How does Microsoft expect developers/designers to make stuff work for everyone?

[Nathan Sokalski]

Ever since I found out that they didn't give us a way to install both IE6
and IE7 on the same machine, I have been more frustrated and annoyed with
Microsoft than I ever have been with any company (and for someone who has
loved Microsoft as much as me, that takes something pretty bad!). I am a web
developer, and only have access to one computer, which makes it hard to test
for both IE6 and IE7. But even for people that have access to multiple
computers (at least one with IE6 and IE7), I doubt they would enjoy moving
between them every time they need to test a change in their code. Because my
boss is not currently requiring me to make the site function in all
browsers, I can survive as far as employment goes, but I don't think people
will want to optimize for IE7 if they are forced to switch at this point. I
feel this way because:

1. Many people (mostly the less technical people that don't want to learn
new software interfaces) won't be using IE7 yet anyway, so smaller
businesses and people creating personal sites will be less inclined to
change their code to make it work in IE7

2. People that develop personal websites and only have access to their home
computer will probably want to keep IE6 so that they can still view more
sites, as well as test on a browser that people as far back as Windows 98
(because believe it or not, some people haven't upgraded their OS) are
capable of using

I don't plan on upgrading to IE7 until I buy a new computer that comes with
Windows Vista or I find a way to have IE6 and IE7 on my machine at the same
time. Some people have told me to use VirtualPC 2004, but that is for
operating systems, and wouldn't help much when I want to see how a page
shows up in different browsers. If they could make something like that for
use with browsers, I would probably be happy. If Microsoft thinks everyone
is going to switch to IE7 because they want to, they are wrong. Many
universities have blocked the upgrade at the server level, so people in the
residence halls won't be getting it, and I don't think many other people do
it by choice anyway. Sorry, IE7, if you don't want to coexist, you're
waiting your turn with me!

 

[Patrice]

Once your OS runs in Virtual PC, you can of course do whatever you do with
an OS such as installing IE7 or any other application you want. Try a
Virtual PC group if you had some kind of problem...

 

[Mark Rae]

I am a web developer, and only have access to one computer, which makes it
hard to test for both IE6 and IE7.

That's what VirtualPC is for...

 

[Aidy]

Ever since I found out that they didn't give us a way to install both IE6

and IE7 on the same machine, I have been more frustrated and annoyed with
Microsoft than I ever have been with any company (and for someone who has
loved Microsoft as much as me, that takes something pretty bad!). I am a
web developer, and only have access to one computer, which makes it hard
to test for both IE6 and IE7. But even for people that have access to
multiple computers (at least one with IE6 and IE7), I doubt they would
enjoy moving between them every time they need to test a change in their
code. Because my boss is not currently requiring me to make the site
function in all browsers, I can survive as far as employment goes, but I
don't think people will want to optimize for IE7 if they are forced to
switch at this point. I feel this way because:

<snip>

I know what you mean. We need to test IE6/IE7/Firefox 1/ Firefox 2/Mac.
You might want to try this;

http://tredosoft.com/IE7_standalone



I haven't tried it myself so not sure how well it works.

 

[AJR]

Not a developer so do not know if your statements are valid, However quote:
"...Some people have told me to use VirtualPC 2004, but that is for
operating systems,..." .
You can have whatever browser your heart desires installed on the Virtual PC
one of the main purpose of the virtual PC is to evaluate OSs and
applications.

 

[Corey B]

I understand why people are suggesting VirtualPC, but I have to whole
heartedly agree with the original poster. Come on Microsoft! This is
2007. It is absolutely ridiculous to not have a (simple) way to run
the two browsers side by side. Netscape Navigator had that ability
from day one!

I think that this is an example of what happens when one company has
complete market dominance. They don't care as much. In the
development cycle for IE7 supporting side by side installation was
probably very, very low on their priority list. When it came time to
cut features that would be one of the first to go.

They will have to see their browser market share really, really slip
before they will start scratching their heads and wondering why
developers are building sites for FireFox instead of IE.

As much as I like MS, this seems to be an example of what happens when
you are able to bundle your browser with the OS. Since the vast, vast
majority of people have Windows, they just end up using IE. And since
MS recommends automatic updating, then the vast, vast majority of
people just start using IE7 when it comes out. And since this
particular problem only impacts a relatively small number of people
they probably decided it wasn't worth the effort.

