CompuNotes Notes from The Cutting Edge of Personal Computing July 4, 1997 - Happy 4th of July to all Americans! Issue 85 +=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+= To subscribe, send an e-mail to listserv@peach.ease.lsoft.com SUBSCRIBE COMPUNOTES-L FirstName LastName To unsubscribe, send an e-mail to listserv@peach.ease.lsoft.com SIGNOFF COMPUNOTES-L +=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+= CONTENTS My Notes: 1=> Contest Winner and New Link to our New Homepage! mailto:pgrote@i1.net 2=> This Issue's Winner! 3=> A Thank You to Judy Litt! Interviews: 4=> Interview with Cari Burnstein, mailto:dr2web@sprynet.com Reviews: 5=> Product: Electronic Arts Sports Edition Gamepad Pro Reviewed By: Doug Reed, mailto:dr2web@sprynet.com --- BEGIN ISSUE 1=> Contest Winner and New Homepage! Well, we went and got our own Domain Name! Can you believe CompuNotes was finally available from InterNic? Anyway, the new page can be found at . Doug and I are very happy to have this space and our domain name! The links we received were fun to look at! Please see your email soon for a message from Doug explaining the new link. Please update your pages post haste as we will be submitting our new name to the search engines shortly. The winner of our Contest was chosen randomly by my daughter, Cassie. She selected Lowell Lutz at mailto:wwwebspinner@geocities.com. Thanks to all that played! 2=> Winner! None. 3=> Judy Litt - Thanks! Many of you who have been with us since we were CyberNews know Judy and her work. As our first webmaster, Judy graciously and brilliantly updated our now extinct site on AOL. As we became more and more tied to the web, Doug took over the webmastering duties weekly -- we still used Judy's site as a reference site to show off I closed my AOL account for a variety of reasons you will read about in an essay in a future issue. We just wanted to take the time and thank Judy for all her tireless effort in the webmastering duties and product review positions. Judy is now a guide on the MiningCo. website. You can check her out at She also owns her own Graphics Design firm and always does dynamite work! You can see her portfolio by clicking on Thanks Judy for all the help and support! 4=> Interview with Cari Burnstein, mailto:dr2web@sprynet.com This week's interview is with Cari Burstein. Never heard of Cari? Cari heads up the "Best Viewed with Any Browser" campaign. If you surf the web you've most likely run across websites with little buttons that say "Best Viewed with Netscape" or "Best Viewed with Internet Explorer". This is all fine and dandy for those with Netscape or Internet Explorer, but for those who don't the pages can look like a disaster. Cari and others are attempting to stop the proliferation of browser-specific tags. In this interview, he explains why. Doug: For our readers that may not have heard of the "Best Viewed With Any Browser" campaign, please explain what it is and the purpose behind it. Cari: The "Best Viewed With Any Browser" campaign, also known as the Campaign for a Non Browser Specific WWW, is an attempt to bring attention to the trend of web site design that excludes many users of the net, and to reverse it. Designing a web site that is usable by everyone as a general rule doesn't require a lot of extra effort, and it makes it possible to reach all users of a site, not just ones using a certain browser. There are many movements on the web against the big browsers (Netscape and MSIE), but most of them are focused against certain browsers. This campaign focuses on inclusivity- everyone should be able to use the net- not just the people with the fastest computers, the fastest Internet access, or the most free time. The campaign makes suggestions on ways to improve the accessibility of web sites, and has links to many other sites with further information. The campaign site also encourages people who have joined the campaign to display the "Best Viewed With Any Browser" graphic or text on their pages, so they can make a statement that their site is designed to be used by everyone, and also so they can encourage others to do the same. Doug: Why should web surfers care about whether sites are designed for all browsers? Cari: There are a lot of reasons why web surfers should care if sites are designed for all browsers. One major one is that the web is getting more and more focused towards the latest release software from the big browser companies. That means that unless you don't mind spending the time downloading several megabyte browser releases and plug-ins from the net whenever you visit sites that require them, you will be locked out of a lot of sites, or unable to use many of the features of these sites. It also means that if you prefer a browser besides Netscape or Internet Explorer, you will often be unable to use sites, and if you prefer an older (often more stable) version of a browser, you may be unable to visit some sites. Also, if you have a slow Internet connection (or even an average one), you may not want to wait for graphics loading on web sites, but many web sites don't bother to use alternative text on their pages, which makes them nearly impossible to navigate without graphics loaded. Basically it comes down to a matter of choice- the web was designed with platform and browser independence in mind, and browser specific design denies people the right to choose the browser, platform, and viewing style that works for them. There are a lot of browsers out there with a variety of useful features that