8 ms·

This may be schadenfreude, but as someone who's been around the web a long time, it really tickles me to see Microsoft have to fake their user agent string to g

by brlewis 15y ago

This may be schadenfreude, but as someone who's been around the web a long time, it really tickles me to see Microsoft have to fake their user agent string to get around an arbitrary browser restriction. Other browsers used to fake the IE user agent string. I suppose it's full circle since IE originally had to pose as Netscape's browser (Mozilla compatible).

jpadvo 15y ago
Same circumstance in both cases, though: _developers_, not browser vendors, unnecessarily restricting functionality based on browser sniffing.
- awj 15y ago
  Oh, it gets weirder than that. Much[1], much weirder. [1] http://webaim.org/blog/user-agent-string-history/ http://webaim.org/blog/user-agent-string-history/
- mistercow 15y ago
  No, MS doesn't get to dodge blame that easily. They blatantly used non-standard features in their browser to stifle competition. Many developers were complicit in this but that was according to Microsoft's design.
  - gaius 15y ago
    Non standard features like... XMLHttpRequest? The entire AJAX industry, they invented. What were you saying again?
    - rpeden 15y ago
      Seems to me there has, for a long time, been a double standard when MS is involved. The response I often see is: Something non-standard but cool in IE? "Screw MS, they're trying to embrace and extend the web!" Something non-standard but cool in another browser? "I don't understand why people are complaining! Good ideas like these eventually become standards, and this is how innovation happens!"
      - mistercow 15y ago
        There is no double standard. If any single browser had the marketshare that IE had in its heyday, it would be irresponsible and anticompetitive for them to implement nonstandard features. But marketshare is spread much more evenly among the players today, so it's pretty much understood that a production site cannot rely on a browser-specific feature. Hell, most people don't even rely on modern standard features because they still want their stuff to work in IE6. Comparing experimental features today with the IE-flavored-web of 2002 is comparing apples to geese.
        biot 15y ago
        You might have a fair point regarding things like ActiveX which only work on Microsoft's own platform and serve to further lock-in to Windows. However, as was pointed out above, XMLHttpRequest is one such nonstandard feature that Microsoft introduced. How is that feature irresponsible and anticompetitive?
        mistercow 15y ago
        The feature is anticompetitive because it was part of a large-scale and well-documented effort within the company to coopt and/or destroy technologies not controlled by themselves. A handful of innovations (which would have happened anyway) that happened along the way do not justify that kind of behavior.
        deleted 15y ago
        [deleted]
        biot 15y ago
        Either you're changing your argument or you failed to articulate your position initially. Nothing justifies Microsoft's abusive practices; that's a non sequitur. If we take your original statement and change "browser" to "search engine" and "IE" to "Google", we end up with this: "If any single search engine had the marketshare that Google had in its heyday, it would be irresponsible and anticompetitive for them to implement nonstandard features." If your initial argument was that an illegal monopolist should be unable to introduce any new features, that's an entirely different statement than saying that having a large marketshare means that any new features are irresponsible and anticompetitive.
    - mistercow 15y ago
      If the features hadn't been useful, it wouldn't have worked. Are you seriously going to argue that their strategy – their explicit strategy – was not incredibly harmful to innovation and competition? Also saying they "invented" XMLHttpRequest is a stretch. If I make a browser with a nonstandard rot-13 function, did I "invent" JSRot13?
      - hackinthebochs 15y ago
        How on earth is implementing a new feature harmful to innovation? This blatantly contradictory.
        mistercow 15y ago
        Look up "embrace, extend and extinguish".
    - tokenizer 15y ago
      ...which delayed web socket development if you think about it. The need of real time applications would've forced the correct solution-websockets, but we already had a shaky solution... AJAX..
      - fanf2 15y ago
        There was no demand for anything like websockets until everyone had years of experience with exploring the capabilities of AJAX.
irahul 15y ago
The arbitrary restriction(not browsers; explicitly placed by the developers) is there to ensure people don't see a broken version. I don't know about the recent IE versions, but earlier versions needed won't center align when I say `margin: 0 auto`(have to do a text-align: center then reset it in child container), have a different boxing model, doesn't support min-height, won't support hover on all elements etc etc. Rather than being bothered with placing conditional rules for non-compliant behavior, I would block IE if I can(i.e if a very small number of users are on IE). I don't know if the current IE behaves as expected, but even if it does, the users who aren't running upgraded IE are going to get a broken version and guess who they are going to think is an idiot(HINT: not IE). My company's site opens up all skewed up on IE because IE won't center the container when I say `margin: 0 auto`. If it were something I was trying to sell, my first instinct would be to check the IE demographics and depending on the numbers, either show a notice regarding using latest version of IE or other standard compliant browser(my preferred scenario), or invest a lot of time to fix it(shivers).
- brlewis 15y ago
  If I were interested in buying something from your web site, I would be less likely to bounce somewhere else as a result of seeing an uncentered container than I would as a result of being told to upgrade my browser. P.S. Browser restritions are placed by developers, speed restrictions by police, and height restrictions by amusement ride operators. It's not the browser, the speed, or the height that's doing the restricting.
  - irahul 15y ago
    > If I were interested in buying something from your web site, I would be less likely to bounce somewhere else as a result of seeing an uncentered container than I would as a result of being told to upgrade my browser. Depending on the demographics(what do I lose if I don't support outdated IE and how likely is my customer base to be running arcane IE), the amount of effort required to make sure my site runs on arcane IE; your bouncing off somewhere else might not matter to me. I didn't say putting up a notice saying use a modern browser will ensure customers will comply - I am saying that might be a reasonable compromise.
5teev 15y ago
Even using Mac IE5 (the best browser for Macs in its time) I sometimes had to fake the user agent to use some sites. So I also felt a little twinge of schadenfreude on reading this.
deleted 15y ago
[deleted]
rbanffy 15y ago
AFAIK, Internet Explorer 10 user agent string starts with "Mozilla" ;-)
- jayferd 15y ago
  Most user-agent strings start with "Mozilla". It's a quirk from the very weird history of the user-agent string. http://webaim.org/blog/user-agent-string-history/ http://webaim.org/blog/user-agent-string-history/
  - rbanffy 15y ago
    That doesn't change the fact IE started its life by pretending to be Netscape.
- josephcooney 15y ago
  Welcome to the internet.
deleted 15y ago
[deleted]

