CSS and why I hate Microsoft

T

thendis

Registered
I'd like to talk about Microsoft Internet Explorer's, shall we say, "quirky" support of Cascading Style Sheets.

I think it's extremely irresponsible that Microsoft has refused to fully support CSS. I read an article recently that claimed Microsoft has again said they will not aim to fully support CSS 2 in their next IE release (IE 7.0). They claim CSS is "flawed" and they are waiting until CSS3 before attempting to fully implement it.

Whether Microsoft approves of CSS or not, as a company that produces the most widley used browser available, their job is to create a means of displaying websites and displaying them properly. It makes me so mad that they should be so pompous, that they believe 91% of Internet users should have to wait until they are good and ready before they start doing their job.

If they're not careful, they will loose their #1 place as quickly as Netscape did.

...I feel better now.
 
With the current uptake of Firefox they're already losing a big share in the market place.

The browser stats for people visiting my site currently stand at:

Internet Explorer 22%
Crawler/Search Engine 22%
Safari 20%
Firefox 13%
Opera 6%
Lynx 2%
Undetermined 15%
 
definately, and I couldn't be happier about it.

Problem is there are a lot of people out there who don't realise there is even another option out there other than IE. These are usually causal computer users, like people who only use it for work or for email etc.

There are a lot of people who think Internet Explorer IS the internet. They actually thing the entire Internet is installed on their computer at the same time as IE.

I'm reminded of a time when my Mum was having serious problems with her computer (no doubt because of IE's security holes). I offered to re-install Windows for her, and she said to me:

"OK, but make sure you re-install Amazon.com; I use that all the time".

Makes me laugh to this day.
 
You are right, IE is a miserable thing to deal with when building sites, but unfortunately you have to live with it.

I have a slightly different approach from you, I regularly use IE. So when my newly developped site works on this piece of C##@R@##A#&%P software, I'm sure it'll work on professionally developped browsers.
 
When it comes right down to it, the fixes you have to build into your CSS (and sometimes to the HTML/XHTML you generate) are rather small and low impact. The web has always been about compromising ideals in design and embracing the lowest common denominator. It seems that's simply not going to change as each browser company does what they want. Yes, Firefox is closer to a "good" solution but it still has its issues.
 
aicul said:
You are right, IE is a miserable thing to deal with when building sites, but unfortunately you have to live with it.

I have a slightly different approach from you, I regularly use IE. So when my newly developped site works on this piece of C##@R@##A#&%P software, I'm sure it'll work on professionally developped browsers.
Click to expand...

Don't be so sure of that.

Microsoft regularly invents HTML properties and objects (see Frames [iFrames, frameborder etc], scrollbar colouring, directX alpha shading and ActiveX) and it's up to the W3C to decide what makes it through into ratified standards (which standards-compliant browsers comply to, funnily enough).

The problem is, they're implemented in IE (and that abomination called FrontPage), so stupid, stupid, RIDICULOUSLY IDIOTIC web designers use them and it makes Firefox, Safari, Konqueror etc all look underpowered and unuseful.



IE is *the* reason why I feel Microsoft is so hated in the open-source community (which is almost entirely standards-based). Its flagrant ignorance of the established standards bodies in place (starting with the lack of JVM in XP, all the way through to their apparent hatred of the W3C). Rumour had it that IE7 will fix that for us all, but MS has said that they won't ever release another standalone web browser. Meaning maybe IE7 won't be released on XP, 2K, Me, NT or 9x.

Meaning we'll all still be writing to those pretend standards that IE 6 and 5 set up.

I just wish when they have problems they'd either FIX them, or LEAVE them, so you could have expectable behaviour every time.


Edit:

The worst part is, the unpredictable behaviour of IE when rendering standards-compliant code leaves people consistently writing TABLE-BASED layouts. Which stops forward advancement of the medium.

I admit, there're holes in the standards at the moment (no vertical-alignment is the glaring one), but the longer people are forced to learn tables as a layout technique, the longer it will take IE to change. It's a horribly vicious cycle.
 
texanpenguin said:
Microsoft regularly invents HTML properties and objects (see Frames [iFrames, frameborder etc], scrollbar colouring, directX alpha shading and ActiveX) and it's up to the W3C to decide what makes it through into ratified standards (which standards-compliant browsers comply to, funnily enough).
Click to expand...

I think we have the same opinion, just my previous post was maybe a little incomplete, I use standard html/css, none of the IE absurdities. Hence if it works on IE, I'm pretty sure it'll work elsewhere.
 
Another real pain is someone using IE'S DOM for development knowing that the other browsers out there won't support it.
 