Netscape and Internet Explorer don't have, and Netscape and Internet Explorer can't be used by everyone even if they did fill the needs of every web surfer. It is vital that the choice of browser be left to the web surfer, not to the web designer. Doug: Why should website designers care? Cari: Web site designers should care about designing their sites to be viewable by everyone for many reasons as well. First of all, most web site designers are aiming to bring as many users to their sites as possible. Designing so that many people can't use the site or can't navigate it well obviously runs contrary to that goal. The amount of work involved in making most sites usable by any browser is not very much, and site design that is compatible with all browsers is also less likely to break in whatever new version of a browser comes out in the future. In addition to people using browsers other than Netscape and Internet Explorer, there are a lot of people viewing web pages with images off. Providing alternative text and navigation alternatives for image maps are necessary if you don't want these people leaving your site because they can't navigate it. There are many site designers that don't realize that their sites are unusable for some users, and there are others that don't realize how easy it can be to make their sites usable by all. Any site can be made usable in any browser, most can be made to be fully legible and easy to read in any browser, and a large percentage can even look nice in any browser. HTML was designed to be browser and platform independent, and it's a shame to see people locked out of sites because the designer didn't make the effort to make the page usable by everyone. In addition to the issues of user choice and ease of design, there is also the issue of accessibility. What many people don't realize is that not everyone can use Netscape or Internet Explorer. First of all, there are a lot of systems that these browsers won't run on, both new and old (WebTV, Nokia 9000, Amiga, Newton) and there are a lot of people using older computers that can't use these browsers- old PCs and Macs, some variants of UNIX. In addition, many users use other browsers to save money (most freenets only have lynx available to their users, and libraries and schools often only have computers that can run lynx or other text based browsers) or because they have special needs that can only be met by those browsers (blind users of the web for instance use speech readers that are mostly lynx based). If your site is just a personal web page then you may not feel an obligation to provide access to everyone, but if you're providing publicly funded information or software tech support or something along those lines, then you should definitely consider yourself obligated to make the information accessible to everyone (it may even be covered under the ADA). Doug: Do you think the W3C's recent recommendation of the HTML 3.2 standard will help? Cari: The W3C's recommendation of HTML 3.2 is a great step towards making the standards for the web fit with the needs of today's web sites. It's obviously important not to forget that there are browsers that don't support HTML 3.2. This doesn't mean that people shouldn't use HTML 3.2 in their sites, but they should definitely keep in mind how HTML 3.2 attributes will degrade in older browsers (tables are especially important to keep an eye on). There's this perception of the W3C that a lot of people share that they are behind the times and that the browser makers need to introduce new stuff because the W3C won't. That's very wrong. The W3C has been introducing some incredibly useful stuff, and they keep doing so, but it takes time for what they introduce to be discussed and tested and evaluated to make sure that new HTML features degrade decently in older versions of HTML, and that they flexible so that the various browsers and platforms can interpret the features in the way that works best for them. When Netscape introduces a new HTML extension, such as frames, they don't think very hard about degradability and they don't spec out how the HTML extension works exactly. Their way of describing the way an HTML extension should work is how it is displayed in their browser. This type of rushing to get new features in without thinking them out thoroughly and without specifying how they should work leads to major incompatibilities with other browsers and can also lead to clashes if other browser makers such as Microsoft make up their own ways to interpret these proprietary extensions or make up other extensions that perform similar functions. This turns into a huge mess and next thing you know, nothing works with anything else. That's why standards are so important- they make the browser and platform independence of the web possible. Proprietary extensions aim to take that away. Another big problem is that the big two browsers are so slow to implement useful features of HTML that are introduced or encouraged by the W3C. Style sheets are just finally coming to Netscape and MSIE, PNG is still not supported except by plugins, and there even some HTML 2.0 features that Netscape and MSIE don't support. So even though the W3C keeps pumping out useful additions, they probably won't come into common use unless the big browsers make an effort to support them. At the same time, the W3C has tried to make HTML 3.2 reflect common practice in HTML today, but there are some things they just can't implement into the standards, such as frames, which were