If I may, I think I'll just chime in with an opinion or two here... Why? Because the original post was simply pathetic and just begs for commentary (as is evident from the commentary). For new people reading this, please note that I am
not an employee of Milonic Solutions, so my opinions are my own. For those of sensitive constitution, please be warned that you may encouter a little sarcasm if you read on.
First of all, this was originally posted in the forum entitled, "Help & Support for Version 5". Most people would assume that the title of that forum is suggestive of the type of content it is intended to hold... something that seems to have escaped stefan_bgbgbg's keen intellect. In his defense, however, I suppose that it would have required some actual effort to find a more suitable forum for this post. And based on the amount of data stefan_bgbgbg supplied to support his claims, it's obvious just how much effort he is willing to exert. Fortunately, John put forth the effort that stefan_bgbgbg apparently couldn't manage and moved the thread to a more appropriate forum, wisely selecting the "Anything Goes" forum, since we don't have a "Baseless Claims" forum.
stefan_bgbgbg wrote:...Konquerer on Unix/Linux 6.0 to 7.0+
<---
Is that the request for help? A bug report? If so, in what language? Certainly not in one that would pass for a reasonable request.
This menu is the most feature rich and possibly the fastest rendering menu available anywhere, if you can find one quicker with the same or even less features, let's hear about it...
OK... so I suppose this was your idea of letting Milonic "hear about it." Fair enough. But it doesn't say "let's hear about it by having you publicly bash our product on our own website in the 'help' forum." Sheesh!
Many? So, is
three your idea of
"many"? Most of us might call that "a few." Then again, most of us wouldn't post a public bash in the Help forum. Or were we supposed to take the following insightful part of your list:
...
...
as further proof of your claim?
...but there are many much faster and stable in performance and more compatible dhtml menus...
"more compatible"??? What does that mean? Something is either compatible with another thing, or it isn't. I'm not aware of any "degree of compatibility" measure. Do you perhaps mean that one particular menu offers more features in a particular browser than another menu does?
Can you comment on the truthfulness of the above?
I can. I have tried recent versions of the many... sorry... the three alternatives that you mentioned and, in my experience, Milonic menus are faster than HierMenus and Coolmenu, and at least as fast as Smartmenus, when comparing
similarly constructed menus (comparing pure text-based to pure text-based for example). I have no empirical test data to back that up, but I am not particulary concerned about that since you apparently don't either.
...I even registered as user some time ago to be able to download your script....
I have read your many... sorry... few previous posts and have not replied, specifically because of their rude tone.
...Still many irritating bugs and still not very stable and fast performance....
So where are the bug reports from you? Where are the requests for assistance when something doesn't work the way you expect it to? Often times, what people intially interpret as a "bug" simply turns out to be incorrect use of a feature that can be easily corrected. But I have only seen you post one topic reporting what you preceived as bugs (many of which weren't). So, rather than posting to get help, you just post a flame instead... yeah, that makes sense... really adds to the credibility of your claims too. Good strategy.
So I really got irritated by the fact you claim it is the fastest as it is not. And this is the truth
...
<parody>"So I consulted my four-year-old as to the best approach to resolving the issues I have with your menu, and we decided that a public tantrum would be in order. We also decided that to counter your claim most effectively, we should simply state that "it is not" and further support our view by insisiting that "this is the truth." My four-year-old calls this the
'is not/is too/is not/is too' debate strategy and assures me that it works well, and that no empirical facts are required to substantiate our view."
</parody>
I don't want to comment the claim of "Andy"...
"But I will anyway."
I almost dropped dead...
... OK... that'd be too easy, so I'll just quote it and avoid further comment.
I would appreciate at least a "thanks!"
See below.
An please tell "Ruth" what it means.
"Since I can't be bothered to, yet again."
Anyway you will not meet me again on your site.
"Thanks" (there it is). I will, however, admit to a certain amount of disappointment. I was so looking forward to your next insightful pile of... um... comments.
OK... seriously now. The bottom line is that not everyone will be happy with a product. Fine. If you think a competing product is better, then by all menas use it, but don't
repeatedly advertise a competing product on someone's commercial site... that's just bad form. Or if you hope to use a product, but have some concerns, then make them known and politely seek help through the available channels. But this sort of thing is an example of how
not to use such channels.
Kevin