Maybe I should forget about using IE to test a couple of small web sites I maintain.
Posted on 08/01/2005 6:07:16 PM PDT by Panerai
Microsoft's new Internet Explorer 7 browser won't pass a stringent standards test that rivals have embraced.
In its browser blog, Microsoft acknowledged that IE 7 would not pass the Web Standards Project's Acid2 test, which examines a browser's support for W3C (World Wide Web Consortium) recommendations including CSS1 (Cascading Style Sheets), HTML4 and PNG (Portable Network Graphics).
"We will not pass this test when IE7 ships," Chris Wilson, lead program manager for the Web platform in IE, wrote in the IE blog. "We fully recognize that IE is behind the game today in CSS support. We've dug through the Acid2 test and analyzed IE's problems with the test in some great detail, and we've made sure the bugs and features are on our list--however, there are some fairly large and difficult features to implement, and they will not all sort to the top of the stack in IE7."
Standards advocates and Web developers have criticized Microsoft for letting Internet Explorer go without a significant upgrade for years. This spring it became clear that Microsoft would finally address long-standing standards-compliance issues in its planned version 7 upgrade.
Microsoft last week came out with a test, or "beta" version, of its Windows Vista operating system and IE 7.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.com.com ...
Eye Roll Please......
Doesn't matter what they do - we're all on Firefox now.
What sense does it make to release a product that doesn't measure up?
Doesn't that describe a few MS products :-)
I guess if you haven't got any good Mac news, you may as well trash MS.
IMO they don't want to measure up. More people use Internet Explorer than any (all?) other browsers. Why should M$ spend their time playing catch up when they are already #1? They would rather set standards than follow them. It's their way of thumbing their noses at the competition.
Maybe I should forget about using IE to test a couple of small web sites I maintain.
I see no mention of any browser that passes the Acid Test.
BTW, FireFox has a few more bugs in it than Explorer...
This article does little more than to mindlessly bash MS.
The trouble with this kind of thinking is that to remain #1, you must build a better mouse trap or be prepared to find yourself in a game of catch up. Resting on your laurels will NOT cut it! NO company is to big to topple.
The open source model is superior to in-house software development when applied to infrastructure products.
Releases are every 6 months and validated by a dedicated group of talented user/developers numbering in the 1000s and scattered about the globe.
You can't beat that when it comes to code stability, innovation and rapid issue resolution.
MS is betting their GUI is superior to the point where swithing costs are sufficiently high to allow them to release an inferior product knowing the market will stick with them.
Honestly, I don't know how long this can go on. Open source applications are more difficult (but not impossible to) gain competitive advantage over in-house designs due to the lack of critical mass developer/users (word processor users don't typically have deep programming knowledge or a need to improve on whats out there).
Crazy Prediction: MicroSoft will lose the infrastructure game, but continue to win in the integrated suited of productivity related applications areana.
I was checking out IE 64 last night...pretty darn fast, just needs some plugins and it'll be killer. I'll stick with Firefox until then.
Honestly, I don't know how long this can go on. Open source applications are more difficult (but not impossible to) gain competitive advantage over in-house designs due to the lack of critical mass developer/users (word processor users don't typically have deep programming knowledge or a need to improve on whats out there).
Crazy Prediction: MicroSoft will lose the infrastructure game, but continue to win in the integrated suited of productivity related applications areana.
I use Microsofts IE and generally support their products but they remind me of the runner who is leading the race by a lap and sees no reason to look behind him.
Nope ! Still OPERA
When things got going in the marketplace with word processors, WordPerfect was the MASSIVE leader. It had 95% market share. Microsoft came along and bought Word from a tiny little company and tried to rebuild it to a little bit better. They succeeded. WordPerfect corporation decided to delay doing a Windows version. MS came out with a new Windows version of Word. WP had to play catch-up. They came out with a half-hearted effort at a Windows release. It was buggy, unstable and caused Windows 3.0 to actually be WORSE than it was before, if you can believe that. By the time they came out with a workable Windows version, they had 25% of the marketshare, and shortly later, had to sell the company. It's been sold at least 4 more times since. The simple moral is you can't wait for the world to catch you, they build too much momentum and sweep you under the rug.
Paul
Paul
I remember those WordPerfect days when WP was THE word processor. I used it and thought highly of it UNTIL Microsoft Word became my word Processor of choice. Your point is well taken.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.