RSS
Over the past 2 days, the internet has been abuzz over Google's long-rumored internet browser coming to light. Called Google Chrome (Beta!), the browser aims to significantly speed up browsing sessions and web applications using multiple threads (think of these as individual messengers instead of one very overwhelmed, underpaid messenger).
Of course, such talk immediately drew comments from developers and internet enthusiasts alike: the (second) web browser war is in full swing. Like the first war in the 90's between Netscape Navigator and Microsoft Internet Explorer, comparisons were being brought back into blog posts and Twitter/FriendFeed.
As I've noticed in the discussion, developers' hate for one particular browser was obvious: Internet Explorer 6; and as I've noted in the past, very publicly I might add, I'm not a fan of such criticism.
Of course, such talk immediately drew comments from developers and internet enthusiasts alike: the (second) web browser war is in full swing. Like the first war in the 90's between Netscape Navigator and Microsoft Internet Explorer, comparisons were being brought back into blog posts and Twitter/FriendFeed.
As I've noticed in the discussion, developers' hate for one particular browser was obvious: Internet Explorer 6; and as I've noted in the past, very publicly I might add, I'm not a fan of such criticism.
Let's face the facts: When Internet Explorer 6 was first launched,
Windows XP was just getting ready to go on sale. The September 11
attacks hadn't taken place yet and the world was vastly different.
Microsoft was riding high off of polishing their lead in the browser
(cold) war, and sadly decided to take a backseat in development for a
bit. At the time, Internet Explorer was among Netscape and Opera, as
well as the (then publicly perceived bloatware) Mozilla Suite. Simply
put, there weren't many alternate options.
When Firefox came around, the first public beta hit the internet some 3 years later. Those 3 years, development-wise, is a very long time, giving any team ample time to check off items on a list of improvements, new features and competitive options Internet Explorer hadn't introduced or resolved yet.
When Firefox was fully launched, it had a large community of developers behind it, and a grassroots marketing push to get it to be the de facto replacement for the aging Internet Explorer platform. Toe-to-toe, Firefox 1.0 was a very different internet browser than Internet Explorer, even if both were released at the same time.
I, as a developer, understand the frustrations most of us face when we have to continually support Internet Explorer 6. I, along with the rest of us, can't wait until Internet Explorer 8 is released and being pushed out to the masses via pre-installation and update services. But there is still something about Internet Explorer that allowed the internet to reach critical mass with the general population.
Internet Explorer 6, as flawed as it is, gave much more flexibility to developers and users alike, to experience new functionality and allowed a number of groundbreaking web applications to reach a larger audience.
While I fully support the efforts like "Save the Developers" and the campaign to replace Internet Explorer 6 with IE 7 or even Firefox, I can't hold Internet Explorer 6 on the same pedestal as Firefox 1.0. I certainly understand and appreciate the differences in features, standards support and overall community support between the two. And while I wish things were different, I can't hold the developers of Internet Explorer 6 at fault either. After all, most employees can only do what they're told, especially when they have other goals and projects in the pipeline.
Internet Explorer 6 was even listed by PC World as being among the "25 Worst Tech Products of All Time." Hindsight is a terrible scale to measure by, and in this case, hindsight unfortunately takes the spotlight in criticism against an internet browser.
So I ask again: looking at the facts, knowing that Internet Explorer 6 is now 7 years old and is somehow continually being compared to even modern-day browsers, why should Internet Explorer 6 get as much hate from the community as it does?
Update: Not sure why my friend Dan Rubin's trackback didn't work, but there's some excellent follow-up discussion to this post over at his blog. Read "The Final Word on IE6" and add your feedback!
When Firefox came around, the first public beta hit the internet some 3 years later. Those 3 years, development-wise, is a very long time, giving any team ample time to check off items on a list of improvements, new features and competitive options Internet Explorer hadn't introduced or resolved yet.
When Firefox was fully launched, it had a large community of developers behind it, and a grassroots marketing push to get it to be the de facto replacement for the aging Internet Explorer platform. Toe-to-toe, Firefox 1.0 was a very different internet browser than Internet Explorer, even if both were released at the same time.
