|
> From: Lou Forlini > > These are the kinds of sites that I avoid like the plague. It > takes a certain amount of impudence to dictate what software I should > use just because the web "designer" doesn't have the necessary skills > to create a decent web page. > > What it tells me is that the company doesn't particularly want my > business. And I'm always happy to oblige. I've kept out of this discussion until now, but this particular comment has raised my hackles. You're somehow equating your decision to use a less popular browser with my development skills, and frankly, that's so arrogant as to be laughable. As a web software developer, I know full well the idiosyncracies of the various browsers. It's not a matter of skill that determines whether it makes sense to have full cross-browser compatibility. That's because those of us with real experience in web design know that it goes far beyond a few simple differences in tags. Most important is how events are handled, which differs wildly from one browser to another. While it's easy enough to create a static web page that has reasonable cross-browser compatibility, it is all but impossible to add any kind of reasonable functions to a browser without running into some severe differences from one to another. Try to enable the function keys on a web page. Or make a field upper-case only. Any non-trivial techniques require a long and arduous testing process that, due to the ever-changing landscape, the sorry state of the documentation and the lack of a decent debugging facility, is largely a trial and error process. There is no - and I repeat NO - simple way to handle events cleanly across all browsers. The fundamental architecture between IE and Mozilla is so entirely non-compatible as to make it easier to try and sense the appropriate browser and then generate a completely different page for each one. Of course, then you have to deal with browser spoofing, where a browser pretends to be something it is not. Finally, if you're going to be completely adamant about your position that you should be able to use whatever software you like, then try to wander the web using Lynx for awhile and tell me how easy it is. No, an unbending requirement that I triple my development effort so that YOU can use whatever obsolete or unpopular piece of software you choose is completely and utterly unreasonable. On the other hand, whenever I tell someone I can modify my software to use a different browser if they're willing to pay the development costs, they suddenly seem to be less fanatical about the concept. Because when it comes time to put their money where their idealism is, it's not so darned important anymore. So sure, rattle on about how I don't want your business. If it's because you're unwilling to use an industry standard, whether it's de facto or not, and unwilling to compensate me for the time to support your quirks, then you're absolutely right. Because in reality, you want something for nothing, and the fact of the matter is that there ain't no free lunch. Joe
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.
This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2025 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].
Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.