I might as well delete my Hotmail account if they're not going to make it Opera compliant.

I've had Enough of these guys forcing me to use Internet Explorer and FireFox for that matter.

Hotmail? What's hotmail? Oh. You mean that s*** mail provider I deleted my account from about... 5 years ago?

Gmail and Yahoo mail all the way ^_^

Have you people checked out the content categories? There is content from Google and Yahoo as well (such as news).

Is Microsoft just getting desperate? Or is this a good thing? Maybe one day we will be able to access all our email accounts from a single portal.

I noticed that as well. I don't think they're getting desperate. I think they're trying to draw in as many people as they can who may not be willing to give up their Google and Yahoo content for an MS alternative.

Wee town Hooooo Ha!

Woot doo.

Wing dings!

I dusted the cob webs off of IE to check this thing out when it launched. It was just a tad bit underwhelming. This is just one time when adding FireFox support doesn't make something appealing to me simply because it was so underwhelming.

live.com is really a good site for hotmail users and i am using it and liked it very much.

i'm 100% microsoft free... I'm a linux guy... I don't need anything from microsoft... just wait for someone to put a worm on the live server and 90% of the world gets it.

Alright I'll do that :o)

Yeah but I be willing to bet you got Widnows emulated some place or you got a copy of Wine running.

No matter how much you may want to be, you are not 100% Microsoft free. If you do anything at all on the Internet, it's highly likely you've used a service that was running on a Windows server.

Great. Hows support for Opera, konqueror, safari, etc, coming along? Bas***ds

Well im thinking you don't know much about programming. Because if you did you would know that it does take some time to code the website for different browsers. Micrsoft is supporting the browsers which are more populary used first. Then they will move onto other browsers.

If they write W3C complient code, it would work across 100% of browsers.

Konqueror? Hang on, I think I cracked a rib laughing.

100% W3C-compliant code doesn't work 100% on Internet Explorer. Any webmaster worth its salt knows that.

Why would anyone make support for those? Konqueror? That thing that comes with KDE? HAH!

That and remember that they are also going to showcase new technology that none of these other browsers have yet.

Yeah, right. Just like the W3C's own browser Amaya complies 100% with W3C standards...NOT!

Absolutely every single browser in existence (including Firefox, Safari, and Opera) lacks 100.00% compliance with various portions of W3C standards. All their boasts are qualified as being "more complaint than..." or "passes XYZ test suite" (but not necessarily others) or "implements everything in standard XYZ version 1 and everything in version 2 except..."

It's absolutely true that IE has fallen behind in standards support but it's also just plain wrong to claim that any other browser is completely compliant with all W3C standards.

I never claimed they were. But I said, Microsoft should lay off their own browser - it's dead - and focus on Firefox, Opera, Konq (KHTML - also used in Safari AFAIK), And other browsers.

"A commenter to the official Live.com blog questioned why Firefox wasn't supported at launch."

Uhh, because that is their prerogative? They don't have to support it.

Lol. Agreed. And it's just a beta. People can be really funny sometimes.

And they don't have to get the support of those users. Sounds to me like they made a sound decision in providing firefox support.

True that.

Funny?

Try idiotic.

All websites have a prerogative to program their site for any number of browsers of their choosing.

Its not a UN ratified international law to program your own website to work with other browsers so nick picking a company for releasing a service that is still being tested slowly to different browsers shows the unintelligence of the nit picker.

I agree the service isnt very useful to me but its hardly my place to demand something from the company providing the service to appease a small sect relative to the whole market.

A small sect indeed. Amen.

easier to use google, any place on the net, one word away. ms cant beat that. they should stop trying.

'Bout time.

Add an online word procesor, database, spreadsheet, and PIM and we'll be set.

Thanks.

You might want to add servers with high uptime to support those services,strong security, and support staff to keep it running smoothly. On those counts, history gives us reason for caution.

Parts are broken and most of it is no more useful than any other portal. Weren't portals declared dead long ago? I'd like to have expected better, and I was hoping to see something innovative, but I didn't. Microsoft needs some fresh ideas...fast!

Just wait. It's still in beta ('still' - it's only been a week lol...).

Wait until they integrate Office Live and Foldershare. We've only seen the vapors off the tip of the iceberg so far.

Betas are an indication, usually a substantial one, of things to come. If a beta holds no predictive value, then they shouldn't be released (although there are cases when they are just released for the "me, too!" factor), "It's just a beta!" is starting to sound like an excuse, especially when compared with the betas released by some other companies.

I'll have little choice but to wait, but there is not much in Windows Live to keep my interest. Frankly, Office Live doesn't sound all that appealing. Most of what Office Live seems to offer is already available either from Microsoft, or other well established sources. Sorry, I just don't see the substance to justify the hype, and believe it or not, I'd like to.

That's definitely true. Although, I think you're on to something with the "me too!" reason. Microsoft seems to be going for that a lot these days. I mean they followed with MSN virtual earth, the book search deal, and now this...

I think a large part of the reason for Live.com is pressure they've felt from other portals (not necessarily just Google). I'm still anxious to see how everything will fit together when it's final. I guess I'm a little more optimistic than you, but I could just be delusional =p

So far I find it a superior portal to most of the others, for the simplicity. I mean, gadgets....and you can just mouse drag them across your browser. No more time consuming information positioning. I can see it become a great start site. Even in beta it's more useful than my.yahoo

It's going to take more than whats there to make it apealing, I already make my own startpage with the stuff I need, you mean Microsoft with all those engineers can't do better than Frontpage?

You can make a completely dynamic page supporting millions of users' varying configurations? In Frontpage no less?

Do tell.

I think I tried Frontpage once a long time ago before I trashed it and vowed never to contaminate my computer again. The memory is kinda faint. I think I tried to block it out.

LOL! Agreed...too painful...to remember...still hurts.

Actually I think you CAN do it with Frontpage. However, it'd be easier finding a blindfolded three-legged donkey code it himself in HTML...

LOL

"eDonkey2000"

Actually, FrontPage 2003 has come a long way, and as long as you don't use anything that depends on the FrontPage or Office Extensions (and stick to tried and true coding), then most of what it produces these days isn't too bad. Of course, I do remember the days that FrontPage was absolutely disgusting. Still prefer Dreamweaver though...

I'd LOVE to see that. So far, I havent seen many other pages where you can use your mouse and drag stuff around. Adding and removing content is as easy as one click.

You are right about the 2003 version, it has improved and I try to stay away from their hard-coded things for forms because it will throw so much code into your page.