UK Government Locks Out Non-MS Browsers 268
Joel Rowbottom writes: "The UK government's new gateway.gov.uk site, which is being trumpeted in advance of the forthcoming General Election, has been revealed to only work on Microsoft browsers under Windows - meaning you must use IE5.01 or above to be able to access government content, or do your tax returns online: no MacOS, no Netscape, and certainly no Linux. Who can have developed this site for the government? It's Microsoft of course, on their .NET platform! There's a Register article about it, but for a more extensive look LinuxUser magazine in the UK have written a article on it which is available as PDF here."
Re:Well duh.. (Score:1)
Re:So... yeah... (Score:1)
We also don't bother ourselves with trivialities such as Nike shoes and Tommy shirts. We wear proper attire: tight fitting vests over pressed white dress shirts and polished leather shoes, brown of course. Step into a knee length pair of knickers and the day can begin!
Re:Tony Blair releasing XP (Score:2)
Following a little research of my own:
Says it all to me...
Re:Or konqueror (Score:2)
There is a bug filed [mozilla.org] for that functionality. Feel free to vote for it [mozilla.org] as well (of course, you need a free Bugzilla account [mozilla.org] to vote).
Alex Bischoff
"who can have"? (Score:1)
--
Forget Napster. Why not really break the law?
Re:The really funny part? (Score:1)
According to Register sources, there's a sorry tale behind all of this. About a year ago the Blair government was determined to embark on a love affair with Bill and his merry men, and it began to be made clear to the techies (many of them Linux lovers) on government staff that further mention of the L-word would likely be career-threatening. Many of the sites produced prior to the great Government Gateway project were indeed Linux-based, but this would cease.
Re:Don't worry about it. (Score:2)
Microsoft may not be very responsive to public opinion, but the British Government sure is.
Heh.. the Blair government's share of the vote in the last election was almost as high as Microsoft's share of the desktop OS market. They could piss of 10 million Slashbots and still win the next election.
I think it's just about their CA (Score:1)
They probably don't want to try to explain to the average user how to update their browser to recognize their CA.
My tests, iCab, IE, NC, and Opera, MacOS9... (Score:2)
iCab, with browser id set to Mozilla/4.5 (compatible; iCab 2.5.1; Macintosh; I; PPC) and javascript off: Failed
iCab, with browser id set to Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 5.5; Windows 95) and javascript off: Failed
iCab, with browser id set to Mozilla/4.75C-CCK-MCD {C-UDP; EBM-APPLE} (Macintosh; U; PPC) and javascript off: Failed
MS IE 5 for Mac, (browser id: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 5.0; Mac_PowerPC)) javascript off: Failed
Netscape 4.7 for Mac, (browser id: Mozilla/4.75C-CCK-MCD {C-UDP; EBM-APPLE} (Macintosh; U; PPC)) javascript off: Failed
MS IE 5 for Mac, (browser id: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 5.0; Mac_PowerPC)) javascript on: Worked!
Netscape 4.7 for Mac, (browser id: Mozilla/4.75C-CCK-MCD {C-UDP; EBM-APPLE} (Macintosh; U; PPC)) javascript on: Worked!
iCab, with browser id set to Mozilla/4.5 (compatible; iCab 2.5.1; Macintosh; I; PPC) and javascript on: Failed
iCab, with browser id set to Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 5.5; Windows 95) and javascript on: Worked!
iCab, with browser id set to Mozilla/4.75C-CCK-MCD {C-UDP; EBM-APPLE} (Macintosh; U; PPC) and javascript on: Failed (strange...)
Opera for Mac v5.0 tp3.298, set to "Identify as MSIE 5.0", which gives a browser id of: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 5.0; Mac_PowerPC) Opera 5.0 [en]: Failed (beta version, probably does not support javascript...)
--
Re:Use Opera (Score:2)
--
more details (Score:1)
I don't actually think that the IE exclusion is the most damaging part of this story. The tacit support by the government for a handful of commercial authentication services (at least one of which, Chambersign, appears to involve private key escrow) looks to be more pernicious.
d.
