Comments for Microsoft and AOL kiss and make up

Comment from liorean on 2003-05-31

2003-05-31T18:38:34Z

Well, IE is a mess as it is... What I don't understand, is why MS couldn't make IE updates seamless and automatic. That way, the browser checks out what updates are available automatically and downloads them . The features would have to be opt-out, of course, or possibly detect connection speed and ask if the download would take too much time.

Oh well, it would be interesting to see moz as a standard browser for windows, but that is not a way I see Microsoft taking anytime soon. (One have to wonder, with their licence on UNIX sources and all, if they don't have some devious plan under way, though...). And I don't think we are likely to see the browser becoming a free toy with the OS, either. I believe MS will do like they did on Mac, and make the browser more and more a service that the user pays for. The conversion will take time, they need to obscure the fact that the service is there to give them an excuse to let you pay for hte browser, but it'll come. This is in line with the tryouts of a pay-to-use instead of pay-to-install version of Office, for instance.

As for IE on Longhorn, the OS will be using DirectX to render it's GUI, and IE6 needed DirectX to render the PNG Alpha correctly, so I think we can expect PNG to be fixed. However, I don't see that we will get any updates on the win9x and winnt/2k/xp to bring them up to date with the browser of Longhorn.
The rest of the CSS problems we've had with Trident? We can only hope...

]]>

Comment from Chris Pirillo on 2003-05-31

2003-06-01T03:16:57Z

Wouldn't that beat all? :)]]>

Comment from milbertus on 2003-05-31

2003-06-01T03:30:58Z

Wow, that would so rock to see Mozilla used by default in Windows. Sadly, I don't think MS will see things the way that we do, though.

Until these stories about the MS/AOL settlement have been going around, I had forgotten just how old IE6 really is. They probably haven't updated it because, well, they don't "need" to. They have 90%+ of the market, what else is there to get? Sure, us geeks would love them to get it to be more standards compliant, but I don't see the marketing people agreeing with that.

]]>

Comment from Mike on 2003-06-01

2003-06-01T07:40:50Z

The key is that Mozilla at this point isn't built like IE, which fits into a corporate managed network environment under windows domains nice and neatly, with the potential to control much much more than Mozilla could be able to do in its current incarnation. Which isn't to say that Gecko couldn't be used, but MS has been focused on "the next step" where the browser is a service within the OS and is manged and secured just the same as everything else on a network is. A consumer oriented switch to Mozilla isn't going to happen, and anyone who thinks it might is missing the part where MS gets its bread buttered by corporates, not consumers.]]>

Comment from Fil on 2003-06-01

2003-06-01T10:22:52Z

The lizard is my best friend.]]>

Comment from pb on 2003-06-01

2003-06-01T22:02:26Z

Microsoft using KHTML for rendering seems far more likely.]]>

Comment from Basil Crow on 2003-06-01

2003-06-02T01:06:25Z

Hmm... I *just might* have a recent build of Longhorn somewhere around here (wink wink), such as maybe build 4015. What are some pages that you might want me to test, in terms of web standards/PNG support?]]>

Comment from Gerald Bauer on 2003-06-01

2003-06-02T06:59:10Z

As I see it the browser war is over and now the desktop war is on. Just recently, for example, the Munich city council decided to move 14.000 desktops from Windows to Linux. Now is the time to push XUL forward. What is XUL? HTML is the markup for browsers and XUL is the markup for desktops. Find out more at the XUL Alliance site @ http://xul.sourceforge.net]]>

Comment from Nina Risa on 2003-06-03

2003-06-03T15:10:28Z

There is another browser: MyIE2. It is an IE
replacement, and has more up-to-date features,
such as blocking pop-ups, tabbed windows,
and is highly customizable. I had to switch
to MyIE2 from Mozilla because the company I work
for declared IE as the official browser, and
we have to use software that doesn't work in
Mozilla. But MyIE2 is a good replacement.]]>

Comment from Richard Tallent on 2003-06-03

2003-06-04T04:09:31Z

(Side Note: I like the fields on this form! Never thought of using that CSS trick, I'll have to play with this on some web apps at work that are meant to be printed.)

For anyone interested in a tabbed browser with an IE back-end, try Avant Browser instead (Google it). I'm *much* happier with it than I was with MyIE2. The Google bar doesn't work, but they have a near-identical replacement. Other than that, the featureset is much more complete and the program is very stable (no crashes, vs. some issues with MyIE). Support is better as well.

]]>

Comment from MikeyC on 2003-06-08

2003-06-08T08:11:15Z

Just curious about the effect Microsoft's involvement would have. Its good to have a goliath when you aren't getting paid as it gives you motivation to make your product better. Would the open-sourcers continue forward or abandon the product instead of doing free work for the benefit of Microsoft? I think there would be a splinter of sorts in the Mozilla community.]]>

Comment from Aaron Brazell on 2003-06-16

2003-06-16T22:07:08Z

In response to milbertus, I would say that IE may be able to stagnate for a few (5?) more years. I mean, yeah, they have market share, they have fan-base, they have corporate loyalty, they have OS integration. But in 5 years...with the ongoing development of Mozilla and now FireBird (w00t!) and "Real" standards and technologies being implemented, and developers becoming wiser, and the burst of Web services and apps (mature technologies) that won't simply cease development because IE chooses not to update...with all of these things (and more), if IE sits they will lose martketshare. In this industry, a slip from 70% to 65% in 2 years or 70% to 55% in 5 years, hurts. I think I agree we won't see alot of significant development to IE in the near-run, but in the long-run I don't think IE has a choice but to improve...especially in the area of standards compliance. When every other browser (seemingly) is compliant, IE has to follow suit sooner or later.

Aaron Brazell

]]>

maintain your product

2003-05-31T22:27:13Z

Brad Choate has some interesting commentary on Microsoft, AOL, Internet Explorer and Mozilla.

The Future of Web Browsers

2003-05-31T23:09:55Z

Zeldman, Brad, Web-Graphics, MozillaZine and Slashdot all comment on the recent announcement that Microsoft will no longer support IE as a stand alone product. Reactions are for the most part leaning towards “Oh Crap”. A summary of some of ...

no more browser wars?

2003-05-31T23:33:18Z

The big news right now buzzing on tech blogs is that Microsoft and AOL have settled for $750 million and...

AOL and Microsoft - A possible Internet revolution?

2003-06-01T13:04:46Z

This entry at kadyellebee dot com talks about the recent settlement of a court case between Micro$oft and AOL, where they agreed to share knowledge. This has meant that AOL now gets to integrate Internet Explorer into their software for...

THE DOMINO EFFECT

2003-06-01T18:00:52Z

Earlier this week I expressed my own dilemma about the open source software movement vs. the closed and proprietary (and...

The Future of IE, Mozilla: Other Voices

2003-06-02T06:58:35Z

In an unsorted list, some other voices on the Microsoft/AOL-deal and the future of Internet Explorer: Ian Hixie: Congratulations...

No IE 7?

2003-06-02T16:47:44Z

Wow... this article says that Microsoft will not release another stand-alone version of IE. I can't wait for IE service...

WaSP Stings

2003-07-20T18:41:51Z

Finally theWaSP breaks it’s silence on the current Microsoft saga. Some very interesting questions are asked of Microsoft within the article, namely — when will bugs be fixed? and why should we pay for a substandard browser when free altern...