Microsoft finally kill Mac/IE

Discussion in 'HTML' started by Andy Dingley, Dec 19, 2005.

  1. Andy Dingley

    Andy Dingley Guest

    Andy Dingley, Dec 19, 2005
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. In message <>, Andy Dingley
    <> writes
    >http://www.microsoft.com/mac/products/internetexplorer/internetexplorer.
    >aspx?pid=internetexplorer
    >
    > Microsoft will end support for Internet Explorer for Mac on December
    >31st, 2005, and will provide no further security or performance updates.
    >
    >Additionally, as of January 31st, 2006, Internet Explorer for the Mac
    >will no longer be available for download from Mactopia. It is
    >recommended that Macintosh users migrate to more recent web browsing
    >technologies such as Apple's Safari.


    (or Firefox) - does anyone know the relative percentages for each in
    terms of Mac usage?

    thanks

    --
    Craig Cockburn ("coburn"). http://www.SiliconGlen.com/
    Please sign the Spam Petition: http://www.siliconglen.com/spampetition/
    Home to the first online guide to Scotland, founded 1994.
    Scottish FAQ, weddings, website design, stop spam and more!
     
    Craig Cockburn, Dec 19, 2005
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Andy Dingley

    David Ross Guest

    Craig Cockburn wrote:
    >
    > In message <>, Andy Dingley
    > <> writes
    > >http://www.microsoft.com/mac/products/internetexplorer/internetexplorer.
    > >aspx?pid=internetexplorer
    > >
    > > Microsoft will end support for Internet Explorer for Mac on December
    > >31st, 2005, and will provide no further security or performance updates.
    > >
    > >Additionally, as of January 31st, 2006, Internet Explorer for the Mac
    > >will no longer be available for download from Mactopia. It is
    > >recommended that Macintosh users migrate to more recent web browsing
    > >technologies such as Apple's Safari.

    >
    > (or Firefox) - does anyone know the relative percentages for each in
    > terms of Mac usage?


    Over a two-week period in September, I logged the user agents (UAs)
    for 1,987 hits to my Web pages. Of those, 75 can be readily
    identified as running on Macs. (Others might also be from Macs,
    but I didn't do a thorough analysis of each UA.)

    The specific browsers were:
    Safari -- 55
    Firefox -- 8
    Camino (another Mozilla-based browser) -- 3
    others -- 9

    A more detailed discussion can be found at my
    <http://www.rossde.com/viewing_site.html>. However, I do not break
    out platforms there, only browsers.

    --

    David E. Ross
    <http://www.rossde.com/>

    I use Mozilla as my Web browser because I want a browser that
    complies with Web standards. See <http://www.mozilla.org/>.
     
    David Ross, Dec 20, 2005
    #3
  4. Andy Dingley

    Andy Dingley Guest

    On Mon, 19 Dec 2005 16:22:15 -0800, David Ross <>
    wrote:

    >> (or Firefox) - does anyone know the relative percentages for each in
    >> terms of Mac usage?


    I recently did a site makeover for a pretty big gamer site. This
    included spending around an extra month getting the damned thing
    pixel-perfect on Mac/IE (and barring a few pixels, I pretty much
    achieved it).

    Visiting browsers were about 4% Mac platform, of which almost everything
    was Safari. There was a measurable but tiny traffic of non-Safari
    browsers. The only Mac/IE I saw though was from our own test machines.

    IMHO, people who don't use Macs (i.e. my boss) use Mac/IE because it's
    what they're used to and are expecting to find. People who do use Macs
    have long moved from IE to Safari.
     
    Andy Dingley, Dec 20, 2005
    #4
  5. Andy Dingley

    Dan Guest

    Andy Dingley wrote:
    > http://www.microsoft.com/mac/products/internetexplorer/internetexplorer.aspx?pid=internetexplorer
    >
    > Microsoft will end support for Internet Explorer for Mac on December
    > 31st, 2005, and will provide no further security or performance updates.
    >
    > Additionally, as of January 31st, 2006, Internet Explorer for the Mac
    > will no longer be available for download from Mactopia. It is
    > recommended that Macintosh users migrate to more recent web browsing
    > technologies such as Apple's Safari.