My two cents.
Corey

 

[C A Upsdell]

Ever since I found out that they didn't give us a way to install both IE6
and IE7 on the same machine, I have been more frustrated and annoyed with
Microsoft than I ever have been with any company (and for someone who has
loved Microsoft as much as me, that takes something pretty bad!). I am a web
developer, and only have access to one computer, which makes it hard to test
for both IE6 and IE7 ...

Others have told you to use Virtual PC. Normally you have to get a
license for any O/S you install using Virtual PC, however, MS offers a
free pre-licensed copy of XP SP2 with IE6 that you can install using
Virtual PC, so you can upgrade to IE7, and install Virtual PC with this
virtual copy of XP SP2 for testing with IE6. I have done this, and it
works fine.

See
http://blogs.msdn.com/ie/archive/2006/11/30/ie6-and-ie7-running-on-a-single-machine.aspx

 

[norm]

Ever since I found out that they didn't give us a way to install both IE6
and IE7 on the same machine, I have been more frustrated and annoyed with
Microsoft than I ever have been with any company (and for someone who has
loved Microsoft as much as me, that takes something pretty bad!). I am a web
developer, and only have access to one computer, which makes it hard to test
for both IE6 and IE7. But even for people that have access to multiple
computers (at least one with IE6 and IE7), I doubt they would enjoy moving
between them every time they need to test a change in their code. Because my
boss is not currently requiring me to make the site function in all
browsers, I can survive as far as employment goes, but I don't think people
will want to optimize for IE7 if they are forced to switch at this point. I
feel this way because:

1. Many people (mostly the less technical people that don't want to learn
new software interfaces) won't be using IE7 yet anyway, so smaller
businesses and people creating personal sites will be less inclined to
change their code to make it work in IE7

2. People that develop personal websites and only have access to their home
computer will probably want to keep IE6 so that they can still view more
sites, as well as test on a browser that people as far back as Windows 98
(because believe it or not, some people haven't upgraded their OS) are
capable of using

I don't plan on upgrading to IE7 until I buy a new computer that comes with
Windows Vista or I find a way to have IE6 and IE7 on my machine at the same
time. Some people have told me to use VirtualPC 2004, but that is for
operating systems, and wouldn't help much when I want to see how a page
shows up in different browsers. If they could make something like that for
use with browsers, I would probably be happy. If Microsoft thinks everyone
is going to switch to IE7 because they want to, they are wrong. Many
universities have blocked the upgrade at the server level, so people in the
residence halls won't be getting it, and I don't think many other people do
it by choice anyway. Sorry, IE7, if you don't want to coexist, you're
waiting your turn with me!

If you code to w3c recommendations and standards, it should not make any
difference to ie6 and ie7, or most any other browser being used.
http://validator.w3.org/

 

[Corey B]

So it sounds like you are saying that if you code to the standards then
there is no need to test in the different browsers? Is that realistic?
I think we will always want to test in the different browsers. Even
with standards we could have slight variations in how those standards
are implemented - true?

Corey

 

[norm]

So it sounds like you are saying that if you code to the standards then
there is no need to test in the different browsers? Is that realistic?
I think we will always want to test in the different browsers. Even
with standards we could have slight variations in how those standards
are implemented - true?

Corey

If coding to standards, there probably should not be any "show stoppers"
when viewed with standards compliant browsers. There could be variances,
but nothing that should create an unpleasant viewing experience for the
user. If you are concerned about viewing differences between ie6 and
ie7, what about how things show up in mozilla, firefox, seamonkey,
netscape, opera, konqueror, safari. Are you also testing each of these
against your code? Recommendations and standards compliance offer the
greatest amount of certainty that you are not inadvertently excluding
someone from viewing your work in a satisfying manner.

 

[Mark Rae]

If coding to standards, there probably should not be any "show stoppers"
when viewed with standards compliant browsers. There could be variances,
but nothing that should create an unpleasant viewing experience for the
user. If you are concerned about viewing differences between ie6 and ie7,
what about how things show up in mozilla, firefox, seamonkey, netscape,
opera, konqueror, safari. Are you also testing each of these against your
code? Recommendations and standards compliance offer the greatest amount
of certainty that you are not inadvertently excluding someone from viewing
your work in a satisfying manner.

That's certainly true! E.g. Safari simply doesn't understand CSS of any type
when applied to buttons...

P.S. don't forget Camino...

