51–60 of 77 posts
Almost every major browsers had some kind of contributions that we take today for granted. Also: http://www.slashgeek.net/2012/06/08/5-features-opera-browser...
Opera didn't invent [modern] tabs http://allthatiswrong.wordpress.com/2011/01/14/opera-did-not...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Vista's delays didn't do much to entrench IE6. IE7 was available on XP, and companies just flat out didn't want to upgrade from XP or IE6, even though there were more superior options available. Why? Because of the huge amount of legacy code that relied on IE6, and would not run on IE7. Microsoft could have kept in ActiveX support and all the insecure bits that these applications relied on, but instead they did the r…
>Vista's delays didn't do much to entrench IE6. It did in that Microsoft did not originally plan to release an update to ie for Windows XP. The idea was that next gen OS would come with next gen browser. >IE7 was available on XP, and companies just flat out didn't want to upgrade from XP or IE6 ... Do you not think that that has something to do with the fact that there was a 5 year window, in a pivotal time for the i…
Consequently, I'm of the opinion that they made a rod for their own back and it became very costly to maintain and enhance their browser. Truly, they were hoist on their own petar!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why discount Microsoft's contribution just because "if they didn't do it, someone else would have"? If that's how you think, then nobody's contribution to the world is significant, since "somebody else would have done it."
Not really. Not all contributions are equal. For every contribution A there is a likelihood L(A, X) that is the chance of someone else making the same contribution within time X. It seems completely reasonable to rank contributions with low values for L (for a given X) higher than others. People are claiming that Microsofts contributions have very high values for L, ie. if MS hadn't come up with it, someone else woul…
And then we found this functionality had been removed in IE8 :(
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Google does have a conflict of interest. The best case scenario is a better internet, but only for google products for them. People love google, but it's a for-profit company, not a foundation. Chrome would not be the first abandoned project, either. Anything can happen. Competition is good.
Google may be motivated to attempt things like Dart and NaCl which help drive forward their own products first and foremost, but they have a consistent reputation of making their web-advancing client-side technologies open source too (Dart, NaCl, WebM, SPDY, Chromium, Webkit, etc are all open source). They also have Mozilla, Opera and Apple pushing forwards as well (though I'd argue that IE9/10 isn't putting much com…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, I think it's important to point out to people that perhaps weren't active in web development back then that IE6 was a huge leap forward, and at the time was a great browser. The only reason we hate it now is because it stuck around too long, and arguably that isn't even Microsoft's fault.
>and arguably that isn't even Microsoft's fault. Yes it is. Microsoft disbanded the ie team after the release of ie6. This coupled with Longhorn/Vista's delays entrenched Windows XP and by extension ie6 stronger than it otherwise would have.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not really. Not all contributions are equal. For every contribution A there is a likelihood L(A, X) that is the chance of someone else making the same contribution within time X. It seems completely reasonable to rank contributions with low values for L (for a given X) higher than others. People are claiming that Microsofts contributions have very high values for L, ie. if MS hadn't come up with it, someone else woul…
How soon we forget. If TBL hadn't invented the web, we all would have had to wait six months for gopher to come out. Hell, SGML + FTP is practically the same as the web, and that was around for years.