Internet explorer is the devil

I may be jumping the gun on this subject because I don't know the complete history of web standards but why doesn't Internet Explorer meet them? I am wasting hours and hours trying to get my site to work in IE and Mozilla based browsers.

What are Microsoft's plans for fixing Internet explorer? I can't help but get the feeling that they are choosing to not fix it because as long as developers are forced to write IE code they can continue running thier monopoly. Well I'm tired of writing crap IE code. I want to browse my websites and others in Firefox.

What actions have people taken against IE's lack of support for web standards? I don't want to have to write IE code all the time but I don't think any of my clients use anything other than IE.

For client sites I guess I have no choice right now until Microsoft steps up to the plate and plays fair but I'm tired of this crap and my own personal sites will block IE.

Are there any IE developers here that can explain to me why the IE department is so incompetant? Don't tell me there is a lack of funding.

I can some up the state of IE in a few bullets:

• After IE gained market dominance, the "suits" didn't think it was worth putting too many people on, so gave the IE team a skeleton crew, hence the lack of development since IE6
• At the time IE6 was released in 2001, it was on par (even ahead of) the other browsers available
• ...but since IE6 was left to rot (by the suits, not the devs) the other browsers overtook it
• Now that the threat of "alternative" browsers is visible to the suits, they're putting more money into IE and now it has to play catch-up.

So if you want someone to blame, ask Scoble for the email address of the comittee that shut down IE6 after Windows XP was released.

Sounds like you need to go read the IE Team Blog.

The following blog entry sheds some light on the issues you raise:
http://blogs.msdn.com/ie/archive/2005/07/29/445242.aspx 

I read up until "web standards" and now I'm done. I suggest you go google Internet Explorer 7 and while you're at it I suggest you look for - "acid 2 firefox" and you might learn a little something about how "standard" firefox is.

W3bbo wrote:

I can some up the state of IE in a few bullets:

• After IE gained market dominance, the "suits" didn't think it was worth putting too many people on, so gave the IE team a skeleton crew, hence the lack of development since IE6
• At the time IE6 was released in 2001, it was on par (even ahead of) the other browsers available
• ...but since IE6 was left to rot (by the suits, not the devs) the other browsers overtook it
• Now that the threat of "alternative" browsers is visible to the suits, they're putting more money into IE and now it has to play catch-up.

So if you want someone to blame, ask Scoble for the email address of the comittee that shut down IE6 after Windows XP was released.

Better still ask for the email address of the DOJ who decided that bundling the browser with the O.S. was wrong and made all kinds of threats that meant the IE team got demoralised and the suits felt they had to seriously cut back on the plans they had for fear of more litigation and heavy fines.

At least that's my reading of what happened.

Manip wrote:

I read up until "web standards" and now I'm done. I suggest you go google Internet Explorer 7 and while you're at it I suggest you look for - "acid 2 firefox" and you might learn a little something about how "standard" firefox is.

I looked up Firefox's acid2 results and firefox did very well. I then looked up IE's results and they were much much worst than any of the other browsers. Infact IE7 did worst then IE6. I'm using IE7 beta right now for my testing and it's a joke.

You can also make the argument the other way: why doesn't Mozilla render the way IE does?

Because the standards say differently? Well, since IE is so popular, why not change the web standards to fits IE's behavior?

It's about as logical

Of course, it'd be better if IE and Mozilla and everyone else supported web standards perfectly. Frankly, it matters less what the standards are.

JoshDavey wrote:

I looked up Firefox's acid2 results and firefox did very well.

Your kidding, right? Firefox is terrible on the acid2 test. The only browser that comes close is Safari, and even it screws it up.

Michael Griffiths wrote:

Because the standards say differently? Well, since IE is so popular, why not change the web standards to fits IE's behavior?

Better duck for cover after that comment

I said somethng like that last year. I'm still clearing the complaints from my inbox , hee hee 

Actually Apple's WebKit (which safari uses) can render the acid2 test perfectly, unfortunatly the code is still in cvs and hasn't made it's way to release. (Turns out that safari was the first browser to do that when it passed the test back in April)

Michael Griffiths wrote:

Because the standards say differently? Well, since IE is so popular, why not change the web standards to fits IE's behavior?

That's what Microsoft has been trying to do:p

Sheva

i really hope they make it so they pass acid 2 this is just unimaginable that they aren't

we need safari for Win32, firefox is starting to feel dated for me.

Michael Griffiths wrote:

Because the standards say differently? Well, since IE is so popular, why not change the web standards to fits IE's behavior?

It's about as logical

Actually, I quite agree with this.

It's kind of like Massachusetts and Open Source. Why should we use open source documents when Office is predominantly used in MA?


mVPstar

mVPstar wrote:

Michael Griffiths wrote:Because the standards say differently? Well, since IE is so popular, why not change the web standards to fits IE's behavior? It's about as logical

Actually, I quite agree with this.

It's kind of like Massachusetts and Open Source. Why should we use open source documents when Office is predominantly used in MA?

mVPstar

    So you think Microsoft can take over W3C, and make every single web related standard in favor of his own interest? and you think a company which is in the monopolistic position in the market should make standards  that  other companies at the disadvantage have to follow, and is this justifiable?
   
    Sheva

Read http://blogs.msdn.com/ie/archive/2005/02/22/378470.aspx from the IEBlog for some background on what the IE team and Microsoft did between XP and now.

DevilsRejection wrote:

i really hope they make it so they pass acid 2 this is just unimaginable that they aren't

we need safari for Win32, firefox is starting to feel dated for me.

Acid2 doesn't proove a thing, even the guys who developed Acid2 stated on that on the disclaimer.

Its just a glorified compsoite test suite.

argh

bsilby wrote:

        JoshDavey wrote:
    I looked up Firefox's acid2 results and firefox did very well.



Your kidding, right? Firefox is terrible on the acid2 test. The only browser that comes close is Safari, and even it screws it up.

Actually, Safari does it just fine.