Slashdot Mirror
The Browser Wars Are Back?
jpkunst writes "ZDNet UK reports and PCWorld.com report that, according to Netscape founder Marc Andreessen, whose comments came during a discussion with Yahoo Chief Operating Officer Dan Rosensweig at the Web 2.0 Conference in San Francisco on Wednesday, 'the browser wars are back', thanks to the emerging popularity of products such as Apple's Safari and the open-source Firefox. Andreessen warned that 'competition could compel the company [Microsoft] to use aggressive tactics to protect its Windows operating system monopoly'."
When my company started putting "Best Viewed in Firefox/Mozilla" on the intranet . I knew that the browser wars are over .
.NET and Java) ... but I suspect Mozilla's not as slow as Java in responding , especially when it's Microsoft
Microsoft may be able to do something however late it is (see
Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum videtur
standardizing on IE? as a web designer, id rather shoot myself in the face than be saddled with IEs "enhancements" and "features" thankyouverymuch.
whats so hard about loading a transparent PNG anyway?
turn up the jukebox and tell me a lie
Maybe the browser wars are back, but that gasbag Andreessen is clamoring to be back at any rhetorical cost. He hasn't done anything useful since he butchered HTML with the badly coded tag, which he couldn't even code himself at NCSA. Since then, he's gone from expensive blowhard spokesmodel for the biggest IPO in history, to has-been blown '90s dude. Only _Wired_ even listens to him anymore.
--
make install -not war
OK, so they've got the embrace done.
I predict that their REALLY extreme tactic will be to start throwing every "extension" they can think of into IE, especially ones that break compatibility with other browsers and webservers.
Well, every "extension" except for security, that is. =D
When my company started putting "Best Viewed in Firefox/Mozilla"...
Why do people continue to insist on stupid "Best viewed with X" labels. Your website should be developed to display properly on any standards-compliant browser, and not be restricted to a particular platform or application.
Why not put up one of those "Try Firefox" icons instead of implying that other standards-compliant browsers (namely Opera) might have trouble with your poorly-designed site?
I can think of a few compelling reasons...
-- james
Which I'm not - and based on the popularity of adblocking extensions, I'm not alone.
It also isn't open-source which is kind of important to a lot of people here.
But with Netscape turning into Mozilla and then being spunoff into Firefox, and Safari along with Opera and Omni giving even MORE choices, there now are more browsers that dont support microsoft standards than do.
Now you couple the fact that a large number of in the know people have now said to NOT use IE because of numerous widely publisised security breaches, and the once barely existant browser war has regained steam.
The best analogy would be the World Wars. It might be considered one long war, but there was a long break where hostilities stoped.
"Slashdot, where telling the truth is overrated but lying is insightful."
I don't know about the rest of you, but I still find myself having to explain what a web browser is to 90% of the people I know that use the internet. Many of these people think that their web browser is called "MSN" or "Yahoo." They pull up a portal site as their home page and actually enter URLs into the search window and wait for the portal site to give them the link. I try to tell them about the wonders of Firefox, and they stare at me blankly and say, "But I'm perfectly happy with Yahoo."
You are in error. No-one is screaming. Thank you for your cooperation.
Firefox & Co. are coming back, and that software is indeed technically superior to IE. However, Mozilla foundation still misses one crucial piece of the puzzle: a distribution channel. Until somebody with a big distribution channel jumps in and helps Mozilla, my web server access log will continue showing Mozilla user base growth of less than 1%/month/year.
That is where GBrowser comes into play. Google has a massive distribution channel that knows no OS boundaries.
Simpy
The reason that Micro$oft cannot win in this kind of fight is that there is no company paying the salaries of the programmers developing FireFox. It is a volunteer effort.
In the case of the Netscape browser, Netscape was a commerical company and essentially cut its own jugular in funding Netscape development and support and giving it away for free, but where could Netscape get its money to grow? It tried branching into commercial Web servers, but there were too many competitors in that market. Netscape was headed for bankruptcy.
