4 ms·

"I would shoot the IE6 lead twice.." That's a little bit harsh, isn't it? While I would never defend it's usage today, it wasn't that horrible at the time it w

• masklinn 14y ago
  > While I would never defend it's usage today, it wasn't that horrible at the time it was released. It wasn't exactly good either, IE5/Mac was better on many fronts, and released at least a year before.
• _pferreir_ 14y ago
  > While I would never defend it's usage today, it wasn't that horrible at the time it was released. I think it was bad even considering that it was released in 2001. Not supporting PNG alpha channel is just an example. But I do agree that Microsoft taking so long to release IE7 made things even worse.
• stdgy 14y ago
  The issue with Microsoft can be entirely explained by this sentence: "While I would never defend it's usage today, it wasn't that horrible at the time it was released." Windows Update has been reasonably coherent since Windows XP. They've had the ability to push out software for a long, long time. Why isn't every person using Windows XP, Windows Vista, Windows 7 and Windows 8 currently using Internet Explorer 10? The issue at hand isn't that Internet Explorer 10 is bad. It's not! It's a great browser. The issue is that Microsoft doesn't care about providing an ecosystem that protects people from legacy browser lock-in. They have the ability to transition tens of millions of users to a modern browser. But they haven't, and they won't. Actions speak louder than words. Or perhaps, in this case, inaction speaks louder than words. Until they join the rest of the browser vendors in the 21st century, they're simply not worth trusting.
• deleted 14y ago
  [deleted]