Kitcat's FOIA report [free-project.org]
Original report [ntk.net]
Follow-up, including mention of the Open Source project, with details of how you can help. [ntk.net]
Re:Can we have a new group please? (Score:1)
Jeez. Read the damn article. The Register pointed out most of the things that people are comlaining about in the /. story. But since nobody bothers to read the Reg article, everyone seems to assume that THEY were the ones that left all the important info out.
Re:Well, read the whole article before you flame ' (Score:1)
Depends on what sorts of bells and whistles they are gonna build into the site. Microsoft should certainly be able to throw a ton of manpower at a high-visibility project like this though. 3 weeks should be more than enough to put together a pretty good site.
This won't happen in the US ... (Score:5)
Browser checking issue (Score:2)
Netscape 4.7 works on Mac and Windows, and since all versions of Netscape 4.7 on all platforms can do all the PKI/crypto stuff, there shouldn't be any technical reason why Netscape won't work under Linux/NetBSD/Solaris/AIX/whatever.
If I knew a URL beyond the browser-checking first page, I'd be surprised if I couldn't go on to use the site perfectly happily. It's a shame the authors of this site couldn't be a little more intelligent with their checking.
--
workaround (Score:1)
Just edit your preferences and set:
user_pref("browser.useragent", "MSIE
Hugs, Cyke
Can anyone make sense out of this article? (Score:2)
But other than that, it seems like a number of wild complaints with no coesion to the story.
Something about the PKI technology used. Well if other browsers don't support this, uhh what can be done about it?
PKI is here to stay, and it would be wise for other browser makers to come up with support for this would it not?
Ohwell the Register is the National Enquirer of the IT world for a reason, I guess.
Re:Can anyone make sense out of this article? (Score:2)
http://www.gateway.gov.uk/html/bad_browser.asp
I know it's called if you don't have Javascript. According to that same article it also doesn't work if you have cookies and Java turned off.
It's been a long time since I tried to use browsers other than IE. I know last year Opera had problems with Java and Javascript. I don't know what the current state of Mozilla is.
It just seems to me that this UK website is on the bleeding edge of technology, especially with it's use of PKI. To expect luddite browsers to work might be a bit much.
Re:Can anyone make sense out of this article? (Score:2)
None of the other reasons described in the web page apply?
If you want, I can verify on my Solaris box.
Re:Use Opera (Score:1)
Yeah, but remember that Microsoft started this trend by saying they're a bogus "compatible" version of Netscape... (I think MS still says their browser is "Mozilla/x.xx (compatible...)")
I just wish people would use real user agent information and not try using really silly stuff like some people seem to do ("Lynx on ENIAC" and "Commodore 64 with 32 megs of RAM" seem to be popular - as a side note, I would like to get a SuperCPU and RAM expansion for my C64 so I could browse web better on that... =)
(...or, at least, if they're using silly bogus User-Agents, they should at least be creative. That "Bond/007 (James Bond; 007; UK; Licence To Kill)" was pretty cool =)
Re:Use Opera (Score:2)
...or use things like Junkbuster to mess with the User-Agent header.
I don't like this behavior, personally, because this skewers statistics. Now, webmasters think 90% of web users use MSIE, so they start "optimizing" their pages for MSIE.
But do all people really use MSIE? I think not. Especially when many "small" browsers lie that they're MSIE...
"nn percent of web surfers use MSIE. The rest lie they do." =)
It's called The UNITED KINGDOM, not ENGLAND (Score:1)
Have a reference for that code theft? (Score:1)
Re:Don't worry about it. (Score:1)
Me, on IE dominance (Score:2)
The biggest problem with IE dominance is this:
If the day ever comes that [someone like] MS controls [almost] 100% of the browser market, that puts them effectively also in control of the web server market, the content authoring market, the browser plugin market, etc.
No offense, but this didn't strike me as all that "(Score:5, Insightful)". Not that you're wrong or anything -- actually, I'd say it's dead on target, as far as it goes. It's just that you didn't really shed any new light on the issue with respect to what we've all been discussing for years now. As in, pretty much everyone knew, back when the "Browser Wars" were first starting, that this was what made the issue so strategically important. Or at least the geeks knew, which is what made it so frustrating trying to answer less-technical users who asked, "So what makes Netscape so much better, that I should muck around trying to replace [the pre-installed] IE [on my new Win95 box]?"