In the case of FireFox, there is no company for Micro$oft to crush. Round 1 and the game goes to FireFox and the open-source movement. <applause>
Opera was around during the original browser wars but was never a serious contender (in terms of market share). What makes you think it is a serious contender now? Firefox has mouse gesture extensions (some people don't like them anyway), has managed to gain a reputation as more secure than IE and, as others have pointed out, is free.
Decode these
And why would I want screen real estate taken up by an ad when I can use Firefox instead?
"You're older than you've ever been, and now you're even older."
Or they could make it impossible to uninstall, make it the file manager, require it for security updates, and make the help system dependent upon it.
OH, WAIT. The only way could integrate IE more into my Windows "experience" is if they soldered a big metal "e" onto my ass.
For I design my sites to standards.
(Sure, I kludge it a little to make it look 100% in all the major browsers, but it still validates w3c.)
vk.
Firefox will most likely gain a lot of ground but I don't think it will come out on top. I would love to see it come out on top but Microsoft has a lot of ground it they're not going to give it up without a fight.
Firefox and others don't have to come out on top. There just needs to be a significant presence of browsers other than IE on the net to negate Microsofts ability to abuse. When 98% of browsers are IE, they can basterdize standards and it looks like the 2% are the screwed up ones. If several other browsers are largely in use (don't need to be #1) then it will be more apparent which browser is actually screwed up and not following standards.
Well, I can see it in Safari, and Joe can see in Firefox. Sally says it works with Opera. How come it looks so weird on your computer?
Slashdot Syndrome: the sudden, extreme urge to correct someone in order to validate one's self.
It may be gratis, but it's not libre.
Because IE isn't standards-compliant and barfs on standards-compliant pages very often.
retrorocket.o not found, launch anyway?
"But the included browser (if they know this expression) works fine. I'm used to it."
Aye, I get this argument too (and also from people I'd expect to know better ;) but I just don't get it:
wordpad comes bundled with Windows; yet the first thing most people do is install Word. I think that that needs to be our argument: "IE is a capable-enough browser, a bit like wordpad or the Windows firewall, but a power-use like you would probably want to upgrade to a proper browser"... or something similar.
Also, don't underestimate the power of themes and extensions! Most of the interest I get in my "strange" browser is from it (a) looking different fairly frequently (usually when a new Firefox is released and my usual theme breaks :( ) or from (b) me using an extension to do something faster than my colleagues.
It's a slow process, but I feel I'm winning people over bit by bit...
This is where the serious fun begins.
Well I wouldn't call it inferior because it still is a damn fine browser but there are a few things that don't make me use it.
- larger footprint
- less CSS support
- not free (unless you want an annoying banner ad)
- buggier (yes, in comparison to Firefox)
- less support
- they make the choices for you unlike in Firefox where all the add-ons and extensions are there for YOU to choose.
Al in all, I would still use Opera LONG before I got back to IE but it took a different approach than Firefox and I really have to say I like that I get to choose my own extensions rather than having them bundled.
This is my sig. There are many like it but this one is mine.
After being ignored the 1st time I decided to keep a copy the text of my latest email to Bellsouth. When trying to access their page with my latest version of Opera I am told to "upgrade" to IE or Netscape. For the record most of the times when I access this page it's to pay my bill.
---
Once again I would like to renew my request that your website be updated to support all modern browsers. The idea that by running a current version of Opera but then being told to "upgrade" speaks poorly of your website and it's staff.
The fact that all one must do to access Bellsouth's website is to change the user agent gives lie to the fact any upgrade is need.
Please respect your customers by allowing them the option of using whatever modern browser they wish instead of making them think that they must use a browser that has so many security issues that the federal government has dissuaded it's use or one that has become outdated.
Thank you.
---
Yes it may be a little harsh but sometimes you have to be pretty forthright to get past the corperate mindset. Until I get a response I plan on sending this same text once a week.
