Slashdot Mirror
IE The Great Microsoft Blunder?
JordanL writes "Hot on the heels of the beta rollouts of IE 7, comes an editorial from John Dvorak declaring IE the biggest mistake Microsoft has ever made. From the article: 'All the work that has to go into keeping the browser afloat is time that could have been better spent on making Vista work as first advertised [...] If you were to put together a comprehensive profit-and-loss statement for IE, there would be a zero in the profits column and billions in the losses column--billions.'"
As usual, Dvorak is on crack.
I'm not sure what he means by biggest, but microsoft's stupidist blunder was Bob and its most expensive blunder was the Cairo project (Cairo was later renamed and one of its most important element, OFS, is still nowhere in sight).
Internet exporer was not so much of a blunder as an expensive way to kill off Netscape (they were a much bigger threat then Dvorak makes out.
(the OT part) Still, at least Microsoft Bob was not a completely wasted effort - after all, you still have Rover the retriever to help you with searching in XP - and we all know that was worth waiting 10 years for...
There are shills on slashdot. Apparently, I'm one of them.
I don't understand why Microsoft doesn't just rewrite Internet Explorer in .NET. They can leave the existing rendering engine behind as a legacy component and work on a new IE that can take advantage of .NET's security mechanisms. Not only would it be a good excuse for a clean break, but it would also give them a chance to show off what .NET can do for desktop apps.
I think credit should be given to IE and Microsoft for inspiring the next generation of browsers. I mean, if it weren't for Internet Explorer setting the bar in browser features and functionality, we wouldn't have such a great open source push for a great new browser platform such as Firefox or Opera.
:-(
Imagine if Microsoft's only competition was Netscape
ClearType, nor any other antialiasing scheme for that matter, doesn't alter fonts sufficiently enough for them to look bold. Whatever is causing the bold appearance, ClearType isn't it. If turning off ClearType fixes the problem, then the switch must be doing more than simply turning ClearType on or off. Besides, I thought ClearType was an OS-wide, on/off thing.
Is anybody else noticing how many aricles are being tagged "troll"? Won't make for a very good indexing mechanism is every third article has the same keyword...
Who did what now?
Printer companies are stupid because they virtually give their printers away. Always at a loss to the company.
Let's not look at the big picture with the purchase of ink.
Jonesy
Step 1: Give Internet Explorer away for free and include it with every copy of Windows sold, increasing its usage to over 80%. Step 2: Break from accepted standards. Website programmers become lazy and code to these broken standards. Now Internet Explorer is the only browser that will properly render all websites. Usage surges to over 90%. Step 3: Require users have the latest version of Windows to use the latest version of Internet Explorer. Now, even though the browser is still free, in a roundabout way people have to pay to use it. Step 4: Profit. Oh yea, Dvorak is a yellow journalist. If Slashdot has a shred of integrity they should not post any of his articles.
While IE may have been important to Microsoft in the past as many people have pointed out, there is also another option for them now. They could take a small fraction of what they spend on IE and invest that in Firefox in exchange for having some input. They also could have few programmers at Microsoft donating code for Firefox. Then, they could just bundle Firefox with Windows and have it use MSN as the default search still. Sure Microsoft would argue things like Active X, but maybe there is a way to turn on and off your compatibility for those kinds of websites.
Maybe that is why they are all getting tagged troll, /. is just troll-happy.
Bottles.
What are their UI people smoking? Or did they hire some Opera UI people?
Opera is the most customisable interface I've ever encountered, and not just browsers.
Fair play. I was referring more to the IE7 interface compared with the goofy default layout of Opera's UI. You're very correct in how customizable Opera's UI is - although it's often EXTREMELY obfuscated as to how to customize many things. Nevertheless, what you want to customize can almost always be done in Opera, though it'll take some requests for help in the forums.
Not so with IE7, as far as I can tell. I can add, remove, and rearrange stuff on the toolbar, but I can't move the toolbar into different locations, as I could with previous versions of IE.
I'm hoping this isn't the final UI form. If it is, then it's taken several large steps backwards in UI customizability from previous versions of IE.
It's not like it's a big deal to me, since even with all its nifty new features (well, new to IE), I'll still be using Firefox, but the ClearType issue fucking up font display is going to mess with the usability of some of the sites I've designed, which is really irritating.
