Re: Prefer Netscape (was: Lies, Damned Lies & Statistics)

What ever you say! I will do my coding, you do yours. Happy coding.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jeremy Brown" <jeremy(at)localnetamerica.com>
To: "Lisa H" <nstar92(at)bellatlantic.net>
Cc: "KathyW" <kathyw(at)home.albury.net.au>; <hwg-techniques(at)mail.hwg.org>
Sent: Thursday, November 02, 2000 9:49 PM
Subject: Re: Prefer Netscape (was: Lies, Damned Lies & Statistics)


| I hardly believe that coding 'to the standards' is babying Netscape.  It
seems
| more to me like buying into proprietary corporate dependence.  Think of
| Microsoft's popularity this way:  Can a car function without, say a radio?
| Absolutely.  As a matter of fact, the driver is probably less distracted
without
| one.  However, almost every vehicle purchased today contains a 'factory'
| stereo.  Does this make the car function better.  Absolutely not!  But
it's
| there.  Now if someone was to offer you a different radio, after you've
| purchased your car, either for a fee or for free, what's the likelihood of
| switching radios?  Not very.  Why?  You've already got one that works
'just
| fine'.  Never mind that the radio that's in your car is only there because
the
| factory/manufacturer threw it in because they control the/your
environment.  The
| other radio could be (and in the case of Netscape is) better, but it's
'too much
| hassle' to change.  If Netscape had the marketing advantage Microsoft has
by
| distributing it's own OS w/ its browser pre installed, then everyone would
be
| complaining about having to code for the IE users.  As I started off
saying,
| coding 'to the standards' is not babying Netscape.  What happens when AOL
| switches to their own products?  What then when 22 million plus users now
use
| Netscape instead of IE?  We'll see all of the developers who will have to
be
| babied by their clients while they frantically try to fix their mistakes!
( I
| just hope that Microsoft will then get the HINT, as so elegantly put )
|
| Side note:  Oh, I know that this is sure to start the email coming.  Well,
I
| welcome them. I have spent over 6,000 hours in the past year alone doing
nothing
| but coding/programming web sites (Yes, 6,000 hours personally, by myself -
| that's just over 16 hours a day, as I do work Sundays.  Collectively, my
entire
| staff has logged over 15,000 hours). I have dealt with the idiosyncrasies
of
| each browser and have exalted the greatness of each browser.  But when it
comes
| down to it, you make sure your code is written to the standards, Netscape
will
| love it, and IE will accept it.  Why do we insist on coding for a
browser!!!!
| (IE) and then scratch our heads in befuddlement and anger when another
browser
| won't accept the code.  That's equivalent to designing a vending machine
to
| accept your own 'special currency' then get upset when the rest of
America's
| coins don't work in the machine.  It's amazing what standards can help
| accomplish when they're followed.
|
| Lisa H wrote:
|
| > I am tireded of the "browser wars" !  MS had a good product, strong
| > marketing, and Apple could have had it too in the beginning instead of
IBM.
| > Would we be worse off? I guess not in Netscapes eyes.
| > I say we need to get rid of NS if they cannot become compliant.  Too
many
| > hours, and not even enough time in my day to worry over the small
amounts of
| > Netscape traffic. IF we stop babying Netscape, perhaps when it has no
more
| > users, it will get the HINT!
| > ----- Original Message -----
| > From: "KathyW" <kathyw(at)home.albury.net.au>
| > To: <hwg-techniques(at)mail.hwg.org>
| > Sent: Thursday, November 02, 2000 7:02 PM
| > Subject: Re: Prefer Netscape (was: Lies, Damned Lies & Statistics)
| >
| > | ** Reply to message from Dawn <dawn(at)soholondon.com> on Thu, 02 Nov
2000
| > | 19:24:30 +0000
| > |
| > | This one has nearly had it's run, but for those new to the wars ...
| > |
| > | > Many people do not consider the fact that although Netscape had some
| > | > very talented programmers and engineers, that sort of management was
| > | > never going to make it when the market got competitive.  That is why
| > | > they lost the browser wars and that is why they now belong to AOL.
| > |
| > | Not entirely. As someone who tried to organise for an Australian ISP
to
| > get a
| > | contract to sell Netscape when it was still commercial, I agree
| > wholeheartedly
| > | that their management and marketing sucked big time, and their
arrogance
| > was,
| > | in hindsight, amusing.
| > |
| > | As a partner in an ISP who looked at a contract from M$ for
distributing
| > their
| > | browser, and saw in WRITING the exclusionary clauses that would have
| > prevented
| > | us distributing NS even if subscribers wanted it, I have to say M$
have
| > been
| > | more than just "naughty". Opera aren't exaclty innocent in that
respect
| > either
| > | ...
| > |
| > | Netscape's poor java support (which annoyed me enormously) I have also
| > come to
| > | find can also be blamed directly on M$ for applying pressure on other
| > industry
| > | bodies to stop helping NS improve it, to the point where NS could no
| > longer
| > | afford to keep a Java development team going at all (spelt out in part
on
| > the
| > | Anti-Trust Findings of Fact).
| > |
| > | MS have, however, had a lot of help along the way:
| > | * from every slovenly, lazy individual, business and OEM that couldn't
be
| > | bothered installing the NS browser if the OS came with IE;
| > | * from lazy or ignorant web "authors" (I use the term loosely) who
| > couldn't
| > | even get their code to validate if their lives depended on it ("but it
| > works OK
| > | in IE, besides what is 'validate' anyway??");
| > | * and from a largely ignorant and computer illiterate user base who,
when
| > asked
| > | what their Operating System is (on support calls) regularly offer
"Office
| > 97"
| > | or "Office 2000" and the occasional "Windows 97" (windies jumped from
95
| > | straight to 98 for those that don't remember back that far ... ).
| > |
| > | > still build backwards-compatible sites until NN4x users drop below
2%.
| > |
| > | Unfortunatley (and despite M$ attempts to the contrary), that is going
to
| > take
| > | a while :-(
| > | One of our support personnel spent 15 minutes on the phone last week
| > | UNsuccessfully trying to talk a windows user through shutting down
their
| > | computer. Geeez .... felt like saying "put it back in the box, take it
| > back to
| > | the shop that sold it to you and go buy a Mac ..." There is a HUGE
user
| > base
| > | "out there" that are simply incapable of installing even the most
| > | easy-to-install lead-you-by-the-nose piece of software.
| > |
| > | How long is the warranty period on computers these days? How soon can
we
| > expect
| > | the old machines to fail and need replacing with something that has a
| > later
| > | browser(s)?? Good question.
| > |
| > | Will the consumer be given any choice in pre-installed browser
software? I
| > | doubt it ... not if M$ and lazy OEM's have their way. I hear M$ bought
| > their
| > | way out of the 95 anti-trust case. I wonder how much they are offering
to
| > whom
| > | now to get out of this one?
| > |
| > | Well, that's my rant for the month. Pity it doesn't make me feel any
| > better
| > | about browser incompatabilities ...
| > | KathyW.
| > |
| > | SuSE Linux 7.0 / IBM JRE1.1.8 / PolarBar Java Mailer 1.19RC11
|
| --
| Jeremy Brown
| CTO,CIO
| Innovative Business Consultants, Inc.
| http://www.ibc2001.com
| USA: (937) 277-2000
| 1-800-398-3007
|
|

HWG hwg-techniques mailing list archives, maintained by Webmasters @ IWA