4 ms·

What does it mean? (Honest question)

by KarimDaghari 6y ago

EugeneOZ 6y ago
alias of the internet for users, main target for devs and designers. Chrome is the new IE.
- rossjudson 6y ago
  Uh...no. Perhaps you weren't there. Microsoft wanted IE to be a wedge to drive Windows into enterprises. An open, standards-based web threatened that quite deeply (particularly one where the experiences that could be created could rival desktop apps). Microsoft adopted a two-pronged approach. One was the inclusion of IE into the operating system to ensure the ground was seeded, and IE would be ubiquitous (keep in mind this was prior to Apple products being a realistic alternative in enterprise settings, so it was PC/Windows everywhere). The second part was investing significant engineering efforts into ensuring that Windows- and Office-specific capabilities could emerge through IE (and only IE). For example, if you wanted vector graphics you could use Office to produce VML and that could be viewed through IE (only). Pointedly, IE did not support SVG, which was the other major vector graphics standard at the time. This neatly (and painfully) fragmented the market for anyone who wanted to produce vector graphics as part of a solution. You had to find a way to support VML and SVG if you wanted that to happen (and many early graphical toolkits for the web did precisely that). All development for IE was conducted as closed source. Microsoft had no particular interest in making the browser compatible with the web standards, because as synergy between Windows and IE created a development target with benefits for Microsoft. Nobody else could create an equivalent to IE that would replicate the Microsoft-specific capabilities. The lack of standards-support created stickiness that kept IE around for a long time, because enterprises couldn't (or didn't feel like paying for) the changes necessary to bring apps into standards compliance. A wholesale shift towards Adobe Flash was made a big crack in IE's armor. Flash ran everywhere, and sophisticated solutions could be built with it. Real web standards also made a lot of progress, and IE's creaking old engine was easily outperformed and "out-standarded" by Chrome. The subsequent rise of Apple and fall of Flash cemented Chrome (and Safari) as solid performers that could be used to deliver enterprise solutions and worked on multiple platforms. Is Chrome the new IE? Well, is Chrome being used to drive Google-specific functionality that can only be used with other Google technologies, and can't be implemented elsewhere? Does Chrome actively avoid standards? Is Chrome actively attempting to fragment the standards? Is Chrome developed as closed source? The thing is, Microsoft's strategy stood a pretty good chance of working. I'm always amazed at how IE stuck around when there were better alternatives, and how long it took before market pressure forced Microsoft towards web standards. A lot of money was spent on Enterprise Windows, and a lot of solutions used Microsoft-specific parts of IE. Enterprise dollars cast a long shadow, over time.
chrisseaton 6y ago
I think it's more about the experience of the little people trying to target and use these browsers, not the experience of the super privileged Microsoft/Google people developing the browsers, for a start.
mattnewton 6y ago
Different things to different people.

What does it mean? (Honest question)

EugeneOZ 6y ago

alias of the internet for users, main target for devs and designers. Chrome is the new IE.

rossjudson 6y ago
Uh...no. Perhaps you weren't there. Microsoft wanted IE to be a wedge to drive Windows into enterprises. An open, standards-based web threatened that quite deeply (particularly one where the experiences that could be created could rival desktop apps). Microsoft adopted a two-pronged approach. One was the inclusion of IE into the operating system to ensure the ground was seeded, and IE would be ubiquitous (keep in mind this was prior to Apple products being a realistic alternative in enterprise settings, so it was PC/Windows everywhere). The second part was investing significant engineering efforts into ensuring that Windows- and Office-specific capabilities could emerge through IE (and only IE). For example, if you wanted vector graphics you could use Office to produce VML and that could be viewed through IE (only). Pointedly, IE did not support SVG, which was the other major vector graphics standard at the time. This neatly (and painfully) fragmented the market for anyone who wanted to produce vector graphics as part of a solution. You had to find a way to support VML and SVG if you wanted that to happen (and many early graphical toolkits for the web did precisely that). All development for IE was conducted as closed source. Microsoft had no particular interest in making the browser compatible with the web standards, because as synergy between Windows and IE created a development target with benefits for Microsoft. Nobody else could create an equivalent to IE that would replicate the Microsoft-specific capabilities. The lack of standards-support created stickiness that kept IE around for a long time, because enterprises couldn't (or didn't feel like paying for) the changes necessary to bring apps into standards compliance. A wholesale shift towards Adobe Flash was made a big crack in IE's armor. Flash ran everywhere, and sophisticated solutions could be built with it. Real web standards also made a lot of progress, and IE's creaking old engine was easily outperformed and "out-standarded" by Chrome. The subsequent rise of Apple and fall of Flash cemented Chrome (and Safari) as solid performers that could be used to deliver enterprise solutions and worked on multiple platforms. Is Chrome the new IE? Well, is Chrome being used to drive Google-specific functionality that can only be used with other Google technologies, and can't be implemented elsewhere? Does Chrome actively avoid standards? Is Chrome actively attempting to fragment the standards? Is Chrome developed as closed source? The thing is, Microsoft's strategy stood a pretty good chance of working. I'm always amazed at how IE stuck around when there were better alternatives, and how long it took before market pressure forced Microsoft towards web standards. A lot of money was spent on Enterprise Windows, and a lot of solutions used Microsoft-specific parts of IE. Enterprise dollars cast a long shadow, over time.

chrisseaton 6y ago

I think it's more about the experience of the little people trying to target and use these browsers, not the experience of the super privileged Microsoft/Google people developing the browsers, for a start.

mattnewton 6y ago

Different things to different people.