By the way, there is something that I think is an important piece of the "control of the browser gives control of the server" argument, which I don't see stated very often, though maybe it's just because people consider it obvious and don't bother saying it explicitly. Anyway:
The core of it is, to summarize what you said, They decide to implement [some new feature] in their browsers that only accept data from [their] servers, effectively putting [other] server authors out of business. Here's what I'd like to add: the key is that they wouldn't do it all at once. People sometimes respond that, even if you control one side or the other, the existence of diversity on the other side would prevent acceptance of your proprietary extensions -- your failure to play well on the other side might even endanger your dominance on the first side.
However, this misses the possibility that you might phase in the proprietary extensions on both sides while also maintaining standards-compliance, meaning that your products on both sides would become not just as good, but actually the best, since they would be the only ones to support both the standard and proprietary features. Only later, once you become dominant on both sides, would you gradually begin to "accidentally" break the standards-compliance on one, the other, or both sides (not necessarily with anything so blatant as real incompatibility; a performance or stability hit would serve just as well) -- it wouldn't hurt anyone, you see, because by then providers could cheerfully switch their servers over to using the proprietary features, confident that everyone (well, almost -- everyone that matters, anyway) would be using the supported browser as well.
David Gould
Actual Error Message w/ iCab 2.5.1/MacOS X10.0.3 (Score:1)
You cannot access the Government Gateway at the moment. This is because you are either using an old version of a browser, or the browser you are using does not have the correct settings. Read this page to find out which browsers are supported and which settings to use.
Supported Browsers
We have made the Government Gateway compatible with as many browsers as possible, on both PCs and Macintoshes. However, because we need to maintain maximum security on this web site, we cannot support older versions of browsers. To use the Government Gateway, you must have:
a PC, with Windows 95 or later, or Windows NT 4.0 or later with Microsoft Internet Explorer version 4.01 or later or Netscape Navigator version 4.08 or later
OR an Apple Macintosh with Mac OS version 7.5 or later with Microsoft Internet Explorer version 5.0 or later or Netscape Navigator version 4.xx or later
a working Internet connection
the 128-bit security add-in, for your version of the browser
Please note that you cannot currently use Netscape 6 to access the Government Gateway, due to issues with the support for digital certificates in this new version.
You can find out which version of the browser version you are currently using, by clicking on Help, then About..., in the menu bar of your browser. The name and version number of your browser is displayed.
Browser Settings
To use the Government Gateway, you must also have the following options enabled in your browser:
Your browser must be set to accept cookies
Java must be enabled
Javascript must be enabled
To check your settings:
Internet Explorer
1. From the menu bar, click on Tools, then Internet Options.
2. In the window that appears, click on the Security tab. Click on the Internet zone and check that the security level is set to Medium
Netscape Navigator
1. From the menu bar, click on Edit, then Preferences.
2. In the window that appears, click on Advanced in the left-hand pane. The settings are displayed.
Interesting technology though (Score:1)
http://www.gateway.gov.uk
This isn't inside a hidden frame because in general iCab gives you all sorts of neat tools to see those icky little in line frames.
But loading the site with IE5.1.1 tech preview for Mac OS X does give in the code:
NOSCRIPT
META HTTP-EQUIV=REFRESH CONTENT="0; URL=/html/bad_browser.asp"
You are using an unsupported browser. For further information, please click a href="/html/bad_browser.asp"here/a.
/NOSCRIPT
*of course cleaned up without html brackets for slashdot*
So I'm assuming some erstwhile interested party might go find out what actually is programmed in to bad_browser.asp to find the truth about what the detection method really is....
typical slashdot SNAFU (Score:1)
Re:So it starts... (Score:1)
try homesite or dreamweaver
Hmmmm (Score:1)
I would have to agree with Stevo. It is well with M$'s PAST behavior to attempt to 'lock' out a competitor. The question is can 'we' make a Linux browser that meets the encryption standards that are required ? If that can be done and IT still is refused then there is a possible sherman act violation.
