SuperSite Blog

90,000 users? Does he realize that while those would be HUGE numbers for Opera, its nothing compared to the windows install base? Hell, I bet there are 90,000 people still running Windows 95 but that doesnt mean that Microsoft should keep selling it.

His complaint should be "Hey, IE doesnt do web standards 100% and that is so important that you should use a different browser. And Opera does do that so it's a great choice." That is an argument thats worth having.

Functioning?  I guess the question is - is the market for web browsers functioning as well as it could be if MS was standards-compliant with IE?  Perhaps more people would use other browsers, or even more browsers would come out, if MS was standards-compliant.  Because then people would not run into issues with some websites that are designed for IE.  

Besides, so what if the Opera guy is wrong in the substance of his arguments.  Bottom line - his argument is CORRECT - MS should adhere to web standards.  There's no excuse not to.  Maybe it can't be done overnight, but they should move in that direction, commit to full compliance by some date and not take any backwards steps like the one the Opera guy is pointing to.

You know I agree. Opera lately has been presenting its case with a serious taint of sour grapes in their vitriol. Opera has done a lot of good for web standards but rather than promoting that, they seem to be getting rather fixated on kicking Microsoft.

Now I am no fan of Internet Explorer (7 is bearable) due to its frankly awful standards support and the proposed IE 8 switching mode is something I have great reservations over. (Jeremy Keith explains this on A List Apart in the current edition) However I think Opera are doing this the wrong way and instead of presenting their case fairly, the opinion is beginning to regard their attitude as immature and petty.

That said, IE does hold a monopoly at the moment (certainly it holds on average about 79% of the browser market on the websites I manage) but I don't think it's a stable position as it has a number of challengers in the form of Firefox, Safari and yes -- Opera.

We should be pressing the IE 8 team to adopt standards by default rather than via opt in with sensible, logical and rational arguments, not hysterical knee jerk and one minute headline grabbing rantings.

I would happily present this case considering the grief that Internet Explorer adds to developing valid and accessible websites. And let's not get on to the disaster that is Outlook 2007 using Word to render HTML e-mail. (No image alt tags?) But I refrain from spitting bile onto the pavement on a soap box to do so. I'll cater for everyone, IE users alike and push the need for web standards across the board.

The problem is -- the end user has often no idea of how much grief goes into any design work to get it to work on a cross platform basis and so if a web developer does a good job and can create a consistent across platform and OS website with all the variations this presents; then why would a user be particularly compelled if their current browser seems to work just fine. That's why ~35-40% of users are still on IE6 because to them, the web isn't 'broken' and who would expect them to know.

If Opera can't market their browser in a compelling way to attract new custom then they need to look at where they are going wrong, rather than blaming their competitors solely for their lackluster performance.

I have all the three browsers in my system (IE, FF, Opera). Each browser has its own advantage enough to keep them. I see Opera's "failure" on market is just about bad marketing. Many times I enter a site and there is adv tell me to switch to FF, but didn't see the same thing on opera.

This is pretty typical for the Opera CEO to say these things.  On several occasions he has slammed the Mozilla camp on various issues.  Mozilla's response was kind of like, "you know we're on the same side, right?"

Since Operas numbers have been stagnant and Firefox has surged, it surely seems like sour grapes.  And he certainly sees what was once a major positive for Opera, standards compliance, is no longer going to be exclusive with the impending release of IE8.

The simple fact that Firefox has such a relatively large market share when a perfectly functional browser is installed by default on 90%+ of the worlds computers certainly shows that the market is in fact functioning.

I typed this in Firefox as a matter of disclosure.

I like the comment that a Microsoft tech said on announcing IE8.  Paul, see if you can dig up the quote somewhere cuz I think I read it on here.

The quote was something along the lines of: "IE[8] doesn't need to follow "web standards", because IE IS the web standard".  I agree.  When the majority of websites are designed around a specific browser (IE), that IS the standard.  It doesn't matter that a governing body says "this is what it should be", because it just isn't.  The other browser developers should just adapt to Microsoft, not the other way around.  Paul, isn't this what you defended when you mentioned that "Microsoft has compromised Vista's security to appease its competitors"?

Waethorn's correct, all the companies that I use require IE for the 'cloud' apps. IE 7 now works with these apps, but it is the COMPANIES that are slow to adopt change. Change is needed for improvements and future progress. IE 6 was compatible with my software from the beginning, even when the company warned us that it is not recommended blah, blah, blah. They just were too lazy to test for a year! I use only IE on my Windows PC. Three [almost forgot Vista on my Mac] have nothing else but IE, and at work, it's only IE. Last week, my kid cried when there was no sound at the Noggin site with the newest FF and Flash. It was pathetic as IE worked flawlessly.

