2 ms·
Cynically, the users who need such websites shouldn't use that browser. Fewer users, but potentially more technologically literate ones. Sounds like a win-win t
by cercatrova 7y ago
Cynically, the users who need such websites shouldn't use that browser. Fewer users, but potentially more technologically literate ones. Sounds like a win-win to me.
- shadowgovt 7y agoIIUC, the goal has generally been to make browsers standards-compliant, not balkanize the space into multiple incompatible browsers.
- ForHackernews 7y agoI don't think the internet is well served by a monoculture of user agents all speaking HTTPS (and only HTTPS) and trying to cram everything under the sun into HTML/CSS/JS. My personal preference would be for more specialized agents speaking protocols designed for their use case: email over SMTP/IMAP (or JMAP!), newsreaders with RSS, chat on XMPP, etc, content browsers with some limited markup language, maybe games and fat apps loaded as binaries to a sandbox VM. Maybe this is unrealistic and that time is passed, but the internet used to work more like what I've described. Today, more and more things are just a JS webapp that only runs properly in Chrome.