by brlewis 15y ago

jpadvo 15y ago

Same circumstance in both cases, though: _developers_, not browser vendors, unnecessarily restricting functionality based on browser sniffing.

awj 15y ago
Oh, it gets weirder than that. Much[1], much weirder. [1] http://webaim.org/blog/user-agent-string-history/ http://webaim.org/blog/user-agent-string-history/
mistercow 15y ago
No, MS doesn't get to dodge blame that easily. They blatantly used non-standard features in their browser to stifle competition. Many developers were complicit in this but that was according to Microsoft's design.
- gaius 15y ago
  Non standard features like... XMLHttpRequest? The entire AJAX industry, they invented. What were you saying again?
  - rpeden 15y ago
    Seems to me there has, for a long time, been a double standard when MS is involved. The response I often see is: Something non-standard but cool in IE? "Screw MS, they're trying to embrace and extend the web!" Something non-standard but cool in another browser? "I don't understand why people are complaining! Good ideas like these eventually become standards, and this is how innovation happens!"
    - mistercow 15y ago
      There is no double standard. If any single browser had the marketshare that IE had in its heyday, it would be irresponsible and anticompetitive for them to implement nonstandard features. But marketshare is spread much more evenly among the players today, so it's pretty much understood that a production site cannot rely on a browser-specific feature. Hell, most people don't even rely on modern standard features because they still want their stuff to work in IE6. Comparing experimental features today with the IE-flavored-web of 2002 is comparing apples to geese.
      - biot 15y ago
        You might have a fair point regarding things like ActiveX which only work on Microsoft's own platform and serve to further lock-in to Windows. However, as was pointed out above, XMLHttpRequest is one such nonstandard feature that Microsoft introduced. How is that feature irresponsible and anticompetitive?
        mistercow 15y ago
        The feature is anticompetitive because it was part of a large-scale and well-documented effort within the company to coopt and/or destroy technologies not controlled by themselves. A handful of innovations (which would have happened anyway) that happened along the way do not justify that kind of behavior.
        deleted 15y ago
        [deleted]
        biot 15y ago
        Either you're changing your argument or you failed to articulate your position initially. Nothing justifies Microsoft's abusive practices; that's a non sequitur. If we take your original statement and change "browser" to "search engine" and "IE" to "Google", we end up with this: "If any single search engine had the marketshare that Google had in its heyday, it would be irresponsible and anticompetitive for them to implement nonstandard features." If your initial argument was that an illegal monopolist should be unable to introduce any new features, that's an entirely different statement than saying that having a large marketshare means that any new features are irresponsible and anticompetitive.
  - mistercow 15y ago
    If the features hadn't been useful, it wouldn't have worked. Are you seriously going to argue that their strategy – their explicit strategy – was not incredibly harmful to innovation and competition? Also saying they "invented" XMLHttpRequest is a stretch. If I make a browser with a nonstandard rot-13 function, did I "invent" JSRot13?
    - hackinthebochs 15y ago
      How on earth is implementing a new feature harmful to innovation? This blatantly contradictory.
      - mistercow 15y ago
        Look up "embrace, extend and extinguish".
  - tokenizer 15y ago
    ...which delayed web socket development if you think about it. The need of real time applications would've forced the correct solution-websockets, but we already had a shaky solution... AJAX..
    - fanf2 15y ago
      There was no demand for anything like websockets until everyone had years of experience with exploring the capabilities of AJAX.