implemented in a horrible way and need to be totally reworked if they are to ever be fully useful and degradeable. Doug: Why you? What led you to start this campaign? Cari: I started this campaign because I was truly saddened by the degree to which the web has really succumbed to browser specific design. I'm a web designer both for myself and at the company I work for, and I have always found it very important to design pages that could be readable by everything. As a person who uses the web from all sorts of different places, I really get frustrated by pages that don't make an effort to be readable by everyone. I mostly use Netscape and Cyberdog myself on my macs, but I often browse the web using lynx from any of my accounts, and I often use the web from other people's computers, using whatever browser happens to be handy (for instance when I visit my mom, her computer is too slow to run Netscape, so I usually use lynx from my shell account). Netscape is really lacking in a lot of the things that could make it a great browser, but I often am forced to use it to view pages, and it drives me nuts that they command the market when their products are so mediocre. As a Mac and UNIX user, my concerns about platform independence run very deep, but anyone who cares about having the option to choose for themselves what platform they use should be concerned. Netscape and Microsoft both want to make the web something that can only be used by people using their products, which naturally would limit the web to platforms that would run their products. I definitely don't want to see this happen. Competition in the marketplace is great and can produce wonderful improvements in technology, but this competition should be over interface and control and other such features in a browser, not over HTML itself. Doug: What do you think it would take to get the two major browser publishers (Netscape and Microsoft) to adhere to the approved standards? Or is it already too late? Cari: I think that the only way the big two will truly start to adhere to standards is if it increases their market share and their power over the market. Right now, Netscape has learned that making their own rules works for them- there are tons of pages on the net telling people they must use Netscape to view their site- they basically have a large part of the Internet doing their marketing for them. Microsoft has taken a very different tact- they have been talking about their standards support all along, while working as hard as they can to put themselves in a position to provide features that no other browsers do. They've been better about standards than Netscape, but only because it helped distinguish them in the marketplace, and they still make a huge point of introducing their own non standard technologies in an effort to make sites dependent upon their browser and also to make browser users dependent upon Windows (as evidenced by their platform specific ploy with Active X). I think there's a chance that there will be a backlash and that Netscape and Internet Explorer will start to make more of an effort to adhere to standards, but this will only happen if the users of the browsers themselves start to speak out against browser specific design and start requesting that the pages they visit (especially the commercial ones) are made to be used with any browser. Right now incompatibility seems to be a market advantage for the big two. Only a change in the demands consumers place on the browser companies will change the way they work. I'd say that a new browser that put all the others to shame might make a difference, but unfortunately, the market isn't motivated or educated enough to adopt a new browser just because it's better. I wish that the big two would pay attention to standards, but I don't expect it to happen unless something major causes them to deter from their current paths. Doug: What is the status of the campaign? Cari: The campaign is doing really well right now. The main campaign page is getting about 500 visitors a day, and several sites join the campaign every day. I've had people volunteer to do translations of the campaign page to several languages (French, Spanish, German, Portuguese, Dutch, and Danish) and there are several other language translations on the way. I've also had over 30 graphics donated for use with the campaign, and about 650 sites have joined so far. I don't have very much time to spend on the campaign myself, so I rely quite heavily on suggestions from other participants on useful sites and information to link to. But I definitely try and keep the information on the site as up to date as possible. Doug: What do you think the future holds for the web? Cari: The future of the web is as yet undetermined, but I can see two prevailing forces that may make a huge difference on the future. First of all, there is the trend towards browser dependence which if victorious could lead to a web that is for the most part usable only by platforms with a large enough market share to get that browser developed for their platform. This would probably be Windows, with perhaps the MacOS and UNIX still being in the loop, perhaps not, depending on how successful Microsoft is on their drive to take over. The other trend is towards more variety of platforms and devices on the net which drive browser independence. We're already seeing several devices hitting the marketplace that are bringing the web to users of systems other than the types of computers that people think of as usually using the