At 4:05 AM +0100 5/18/09, Nathan Rixham wrote:
Paul M Foster wrote:
And by the way, this attitude of "My code is fine; your browser sucks;
upgrade" can be the worst kind of arrogance, and people react to it
exactly as though it were arrogance. There used to be the same kind of
attitude with regard to screen resolution. 640x480 was just so "80s",
and *all* the latest monitors supported 1280x1024 or whatever. So we
design for 1280x1024 and screw those Luddite users. I would agree if
someone's using Netscape 4; you'd have to kindly break it to them that
they really should upgrade. But beyond that, it gets gray.
yeah - major difference being that upgrading your web browser if free,
and as we well know you can have multiple browsers installed with no
I understand what you are saying, but if 50%+ of the worlds web
developers simply cut support for x, y & z browser (or displayed a
limited site with a notice) then I think the old browsers may just go
away (90%). eg if google, facebook, msn, ebay, yahoo all cut support
In most technical things you are right, but here I have to agree with
Paul. The user is king -- you must to design for them regardless of
their browser of choice -- even if their choice is a bad one.
You must design for a standard that is fairly well supported.
At this point in time, html 4.01 and xhtml 1.1 are fairly well supported.
At least time, most features of CSS 2.1 are fairly well supported.
IE 6 maybe not, but users still using IE 6 are usually either on a
government machine or don't have very big wallets and therefore are not
a financial loss to ignore.
If your content is what they are looking for, they will use an
appropriate browser. If your content is easily accessible elsewhere, you
need to start looking at a way to differentiate yourself from the rest
of the pack and make the user want to use your site.
That will draw you far more users than coding for archaic buggy browsers
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php