You seem to be suffering under the same delusion (Score:1)
Apropos red herring stories.. (Score:3)
Slashdot used to be a place where a sufficiently egregious screwup in a story would result in a prompt update and mea culpa from the responsible editor.
This no longer seems to be the case.
I have my sortings set to "highest rated first" because a red herring story will usually have a prompt comment correcting the issue and getting moderated up to 5. When discussion closes on a story, however, it gets served as static HTML, and unsorted, and such comments no longer show up at the top. This is why updates are necessary, but /.'s
editors are getting increasingly lax about
getting these done, some editors more than
others (coughMichaelcough).
This needs to change. Editors, please, start updating your stories, even when it means wearing a paper bag for a few days. If you don't, the "new journalism" will no longer have any advantage over the old.
What interested me most... (Score:3)
"...our governmental infrastructures should be permanently open to competitive bid..."
Yes, Microsoft is the standard, and I'll even give (Linux zealot that I am) that IE is a better browser than Netscape4.x/6, and there's some good tools there on IIS (wealth of MCSE's, etc).
BUT, the truth in that statement - there should be a bid - is beyond petty squabbles about the better OS. If MS really does present the better solution, it should be given the chance to prove it, rather than being implemented because its the "default".
It makes me mad as a Linux advocate. I'd like to "lose" fair and square. If I can't write a good response to an RFP, if I can't get the people and the code running, then I deserve to lose. But I doubt anyone really put any thought into it. We need [foo], let's put it on IIS. Call MS and get a nice site license.
Netscape 4.77 worked fine (Score:2)
Re:Scary? (Score:2)
You cannot access that site from a non-microsoft operating system. Period.
Even faking the user agents doesn't work as they seem to have some extra checking to make sure you don't do that.
This has nothing to do with the capablilties of browsers and everything to do with a monopoly trying to force people to use their products. I hear that the makers of Opera are considering legal action - the actions of the government are a breach of european law (product tying, for one.. possibly others).
Rt.Hon. PHB (Score:2)
From the Register article:
Translation: The country is being run by a PHB.
Jackasses (Score:2)
Re:Jackasses (Score:2)
Opera Software taking action. (Score:3)
Basically, they are going to take issue with this, directly with Andrew Pinder, the UK "e-envoy."
--
Re:Blair uses Zope... (Score:2)
Well, read the whole article before you flame 'em (Score:4)
If they got the first draft to work in three weeks, they're doing a lot better than anybody I've ever worked with. Our stuff doesn't work with ANY browser that fast.
Re:Those bloody brits (Score:2)
I'm running Mozilla 0.9 w/PSM on Win2k and it allowed me to enter the registration process without a problem. Seems like this whole article is a bit over-blown.
And you blame MS for FUD? (Score:3)
Re:And you blame MS for FUD? (Score:2)
We have made the Government Gateway compatible with as many browsers as possible, on both PCs and Macintoshes. However, because we need to maintain maximum security on this web site, we cannot support older versions of browsers. To use the Government Gateway, you must have:
a PC, with Windows 95 or later, or Windows NT 4.0 or later with Microsoft Internet Explorer version 4.01 or later or Netscape Navigator version 4.08 or later
So, in the interest of security, you must use Windows on your PC.
HaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaH
M$ `innovates' again (Score:2)
Re:Let's be honest... (Score:2)
When you hold a lynching majority rules too. 10 while people for killing this nigger and one nigger against too bad for the nigger huh?
Fortunately for us modern republics have recognized such a thing as tyranny of the majority. We uphold the rights of everybody and recognize that the govt is here to serve all of it's citizens.
"If you ask me those other browsers should be more up to standards"
I would have no complaints if the system was written to standards. But it's not. If they just stuck to the W3C standards of HTML and CSS nobody would be complaining about anything. Here MS deliberately wrote the app to reject operating systems and browsers they didn't like. Lots of people demonstrated that by changing the user agent on their browser they were able to use the site. It's not that the browsers were not capable of displaying the page it's that the browsers were rejected by the site because the writers of the site did not like their operating system and name. This is discrimination plain and simple. I think it's outregaous that govt web sites don't comply with W3C standards and force people to pay for software they may not want just to participate in the process of governing themselves.