As far as Opera, I'm eagerly awaiting the final release of 9. I'm hoping I can customize it enough to use it as my main email client, as I freaking hate Thunderbird (and Outlook and Outlook Express, and, and, and...) I'd like the Hugin and Munin scripts updated for version 9.
I'm sorry, but anyone who claims all links on all websites everywhere are "supposed to be" blue with underlines clearly has absolutely no idea about branding, design or the fact the web has moved on in the past decade. Maybe all the clothes you wear should be grey, all the furniture in your house should be bright orange and your car should be a wheezing, smoke belching Trabbant too, eh comrade?
Yes, you can turn off CSS in your browser to make the web look like shit, but I'd hazard a guess that nobody at all, except the visually impaired would do that.
I'd hate to see the ugly grey sludgy mess the web would be with people like you making design decisions.
Code, Hardware, stuff like that.
I live in the UK, at least 90%+ of houses are built of bricks; I know of somme that arn't, but those are mostly some form of concrete. I know on your side of the atlantic wood, for example is very popular, but I don't know a single house made of wood.
If I have nothing to hide, you have no reason to search me
That is of course assuming Netscape would have been able to ship a stable, working usable product. By the time NS4 was pushed, nay dragged, out of the door Netscape as an organization had lost the ability to ship software because they had lost their focus. They couldn't figure out whether they were a portal company or a browser producer or a groupware concern. And they didn't have the leadership to manage all three roles at once (unlike, say Google).
The antitrust trial was an absolute life saver for Andreseen & Co. Instead of the world realizing that they had gone into the Suck Zone for good, they got to whine about how Microsoft had stolen their lunch money.
Of course Microsoft was out to steal their lunch money. It's just that they didn't really need much help. If NS would have been an actually valuable browser platform then a lot of people would have continued to buy and download it, regardless of whether or not IE was bundled with the OS. People downloaded and used Winamp and lots of other media players for a long time even though Windows shipped with a media player of its own. They still do that.
Java might be another issue, but I've never bought into the "IE killed Netscape" meme. Netscape killed itself. The internet is the great equalizer. If you build it, they will come. Netscape simply didn't build it well enough.
Web2.0: I love when people Flickr my cuil and digg my boingboing until my google is reddit and I start to yahoo
What's with eliminating the standard menus that every other Windows program uses?
5 342_rev5_02.jpg5 342_rev5_08.jpg
5 342_rev5_01.jpg
You can enable them!. Look here!. The menu is placed between the address bar and the tab bar. The tab and the address bar are both related with the page you're viewing, the menu is not. It's probably the worst place to put such menu: you want to keep such elements in the same place. But hey, this is microsoft - some reviewer will argue that it has sense.
The UI of IE7 was designed very carefully. They just don't know to do it right. Look at the the latest paul thurrot's vista review:
http://www.winsupersite.com/images/reviews/vista_
http://www.winsupersite.com/images/reviews/vista_
(Try to guess which is the active window)
http://www.winsupersite.com/images/reviews/vista_
("File operations"! great!)
I've enought problems to make people understand XP (why the extension->program associations are placed under "carpet options"???? Why i need to look at the taskwork's properties to delete the list of recently opened files in the start menu??? Why some visual effects are on the "my pc->properties" window, others in the display's properties and some duplicated in both?? Oh, and wait: in IE7 beta 2 you configure cd-auto-startup in IE's advanced properties). I can't wait for vista, it looks like they'd be trying to be better than mac os x but they keep falling in the second-system syndrome. It's so bad when it comes to usability that is laughable - most of the people knows windows just because they're taugh the basic operations in the school.
Look at how many XP/office training courses are in your city. It's so fucking bad that people can make money with it.
I've seen a real house made of straw. Seriously, and supposedly it's not the fire hazard you might guess since it's so tightly bound that fire burns the first couple inches of the bales really quickly since it's not so densely packed and then dies out since it didn't have time to build enough heat to burn the denser straw. I saw pics of the aftermath of a fire and it looked interesting. Dunno if it's true but it's cool if so. I can't imagine hanging pictures would be very effective though.
