Linked by snydeq on Mon 14th Jan 2013 18:46 UTC
Thread beginning with comment 548758
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
They knocked around the easy stuff fairly well, hit their historic cues pretty well, heck, they even stumbled on something insightful like the senior leadership vacuum and yet they botched the pièce de résistance by listing IE6 as misstep number one.
Maybe someone should compile a list of infoworld botch jobs...
IE6 was the best browser at release and Microsoft were at the top of their game. The misstep was not following it up and resting for five years.
A mistake for them, a lucky break for those of us who appreciate the entire web not being tied to Microsoft. It sure sucks for web developers though, since IE6 still has to be accounted for when developing major websites.
RE[2]: Comment by Kroc
by lucas_maximus on Tue 15th Jan 2013 07:19
in reply to "RE: Comment by Kroc"
IE6 was the best browser at release ...
That's debatable. I was using opera at the time. It was faster than IE6, had tabs, rendered most sites perfectly and didn't have the many security issues that plagued IE6. So I wouldn't agree that IE6 was the best browser even back then. It also ran on Linux btw.
Edited 2013-01-14 22:59 UTC
IE6 was the best browser at release and Microsoft were at the top of their game.
Seriously?
I thought IE6 was garbage at the time. No saved sessions, no tabs/multiple documents, and missing quite a few other nice browser features I'd been using for years. It was like a stripped down minimalist browser, only without the speed and low use of resources... What on Earth was so good about it?
To me the idea that it was the best browser at release is about as ridiculous as labelling Windows ME the best OS.





Member since:
2005-11-10
IE6 was the best browser at release and Microsoft were at the top of their game. The misstep was not following it up and resting for five years.