3 ms·
They innovated on the side of the user. Not the rendering engine. I loved the IE interface. But if one window crashed, the whole IE crashed. Then Firefox tabbe
by nashashmi 4y ago
They innovated on the side of the user. Not the rendering engine. I loved the IE interface.
But if one window crashed, the whole IE crashed. Then Firefox tabbed browsing took over hungry for system resource. But at least it didn’t crash, right?
I remember IE research pane. Innovation in the browser became from a toolbar thing. Remember google toolbar? It was the number one bar in many countries.
But then Firefox extensions took over hungry for system resource, but not like Chrome hungry.
IE had addons. Some of them slowed the browser. And it had plug-ins.
It had everything independent innovation needed to thrive. It just didn’t have any vision for the “open web”. No one understood what that was then anyways.
And where ie could not innovate on the web, they used active X plug-ins. This was the Microsoft way. You can’t blame them for being themselves.
- hutzlibu 4y agoAgreed that IE did innovate at its time. "It had everything independent innovation needed to thrive. It just didn’t have any vision for the “open web”." But it didn't had an open source core and was windows only. The vision was microsoft only (forever). "This was the Microsoft way. You can’t blame them for being themselves. " So the argument is, "yeah, Microsoft is a big monopolist who do everything they can, to lock people on their system, you cannot blame them for it, this is just the way they are"? Either way, in this case luckily their monopol strategy failed and IE died because of it.
- nashashmi 4y ago> But it didn't had an open source core and was windows only. The vision was microsoft only (forever). Right. I never would have understood the love for open source if Microsoft hadnt left so much thirst for deeper complex innovation in my mouth.