Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 3rd Dec 2012 15:25 UTC
Talk, Rumors, X Versus Y Interesting theory, backed up by data, to explain the difference between Android device sales and browser usage share. "The stock Android browser in previous versions reportedly had problems rendering non-mobile optimized web-pages, leading to lower usage. If a user realized that certain webpages were improperly rendered on a mobile device, it would obviously lead to a drop in future browsing sessions from that device. Meanwhile, on Android 4.0, as consumers have realized that the browsing experience is more "desktop-like", it has led to an increase in browser usage."
Thread beginning with comment 544023
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: Comment by shmerl
by shmerl on Mon 3rd Dec 2012 21:31 UTC in reply to "RE: Comment by shmerl"
shmerl
Member since:
2010-06-08

It's the problem of illiterate developers, not the problem of browsers. Back in the day many sites were IE only either. That changed, thanks to Firefox to a big degree.

Edited 2012-12-03 21:33 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[3]: Comment by shmerl
by lucas_maximus on Mon 3rd Dec 2012 22:25 in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by shmerl"
lucas_maximus Member since:
2009-08-18

It's the problem of illiterate developers, not the problem of browsers.


Not really IMHO. Two reasons:

* Yet again whoever allowed vendor specific extensions made a massive mistake, they assumed that web developers would adhere to recommendation (not many do, which is ignoring the reality of the situation ... they took an idealistic and not pragmatic view). At some point they could have made a line in the sand ... but they didn't have the balls.

* Companies only care about the top X% support, Webkit was there first, was ahead of the game and it was abused because people have mouths to feed.

Back in the day many sites were IE only either. That changed, thanks to Firefox to a big degree.


I could go on about this .. as this is my trade.

But IE was soo damn superior at the time compared to the competition and there were no real standards in place (much like today) there was little point taking anything else seriously.

You can rage all your want about that, but at the time standards supports was a joke and the only browser that came near to it was IE.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[4]: Comment by shmerl
by shmerl on Mon 3rd Dec 2012 22:47 in reply to "RE[3]: Comment by shmerl"
shmerl Member since:
2010-06-08

IE didn't try to focus on standards, it tried to hijack them. Luckily it failed. I don't think Webkit tries to hijack standards like IE did, but custom extensions obviously complicate things. The situation improves with time though.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[3]: Comment by shmerl
by fatjoe on Mon 3rd Dec 2012 22:54 in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by shmerl"
fatjoe Member since:
2010-01-12

Back then we had IE6-devs, now we have MBP-devs...


A (way too expensive) webdev agency created a new "modern" web page for a business I know. It turns out that new site renders correctly only on MBP-retina and Safari. Guess what their response was when I complained that it looked like shit on a standard 1366x768 PC laptop...

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[4]: Comment by shmerl
by lucas_maximus on Mon 3rd Dec 2012 23:17 in reply to "RE[3]: Comment by shmerl"
lucas_maximus Member since:
2009-08-18

Not surprised in the least.

Works on my machine is an unfortunate reality.

Reply Parent Score: 4