Max Bentz wrote: > Daniel R. Tobias wrote: > >> be helpful to a particular user at a particular time, to get into >> sites with particularly clueless webmasters that block users based on >> the user agent, but the use of such things is harmful to the Web >> community as a whole, by leading to access statistics that show a >> smaller count of "minority" browsers and a larger count of the >> dominant hegemony browser > > > Yes, you are absolutely right! The more diversity the more freedom. > > I just was asking as "the particular user at a particular time", because > my online-banking account does not accept Mozilla. So unfortunately I > have to use IE for that site though I wish to use Mozilla (as also > masquerading does not work for this site). That was the reason for asking. > > Max >
So, in order to reconcile the need to provide accurate statistics, hoping to encourage more sites to become multi-browser accessible, with the practical need to gain access to those sites now, is there any hope of signalling to the server that a user is entering in disguise? I.e., instead of approaching as "IE5," can a user be identified as "Mozilla masquerading as IE5" or even "Other masquerading as IE5"? It's only reasonable to assume that a site outside of the Microsoft realm has no real interest in what browser you're actually using, as long as you're using one that can mimic the browser written for. If more web masters start realizing how many hoops users are willing to jump through in order to acces their sites without IE, perhaps they'll rethink their policies. Many people, myself included, have indicated that they have installed IE for use when they encounter "IE only" sites, but using actual IE does no more to encourage multi-browser friendliness than does using any other browser in disguise.
