3 ms·

Actually, by late 2003 Phoenix (which is what Firefox used to be called back then) was already an impressive little browser (it was little back then) and IE6 wa

Actually, by late 2003 Phoenix (which is what Firefox used to be called back then) was already an impressive little browser (it was little back then) and IE6 was already horribly outdated and clumsy for those of us who grew a penchant for alternative browsers (the others being Opera and the Mozilla Suite).

masklinn 15y ago
I completely agree, but developers-wise it was not a complete pain in the ass yet: it was the "looking forward to meeting you" browser for the development community (having just been renamed Firebird), the community was mostly in its IE5/Mac high and getting started on understanding CSS and trying to get rid of tables. This would lead down a long and painful road re. IE6, but I think it was just getting started and not feeling it yet. On the Phoenix/Firebird/Firefox front, Chris Pederick's Web Developer Toolbar was still a year away. (there were, of course, visionaries community wise: PPK published "Separating behavior and structure" in April 2004[0], and the "javascript prophets" were getting out their suggestions on getting event handler bindings out of HTML[1], it's a long gone time when Opera's javascript support was billed "poor" and the first version of Safari had little CSS support and no ability to execute any javascript worth running) edit: after thinking about it a bit more, i still think 2003 is too early for the IE6 pain point, but my 2005 might be too conservative as well. So I'd put the early pangs in early to mid-2004 for the "wider" community of developers interested in web technologies. [0] http://www.digital-web.com/articles/separating_behavior_and_structure_2/ http://www.digital-web.com/articles/separating_behavior_and_... [1] http://www.sitepoint.com/structural-markup-javascript/ http://www.sitepoint.com/structural-markup-javascript/
- yuhong 15y ago
  And BTW, the year 2003 was when MS said that future versions of IE would come only as part of OS upgrade/updates.

masklinn 15y ago

I completely agree, but developers-wise it was not a complete pain in the ass yet: it was the "looking forward to meeting you" browser for the development community (having just been renamed Firebird), the community was mostly in its IE5/Mac high and getting started on understanding CSS and trying to get rid of tables. This would lead down a long and painful road re. IE6, but I think it was just getting started and not feeling it yet. On the Phoenix/Firebird/Firefox front, Chris Pederick's Web Developer Toolbar was still a year away. (there were, of course, visionaries community wise: PPK published "Separating behavior and structure" in April 2004[0], and the "javascript prophets" were getting out their suggestions on getting event handler bindings out of HTML[1], it's a long gone time when Opera's javascript support was billed "poor" and the first version of Safari had little CSS support and no ability to execute any javascript worth running) edit: after thinking about it a bit more, i still think 2003 is too early for the IE6 pain point, but my 2005 might be too conservative as well. So I'd put the early pangs in early to mid-2004 for the "wider" community of developers interested in web technologies. [0] http://www.digital-web.com/articles/separating_behavior_and_structure_2/ http://www.digital-web.com/articles/separating_behavior_and_... [1] http://www.sitepoint.com/structural-markup-javascript/ http://www.sitepoint.com/structural-markup-javascript/

yuhong 15y ago
And BTW, the year 2003 was when MS said that future versions of IE would come only as part of OS upgrade/updates.