step in the right direction. I'm still considering placing the WIP button on my pages...but, I'd like to add something to the 'webmasters' part of the pledge; that they make their pages readable by the blind, as well. For more information, try Cathy's Newstand, about making web pages that text readers can deal with. Sometimes small steps are the best place to start.

• AOL has 8,000,000 members...
• GeoCities has about 700,000 'homesteaders' with their free web pages up and running...
• My ISP (Internet Service Provider), NETCOM, has about 500,000 subscribers...and my long-forgotten 'mirror' web site hasn't been updated since, oh, around March ('97)...

     With so many people now involved in the Internet, there are also more web pages being produced... someone is busy writing their first, third, 12th, etc. web page right now! I, for one have Bookmarks/Favorites from March 1996, and I'll bet that you might, too. I've been going through them recently, trying to put a links page together, and, I'd guess that at least a quarter of my Bookmarks from then lead to nowhere...or, maybe worse than nowhere, the dreaded browser 'error': "...cannot find...http...". Do I toss these Bookmarks, or, should I just hang onto them, hoping that they'll somehow reincarnate? I'll get rid of them, one of these days. As an example of how long some disused pages can exist, check this out: I'd say that 98% of these pages haven't been touched since December 1995, and they're still in existence!? I'm not holding Prodigy® up as the only ISP that has closetsful of derelict web pages; that was just the only bookmark that I have to web pages that were started before I ever got onto the Internet, and, the shortcut still works! GeoCities, on the other hand, will only allow an un-updated web page/web site six months to live...after that, it's assumed to be abandoned, and it gets deleted. A much better plan, in my opinion, especially if the provider of decided-'dead' web pages spells this information out (big hint)!

     I was surfing & searching at a site last week, and collected a Bookmark for it. Then, my browser decided to crash...meaning the whole ScanDisk and DeFrag routine, mandated by the 'This program has caused an illegal operation and will be shut down at this time' error. After that 45 minutes was done, I decided to return to the site where I'd crashed, hoping that I could see some weird coding that my browser couldn't deal with, therefore the 'crash-catalyst'. Well, I connected to my ISP, started up my browser, and used the Bookmark for that site where I'd crashed, only an hour ago. 'Error 404; File Not Found'!? No, I couldn't believe it...a web site that I'd visited just an hour ago was gone! I've tried that bookmark, since, and I haven't found the file/page...but, I guess, if the file that your browser is 'sitting on' gets pulled from the server machine, at that very instant, yes, your browser will crash!!

     I guess that what I'm trying to get at, in a far too circuitous route, is that the Internet is a very new (c. 1990), growing, and ever-changing. Just as you can find a web site/page there, one hour, and discover it gone the next, there are some sites that will be up as long as the Internet exists. If you find a web site/page, that appeals to you and your interests, I would suggest collecting copies of them (graphics, sounds, pages...) from your cache folders, because you cannot tell how long those pages will exist. As long as you don't use someone else's pages, sounds, and graphics, and call them your own, and/or try to profit from someone else's work, I cannot really see the harm in it. Internet pages are unique unless exact mirror web pages are located elsewhere, or, on a different server machine. This means that if there was a page that had exactly the information you were looking for, and, needed to know, yet, you decided to just make a bookmark for it, hoping to return, you've already lost out. There aren't any rules or guarantees that it will be there, whenever the 'free time' to either read them (or, last-ditch, copy them), will occur!

     'Problems Navigating at some sites' was my inspiration for writing a second, more polished version of this page. I was looking around for some Internet tools at the web site of a giant on the Internet. Well, I typed in their address, and clicked the link of the information or download that I was hoping to find. Well, not unlike another large, online presence, I got some message that something would be installed, OK/Cancel. I went ahead and OK'd it, because I thought I'd already had those updates. Sure enough, it finished more quickly than it would have, all things being equal.

     Anyway, after this too-short 'installation', I was suddenly hit with 5-6 'cookies' warnings in a row, rapid-fire succession! Way too fast for me to decline them before I got a 2nd3rd4th...when all of that craziness finished, I found myself back where I'd been before '...something would be installed, OK/Cancel....'. Well, I had that process down, right?...'OK'...30-second install...oops, rapid-fire cookies™(!?), declinedeclinedecline...I wasn't getting too far. Basically, it was like, "accept the cookie, and, we'll let you continue. "If you decide to turn-down the cookie, we'll bring you back to this very same spot!!"?? So, getting a little frustrated, I stomped off (well, as much as one can stomp off, however symbolically, down a little piece of electrically conducive wire...) 'In Search Of'© (Leonard Nimoy hosted it, early eighties, I think...) some place to write this industry giant an e-mail, to let them know that their 'no cookie, no advancement' methods are a little heavy-handed. Well, I successfully found my way to a form, and started telling them about it, a little more 'specifically' than I can, here. I was really focused on the task at hand, so, when I got to the form page, I didn't look any further than the 'text area', and, I started typing... when I finished typing, the rest of the page became a concern, looking for the submit button with which to send my 'constructive criticisms' on their way. Well, the rest of the page was your basic subscription form...I drew up short. It looked as though each line was a 'required' answer; and here I was complaining about their site, yadda, yadda, yadda™...and, I apparently need to give them my name, rank, and serial number! So, I did a 'clear form', then tried submitting it. It returned with 'so-and-so line not filled'. Thanks, but no thanks.

     How many hoops is it absolutely necessary for one to jump through in order to download some 'free' Internet tools? There used to be a saying that 'Knowledge is Power'...from all of the information that some web sites request from me, and the time necessary to fill out those forms, I am 'paying' for a 'free' product! One site promises to give you Internet tools for free, in exchange for you cluttering up your pages with their logos, and a link to their download...on top of registering, etc.! So, I guess that the implicit deal is that you can get free Internet tools for providing them some free advertising space!? It's tempting...but, if I decide to use these tools, will it limit my site's accessibility by various browsers?

     Frankly, I view web sites giving 'cookies' as nothing better than spammers. Maybe worse. E-mail spam, which is the typical spam, is what it's called when you receive junk e-mails...same thing as junk ('snail') mail: you didn't request it, you don't want it, and, 'Who'd buy anything from that catalog?!'. And, both e-mail spam and 'cookies' take up space on your computer; on my computer, each file takes up 32k, whether it is a 5k piece of e-mail spam, or, worse, a 510 byte 'cookie.txt'...and, that space might be needed for something important! At least e-mail spam is out in the open, is easy to delete, and doesn't even try to be concealed... 'cookies' are meant to be concealed and that strategy is worrisome.