irahul 15y ago

The arbitrary restriction(not browsers; explicitly placed by the developers) is there to ensure people don't see a broken version. I don't know about the recent IE versions, but earlier versions needed won't center align when I say `margin: 0 auto`(have to do a text-align: center then reset it in child container), have a different boxing model, doesn't support min-height, won't support hover on all elements etc etc. Rather than being bothered with placing conditional rules for non-compliant behavior, I would block IE if I can(i.e if a very small number of users are on IE). I don't know if the current IE behaves as expected, but even if it does, the users who aren't running upgraded IE are going to get a broken version and guess who they are going to think is an idiot(HINT: not IE). My company's site opens up all skewed up on IE because IE won't center the container when I say `margin: 0 auto`. If it were something I was trying to sell, my first instinct would be to check the IE demographics and depending on the numbers, either show a notice regarding using latest version of IE or other standard compliant browser(my preferred scenario), or invest a lot of time to fix it(shivers).

brlewis 15y ago
If I were interested in buying something from your web site, I would be less likely to bounce somewhere else as a result of seeing an uncentered container than I would as a result of being told to upgrade my browser. P.S. Browser restritions are placed by developers, speed restrictions by police, and height restrictions by amusement ride operators. It's not the browser, the speed, or the height that's doing the restricting.
- irahul 15y ago
  > If I were interested in buying something from your web site, I would be less likely to bounce somewhere else as a result of seeing an uncentered container than I would as a result of being told to upgrade my browser. Depending on the demographics(what do I lose if I don't support outdated IE and how likely is my customer base to be running arcane IE), the amount of effort required to make sure my site runs on arcane IE; your bouncing off somewhere else might not matter to me. I didn't say putting up a notice saying use a modern browser will ensure customers will comply - I am saying that might be a reasonable compromise.

5teev 15y ago

Even using Mac IE5 (the best browser for Macs in its time) I sometimes had to fake the user agent to use some sites. So I also felt a little twinge of schadenfreude on reading this.

deleted 15y ago

[deleted]

rbanffy 15y ago

AFAIK, Internet Explorer 10 user agent string starts with "Mozilla" ;-)

jayferd 15y ago
Most user-agent strings start with "Mozilla". It's a quirk from the very weird history of the user-agent string. http://webaim.org/blog/user-agent-string-history/ http://webaim.org/blog/user-agent-string-history/
- rbanffy 15y ago
  That doesn't change the fact IE started its life by pretending to be Netscape.
josephcooney 15y ago
Welcome to the internet.

deleted 15y ago

[deleted]