Really, I know what I'm doing...Ohhhh, look at the shiny buttons!
Opera was around during the original browser wars but was never a serious contender (in terms of market share). What makes you think it is a serious contender now?
I'm no Opera Fan, but I have to point out the logical fallacy here (which, by the way the people who marked this guy insightful should read): Product A had no market share at some point in time. Support your argument that it should have more market share now.
Can you see how easily that same argument can be turned against your favorite browser? I believe the term is non sequitur. Get a better argument. One based on facts would be good.
Today is a good day to code.
they offered IE for free in the hope that they could "embrace and extend" the internet - stopping all other browsers, and thereby stopping all other platforms - but it didn't work. so why should they bother any more?
Imagine what they COULD have done by leveraging IE into developing weblications!
The biggest problem with web-based anything is the lack of control you have over the browser. Not coincidentally, this is why development time for web-based applications is quick - the application output is very simple.
For example, I've written a medium-sized application (~40,000 lines) in PHP-GTK and love the control I get over the client experience in the application. User chooses X, I pop up a dropdown list to get more information, pop up an editor that captures their input in real time, etc....
It's hard to impossible to do all this with javascript, but it's sort of what I'm talking about.
Take javascript, make it 10x more powerful, and provide some security measures.
For example, a certificate that would have to be installed in the browser first before scripts from NNN site would operate. Control the distribution of the certificates, and you control access to the application! You could use a bi-directional certificate so that both sides authenticate each other!
Run this over HTTPS and you'd have a damn secure application framework that would allow for:
1) Rapid application development times - On the server it'd be a set of ASP/PHP style scripts.
2) Rich client-ish interfaces that make XUL look tame.
3) Secure by design. Your scripts would only be accessable to somebody with a valid certificate.
4) If sufficiently developed, the javascript replacement could operate offline merely by saving the script to disk. (stretching things a bit, here)
In short, all the advantages of web-based design with all the advantages of client-side design. What's not to like?
They botched it with ActiveX, but it was an attempt at what I'm talking about. Can you imagine trying to fight that?
Java comes close to the above - but it lacks the security features I'm mentioning, and it's operational characteristics are "heavy" - the JVM is large and slow, particularly in low-memory situations.
I have no problem with your religion until you decide it's reason to deprive others of the truth.
I don't think that'll work anymore because there are just too many people using open-source browsers nowadays, including all Mac users.
Microsoft's enormous mistake was to drop IE for the Mac. Back in the days, when you complained to a webmaster about a webpage not rendering well on Linux, you'd get laughed at. I got even insulted once, about how i had to use a 'serious' browser. Now, when you complain about a page not rendering well on a Mac, webmasters take you seriously because Mac OS gets a lot more respect as a desktop OS.
While there are still web sites out there that don't render well outside of IE, there are a LOT less of them compared to three years ago.
If I were MS, I'd make a huge marketing campaign about a brand new browser, with a different name and all, with all sorts of new features, and make sure you provide a Mac version. If they were smart, they'd release a Linux version too, but god knows pigs will fly when that happens...
-DZM
But I thought that Microsoft got rid of all of the competition by illegal exercise of its monopoly power?
The good news is that innovation (including better security) are good reasons to switch from even heavily-entrenched products.
The bad news is that some people may have to admit that Microsoft isn't as guilty as they want it to be. IE beat Netscape for the simple reason that it sucked less. Sure, maybe being a "monopoly" helped, but that doesn't mean much when browsers were and are still given away for free (a trend which M$ didn't start).
If Firefox overtakes IE, I win. If IE gets better, I still win. If Netscape pulls out from under years of browsers not any better and usually worse and more bloaty than IE, I still win. I win, I win, I win. And, honestly, I don't care who else wins with me. It can be MS, or Apple, or the open source community. The point is that competition is still alive in the browser world, even if all of the things Netscape whined about were true.
144l. ph34r my 133t l3g4l 5k1lz!