Too Cool for Internet Explorer

I prefer Andy Clarke's approach: http://www.stuffandnonsense.co.uk/

I find it somehow more subtle whilst still making the point.

I love it, although IE users probably won't know what they're missing (I guess that's the point )

I find it somehow more subtle whilst still making the point.

Haha , hadn't seen the site in Firefox until now (since I just recently switched to Firefox as default browser :oops: :roll: ) !

That's so great!

I love it!

Today, researching hacks to fix my business site for PC for IE I found the same "conditional comments" way to display comments only to IE. Ironically, the example MS used is to recommend updating to IE 5.5.

I was planning to use that trick to tell visitors to my non-biz site to "upgrade to Firefox".

Hah i love both the websites

Perhaps when i start a blog I'll join the too-cool club

I think I'll slip on my bullit proof vest and prepare to be shot....

But this notion of willfully sending different stuff to IE (or anything else for that matter) is not an overly comfortable one.

Ok IE is utter and total bobbins but as a site creator you are supposed to deliver the same stuff to people regardless of what they are using. It's not for you to dictate how someone accesses a site.

As far as I can tell the content is indeed the same so nothing really to complain about there (I refuse to use IE long enough to check much) but it's certantily not as easy to read and some functionality might be absent (search box for example).

Now that all said I would be the first to rejoice when the last copy of IE was deleted but if people wanna use it (yes some people actually like it for some reason) who are we to make life harder for them?

*ducks from sniper fire*

Pyeeoooow

I don't see a problem with sending different content to IE users.

Check this out:

http://www.hattrickentertainments.co.uk

That's an appropriate Icon I think

Put it this way - remember the outrage at Microsoft for sending different stuff to Opera and non-IE things?

What's the difference?

Also that link you sent is EXACTALLY the point. It's stupid to willfully and knowingly ghettoise one browser over another, be it IE or any sensible browser.

Right. There´s no need for it anyway - just use "modern" HTML/CSS, and IE will outcast itself.
However, it probably is a good idea to include a warning(conditional comments) that it mightn´t look as good in IE as in other browsers.

I agree with briski on this one. doesn't this go against the whole code-forking thing? and as briski says, who are we to dictate what browsers users use?

I abhor IE, MS and all it stands for. But who am I to tell people not to use it? Sure, educate people to its defects and let them make the choice for themselves, but this is not going to get anywhere.

IE is not going anywhere any time soon. what I feel we should push for is twofold, education (as stated) and IE to get with the standards. I know it's unlikely the later will happen, but if you don't try there is no chance at success. I know there are people from within the community which we are a part of, who are trying to do just that, and so far they are positive about what is happening.

furthermore, I've read plenty on how MS sever up an inferior site to non-IE users, and they were so slated for that. how is this any different? it's it right because we believe in it and think it's right?

hrm. dangerous road imho.

finally...

unless there is only ever one browser, in the foreseeable future will one website really look the same on all sites??? is it necessary? aren't we then doing what the pro-ie people do? they don't care about other browsers, so we don't care about ie enough to make it look good in there?

I just don't think two wrongs make a right.....

but at the end of the day each person has to decide for him/herself what their choices will be.

larmyia

Why not use javascript to detect IE and just block those users? That's a good way to kill a website. I love firefox because it actually is standards compliant. I developed for IE for the longest time, and unfortunately, my clients don't give two hoots about compliance. So, I build them what they want to see. Firefox originally made the sites look like crap.

One thing to consider is audience. If a webmaster wants to reach the widest available audience, then making a site accessible in IE despite it's flaws makes sense. This is typical for a commercial or not-for-profit type site.

OTOH, for personal sites, I see nothing wrong with feeding Standards compliant code to any browser that comes along with no further effort. There's an axiom "let it fail"... if IE users never have to pay the consequences (e.g. see broken websites) for their (non-)choices to use IE there will be no reason for them to switch or Microsoft to become compliant.

It's the cost of doing business to pay the hacking price to make my business site work for IE users. I'm not willing to pay with time from my life to make my personal sites work for IE users.

There's 2 ways to look at the "too cool for IE". It can be snobbish "Rolex is too good for you little people", or if combined with some educational outreach (e.g. Browse Happy ) it can be "Whee this is cool... why not join us".

Advertising is all about creating a want in the person you're trying to sell... giving IE users "broken" (i.e. standards compliant) websites is a good way to create the want, IMHO, if you don't mind or can afford to "lose" some customers.

My little personal sites are W3C compliant, and all have disclaimers that they're not tested in IE, but why not check out Firefox. I don't feel any obligation to do more for them.

Well, most browsers play by the same rules - IE is the one playing a different game alltogether.

