If there were no browser bugs...

Discussion in 'HTML' started by e n | c k m a, Nov 3, 2003.

  1. If there were no browser bugs (in terms of standards compliancy and the way
    CSS is rendered) then we'd only have use for one browser. Do you agree with
    this?

    If so, do you think that major browsers (namely Micro$oft) intentionally add
    buggy code so that at least the developers will "use" it for testing
    purposes?

    I love a good conspiracy ;)

    Nicko.
     
    e n | c k m a, Nov 3, 2003
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. Sorry, forgot to add the [OT]
     
    e n | c k m a, Nov 3, 2003
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. No. A browser is more than a rendering engine.
     
    Leif K-Brooks, Nov 3, 2003
    #3
  4. No. A browser is more than a rendering engine.

    True, but hypothetically, what if they exhausted all the possibilities of
    user features?
     
    e n | c k m a, Nov 3, 2003
    #4
  5. No. Differences in rendering between browsers are not always as the result
    of bugs.
     
    Toby A Inkster, Nov 3, 2003
    #5
  6. e n | c k m a

    Kris Guest

    I disagree. There is more to a browser than adhering to the written
    standards. This is were variety is comes in; after all, your preference
    is probably different than mine. And don't forget there are people with
    special needs, for who special browsers exist. "One browser fits all" is
    an utopia, IMO.

    Also, competition among browser makers forces them to improve the
    product, which will benefit the user. It is typical that MS has not
    tried improving their browser for a long time (security patches are not
    what i call improvements), now that they have come to dominate the
    browser market. I anticipate only growth for other browsers.
     
    Kris, Nov 3, 2003
    #6
  7. e n | c k m a

    Steve Pugh Guest

    Only if that browser was the perfect choice for all users on all
    paltforms. It would need to be the perfect browser with the perfect
    user interface for everyone, regardless of whether they used its
    output on a braile device or a pda or on a TV, etc., etc.

    I find it very unlikely that the same browser would ever give the best
    performance for someone surfing the net via their TV and someone
    surfing via an aural interface.

    Even if there were no bugs there can still be massive differences in
    hwo pages are rendered.
    No. By definition a bug is accidental.

    Many of the non-standard 'features' of browsers were added during the
    'browser wars' to make their browsers more attractive to developers
    ("Look you can make text blink in our browser!"). And many of them
    were retained and/or copied for reasons of 'compatability'.

    Anyway, why would a browser manufacturer want their browser to only be
    used for testing purposes? Where's the return on investment in that?

    Steve
     
    Steve Pugh, Nov 3, 2003
    #7
  8. e n | c k m a

    Chris Morris Guest

    Then there'd be a need for a browser that could be configured without
    going through 100 layers of menus and didn't take up Gb of HD space.
     
    Chris Morris, Nov 3, 2003
    #8
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

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

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.