Re:Let's be honest... (Score:4)
Most people in the UK are also white. Maybe the the govt should prevent the east indians from some things too. Maybe it should prevent them using convenient services and instead make them wait in lines instead. Sorry only white people can use this web site the rest of you can haul your assess off to the courthouse.
The Govt is there to serve everybody not just the majority. The rest of the people are citizens too arent they? Why didn't they insist on using cross platform browsers on the contract?
Netscape 4.77 for Linux,. 128 bit: Locked out. (Score:2)
Fuckers.
Re:Those bloody brits (Score:2)
Now that its a requirement to be a client of Microsoft to be able to access information from the government - does this mean that MS client licenses will be tax deductible ? It should - considering your rights as a citizen appears to be hinging on if you are a customer of MS.
Change of direction... (Score:3)
This development is particularly frustrating, since up to now UK .gov sites have generally been very standards compliant. In fact the open.gov.uk [open.gov.uk] initiative even has a W3C standards statement [open.gov.uk]. I quote:
"The most important aspect of publishing information on the internet is to ensure that it is available to all, not just a select few who happen to have the newest browser, all the latest plugins and a top of the range, superfast PC.
UK public sector information must be accessible, legible and fast to download."
And indeed, the vast majority ofMe, on IE dominance: (Score:2)
I often use Netscape 4.7 on Windows. Not to be elitist, but in a mostly-vain effort to curb IE dominance. I use Mozilla at home. Anyway.. read above for my thoughts on IE dominance. This is a prime example of why it's bad. It's not necessarily the browser, but the certs and the OS in this case, but it's pretty much the same situation.
Re:Those bloody brits (Score:2)
There's no reason whatsoever to support Netscape on Windows and not on Linux.
Re:You CAN use Netscape! Read the article! (Score:2)
Maybe there's an update due ... (Score:2)
Maybe some other people should check their "browsing experience" there. The page explaining that i had to use netscape or ie 4+ only popped up once, when i had disabled Javascript.
No, No, NO! Stop Lying In Story Descriptions. (Score:3)
---
Cool! (Score:2)
This is so cool. Linux users don't have to pay taxes!
Yes, do! (Score:2)
"But why the rush? Again, it's ever-helpful Dell that tells us that although work on the project had started last June, "the original vendor withdrew from the project four months later." Coyness does set in now, but The Register is able to tell you that the original vendor was Compaq. The precise kit, reason for 'withdrawal' and projected OS we don't know, but somebody'll tell us, and the timing does seem to match the banning of Linux and the onset of the Redmond love affair. "
A recent turnaround for no real reason, and the vendor is hurrying to get away with the money before maintenance costs sink in.
--
Re:This won't happen in the US ... (Score:3)
Actually, while most of us chose not to use Microsoft products, for some less fortunate people it is not just a question of choice. Blind people often surf with "braille lines" or text-to-speech software. Neither of these devices can represent images; they only work with text-based browsers (such as lynx). Those people will effectively be locked out of the new site, just like wheelchair bound people are effectively locked out of building which can only be accessed through stairs.
....might want to read the actual article... (Score:5)
It's not a big, public launch, and like any launch of a web-based product, you're going to see browser incompatibilities. If my company could get back every dime spent on dealing with the differences between IE and Netscape, we'd be in a hell of a lot better market position.
If MS somehow tries to maintain that it will always require Windows/IE, then you've got a problem. But this, this is nothing yet.
Use a Validator to Test Your Website (Score:2)
Using a validator during daily development of your website, whether static or dynamically generated pages, in the long run just makes it a lot easier because you catch a lot of careless errors. Imagine how hard it would be to write syntactically correct C code without using a compiler!