The reason why my site has this warning is that I´m using recent HTML - which IE doesn´t know. So it works, but looks/feels different.
The static menu isn´t static, some features don´t work, etc...

When browsers honor the W3C standard, a site will look more or less the same in all browsers - the variations should be minimal.

What have I started - but ok

Glad to see I have not taken total leave of mysenses

And that's fine, but the point here is that Malarky has WILLFULLY spent time to create a totally seperate style sheet for IE that makes his site in my opinion less usable for IE folk. There is NO reason for this, it's not like IE could not do most of the things on the better site, he's just choosing not to do it to get people to leave IE.

Not everyone can join that's the problem, there are countless people in business who can not change thier system at all. Sad but true i'm affraid.

Just to clear up I am not saying "Malarky is the devil burn him", his site is brilliant and he's great. I am not saying "hey IE's ok lets play with it some more", it's not it's rubbish. I'm just saying that if this willful alianation of IE (Or any other browser - yes Microsoft i'm looking at you here) seems a totally against the principal of "this site will work however YOU choose to acess it" and I found it odd that someone would spend lots of time creating a totally seperate site style for IE. :

Let the barrage commence

I hate M$ and IE with a vengeance that is beyond measure, but the sad fact of commercial life is that we have got to hack our code to deal with it's pitiful inadequacies - we have no choice if we wish to stay in business

But if enough web designers were to start a movement whereby IE was not supported, accompanied by massive global publicity that shamed M$ into producing a proper browser, I for one would risk loosing clients to join that movement. M$ would then have to respond to such an initiative and we could start spending our time on more productive tasks than hacking hacks and cursing M$.

But that simply isn't going to happen in big enough numbers to create momentum. Unless corporate buyers start recommending Macs, we are always going to be at the mercy of that self-centred monopoly called Microsoft; and IT departments will never recommend Macs because they know they'll be out of a job when everything runs smoothly and calls to the IT Help Line are halved (after an initial bedding in period).

WAKE UP WORLD!

Plee of ignorance here but..

Wouldn't it better for MS if they made a browser that was w3c compliant? I mean, if *I* was a developper on their team and we were sitting at a meeting brainstorming new ideas I'd be like:

"Hey guys, lets make something that follows all the standards so the CSS Creator members won't be able to give any valid reasons (except spite) to make IE users convert to FF!"

Am I giving MS too much credit?

Yes.

As far as they're concerned, IE works. They have no need to fix it.

If only it were that simple! Alas it is far more complex and devious than that, although I will attempt to explain it in simple terms. Application developers are keen to build applications that run on the web, not the desktop, due to many advantages and issues including Microsoft's ever-changing API problems. If Microsoft build IE to keep up with the standards then browsers would very swiftly go from strength to strength, web technology would blossom at a far greater rate than it currently is, and most applications would run across the web, leaving end-users needing nothing more than a good browser on any platform. Suddenly Windows would not be needed, just a browser - any good browser. Microsoft's core product would loose the one attraction that keeps it in it's monopoly position: desktop application compatibility. It is therefore in Microsoft's long-term interest to sabotage browser development and keep the world relying on Windows applications. The internet is a threat to Microsoft and so it is successfully implementing it's tried and tested strategy of 'embrace, extend and extinguish'.

Another approach

http://4webmakers.com/blog/

Are you able to summarise that in English please?

Do you mean that 4webmakers site?
See attachment.

Open it in IE

Oh I see, or rather I don't because I'm using Firefox on a Mac! Thanks Lorraine.

[edit] x-posted with above.

hehe that's cute, and more the way we should be going I think. remind people not to use IE sure but make it impossible, no way jose!

Rofl

I like it, it's clever.

Oh. I had no idea of course because I use Macs. What does it do?

True enough. And that's why it's worth the effort to hack for IE's flaws if it's a business site, or info you want everyone to access it.

Yet... even if people can't change their browser, they can certainly agitate the IT departments or their bosses for better alternatives. That's why I'm OK with "let it fail" when it comes to my personal sites. That and I don't have a PC, and it's darn near impossible for me to troubleshoot for IE. So, I code for standards and link to Browse Happy and Firefox.

I sympathize with the frustration behind it. Trying to get my "validated" business site to display in IE for PC somewhat close to how every other browser does makes me angry and crazy. I'd love to see Microsoft broken up the way AT&T was in the 80s.

I think it was Abraham Lincoln who said you could catch more flies with honey than vinegar... and that's a better PR move for web standards. Always compensating for someone else's choices is forfeiting your opportunity to influence; that's as bad as no PR. Just giving IE valid code will make it look ugly and broken and make the point. Tops it off innocently too with good motivations of "compliance".

