Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 3rd Dec 2012 15:25 UTC
Thread beginning with comment 544030
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[5]: Comment by shmerl
by lucas_maximus on Mon 3rd Dec 2012 23:11
in reply to "RE[4]: Comment by shmerl"
IE didn't try to focus on standards, it tried to hijack them. Luckily it failed.
No, it did try to focus on standards. IE 8 was the first browser that implemented XHTML 1.1 and CSS 2.1 correctly. (Firefox 2 BTW came out at the same time as IE8 and that supported far fewer web standards and has far more bugs).
IE 6 was working against a draft standard at the time and said draft standard was changed after its release and they Microsoft couldn't change it because they promised to support it for as long as they have.
The equivalent browser at the time was Netscape ... and that didn't give f--k about standards.
Also recently, Microsoft have actually been speaking to the web developers on why they don't always support the latest stuff.
This is what I said about it:
http://luke-robbins.co.uk/internet-explorer-and-why-they-are-behind...
Here is the original video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GvtHb6tBx6Y
The long of the short of it is, that IE is used by the Enterprise and Enterprise customers expect a certain set of features to be support to browser EOL. If they get include standards that aren't finalised they find themselves forever supporting an incorrect standard (see IE6 comment I made above).
I don't think Webkit tries to hijack standards like IE did, but custom extensions obviously complicate things. The situation improves with time though.
No it won't improve with time, because other browser that aren't webkit based are being forced to support the -webkit extensions on mobile.
Webkit it the IE6 of the Mobile browsers.
Edited 2012-12-03 23:15 UTC





Member since:
2009-08-18
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.
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.