I, as a developer, understand the frustrations most of us face when we have to continually support Internet Explorer 6. I, along with the rest of us, can't wait until Internet Explorer 8 is released and being pushed out to the masses via pre-installation and update services. But there is still something about Internet Explorer that allowed the internet to reach critical mass with the general population.
Internet Explorer 6, as flawed as it is, gave much more flexibility to developers and users alike, to experience new functionality and allowed a number of groundbreaking web applications to reach a larger audience.
While I fully support the efforts like "Save the Developers" and the campaign to replace Internet Explorer 6 with IE 7 or even Firefox, I can't hold Internet Explorer 6 on the same pedestal as Firefox 1.0. I certainly understand and appreciate the differences in features, standards support and overall community support between the two. And while I wish things were different, I can't hold the developers of Internet Explorer 6 at fault either. After all, most employees can only do what they're told, especially when they have other goals and projects in the pipeline.
Internet Explorer 6 was even listed by PC World as being among the "25 Worst Tech Products of All Time." Hindsight is a terrible scale to measure by, and in this case, hindsight unfortunately takes the spotlight in criticism against an internet browser.
So I ask again: looking at the facts, knowing that Internet Explorer 6 is now 7 years old and is somehow continually being compared to even modern-day browsers, why should Internet Explorer 6 get as much hate from the community as it does?
Update: Not sure why my friend Dan Rubin's trackback didn't work, but there's some excellent follow-up discussion to this post over at his blog. Read "The Final Word on IE6" and add your feedback!
Facebook
FriendFeed
Google Reader
Last.fm
LinkedIn
Technorati
Twitter
dude. seriously? the fact that its 7 years old means it should be abandoned. better browsers have emerged in the last 7 years (IE7, Safari, Firefox 2+, etc.)
I would agree with you on this post. I think alot of the frustrations that designers and developers feel is certainly misguided. Hating IE6 is the easy thing to do but if anything we should hate the fact that people are still using this browser. Microsoft has released IE7 and is getting ready to release IE8 so it's not like people don't have choices. So I guess the answer to your post would be the reason we hate on IE6 so much is because it's the easiest target to place the blame on.
As I said, I completely support the grassroots campaigns to get people to switch to a newer version of IE or another browser altogether. But this post isn't about switching, it's about the browser itself. With age, any software or hardware shows its irrelevance when compared to modern versions, but that doesn't mean that said older software or hardware is inherently bad.
Chris, even without a comparison to other browsers, IE6's faulty support of the box model, weird errors encountered with margins when floating items, quirks mode (...I can add more and more and more) made it a shitty browser even back when it was relevant.
"dude. seriously? the fact that its 7 years old means it should be abandoned." You don't have kids, do you? (-:
Yes, IE6 has become a huge pain in the ass for developers. (Paradoxically, it also gave most of us our jobs.) But guess what? Everything is a huge pain in the ass for developers.
Internet Explorer is a piece of consumer software, and by most measures, it's some of the most successful software in history. You really have to ask yourself why all these millions of people have ignored the alternatives and REPEATEDLY OPTED OUT of the free IE7 upgrade. From the user side, the difference obviously isn't as dramatic as you're making it out to be.
I'm quite ambivalent about IE6 nowdays, while it's reducing in market share it's going to remain significant for a long time yet. Perhaps its real crime was the longevity of 7 long years alongside the growing expectations of web standards developers.
The next pain in the butt for us is probably the rapid releases of browser versions now. I'm getting more calls asking about version x.x not looking right in browser X. The expectation that we'll all happily keep upgrading browsers en masse is also a bit naive. We need to accept that our environment is a complicated one - regardless of who the demon of the day currently is.
Google Chrome? It's yet to be realised whether this will require new workarounds. I've installed and been testing it and get this constant Google Installer notification that comes back even when approved - every 10 to 15 minutes. So its fast but obviously not without its own flaws.