RE: why linux?

> I think the view of "IE vs. Mozilla" is the wrong way to look at
things.
>   The correct way is "IE vs. web standards".  Do you want your product
> to be a Microsoft-only product?  If so, why bother using a web
browser?
>   Web browser aren't particularly good interfaces for most things (but
> they are great for web browsing!).

This is where it gets religious.  I'm going to be blunt here - any
argument that uses the phrase "web standard" is self defeating.  The
folder name "WEB-INF" is a web standard, and I'm stuck with it, and it's
because the people making these standards are... less than versed in the
realities of application development.

The reality is that IE's implementation of the DOM is better than the
"web standard".  Why?  Because the web standard SUCKS.  Any web standard
that doesn't address the requirement to modify events is written by
people who spend more time overclocking their CPUs than writing business
applications.


> Many people complain that they have to have MS windows to run their
> iSeries.  If your company's product only works in IE, wouldn't those
> same complaints be directed at you?

My product works fine in all browsers.  Some browsers have less
functionality than others.  That is the user's choice.  Until the
Mozilla DOM "standard" is usable, then I guess we all suffer.

You see, the problem with the guys writing web standards is that they
never address the HARD parts of the issue: like event handling, or in
the case of the J2EE "standard", the concept of upgrades or hot patches.

As far as I've seen, nearly every "standard" developed over the last
three or four years is great on a dedicated workstation where you have
the latest everything, and sucks in the real world where there are end
users involved and changing code.


> By coding to web standards, have you removed functionality?

YES!  Because the standards don't support modifying user events!  THEY
SUCK!  I can't be more clear... the standards were written by guys who
don't write business applications for a living!  If the guys who write
the standards would get off their butts and write a usable standard, I
might comply.  But for now, their only standard is "we don't do that"
and that ain't good enough.

You seem to be one of those people who think "standards" are good,
regardless, just because they are standards.  I, on the other hand,
think a standard is only as good as the business goals it achieves, and
the current W3C DOM standard achieves none of the goals I need, thus I
think I won't be using it.



>   Would it be a burden to either bundle those browsers with your
product
> or provide a link to them?  You can even customize those browsers to
> better suit the way your product works.  And those browsers don't have
> the security problems of IE.  Do you believe your customers would find
> this problematic?  Mine do not.

Not a single customer of mine uses Netscape as a standard.  Not one.

Joe