Bad Microsoft, baaad...
Tuesday, January 29th, 2008Wait, I lied... The title is misleading. I apologize.
People are getting upset because Microsoft Internet Explorer 8 is going to be ACID2 compatible, but only if you add a special <meta> tag to the sites that want IE to be running in that mode. Why? I fail to see why this is such a big deal, from the perspective of a web site designer.
Face it. IE6 was screwed up. But it was still the most popular browser until Firefox showed up on the scene. There are going to be countless sites that are built to cater to IE6's shortcomings and funky non-standards. That's just a fact. Standards compliant sites are a minority. Face it... Not many people but uber-geek techies (with nothing to lose if people don't visit their sites) are going to design outside IE's problems and force their readers to download another browser besides that which came by default with the most popular operating system in the world.
But people are still complaining about IE8. Why? I think it's because it should render sites properly without the addition of a tag, correct? I can understand that... A tiny, tiny bit. But you would rather Microsoft, who has a huge market share, whether you want to believe it or not, decide to fix their browser and then subsequently BREAK all the websites that were designed for IE6? How is that going to be a good thing?
"Hello, this is Microsoft. We finally fixed IE in version 8, but you're going to pay for our mistakes now, because your sites are going to be broken, and you're going to have to rush to make sure it all works again because we screwed up."
Yeah... That's going to be a good approach. (The Apple approach, haha: "We changed this, now deal with it, because we know best.") This is Microsoft we're talking about. Do you honestly think that's the best course of action for them? They have a huge responsibility to their existing users, and they have always bent over backwards to provide backwards compatibility for things. Just look at Windows... It's getting fatter and fatter because people still want to run the thing on ancient hardware. Of course, people complain about Windows being bloated... But then people also complain about Windows Vista having such steep system requirements when Microsoft decides to drop some old hardware in favor of the latest stuff. (And yet, Apple doesn't seem to garner this sort of reaction.)
Approach A: Microsoft builds Internet Explorer 8 to be 100% standards compliant all the time, without use of meta tags. Sites built to cater to the funkiness of the browser instantly stop working. Public outcry ensues because Microsoft doesn't give anyone time to fix the problem.
Approach B: Microsoft builds Internet Explorer 8 to be 100% standards compliant only with a special tag for sites that have been built to be standards compliant. Sites continue to work as they are at the moment, giving time for people to upgrade to the new standards mode. Public outcry ensues because Microsoft makes you add a tag to your site to run in the standards mode.
I am going to give Microsoft the benefit of the doubt and say that this is a transitional phase between IE8 and IE9 and 10. Give people enough time to warm up to the new mode and give them enough time to fix their sites. Every browser has quirks. IE8 is a massive upgrade, from the sounds of things. There will, of course, be some quirks. Every application has them. When IE9 or 10 comes out, strip the compatibility feature and use that as the time limit for people to get their sites finished. There will naturally be a group of people who don't bother to upgrade until they have to, but that's what the time limit is for. Once you have a sample of how IE is going to work in standards mode, you can experiment without it being mission-critical that you have the site working flawlessly when IE8 rolls out.
But maybe that's just me and my being a fan of Microsoft shining through.