- Validate Your HTML here [w3.org]
- Validate your CSS here [w3.org]
- Use Validators and Load Generators to Test Your Web Applications [sunsite.dk]
If you'd like to try validating a couple pages real quick then click here to validate:Mike [goingware.com]
Or konqueror (Score:2)
Bob Young has balls. (Score:4)
B1ood
my tests (Score:2)
So, they want you to be running either MacOS or M$FT stuff........ it's not so much the browser as the OS.
-----
Re:No, No, NO! Stop Lying In Story Descriptions. (Score:2)
http://www.gateway.gov.uk/help/0/help_template.as
Looks like they are not consistent with stating what browsers you require.
Works fine on this mac (Score:4)
Maybe they should update their help (Score:2)
What do I need before I can register?
Before you register with the Government Gateway, check the requirements below to make sure you have everything you need:
Hardware
* PC or Macintosh
* A working Internet connection
Software
PC Users
* Microsoft Windows (Windows 95 and above or Windows NT 4 and above)
* Internet browser. Either Microsoft Internet Explorer (v4.01 or later) or Netscape Navigator (v4.08 or later).
Your browser must have Javascript and Cookies enabled, and be capable of supporting 128bit SSL.
Apple Macintosh Users
* Mac OS version 7.5 or later
* Internet browser. Either Microsoft Internet Explorer (v5.0 or later) or Netscape Navigator (v4.08 or later).
Your browser must have Javascript and Cookies enabled, and be capable of supporting 128bit SSL.
But it looks like Netscape or Mozilla should work just fine.
Re:Works fine on this mac..Fact Checking (Score:2)
sad to see the UK dip so far (Score:4)
oh well, it might be a freebie now, but man will MS bend them over in the coming years once they're hooked.
very annoying to see all the posts that say "read the article! it works for me!" obviously, you didn't read the article, cuz it states that SOME parts work with SOME certs on SOME versions of netscape on SOME platforms.
sheesh.
Treatment, not tyranny. End the drug war and free our American POWs.
The Blame (Score:2)
If someone offered me a monopoly on citizen-to-government interactions, I'd take it.
-- Kris
Not the whole story (Score:2)
Another scary thing (Score:2)
When they started the demo of Office XP, I was sitting there waiting for a BSOD, but unfortunately they cut the broadcast after a couple of minutes.
Even the news presenter said "Well that just looks like an advertisement for Microsoft."
Re:And you blame MS for FUD? (Score:4)
Re:The website doesn't say that (Score:2)
Think different, man.
Re:Netscape 4.77 worked fine (Score:2)
(No personal offense intended, of course ... no problem with the comment. Just wondering at the lack of intelligence shown by the moderators at times, when they're in 'moderate up my side' mode. Insightful?)
Just for that! (Score:4)
Course, I live the the sovern country of Texas!
Man im in a good mood...
Just what we needed.. (Score:3)
--
I hit the karma cap, now do I gain enlightenment?
Re:What would be even scarier... (Score:4)
The web is about standards. Those things can be built for 99% or even more of the netizens, if so wanted.
--
I hit the karma cap, now do I gain enlightenment?
Re:Well duh.. (Score:3)
People without computers also helped pay for the site. If Linux support is added, will you demand a tax refund for those who choose not to buy computers?
Re:Me, on IE dominance: (Score:2)
I use it on all my Windows systems - its quite capable. And you can config it to report MSIE5 to this UK Gov. site.... but it dosnt work with "MSIE5". Does anyone know the *exact string* that IE reports as 'browser type'?
Re:Actually, no... (Score:2)
Re:Those bloody brits (Score:5)
IE 5.01 (Score:2)
Of course, this assumes that The Register even tried IE 4 on the site. :-P
Re:So it starts... (Score:2)
The Microsoft Way (Score:2)
Re:....might want to read the actual article... (Score:2)
-- .sig are belong to us!
All your
Re:....might want to read the actual article... (Score:3)
A year ago they probably considered it, now it's probably on the back burner, although, I haven't followed the Ashcroft Dept. to see how friendly W's administration will be to M$. My guess is they'll quietly sweep it under the rug. Once the furor settles I wouldn't be surprised to see M$ adopt such a strategy, with consoling words from Bill, "Because with only one product to chose from it makes everyone's life so much easier, and, Gosh, we only want to do what's best for people!"