net. WebTV, Nokia 9000, Newtons, Pippin, Sega Saturn, WinCE, Pilots, and NCs are all devices which don't fit in with the browser dependence trend, and if they become popular enough before the browser dependence trend goes too far, then the web will probably begin trending more heavily towards browser independence. Other factors that play heavily in this are countries with low net access getting on more heavily, more strain on the available bandwidth, and the congestion of the net. Depending on what happens as these factors work together can make a huge difference in the future of the net. Major increases in the average speed of connection may push more browser dependence, while major increases in net congestion may push more browser independence. It's still very much too soon to predict what will happen, although of course my hopes are for a web viewed by a vast variety of devices with browser independence being a huge concern and net congestion decreasing due to new technologies which place less strain on the available bandwidth (style sheets, PNG, HTTP 1.1). Doug: What do you think of dynamic HTML, the new extensions being pushed by Microsoft and Netscape for version 4.0 of their browsers? Do you think it will make a bad situation even worse? Cari: I think dynamic HTML is great in theory, but I have little confidence in Microsoft and Netscape's abilities to implement it in an intelligent manner. It could very well make the situation worse, but I don't know enough about their plans to say for sure. I think that XML (Extensible Markup Language) which the W3C is pushing, is very promising, but I don't have any idea what the big two browsers plan to do with it. Doug: What can people do to help the campaign? Cari: The best way people can help the campaign is to join it. If you're a web designer and would like to join, or learn more about the campaign, visit: If you're not sure how to go about making your sites more accessible, the page has tips and links to a lot of useful information that should help. If you need more information than is provided there, feel free to email me at cdaveb@server.berkeley.edu. I get a ton of mail, so I can be slow to respond, but I can certainly try to help. I maintain a list of sites participating in the campaign, so definitely let me know if you'd like to join. If you don't feel comfortable joining the campaign, but you'd like to contribute, I encourage people to send in good graphics or slogans that can be used for participating in the campaign, I love to receive suggestions of related sites that I should link to, and if you're fluent in a language that there's no translation of the page to yet, you may want to volunteer to do a translation of the page to that language. For those of you who don't have web sites of your own but would like to see more sites that are viewable by any browser, a good way to help out is to mail designers of sites that you visit that are browser specific, and make a suggestion that they make their sites useable by everyone. Some site designers will ignore such suggestions, but often times they either don't know they are locking people out, or they didn't realize anyone would care. Many times I've heard people say that if they had more people complaining about accessibility, they'd make the effort to be accessible, but that they just didn't think people cared. For For instance, during the '96 campaign, I visited the Clinton/Gore campaign site and noticed that there was absolutely no alternative text used on the site- it was totally unreadable in lynx. I mailed them about it, and never received a response, but within a few days, alternative text was added to the site. So sometimes it can make a difference to register your comments with the site designer. 5=> Product: Electronic Arts Sports Edition Gamepad Pro Reviewed By: Doug Reed, mailto:dr2web@sprynet.com Requirements: 486, 2xCDROM MSRP: $34.95 Advanced Gravis is probably best known for its cheap, reliable gamepads for PC computers. I've owned one for years, a gift from my sister-in-law and her husband, and the poor thing has seen a lot of use (and abuse). Despite all the mistreatment, the little sucker continues to work like a charm. I was very eager, therefore, to receive Gravis's new Gamepad Pro for evaluation. Gravis teamed up with Electronic Arts to release new versions of its GrIP multi- player controller and Gamepad Pro bundled with the latest Electronic Arts sports games. I've already covered the GrIP system, which is sensational for multiplayer games at the same computer. But I was really looking forward to the Gamepad Pro, since I usually play computer games by myself and I have had such a great experience with the old gamepad. Sadly, the best I can report here is mixed feelings about this new gamepad. There was only one major problem encountered with installing the Gamepad Pro - no installation disks were included in the box! Luckily, the Gamepad Pro uses the same installation files as the GrIP, so I just reused my install disks for the GrIP (ver 2.1 that I downloaded from the Net). Like the GrIP, the Gamepad Pro is designed for Windows 95 although it can function in DOS and other operating systems. The Gamepad Pro is automatically configured when the computer is booted, which seems to work flawlessly. Further, the Gamepad Pro does come with a "Y" connection allowing you to connect another gamepad and play against a friend at the same computer. The Gamepad Pro itself feels lightweight but sturdy, with its grip designed so that all ten