A surprising move by Microsoft: “MSDN Subscriber Downloads now supports Firefox! And Opera. Funnily enough, when we were doing the initial planning for our 3.0 platform I got some pushback from the dev team on this requirement because only .5% of our old site traffic was on a non-IE browser. After we realized that they were serious we got the requirement straightened out, only changing it from ‘Mozilla’ to ‘Firefox’ since that’s the predominant browser.”
we got the requirement straightened out, only changing it from ‘Mozilla’ to ‘Firefox’ since that’s the predominant browser.”
Does it means that they’re still browser sniffing?
At least they support FF
All servers get user-agent info, and it’s a very simple thing to use this info through javascript or better in PHP or other server-side scripting interfaces.
Now if they deny certain browsers -even though they’re compatible with the site- that’s another story.
Javascript doesn’t care what the server gets for user-agent info…it’s locally executed code…
It might be possible (and interesting to see) Javascript code that is generated serverside using the User-Agent info as a basis…instead of passing down JS for every agent imaginable, generate the Code based on the Server received UA information…
I wasn’t saying Javascript was a server side language, I’ve used JS before (and prefer not to most of the time) but I was saying one can either use a function in their server side language to send code based on user agent (insanely simple to do through PHP) or use JS.
Depending on the situation they both have their place.
I like the idea of using a server side UA grabber to send custom JS code to a user though, not entirely flexible for all server setups but that can possibly save a lot of time!
When I refer to browser sniff, denying access to browsers is exactly what I’m talking about, note that to “support” firefox they replaced ‘mozilla’ with ‘firefox’
Obviously they’re getting <1% of hits from non-IE browsers. It was originally designed to be used w/ IE, and if it didn’t work w/ other browsers, then why would people use them to access MSDN?
What probably happened is that someone would try to use a non-IE browser, see it didn’t work well, then come back using IE.
I’m curious though. How difficult is it to create a download area that’s cross-browser compatible?
I’m curious though. How difficult is it to create a download area that’s cross-browser compatible?
Very difficult when you don’t want competition from other browsers
dylansmrjones
kristian AT herkild DOT dk
Obviously they’re getting <1% of hits from non-IE browsers. It was originally designed to be used w/ IE, and if it didn’t work w/ other browsers, then why would people use them to access MSDN?
Because we don’t use IE on principle until MS fixes all the long outstanding problems. When I was actively developing on Windows (only a hobby now), I used Mozilla (there was no Firefox then) to access MSDN and Windows Update. It was a royal pain in the butt, but I stuck to my principles. If more people did, maybe IE wouldn’t be the mess it is today.
I totally agree. If a site doesn’t work well w/ Opera or FF, I usually send a nasty gram to the webmaster and/or don’t bother going back.
Of course, since MSDN is an MS site, is it any wonder why they are preventing the use of other browsers? I don’t agree with it but I understand it.
Actually, the site works better in Firefox then in the latest IE.
I was logged into the downloads section to get a new ISO of XP2 Vol, and IE would not allow me to expand the tree to that level for some reason, every other product worked fine.
But I opened it in Firefox and it worked flawlessly.
Is it a good sign or a bad sign that now Microsofts own sites work better in Firefox then IE?
This is the Shock-Of-The-Day!
Maybe it is just a bunch of dumb-ass fanboys at Microsoft that make ( some ) Asp.Net generate code that only works in IE. Maybe it’s not a corporate edict. Your typical MS fanboy probably still hasn’t downloaded their first version of Mozilla/Foxfire, still, this is good news!
The only reason for my sarcasm is in my job I CAN’T pretend IE is the only browser in town. So, it’s an incredible pain in the ass to have to come up with workarounds to problems generated by Asp.Net.
And I thought Bill and Steve told the world .Net would be browser agnostic…
And I thought Bill and Steve told the world .Net would be browser agnostic…
Agnostic 2. One who is doubtful or noncommittal about something.
So basically it means they’re doubtful about using other browsers with it, and noncommittal about adding support.
Sounds about right to me.
Maybe it is just a bunch of dumb-ass fanboys at Microsoft that make ( some ) Asp.Net generate code that only works in IE. Maybe it’s not a corporate edict. Your typical MS fanboy probably still hasn’t downloaded their first version of Mozilla/Foxfire, still, this is good news!
Decisions like that come from the top, not from the fanbase.
Corporations work like this..
the main work force (grunts), do the real work.
their managment make STAFFING decisions
senior management make decisions on company policy.. (like only IE support etc)
CEOs etc are purely figureheads.
same the world over for all types of corporations.
So as you can see, it was not a bunch of MS fanboys working at MS who decide not to support other browsers.
BUT it does raise more questions.
Why do people from the US become SO loyal to a company, even if they have only been working there a few days ?
Is this real loyalty or just an act ?