Why I'm not happy about IE9
stefanp.tumblr.com
Why I'm not happy about IE9
1–10 of 35 posts
Re: Why I'm not happy about IE9
#2[deleted]
Re: Why I'm not happy about IE9
#3IE for other platforms? No Please. There are at least a few niche mac/linux websites which you can build without worrying about cross-browser issues. You introduce IE and the whole echo-system lags behind.
Further, there may be reasons why IE is not so portable to other platforms. Considering the fact that IE9 is not currently (and probably will never be) available for even Windows XP, I don't think that a cross-platform version is a realistic expectation.
IIRC, IE is an integral part of the Windows OS (for whatever business/architectural reasons) and this means that producing a Linux/Mac version may be more work that you think it is.
Re: Why I'm not happy about IE9
#4Who benefits from IE9 being available for other platforms?
Not users. What would the ability to run IE9 add to the Linux or Mac desktop? Another web browser? Do we really need one?
Not Microsoft, who would have to invest massive amounts of effort into porting it, and large parts of the Windows codebase too.
Honestly, I wonder if the author of this article was deliberately trying to think of something to criticise about IE9, and this was the best he could do.
For non-web developers who use non-Windows operating systems, IE9 is an irrelevance. For web developers who use any operating system, IE9 has to be a good thing, because it means more browsers out there that are closer to the standards.
Re: Why I'm not happy about IE9
#5It sounds like a conspiracy theory - make IE standards complaint -> get the market share -> introduce new nonstandard features.
PS Safari runs on linux only under Wine as far as I know.
Re: Why I'm not happy about IE9
#6The core argument is that IE9 is so good that it might make people like Windows and stop using Linux, and that's bad because obviously MS will abuse its new found web browsers market share.
By that argument, with IE9 making web developers lives happy, and much more importantly, making users' lives happy with a decent default browser on the most popular OS are bad things.
Re: Why I'm not happy about IE9
#7Who benefits from IE9 being available for other platforms? Not users. What would the ability to run IE9 add to the Linux or Mac desktop? Another web browser? Do we really need one? Not Microsoft, who would have to invest massive amounts of effort into porting it, and large parts of the Windows codebase too. Honestly, I wonder if the author of this article was deliberately trying to think of something to criticise abo…
Hey ! Thanks for taking the time to read and comment.
I'm sad that you think I was trying to come up with something - I just wrote about this strange (but honnest !) feeling I got, as people talking in nice terms about IE hasn't happenned in a while.
In fact I don't think I'm criticizing IE itself at all.
Perhaps I could re-phrase my point more simply: I don't think IE 9's standards support means "the web wins" in the long run, since IE is still tied to Windows for strategic reasons.
You're of course right that it's a good thing for web devs right now, though.
Re: Why I'm not happy about IE9
#8It sounds like a conspiracy theory - make IE standards complaint -> get the market share -> introduce new nonstandard features. PS Safari runs on linux only under Wine as far as I know.
Hmm conspiracy theory... Nope, Microsoft is a for-profit company with a huge platform that might be slipping into irrelevance.
They're playing the cards they have at any given time - when it means supporting standards, they do that. And when they're totally dominant, they tend to set the standards.
I'm not even suggesting it might be intentional - the IE team and the MS top management don't necessarily have the same long-term goals is all.
Maybe the IE team would even love to go cross platform and compete as a browser and not as a part of a larger platform.
Re: Why I'm not happy about IE9
#9There are many things I dislike in this article.
The first thing is this primal "everything microsoft does is evil" reaction. The author tries to rationalize, but in the end it's just "well IE9 is bad because it can be good for Microsoft".
The use of fallacies such as "most of them are probably Microsoft fan boys" is also quite irritating. People disagree with you? Fanboys! Blinds! Fools! Heretics!
Then, the article ends with the strange argument "IE9 should be cross platform". Should Microsoft port all their clients to other plaftorms? The goal with IE9 is to provide Windows with a as good as possible browser.
Yes Microsoft did play the embrace and extend game and we should thank them, because frankly, IE6 introduced a lot of useful features back then. The world changed and I don't think such approach would make sense now.
The real thing to be angry about is when they decided to stop development on IE.
Re: Why I'm not happy about IE9
#10Really silly article - I can't believe this made front page on HN. How many Linux users would use Internet Explorer? How many Mac users would use Internet Explorer 9? Probably not many, almost certainly not enough to justify the cost in time and dollars to Microsoft, and assuredly not the author of this post, who seems to just need to find something to pick on Microsoft about. I thought those types died out long ago. I'm neither an MS/Mac or Linux fanboy. As a web developer, I've used Windows & Linux professionally, and developed sites to work on PC, Mac, and Linux browsers (as many of us have), and IMO, we don't need more OS/browser combinations to contend with; instead we need the browser/OS combinations that we do have to behave in a standards compliant manner across those OS/browser combinations. IE9 is a strong step in that direction for Microsoft.