    I never thought I'd see the day when M$ was recommending that people
    upgrade to non-M$ browsers... For once, here's a Microsoft
    announcement that should be well-publicized by supporters of alternate
    browsers.

    --
    Dan
     
    Dan, Dec 20, 2005
    #5
  6. On Mon, 19 Dec 2005, David Ross wrote:

    > A more detailed discussion can be found at my
    > <http://www.rossde.com/viewing_site.html>. However, I do not break
    > out platforms there, only browsers.


    What's that mean? Mac MSIE is a completely different browser than
    Win MSIE. Lumping them together would make the results even more
    bogus than usual.
     
    Alan J. Flavell, Dec 20, 2005
    #6
  7. Andy Dingley

    dorayme Guest

    In article <>,
    Andy Dingley <> wrote:

    >
    > IMHO, people who don't use Macs (i.e. my boss) use Mac/IE because it's
    > what they're used to and are expecting to find. People who do use Macs
    > have long moved from IE to Safari.


    Even those on OS 9 are likely to have moved to Mozilla or iCab,
    both rather better on the whole. I was surprised to hear about
    support being stopped for IE Mac soon, I thought it had been for
    a while. What have they ever done for the last year or two I
    wonder?
     
    dorayme, Dec 20, 2005
    #7
  8. Andy Dingley

    David Ross Guest

    "Alan J. Flavell" wrote:
    >
    > On Mon, 19 Dec 2005, David Ross wrote:
    >
    > > A more detailed discussion can be found at my
    > > <http://www.rossde.com/viewing_site.html>. However, I do not break
    > > out platforms there, only browsers.

    >
    > What's that mean? Mac MSIE is a completely different browser than
    > Win MSIE. Lumping them together would make the results even more
    > bogus than usual.


    My purpose was to catagorize browsers by the companies that develop
    them. If you look at my page, you will see this.

    Followup set to <comp.infosystems.www.authoring.html>.

    --

    David E. Ross
    <http://www.rossde.com/>

    I use Mozilla as my Web browser because I want a browser that
    complies with Web standards. See <http://www.mozilla.org/>.
     
    David Ross, Dec 21, 2005
    #8
  9. Andy Dingley

    Neredbojias Guest

    With neither quill nor qualm, Dan quothed:

    >
    > Andy Dingley wrote:
    > > http://www.microsoft.com/mac/products/internetexplorer/internetexplorer.aspx?pid=internetexplorer
    > >
    > > Microsoft will end support for Internet Explorer for Mac on December
    > > 31st, 2005, and will provide no further security or performance updates.
    > >
    > > Additionally, as of January 31st, 2006, Internet Explorer for the Mac
    > > will no longer be available for download from Mactopia. It is
    > > recommended that Macintosh users migrate to more recent web browsing
    > > technologies such as Apple's Safari.

    >
    > I never thought I'd see the day when M$ was recommending that people
    > upgrade to non-M$ browsers... For once, here's a Microsoft
    > announcement that should be well-publicized by supporters of alternate
    > browsers.


    You have to remember that IE isn't a browser. It's a browser-like
    something that works something like a browser.

    --
    Neredbojias
    Contrary to popular belief, it is believable.
     
    Neredbojias, Dec 21, 2005
    #9
  10. On Wed, 21 Dec 2005, Neredbojias wrote:

    (snip stuff about MacIE...)

    > You have to remember that IE isn't a browser.


    And *you* need to remember that MacIE is not WinIE.

    > It's a browser-like something that works something like a browser.


    I would accept that statement about WinIE. And probably add a free
    extra portion of raspberries.

    Although I don't happen to use Macs, I'm aware that when it was
    introduced and being supported, MacIE was a good, standards-oriented,
    CSS-ish-supporting browser for the Mac, which stood up well against
    the then-current opposition on any platform.