 

[C A Upsdell]

Nathan Sokalski wrote:

If you code to w3c recommendations and standards, it should not make any
difference to ie6 and ie7, or most any other browser being used.
http://validator.w3.org/

It should not make a difference, but it does. IE6 and IE7 both have
bugs -- not always the same bugs -- and neither supports the standards
100%. Some tricks to make IE6 behave properly are not needed for IE7,
but can create problems in IE7. In addition there are some aspects of
page rendering that are not detailed in the standards (e.g. the position
of markers and sizes of LI indents), so that browsers are free to do
things differently: and they do.

I code to the standards, but I have sometimes had to resort to
conditional comments to make the various version of IE to do things in
an acceptable manner.

 

[Corey B]

If coding to standards, there probably should not be any "show stoppers"
when viewed with standards compliant browsers. There could be variances,
but nothing that should create an unpleasant viewing experience for the
user. If you are concerned about viewing differences between ie6 and
ie7, what about how things show up in mozilla, firefox, seamonkey,
netscape, opera, konqueror, safari. Are you also testing each of these
against your code? Recommendations and standards compliance offer the
greatest amount of certainty that you are not inadvertently excluding
someone from viewing your work in a satisfying manner.

Yes - you absolutely test using lots of different browsers. How many
browsers depends on the requirements and the client. Most clients are
happy if you can guarantee that the site will behave properly in about
90% - 95% of the population. So you can not worry about some of the
browsers with very, very small market share. Also, it depends on the
intended audience. If you know that your audience will be very, very
technical then there is a much greater chance that they will be using a
more obscure browser. So for most situations you will need to test
IE5, IE6, IE7, mozilla, firefox, safari, netscape and probably opera.
It's very simple to test all of those except the multiple versions of
IE. Then it becomes a royal pain in the butt. Either multiple
computers or VirtualPC. Either one is way more effort than should be
needed.

Corey

 

[ThunderMusic]

hi,
I must say I also code to the standards, however, I must do conditional
blocks based on the browser type and version when doing many things in
javascript because each browser implements javascript their own way. CSS has
some differences and we must sometimes use "hacks" to get things straight on
some browser, but it's not IMHO the major problem with "cross-browser"
compatibility... Actually, for me javascript is a much bigger problem in
that field.

And it's absolutely sure I won't test on every browser available, but I do
what I consider the "bare minimum" : IE6, IE7 (we have 2 computers to do
so), Netscape, Firefox and Opera. And I find some major differences between
just these 5 browsers, so I do even want to think about what I could find on
the others...

I also think it's a bad move from Microsoft, but since some IE components
are part of the OS, it was very predictable that it would be that way...

ThunderMusic

 

[clintonG]

<snip />

<snip />

Architects and others in the construction industry know what this is like
because Autodesk controls the entire U.S. construction industry. Autodesk
sells crippleware CAD and its products are qualitatively trash yet they
continue to control the entire industry after imposing a proprietary file
format in the mid 1980s which has allowed the company to rape and pillage
the U.S. construction industry one the construction industry participants
became locked in.

In fact, the National Institute of Science and Technology (NIST) states in
recent studies that this type of crippleware is costing the U.S.
construction industry over $15 billion annually. Yes, they said $15 BILLION
ANNUALLY!!!

It would be interesting to learn how many tens of billions Microsoft
crippleware has cost America. All I know is $15 billion each and every year
and growing larger and larger is a hell of a price to pay.

Its also become a hell of a price to pay to Microsoft for "free" software
like a browser that has been used in a manner to destroy the web so as to
maintain artificial control of markets at the expense of the customer rather
than any actual competitor.

So the answer is really simple actually. Unlike architects and others who
have decades of proprietary file assets which continues to prevent any
reasonable choice in the matter of change Microsoft has only controlled the
"perception" of those using IE and has no proprietary files that prevent
anybody from choosing to use any other browser.

Microsoft did control the proprietary use of ActiveX controls which
dominated Intranets and enterprise development for some time but quite
frankly, the use of ActiveX is dead and web development need not rely on any
ActiveX controls for several years now.

So the answer is actually really quite simple. Abusers continue to abuse
until they are forced to stop abusing and the only power Microsoft has to
abuse anybody is simply a misplace perception.

All people need to do is use the power they really have to stop the abuser;
the freedom of choice. The power to control your own mind and change your
perception which leads to a change of behavior. It is your change of
behavior Microsoft fears most. Microsoft actually fears its own customers
more than they fear any competitor. I understand this phenomena and I hope I
am helping others to do so.