Stats for Jasoco.net / GeekPub forums as of August:
MS Internet Explorer 40.1 %
Firefox 34.7 %
Safari 21.8 %
Opera 0.9 %
Netscape 0.8 %
Mozilla 0.7 %
Camino 0.4 %
Unknown 0.1 %
OmniWeb 0 %
Konqueror 0 %
Others 0 %

A few months ago, IE was much higher. I'd agree alternate browsers are finally catching up.

Just not fast enough.
 
I've been working with my web designer a lot the last 6 months and we're working on a brand new site that uses heavy CSS and JS, and it's been a lengthy process getting it to work right with IE. All the other browsers (Firefox win/mac, Safari, Opera) work very well, but IE is so stubborn, and often there are stupid CSS hacks you have to do to get around its short comings... I'm really looking forward to IE 7 - hopefully it fixes a lot of these issues.
 
And when can web designers get rid of IE 6 or even IE 5 support? IE 7 will be final at the end of 2006, IIRC, and probably won't have more than 20% of the web browser market until mid-2007. And since users of earlier versions of Windows might be left back... 'ts a drag.
 
I definitely agree. For the past month I've been building my own .com, and while I test my web page primarily in Safari, I also know to test in Firefox and Opera which are the next most popular. Internet Explorer for Mac, who cares no one uses it. I then go to Internet Explorer on my PC. While most of the site is fine, there are always elements that I have to fix in it. And it's not just a simple solution either, IE is so stubborn. Go to hell Microsoft! :mad:
 
Jasoco said:
Stats for Jasoco.net / GeekPub forums as of August:
MS Internet Explorer 40.1 %
Firefox 34.7 %
Safari 21.8 %
Opera 0.9 %
Netscape 0.8 %
Mozilla 0.7 %
Camino 0.4 %
Unknown 0.1 %
OmniWeb 0 %
Konqueror 0 %
Others 0 %

A few months ago, IE was much higher. I'd agree alternate browsers are finally catching up.

Just not fast enough.
Click to expand...

Is that on the PC and Mac platform?
 
if that was cross platform, wouldn't that be a firm figure on the world market share fo rapple? apple computers have nearly 30% of the world share!
 
thendis said:
It makes me so mad that they should be so pompous, that they believe 91% of Internet users should have to wait until they are good and ready before they start doing their job.

If they're not careful, they will loose their #1 place as quickly as Netscape did.
Click to expand...
They are doing their job, frankly. Their job is to provide products that people want. If you don't like their browser, you would use someone else's browser, and they would have to figure out why, and make changes to their product to correct the loss of market share. They are pompous because they can be. If most people are using your product, you might tend toward being a little less interested in making sweeping changes (not that CSS2 is a sweeping change at all). They don't have tabbed browsing yet, when everyone else does. Why? Simple. They don't need to. They have no incentive to. The only way to give them an incentive is to stop using their browser. On Windows, I use FireFox, and I use it on the Mac as well. It's a better browser, by far, and I like not having to rely on MS apps.

The simple answer to all this is simple. Bill Gates and the upper-management of MS need to be removed. Now, that won't happen, because he owns more of the company than any other stockholder, but my point still stands. If they were to leave and put someone in there who could be innovative, which they are not anymore, the company could release better software. You can complain about their browser, but remember that all their software is like that. It's rushed to market and then forgotten about for two years at a time. In their effort to control the software industry, they have moved into too many markets, and spread themselves far too thin. Look at their OS. What is innovative about that? Unlike browsers, there are no real standards in the OS world. You can build whatever you like, but when you have other companies (Apple and Sun, to name two) that are putting features into their systems that are far superior than yours, you have to wake up at some point.

Regarding Netscape, it died because MS started giving their browser away (oh, and they used anti-competitive tactics to force OEMs to stop packaging Netscape with thier computers). You can't go any lower than free (unless you pay someone to use your browser), so Netscape was finished. Their business model made reacting to MS impossible.
 
dmetzcher said:
They are doing their job, frankly. Their job is to provide products that people want.
Click to expand...

IMO their 'job' in the context of IE is to provide a web browser. The definition of a web browser is "software that allows a user to access and view HTML document" (University of Guelph definition).

If MS is actively refusing to update their software to support components used by that HTML document, that contradicts the very definition of a web browser. Thus, they are not doing their job.

It's like an automotive company creating a car with no steering wheel.
 
This is like using a bad comparison instead of a good one. (All comparisons are bad. Just talk about what you're really talking about instead.)

Btw.: IE _does_ "allow a user to access and view HTML document" (shouldn't that be "documents"?) alright. It's just not top-notch at its job.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top