    Time has moved on, and MacIE has not; so, nowadays it's quite a
    disappointment as measured against other *current* browsers. But
    tossing it casually into the same pot as the browser-like operating
    system component for Windows would be a big mistake, and would tend to
    discredit anything else which the contributor was trying to say.

    cheers
     
    Alan J. Flavell, Dec 21, 2005
    #10
  11. Andy Dingley

    JDS Guest

    On Wed, 21 Dec 2005 12:18:31 +0000, Alan J. Flavell wrote:

    > Although I don't happen to use Macs, I'm aware that when it was
    > introduced and being supported, MacIE was a good, standards-oriented,
    > CSS-ish-supporting browser for the Mac, which stood up well against
    > the then-current opposition on any platform.


    But the same could have been said of WinIE 5. IMO, Netscape died not
    because of (well, not *just* because of) underhanded, sneaky, monopolistic
    practices of Microsoft[1]. Netscape died because it sucked as
    compared to MSIE 5. Really, compare the browsing experience of MSIE5 to
    NS4. Hello? Can you say Netsuck?

    But, of course, Microsoft being what it is, "innovation" only occurs when
    there is a market to monopolize, and MSIE stagnated and langoured in its
    market dominance, and by today's standards, MSIE is the "lame duck" so to
    speak. (Or does "lame duck" have to much of a political connotation to
    use there? But I digress).

    In any case, the degree of "innovation" from MSIE5 -> 5.5 -> 6 has been
    miniscule in comparison to what other browsers have been doing in that
    time frame. And we're talking, like, 5-6 years here. Hard to believe
    that MSIE 5 was released in 1999. And IE 6 in 2001. 4+ years ago for
    the last major update from Microsoft?? Ugh! But I digress again.

    happy whatever-o-days to all.




    [1] Need an example? See this 9 year old news.com.com story:
    http://news.com.com/2100-1001-240546.html

    --
    JDS | lid
    | http://www.newtnotes.com
    DJMBS | http://newtnotes.com/doctor-jeff-master-brainsurgeon/
     
    JDS, Dec 21, 2005
    #11
  12. On Wed, 21 Dec 2005, JDS wrote:

    > On Wed, 21 Dec 2005 12:18:31 +0000, Alan J. Flavell wrote:
    >
    > > Although I don't happen to use Macs, I'm aware that when it was
    > > introduced and being supported, MacIE was a good, standards-oriented,
    > > CSS-ish-supporting browser for the Mac, which stood up well against
    > > the then-current opposition on any platform.

    >
    > But the same could have been said of WinIE 5.


    No. Its violation of several mandatory requirements of the
    interworking specifications have been on record for years.

    > IMO, Netscape died not because of (well, not *just* because of)
    > underhanded, sneaky, monopolistic practices of Microsoft[1].
    > Netscape died because it sucked as compared to MSIE 5. Really,
    > compare the browsing experience of MSIE5 to NS4. Hello? Can you say
    > Netsuck?


    I*'m not sure what you're hoping to achieve by this forceful
    obfuscation of the fact that MacIE is a completely different product
    from WinIE, and the lead developer for MacIE put considerable emphasis
    on conforming to published specifications, instead of riding roughshod
    over them in the way that WinIE has repeatedly been exposed for doing.

    ho hum
     
    Alan J. Flavell, Dec 21, 2005
    #12
  13. Andy Dingley

    Andy Dingley Guest

    On Wed, 21 Dec 2005 15:54:12 +0000, "Alan J. Flavell"
    <> wrote:

    >the lead developer for MacIE put considerable emphasis
    >on conforming to published specifications, instead of riding roughshod
    >over them in the way that WinIE has repeatedly been exposed for doing.


    So why does Mac/IE suck so badly then?

    Maybe the specification for mac/IE was to support standards. This would
    be laudable. However the reality is that its basic parser is so broken
    that it collapses entirely under trivial syntactic errors, and even
    several valid constructs that are just trivially different from the
    minimal case. This makes it a poor browser for practical use on the web.
    I suspect that the implementation and _particularly_ the test case
    design for it were distinctly poor in comparison to these lofty design
    goals.