Web standard and open web standard are not the same thing, and IE is a lock-out/lock-in, and IE 8 is more of the same from Microsoft.

Pingback from  Daily Find #33 | TechToolBlog

"Web standard and open web standard are not the same thing"

ya, this is what it equates to:

"web standard" - what the largest shareholding company makes up as the de-facto standard for all web specifications

"open web standard" - what the rest of the collective loser crybabies want it to be, but will never make it so

;)

Waethorn,

I'm not a cry baby looser. I'm someone who works hard to deliver services via the web that are accessible to people of all abilities, some of those with disabilities whose lives are made easier because hard to reach services are now available on the web providing them with great benefits.

Internet Explorer doesn't stop this happening but it doesn't exactly help when many 'designers' give up and lay a site out using tables creating a nonsense reading order...

"Internet Explorer doesn't stop this happening but it doesn't exactly help when many 'designers' give up and lay a site out using tables creating a nonsense reading order..."

you should really update your tools - Expression Web in XHTML 1.1 mode shows tables as being depracated.  stop using Frontpage - it's also depracated.

*laughs*

What's the saying about assumptions? :) I don't resort to tables but many designers do when they give up when IE breaks their CSS layouts.

My tool is Notepad and I personally haven't laid a website out using tables since about 2002. But it's hard work and others do give up. This site itself seems to make a spurious use of tables itself.

"many designers do when they give up when IE breaks their CSS layouts."

They should honestly stop using XHTML 1.0T then.  it's not hard-locked to the standard - it's meant to be a transitional standard (hence the name), IE doesn't treat (read: render) it as strictly as 1.0S because it incorporates certain IE-specific tweaks in that rendering mode that also affect many CSS properties.  Posting a site and listing "XHTML Compliant" and only using 1.0T is a MISTAKE.  If you want better XHTML support, use XHTML 1.1 and CSS 2.1.  There's really no reason to use 1.0S either, since there are still many depracated tags and properties in that mode.  Using Expression Web in 1.1 mode (which is ONLY "Strict") renders beautifully in IE7, Firefox 1.5+ and Opera alike.  I don't even support IE6 anymore because IE7 has been on Windows Update for ages now, and for security reasons, IE6 SHOULDN'T be supported.  I'm not saying IE6 was that bad for the time (XP SP2 gave it some much needed updates), but when it's successor is now just under 3 years old, there's no reason not to upgrade.  Besides, it's just easier to code in XHTML 1.1 because Expression Web doesn't even let you use depracated tags in a page when you validate it, so there's none of the old "garbage" leftover.  XHTML 1.1 is a slick standard.

Waethorn,

Thanks for the heads up, I'll have to have a closer look at Expression Web, I'm pretty certain that I may have been given a free copy at a developer conference last year by Microsoft... Now where is it?!

I work in XHTML 1.1 exclusively as well, best to stick to the same standard across all sites, and it just makes for a much tidier site that is reliable to manipulate through the DOM. I tend to use jQuery a lot with ASP.net at work.

I only wish I was able to drop IE 6 support. On the main site I maintain (about ~6,000 unique visitors a day) 35% of users are browsing with IE6 according to our analytics software for Feb 08 so far. However the recent push of IE7 on WIndows Update will hopefully start denting that.

IE6 was at the time the best browser, in 2001 Netscape was hopeless (remember NN4 compatibility kludges....) and it's good Firefox cajoled MS into updating IE.

FWIW, I'm using IE 7 to write this reply so I'm not a raving lunatic :) Ok I am but for other reasons!

Thanks!

"what the rest of the collective loser crybabies want it to be, but will never make it so"

Interesting perspective for a Canadian. Typical Micro-zealotry, though.

Having said that, Paul's analysis is spot-on. There's a reason Firefox is doing so well, and it clearly shows that Microsoft doesn't have a deathgrip on the browser market. Thank goodness for that.

"Interesting perspective for a Canadian."

you see, that's why the rest of the world hates America.

"There's a reason Firefox is doing so well, and it clearly shows that Microsoft doesn't have a deathgrip on the browser market."

Oh ya, Firefox's marketshare is just glowing isn't it.  I guess when you compare it to Mac marketshare, it looks pretty good by comparison.