By the way, what does that 4webmakers site show to IE? I don't see an attachment in Lorraine's post.

Not for MS.
roytheboy already had a good point. Another problem, IMO, is that once IE displays HTML as it´s supposed to be, many sites that once ran well in IE will be broken now.

In the end, the display of sites would be as in any other browser, giving IE no advantage at all.

For now, it at least can claim that many sites work best with IE...

Interesting discussion and comments. Thanks guys

Just for the record, i have to use IE at work. No choice at all.

At home I use IE, Firefox and Opera.

I wonder if Firefox had deficiencies, if there would be such vehemence against them. I suspect not, it would be treated with respect and carefully guided into making the right changes to operate correctly.

Now I appreciat that Firefox is open source but IE can be approached in the same way, if enough people wrote nicely to Microsoft and said "I notice that you don't follow the browser standards X, Y and Z and I would like to know when you intend to" they might get the message that they are alienating people.

However, I cannot condone some of the language used in this forum. I'm shocked to see people saying that they are opposed to Microsoft in such harsh terms. Microsoft is a business, if you were in business (as i suspect a lot of people here would be or would like to be) then you'd expect to be treated the same if you were successful or not.

So what if they are trying to dominate the market, there are methods to stop that and then you move on. You don't just try to destroy something you don't agree with, that's the mentality of a suicide bomber and it is beneath all of us I hope.

I fail to see what is so bad about Microsoft's products though.

<prepare to repel borders>

They do actually work you know and if you choose to learn how they work properly they do what you want, except in some buggy areas, which MS work on fixing. Isn't this the way of all software development? I have had to use MS products mostly for all my working life and have always been abel to get everything done to the level required, if not better...

Just because a company wishes to protect what it sees as its own 'stuff' then we shouldn't be wanting to destory them either.

I understand it can be infuriating to work with but hold on a minute and think what has led us to this point. If Bill Gates hadn't done it, someone else would have. Such is the nature of a market economy.

Open source is ace I do agree, but if the rules were always to be open-source i doubt we would have moved on as quickly as we have done in the computing world. I fear that committees would have slowed things down to a crawl to ensure that everyone was compliant first...

Just a rant and a thought.

</prepare to repel borders>

Hugs,

Rob.

Have you tried creating a site that works in IE? The numerous bugs and hacks are what's so bad about it.

IE7 fixes a lot of these, but how many people are going to get it?

That's a great post dkintheuk. It made me laugh

...now, back in the real world I have yet more sh*t to deal with thanks to M$'s attempts to sabotage everything that it does not own in the internet sector :roll:

Oh Rob, I do hope your defences are strong as thou shalt be repelling those borders for a long time , you are besieged for those remarks

FF does have deficiencies, it's open source which does not mean it's perfect, but it is able to react and fix things and release them at lightning speed.

Wrote to Microsoft ? what do you think people have been doing moaning silently, MS is continually bombarded over their browser, they are quite aware of the feelings towards it in the development community, that community has been patiently pointing out the problems for years now, oh and were you aware that quite a few problems could well have been fixed long ago and released as a critical updates, talk to any software programmer that understands the MS API they have been saying this for some time. So what holds MS back ? it would get us of their back and cement it's position as the leading browser if it was fully standards compliant. Is there some other motive ?

Your shocked by the harsh tone towards MS, I'm sorry but you just do not get the level of despair and fury that MS drives many to with it's useless software and appalling operating systems.

Hugo.

Here is a bit of irony. If IE were made standards compliant it would do well to identify itself as Mozilla so as not to break all those pages hacked to work with IE.

DE

[email protected]:~$ tail -1 /var/log/apache/access.log
192.168.1.47 - - [05/Aug/2005:13:46:27 -0500] "GET /~gt/webdev/hcenter.html HTTP/1.1" 200 1268 "http://koko/~gt/webdev/" "Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows 98; Q312461; sbcydsl 3.11)"

[email protected]:~$ tail -1 /var/log/apache/access.log
127.0.0.1 - - [05/Aug/2005:13:50:45 -0500] "GET /~gt/webdev/go.php HTTP/1.1" 200 354 "http://koko/~gt/webdev/" "Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.7.8) Gecko/20050517 Firefox/1.0.4 (Debian package 1.0.4-2)"

It kinda already does.

cheers,

gary

Fair play everyone... it was a bit inflammatory i suppose but hold a moment, I have been able to make my pages work (albeit eventually) under IE.

It's just a case of horses for courses.

But, while accept that people do bombard MS with commentary about the quality of the software, it is not that organised, i know a bunch of people who work there and they don't see a reason to change the way they develop. Because the people that tell them there are problems normally rant and come across fairly unprepared.