    Maybe Mac/IE was intended to be wonderful, but the simple fact is that
    it isn't. Nor have M$oft shown any interest in fixing minor but damaging
    bugs over several years.
     
    Andy Dingley, Dec 21, 2005
    #13
  14. On Wed, 21 Dec 2005, Andy Dingley wrote:

    > I suspect that the implementation and _particularly_ the test case
    > design for it were distinctly poor in comparison to these lofty design
    > goals.


    You could be right.

    > Maybe Mac/IE was intended to be wonderful, but the simple fact is that
    > it isn't. Nor have M$oft shown any interest in fixing minor but damaging
    > bugs over several years.


    I could not possibly comment on the suggestion from some quarters that
    subsequent MacIE development was deliberately nobbled, despite the
    good intentions of its lead developer, to avoid it looking much better
    than its contemporary WinIE versions.
     
    Alan J. Flavell, Dec 21, 2005
    #14
  15. Andy Dingley

    dorayme Guest

    In article <>,
    Andy Dingley <> wrote:

    > On Wed, 21 Dec 2005 15:54:12 +0000, "Alan J. Flavell"
    > <> wrote:
    >
    > >the lead developer for MacIE put considerable emphasis
    > >on conforming to published specifications, instead of riding roughshod
    > >over them in the way that WinIE has repeatedly been exposed for doing.

    >
    > So why does Mac/IE suck so badly then?
    >


    One thing can be a great improvement on another but still not be
    better than some third thing. Your reasoning commits the fallacy
    of Lingum Perfectio Comparisiona, a well know Italian fault of
    reasoning.

    It never sucked. I used it for years and it worked well enough.
    It started super quick and there are other things besides
    rendering web pages to consider in a browser that it was very
    good at.

    > Maybe the specification for mac/IE was to support standards. This would
    > be laudable. However the reality is that its basic parser is so broken
    > that it collapses entirely under trivial syntactic errors, and even
    > several valid constructs that are just trivially different from the
    > minimal case. This makes it a poor browser for practical use on the web.


    If you were really right, then users would have (had) very much
    more trouble than they in fact had. Now, of course, the situation
    is rather different with css becoming more prevalent.

    What so many IE critics miss is the strength of its flexibilty.
    It mostly did not throw a tantrum (like, say, Safari) when it
    came across invalid mark up.

    > I suspect that the implementation and _particularly_ the test case
    > design for it were distinctly poor in comparison to these lofty design
    > goals.
    >
    > Maybe Mac/IE was intended to be wonderful, but the simple fact is that
    > it isn't. Nor have M$oft shown any interest in fixing minor but damaging
    > bugs over several years.
     
    dorayme, Dec 21, 2005
    #15
  16. Andy Dingley

    Andy Dingley Guest

    On Thu, 22 Dec 2005 08:26:55 +1100, dorayme
    <> wrote:

    >What so many IE critics miss is the strength of its flexibilty.
    >It mostly did not throw a tantrum (like, say, Safari) when it
    >came across invalid mark up.


    Mac/IE leaves gaping holes in the page if the markup contains surplus
    (but valid) whitespace. That's not flexibility, that's rubbish.
     
    Andy Dingley, Dec 21, 2005
    #16
  17. Andy Dingley

    dorayme Guest

    In article <>,
    Andy Dingley <> wrote:

    > On Thu, 22 Dec 2005 08:26:55 +1100, dorayme
    > <> wrote:
    >
    > >What so many IE critics miss is the strength of its flexibilty.
    > >It mostly did not throw a tantrum (like, say, Safari) when it
    > >came across invalid mark up.

    >
    > Mac/IE leaves gaping holes in the page if the markup contains surplus
    > (but valid) whitespace. That's not flexibility, that's rubbish.


    Trouble with whitespace in IE is a fact. You do not miss this.
    But you appear to miss a lot else...

