OpenIDThe reason monopolies are a bad idea
I wasn’t planning to cover the recent AOL and Microsoft announcements as they’ve been covered to death elsewhere by people with far more insight than myself, but this third piece of news seems to bring things to a head: Microsoft have announced the end of development of Internet Explorer for the Mac. I’ve never really had access to this browser but I’ve read enough to know that it was the first full browser release to take web standards seriously, and as such plays a very important part in the history of the web standards movement. It’s sad to see it come to an end, but it also raises yet more questions about the direction Microsoft is taking with regards to the web.
In case you haven’t heard, Microsoft paid off AOL a few weeks ago to the tune of $750,000,000. In return, they got rid of the ongoing lawsuit concerning their illegal use of their desktop monopoly to crush Netscape, and more importantly gave AOL the “right” to use IE as the browser for the AOL software for the next 7 years. Seeing as AOL own Netscape and most Mozilla development is still carried out by full time Netscape engineers, this has raised doubts about how long AOL will continue to fund development of everyone else’s favourite browser.
The real stinker though is the revelation that Microsoft are abandoning development of the stand along version of Internet Explorer for Windows. IE 6 is all we’re getting—if you want a better version of Microsoft’s browser you’ll need to upgrade your operating system, as future browser versions will be an integral part of the OS. When you consider the number of people still using Windows 98 (for example, every PC in the Library at my University) it’s likely to take upwards of 5 years from the release of a new Windows OS for it to achieve a significant market share. The upside of this is that we’re stuck with IE6 for the best part of the decade.
This is incredibly bad news. IE’s support for modern standards, while verging on adequate, is still severely lacking. It’s not just niceties such as alpha-transparent PNGs and position: fixed; the browser is littered with bugs that make writing complex CSS for it a minefield, and has a number of well documented flaws (such as the inability to enlarage pixel sized fonts) that consistently require workarounds. It doesn’t even support the <abbr> tag!
On the plus side, at least this will give developers who haven’t yet cottoned on to the benefits of web standards time to catch up. On the minus side, once they do catch up they’ll have to endure the same pains that the rest of us are putting up with now.
Personally I can’t wait for Firebird 1.0, which I plan to distribute to everyone I know with a Windows PC. I know it won’t make the slightest bit of difference in the big picture, but at least it will help dissipate some of the frustration.
Better analysis than mine:
- Ian Hickson
- Jeffrey Zeldman (and again, and again, and again)
- Todd Dominey
Okay then. I was about to purchase a mac to do testing in, mainly in IE5. This really has made me ponder that decision.
Do MS seriously expect me to subscribe to MSN just to test in their browser? Well they can take that and shove it where the glow from Bill Gates' bank manager doesn't shine.
Are we really like to see changes from Safari directly go back into Konq? If so would I'm wondering if that would be adequate for testing.
Anyway, yes, IE. There needs to be something done about IE *now*. We need protests. We need complaints. We need pressure. Web standards and Web innovation is going to grind to a complete stop if MS doesn't get their act seriously together.
If someone will buy me a plane ticket I'll happily go and stand in Redmond with a "Full PNG transparency now!" sign :)
Tom Gilder - 14th June 2003 01:43 - #
Simon Willison - 14th June 2003 01:47 - #
Actually, having said that, *THE* most aggravating thing is MS not being clear about their plans. I'd be much happier if they just *clearly* stated their plans for the future of IE (please note: comments in webchats by employees is not clearly stating plans), and I don't see why they can't.
Tom Gilder - 14th June 2003 03:33 - #
Tom,
I too was literally going to place an order for an iBook on Mon/Tue, purely for testing purposes. I'm still going to though. There are still quite a few people using Mac/IE, and there will be for some time to come. Also, no matter how closely Konqueror tracks the WebCore changes, it's not enough. For example, testing in Mozilla isn't enough, I need to test in Netscape as well - remember the <label> float bug that made them disappear in Netscape, but never appeared in a Mozilla release?
It's things like that, plus gamma/dpi differences in the display, plus font issues, and a whole load of other things that make it impossible to offer a professional service without doing this kind of rigorous testing (in my opinion, of course, plenty of shops out there feel they can get by with testing in the latest release of "both" browsers).
Jim - 14th June 2003 12:27 - #
irritant - 16th June 2003 17:48 - #
irritant - 16th June 2003 18:16 - #
The Fib - 1st October 2003 17:13 - #
Bill Andrew - 8th January 2004 20:30 - #
Bill Andrew - 8th January 2004 20:37 - #
Standards from a person who likes to bash Microsoft for the sake of it? Why should people care about your own way of standards? Cause you are planning to make tons of money by writing a book on them and that you know them quite well? Why should someone listen to a liar (claimed a person was a Microsoft employee on XAML thing). And why the hell you are using the word standards so many number of times again and again, cause you think you are a savior of the web and you are going to save us? Save yourself from endless Microsoft bashing, get to the facts and then discuss the real issues. Use of the standard over and over again is not going to help anybody and just because you are in the club with other "standard" guys shouldn't mean that you are free to bash anybody else, cause you are the only good people in the world cause you use your standards and everybody else is an idiot.
Some few lies from your post:
Microsoft didn't pay off to AOL, AOL demanded the money, Microsoft settled it.
Microsoft didn't abonden the Internet Explorer for Windows.
Microsoft's action for Internet Explorer for Mac doesn't show anything about Microsoft's intention for the web. You are obviously trying to scare people off by spreading FUD.
I am not a Microsoft employee or in anyway affilated with the company and definitely not an admirer for the company, but as much as you love to talk about your "standards", I also like to point out idiots who waste our time with endless stupid talk about Microsoft.
Sergio - 29th January 2004 21:16 - #