Now i know that is a generalisation and that there a clear standards issues not being properly handled by MS but they honestly believe they have the right idea... FOR THE RECORD I AGREE WITH ALL OF YOU THAT THEY DON'T HAVE A CLUE OF RIGHT IDEA.

That does not mean their products don't work they just work differently and it is no reason to hate with such nastiness, it just breeds more nastiness.

<flame on?>

Sigh :roll: Look for the bigger picture and one day you'll understand that they do indeed have a clue of the right idea. They employ some of the best brains on the planet, so why do you think that IE is such a heap of antiquated [email protected] that can't even follow standards laid down five years ago?

Look at the bigger picture. What will happen to M$'s core business model when business applications work well following the server-to-browser-to-server thin-client model?

The truth is out there

Cd = D / (A * .5 * r * V^2)

Where D=Microsoft
Rho= density of most IE users
V= will to move things forward
A= Browser market

Ok that was meant to sound clever but it's a bit late.. so let's just say that MS is dragging the whole market down to it's level till everyone else loses the will to fight them. That's their dartardly plan.

I just have to say - thanks for having a decent conversation with me and not kicking my butt all over the place.

I totally understand where you're all coming from and i get the hwole deal about MS being non-complinat. I just wonder if i'm seeing as a much smaller deal than all of you.

I can see that point about MS wanting to do every other browser in but is that really the plan? Could be i suppose but we all want all our brwosers to work as effectively as possible. FFS if MS wanted to do it properly wouldn't they have just got people on the standards comittee and taken it over?

Ah well, you're all cool people and I really appreciate being allowed to have an opinion without the need to shout... D'OH did that already... scuse me i'll get me coat...

Also got to add, i've done a complete reinstall today on my home PC.

Yes i've installed MS Win-blows first but i have to so i can connect to work without them crying.

I have installed SP2 and then started to do the Win Updates...

It is very very late now... 2:13 am - started at 9:30...

It's working but there are so many updates it is not true.

Firefox was installed and working in under 4 mins...

Hmmmm... perhaps there is something to not being a big company after all.

It's like anything I suppose - when it starts to cost you time/money/hair then you start to think of it as a problem - if it doesn't affect your day to day life then it's understandable that you feel it's not a major issue.

I've been attempting to build websites professionally for a couple of years now. Before that I was blissfully ignorant about the problems of IE and some other MS programmes and thought that all the anti-MS griping was just a bunch of jealous geeks! I could use the internet when I wanted - I didn't care much if it was via IE or (then) Netscape.

Now I spend a fair amount of developing time frowning at the screen and my language has deteriorated! I do my best to make my sites work on most browsers but I'm not as good a coder as some on here and so it's a struggle. I do get slightly crazy when I think that IE7 may well be released soon and STILL not comply to standards that have been around since 1998.

Nope - you're still missing the big picture - read my last post again

I suppose what they'd actually like is for people to have to buy a MS desktop PC - "sealed unit" with all MS packages on there. Three years later they throw it away and buy a new version with the newer OS on it.

As I don't think there's much money in the hardware side of it they're trying to get as close as possible to this idea with just the software.

I've finally put my money where my mouth is and gone out and got myself an Mac.

That's because most of us regulars on this forum are grown-ups trying to earn a living, not kiddies trying to score 'dissing' points.

I don't think you'll regret it

It´s not a matter of being successful or not. It´s a matter of business mentality.
MS decided not only not to play by the rules, they´re playing a different game alltogether.

In themselves? Not much(though I´d have to revise that when talking about Word).
However, once you´re trying to use their products together with other products, you´re done.

Maybe.
But I fail to see why we are forced to learn the "MS way", if there already is one, clearly laid out by the W3C.

Normally, I´d agree.
But HTML isn´t MS "stuff". It belongs to the W3C, if it belongs to someone at all.
Besides, MS is, IMO knowingly, breaking the future of HTML - as XHTML isn´t properly supported by IE, making it hard to use it.
(XHTML 1.1 and up)

No doubt.
Then it´d be someone else we´d not like.

The real problem here is that, in economic terms, there is a market failure. If there wre a perfect competitive market, IE would probably be a good browser today. However, MS has abused the monopoly power it has by virtue of selling the world's dominant operating system to stifle competition. By bundling IE as part of the OS distribution, they have effectively seized control of a good part of the web.

I suspect IE7 will only be available for an advanced MS OS because many of IE's flaws are inherent to the OS innards at a fundamental level such as the messaging API used for interprocess communication.

So, wait for that new OS and IE7 and make due with Internet Exploder in the meantime. Or do what millions of discerning web-o-philes have done and d/l Firefox.

DE