Cloud Computing

Jake Goldman has written up a lengthy post using three examples of how Microsoft continues to disappoint web developers with IE 8. I think this is an important part of the overall discussion around this browser, and about browsers in general, and of course the wider uber-topic under which it all sits, our inevitable migration to cloud computing. I've given IE 8 a very positive review, something I was pretty sure wouldn't happen as recently as two or three months ago, but in using the browser over a long period of time, I've come around to the notion that IE 8's security/privacy and "beyond the page" (Microsoft's phrase) features will make a much bigger difference to users (real users with real concerns, that is, not people concerned with niche side topics like the Acid3 test or whatever) than various technical failings (or its performance, though I think that's an important concern as well). None of that should take away from the message of this post, however, which seeks to develop "a deeper understanding of the strategic, cost, and technical significance" of IE 8. Again, it's a topic worthy of debate. When it comes to the modern browsers (IE7+, Fx2+, Safari 3+), web developers mostly cater to the lowest common denominator. For example, Safari supports on the fly rendering of font shadows, but IE7 and Firefox 3 do not ... The most infamous example of design / browser trade off is font type, which we’ll discuss in our examples. Alternatively, developers can write alternative code based on the user’s browser. With the “modern” browsers, there are only a few reasons to do this (at least for capable developers) ... In the case of one IE6, however, there are so many inconsistencies and glitches that almost every site we develop has a special stylesheet only for IE6 users. It goes without saying that this adds time (=cost). The “half way” is not so much a way of addressing the differences as it is a way of accepting the differences. That is, the notion of “fa

byPaul Thurrott