    Have you, over a goodly period of time, actually used this
    browser on a Mac? Got by on it? Or what, you see various faults
    and it is rubbish... Dismissed! You would not like my car and you
    would not see thgat actually it is a very good car to have for
    some people....
     
    dorayme, Dec 21, 2005
    #17
  18. In article <Pine.WNT.4.64.0512211658500.884@ZORIN>,
    "Alan J. Flavell" <> wrote:

    > I could not possibly comment on the suggestion from some quarters that
    > subsequent MacIE development was deliberately nobbled, despite the
    > good intentions of its lead developer, to avoid it looking much better
    > than its contemporary WinIE versions.


    Damn, where is the original CSS compatibility chart that showed MacIE5
    by Eric Meyer? When it arrived, it was the *best* CSS compatible browser
    available per that chart, and not by a little.
    Found it, I think.
    <http://www.ddj.com/webreview/style/css1/charts/mastergrid.shtml>
    without the red, green and yellow table fields that made the fact
    obvious originally. The browsers have moved on, but MacIE5 was once the
    best, regardless of its heritage. And I say that without love for MS.
    All in support of your previous assertions.

    leo

    --
    <http://web0.greatbasin.net/~leo/>
     
    Leonard Blaisdell, Dec 22, 2005
    #18
  19. In article <>,
    Andy Dingley <> wrote:

    > So why does Mac/IE suck so badly then?


    When it was introduced it relatively didn't. It does now because the OS
    X port was left on the "it compiles and runs" Carbonization level. Also,
    the DOM features of other browsers have long since passed the abilities
    of Mac IE 5.

    --
    Henri Sivonen

    http://hsivonen.iki.fi/
    Mozilla Web Author FAQ: http://mozilla.org/docs/web-developer/faq.html
     
    Henri Sivonen, Dec 22, 2005
    #19
  20. Andy Dingley

    Neredbojias Guest

    With neither quill nor qualm, Alan J. Flavell quothed:

    >
    > On Wed, 21 Dec 2005, Neredbojias wrote:
    >
    > (snip stuff about MacIE...)
    >
    > > You have to remember that IE isn't a browser.

    >
    > And *you* need to remember that MacIE is not WinIE.
    >
    > > It's a browser-like something that works something like a browser.

    >
    > I would accept that statement about WinIE. And probably add a free
    > extra portion of raspberries.
    >
    > Although I don't happen to use Macs, I'm aware that when it was
    > introduced and being supported, MacIE was a good, standards-oriented,
    > CSS-ish-supporting browser for the Mac, which stood up well against
    > the then-current opposition on any platform.
    >
    > Time has moved on, and MacIE has not; so, nowadays it's quite a
    > disappointment as measured against other *current* browsers. But
    > tossing it casually into the same pot as the browser-like operating
    > system component for Windows would be a big mistake, and would tend to
    > discredit anything else which the contributor was trying to say.


    Apparently MS had a different team working on the Mac IE. I can't be
    all that rueful, though, since Mac as a computer is like Yugo as an
    automobile, anyway.

    --
    Neredbojias
    Contrary to popular belief, it is believable.
     
    Neredbojias, Dec 22, 2005
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Charles A. Lackman
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    1,460
    smith
    Dec 8, 2004
  2. SpamProof
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    655
    SpamProof
    Oct 21, 2003
  3. =?Utf-8?B?ZGF2aWQ=?=

    Microsoft TreeView: Microsoft.Web.UI.WebControls.dll

    =?Utf-8?B?ZGF2aWQ=?=, Apr 11, 2005, in forum: ASP .Net
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    3,657
    Patrick Olurotimi Ige
    Apr 11, 2005
  4. Replies:
    0
    Views:
    3,632
  5. David Lozzi

    Try...Catch...Finally not firing finally?

    David Lozzi, Apr 23, 2007, in forum: ASP .Net
    Replies:
    12
    Views:
    826
    Alvin Bruney [MVP]
    May 11, 2007
Loading...

Share This Page