At 9:37 AM -0600 3/2/07, Sam Beard wrote: >Scott, > > This isn't exactly true. Microsoft CHOSE not to export IE for Mac OS >X. This was done partly because Apple has their own browser, Safari, and >partly because of the rise in popularity of Firefox, Opera, Camino, and >others. The last version of IE for Mac was running quite well on Mac OS >X, but it was also the equivalent of at least one version behind Windows >IE, IIRC. Safari is generally well-regarded, as are the others listed >above. And, with MS pushing IE's "integration" into the Windows OS, >there wasn't really a desire on their part to continue work on something >without much tangible return. IE for Windows gets stuck into the Windows >OS in such a way that it's VERY difficult to fully disentangle it from >the OS and to fully use another browser instead. I've heard of many >times where someone THINKS they've disabled IE as a default browser, but >then something happens that launches IE instead of something else. As >always, YMMV greatly from this. > >Samuel I. Beard, Jr. >Technical Writer >OI Analytical >979 690-1711 Ext. 222 >sbeard at oico.com >
They Chose not to because they were receiving competition, even though they still held a majority usage. If anything it highlights a very disturbing attitude behind Microsoft that many people still don't recognize. As far as their attempt to integrate it into their OS, well, it's a veiled attempt to monopolize the Internet using an unfair advantage. And from a usability standpoint, it's a very stupid use of html. Scott