More disturbing, ATM is the slugging match shaping up between AOL and M$. I don't view either as the lesser of two evils. Other ISP's have fallen by the wayside, been consolidated, or really aren't in this league to begin with. Both want access to your TV and home connection to external communication and media. AOL/TW is in a terrific position to dictate inflexible standards, and M$ knows it.
-- .sig are belong to us!
All your
Actually, no... (Score:2)
I'm surfing in Opera, identifying as IE 5.0, and I couldn't get into the site when I clicked the link.
Use Opera (Score:5)
--
Kiro
Opera on gateway.gov.uk (Score:5)
Re:No, No, NO! Stop Lying In Story Descriptions. (Score:2)
I don't think that Jesus posted this story.
This is the real issue... (Score:2)
I have been following this for sometime and knew awhile ago that they intended to the
This is what is going to happen:
1.A virus is going to sweep across all MSFT
2.Someone from a foreign country will crack the site and steal some information and post it, or threaten to.
3. UK Taxpayer will pay the bills for these licenses when they need to keep up the subscription.
Sorry to say, but this is an outrageous waste of taxpayers money.
Another offending site that uses MSFT only crap is www.classicfm.co.uk which is a shame 'cause I liked to listen to their broadcasts, but its not worth the boot into Windows for.
You CAN use Netscape! Read the article! (Score:4)
Also, it's a step in the right direction. Having access to gov't services online is fantastic. And yes, not everybody can get to them, but with, what, 90% of people able to get to them online, that's a hell of a lot better than 100% of people standing in line.
I got on using Mozilla in Linux. Here's how! (Score:3)
http://www.inlandrevenue.gov.uk/e-tax/checkbrw.
From there, it was clear that everything worked. I was only able to browse the subnet regarding the Self-Assesment Tax Return, which I am hardly eligible for (Living as I do in the US), but if I were British, I could almost certainly do what I needed to do.
From this I can only draw the following conclusion: M$ has set up a series of gateway sites which have no legitimate purpose whatsoever; instead, they appear to be clearly trying to force people to use their garbage. If only Tony Blair knew what a horrible mistake he has made...
Don't worry about it. (Score:3)
Microsoft may not be very responsive to public opinion, but the British Government sure is. Democratic governments have to provide equal access to government services or they risk having a large group of pissed off voters on election day. Blair wants 100% of all government services online by 2005. As a Mac user (IE for Mac doesn't work either), I know I'd be pretty angry if I got left out in the cold.
Not only that, but the standard browser on the upcoming Symbian 3G cell phones will be Opera, not IE [theregister.co.uk]. Symbian looks to be a leader in that arena, so the majority of wireless users wouldn't be able to access government sites if this continued. Microsoft is going to have to buckle on this one and use open standards, guaranteed.
Wooing the TechnoKlutz (Score:2)
6Equifax certs DO work with NS! (Score:2)
--
What would be even scarier... (Score:2)
Oh, wait, no it wouldn't be.
I agree, though. If you're building an app, it's just so hard to decide whether to build for 95% of the population or 2%...
Let's be honest... (Score:5)
Re:So it starts... (Score:2)
Exactly. And while some may view this as the fault of the clueless non-technical person for whom the Linux community has such contempt, I view it as a failing of the Linux community.
I mean, come on - Linux should have half a dozen easy-to-use graphical web page builders that generate decent code. It's shameful.
check your facts (Score:3)
The web site seems to just refuse to talk to people if they don't come from a Windows or MacOS machine. They could simply check for the certificates when they are needed, but they actually seem to check for the browser id string. What if Opera or Konqueror get the necessary certificates tomorrow? What if they already have them?
As for saying you can't do your tax return on-line in Netscape? Bollocks. It uses straight HTTPS. I've just completed mine. Did any of you think to check for yourselves? I doubt it, you just saw "it was written by Microsoft" and your knees starting jerking.
Maybe you just have a knee-jerk reaction when people criticize your favorite monopolist? You seem so far in the Windows world that you don't even notice the inconveniences Microsoft causes to competitors.