0x09F911029D74E35BD84156C5635688C0
I'd hate to see the ugly grey sludgy mess the web would be with people like you making design decisions.
From the grandparent's initial description links looked like normal text because all text appeared bold.
If this looks like a link to you, to many it won't, so I just replied with that information in mind.
I also use orange or yellow or green links, but there's a thin border you don't have to cross and you have to keep things relatively consistent with the world around you by underlining the links and having them in a distinct color from the surroundings, or if they won't be underlined they should be at least blue or green as hint.
People like you lament how usability-minded designers will create "gray and boring web" and instead go happily nesting tables, making mystery meat navigation, use ridiculously tiny text since "it looks so cool" and put flashy intros on everything.
How does it feel being cast in a category like you did with me, parent?
That is of course assuming Netscape would have been able to ship a stable, working usable product. Maybe that would have been easier without the anti-competitive practices of Microsoft. Netscape needed information on the Windows 95 API to ensure that Navigator would work well when it came out. Microsoft tried to strong-arm them into forgoing Navigator as a platform for developers. As a result, Netscape didn't get the API until two months after Windows 95's release, two months where Internet Explorer was bundled with the OS.
See, that's where you're an idiot. (I was going to just say wrong, but it doesn't express how I feel very well.) Marketing is all about logic. One of the key datums in marketing is that people make decisions based on emotion, not on logic. Oh sure, some people develop a logical system for evaluating purchases and then stick to it zealously, which allows them to make logical decisions, but most people vote for the better-looking candidate and buy the car that looks fast, regardless of actual suitability.
Marketing exists in the really real world, not your slashdot fantasy world. Actually, it exists here too, if you don't have adblock or something. And it wouldn't exist here if it didn't work to some degree.
Logic dictates that Microsoft is getting something out of maintaining IE.
P.S. I work in a marketing department but I'm a longtime and very dedicated computer geek. Look at the number of /. posts I've made if you don't believe me :P
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
I think Dvorak is right on this, which doesn't say much. I thought it was patently obvious. Even a broken clock is right twice a day, though.
-Mike
I'm sorry; I don't know what I was thinking!
"If you call a cow's tail a leg, how many legs does a cow have?"
"Four. Calling it so doesn't make it so."
-A. Lincoln
Was it that time in front of the judge or another where the judge spent about fifteen minutes on his own and performed the disconnection [successfully]? (he probably had instructions, but he still did it)
Besides, remember when they claimed 95, 98, 98SE, and 98ME weren't based upon the DOS shell and [instead] were standalone systems? Yet as part of the XP release ceremony, WHG III sat down to a DOS window and typed "exist" along with the [enter] key to indicate DOS was finally gone?
Remember, the two strongest sectors within Microsoft the company are Marketing and Sales. And that's where the salt licks are located for two of the three biggest groups of storytellers. (the third is PR)
There's a reason for that... the only negative mods are troll, flamebait, offtopic and overrated.
Now that overrated doesn't offer a Karma hit, it's not useful if you think a post is simply assinine.
Offtopic and redundant are pretty specific mods which, from my experience, is usually used fairly accurately. However, it's not useful for that assinine post I was referring to.
So... flamebait? That's just a subset of troll.
So, troll 1)gives a karma hit and 2)is general enough to be used as the "most appropriate" case.
The positive mods give a wide enough spectrum to appropriately mod a post. Moderating would in theory be more balanced if there was an equivalent negative mod for each positive one, however this wouldn't really work well as the equivalent negatives would cause a really large flurry of complaints if used:
Interesting -> Boring
Insightful -> Assinine
Informative -> Uninformed/Wrong
Imagine the flurry of "Why did I get this mod" posts if anyone got moderated with the above posts. The current negative mods are either specific enough where it would be difficult to argue against if the moderation is done in good faith, or are a moderation of the poster's intent. The other three which I suggested would generally be construed as an attack on the poster's intelligence, and probably serve to drag conversation down moreso than help illuminate the gems.
If someone else can come up with a better mod system, I suggest they do it.
That didn't stop MS from trying.
http://outcampaign.org/
True enough but I can't help feeling they have lost focus. They developed IE ot "take over the web" but that's failed. What are they developing IE for now? I think they developed IE7 simply to save face.
I used to have a better sig but it broke.