buttons are in easy reach of both hands. So far, so good. My chief gripe with the Gamepad Pro is the use of the GrIP drivers. Gravis, in its infinite wisdom, made the drivers a TSR program that can be called up from the taskbar to make adjustments in button assignments or whatever. The problem is that there is no way to shut the sucker off! This is not a problem if you have the latest system with tons of RAM, but some of us can't afford to make such a leap yet. The TSR doesn't seem to be a major inconvenience, but I have so many TSR's hanging around on my taskbar now that it looks like a Christmas tree! There really has to be a better way to do this, I would think. Now that it was installed and running I was eager to see how it worked in some of my favorite games like Quake and Descent II. First snafu - if you load either of these games from DOS, be sure and turn the Gamepad Pro over and move the switch from GrIP to 1 player. If you don't do this - and do it AFTER you go to DOS, the game won't recognize the 'pad. If you play Quake or Descent II from a DOS box, you'll be in for an even bigger shock. You can't just click on the icon for the game and have at it - you have to open the DOS box, then move the switch on the back of the 'pad, and THEN you can start your game. If you forget one of these first two steps the 'pad will be impossible to configure and will likely act as if you are constantly pressing one of the buttons - at least, that is what it did for me. A little tough to play Quake if you're constantly firing! Of course, there is a workaround, and that is to configure the Gamepad Pro as a standard four-button gamepad. You lose some functionality, but you don't have the GrIP TSR or the headache of trying to remember to switch the modes each time you move from one game to the next. Another small problem that I had with playing with the 'pad was that when walking for long periods in games like Quake or Descent II forward motion would not cease immediately once I took my fingers off the pad. This never happened with the old 'pad - it is almost if the new pad is sticking or something. Perhaps I just need to wear it in - but it is something to be aware of. You don't want to walk around a corner when you meant to stop beforehand! Beyond those problems the Gamepad Pro does seem to have the same sturdiness as its predecessor. I love the angled grip and the way it fits into my hands - very easy to hold, yet it feels solid in my hands and I can easily reach all of the buttons. Further, my hands don't feel cramped or tired even after hours of playing with the Gamepad Pro - a definite plus in my book. The GrIP software does have it's pluses - for example the GrIP key program. The Gamepad Pro comes with ten buttons, all fully capable of being remapped to whatever functions you want. Once loaded, the GrIP key program can be used to set the Gamepad Pro for any game you want - it even comes with configurations for some games preloaded. The preset configurations include Quake - which seems a bit surprising since Quake is played from a DOS box, and as I already mentioned, if you leave the 'pad in GrIP mode it doesn't work in Quake. And you have to leave it in GrIP mode if you want those ten buttons! (Can you say Catch-22?) The Electronic Arts edition of the Gamepad Pro comes with a "Special Edition" of John Madden Football. There is no explanation in the manuals or anywhere else describing how the "Special Edition" is different from the "Regular Edition", so I'll have to take their word for it. John Madden Football is a fun game, focusing more on the action in football than any long-term strategy, but it still is a lot of fun to play. And of course it comes fully equipped to use the GrIP system (not too many games do yet), which means that you can use all ten buttons! Like I said, all in all I have mixed feelings about the Gamepad Pro. I love the grip and the easy access to the buttons, but I'm not crazy about having to constantly remember to shift buttons back and forth between single player and GrIP every time I want to play a game. The additional software is fun to play with and does highlight the strengths of the GrIP system when it is fully supported and running under Windows 95. When that becomes a reality, the GamePad Pro running the GrIP system will be a definite plus compared to the standard gamepads. But for now, I'm going to uninstall the GrIP drivers and run it as a standard 'pad. Final analysis: worthy of consideration if you want or need a new gamepad, but I wouldn't rush to install that GrIP system too fast. Advanced Gravis +=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+= Managing Editor: Patrick Grote -- mailto:pgrote@i1.net Assistant Editor: Writer Liaison: Doug Reed-- mailto:dr2web@sprynet.com Archives: ftp://ftp.uu.net/published/compunotes/ Website: e-mail: mailto:notes@inlink.com fax: (314) 909-1662 voice: (314) 909-1662 +=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+= CompuNotes is: Available weekly via e-mail and on-line. We cover the PC computing world with comprehensive reviews, news, hot web sites, great columns and interviews. We also give away one software package a week to a lucky winner for just reading our fine publication! Never dull, sometimes tardy, we are here to bring you the computing world the way it is! Please tell every on-line friend about us! CompuNotes B440 1315 Woodgate Drive St. Louis, MO 63122 notes@inlink.com (C)1997 Patrick Grote +=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+= END OF ISSUE