Choosing to put an 88x31 "button" image on a website stating the website
only functions with browsers that support W3C Standards and disallowing the
website to function for those using any version of IE is the way to free
ourselves of this scourge on humanity once and for all. At this point in
time it would be painless to do so as there are no more ActiveX controls and
no proprietary file assets that can cost so much to change. All that needs
to be changed in your mind!

Its just like quitting smoking cigarettes. Very difficult to do initially
but once you make up your mind and do it you look back and laugh at yourself
at how ridiculously easy it actually was once you stopped deceiving yourself
and realized the whole thing was in your mind which is the only means to
control behavior. That's all Microsoft has. Deception and your false
perceptions.

I'm finally now using another browser and while I will continue to develop
web applications using ASP.NET I will be practicing what I preach. The
billions of dollars this abusive corporation has unjustly imposed upon the
human race is simply too much to pay and I cannot in good concience continue
to be a part of it.

The joke they call IE7 proves to me Microsoft is not serious and remains
nothing more than a company of lying manipulating pimps who intend to
continue imposing great losses of time and money upon the human race while
spending unknown number of millions of dollars pampering a false perception
that they have changed. It is easy and correct to compare Microsoft to an
alcoholic or a herion addict. Same behavior model. Lies. Lies. Lies
Recidivism. Recidivism. Recidivism. Lies. Lies. Lies not different than the
woman whose husband beats her because "he loves her" and unless she
eventually finds the courage to change her mind she will die at his abusive
hand.

When people understand how insidious Microsoft's control of their minds has
become they must also find freedom to choose differnetly or die. The choice
is still ours to make and its our choice and our freedom to choose that is
important because it is that freedom to choose and that alone that Microsoft
has successfully controlled.

Since Microsoft's Internet Explorer 4 this company's browsers have became
analagous to the AIDs of the Internet and like a real dangerous and
insidious virus, the virus known as Internet Explorer must be eradicated
from the face of the earth or tens of millions of individuals and companies
alike will continue to waste their hard earned wealth throwing their pearls
after swine.

Like abused women married to men who love them Microsoft will continue to
come home and beat us all until we choose to leave once and for all or until
we are beaten to death.

<%= Clinton Gallagher
NET csgallagher AT metromilwaukee.com
URL http://clintongallagher.metromilwaukee.com/
MAP http://wikimapia.org/#y=43038073&x=-88043838&z=17&l=0&m=h

 

[Mark Rae]

So for most situations you will need to test IE5, IE6, IE7, mozilla,
firefox, safari, netscape and probably opera.

IE5 is all but gone now...

IE7, IE6, FireFox and Safari account for over 95% of worldwide usage.

WinXP, 2000 & 98 account for 92% of worldwide usage - Mac 4%

http://www.thecounter.com/stats/

 

[PA Bear]

Did you ever hear of partitions and installing more than one OS...?

BTW there is a way to have IE6 and IE7 installed at the same time, but this
is not supported.

 

[Corey B]

Did you ever hear of partitions and installing more than one OS...?

BTW there is a way to have IE6 and IE7 installed at the same time, but this
is not supported.

Yeah - I know that's a solution. But doesn't it seem absolutely
ridiculous that you must partition your drive and install a completely
separate *operating system* just to get a different version of a web
browser? We should expect more from Microsoft instead of being happy
to find a work around.

Corey

 

[Nathan Sokalski]

Yes, I have heard of all those things, but they do not allow you to have a
window for each browser version open side by side. My basic complaint is
that when testing, I don't want to be logging out and back in under a
different login to test it in a different browser. Not only would this be
very time consuming, but if I have to close my development software (in my
case, Visual Studio .NET 2005) to test, I cannot use the undo feature of
Visual Studio .NET 2005. Yes, I know how to install a second copy of Windows
XP SP2 using Virtual PC, but if someone's going to have software like Visual
Studio .NET open, do you really want to use up all the extra RAM required to
run a second copy of the OS?

 

[Mark Rae]

Yes, I know how to install a second copy of Windows XP SP2 using Virtual
PC,

Good, because that's the solution here...

but if someone's going to have software like Visual Studio .NET open, do
you really want to use up all the extra RAM required to run a second copy
of the OS?

So get some more RAM, then...!