Thank You

Microsoft,

I would like to personally thank you for making web development a royal pain in the ass. Without your uncompliant web browser, it would take me half the time to develop a web site. But because of your inability to follow standards and lack of interest in developing proper CSS support, I get the job done in double the time! If it weren't for you, I don't know what I'd be doing with myself. I imagine I would probably have more time to implement some really cool features that will now go unimplemented because of time constraints or worse unimplementable in IE. But who needs those features, anyway?

It's fun to see my hard work render perfectly in Firefox, Opera, Netscape and Safari to later find that it looks like a big pile of crap in IE because of the inconsistencies mentioned above. Even better, I love going back to downgrade the potential power of my site so that it works with your browser. It really gives me a sense of pride in the time I spent developing the site to begin with.

In closing, it gives me much satisfaction to know that development of Internet Explorer 7.0 will continue to follow the trend of being the most uncompliant browser available today. It also gives me a much needed "warm and fuzzy" feeling to hear that CSS support will continue on it's broken path where the programmers of Internet Explorer will either make their own rules as they go along, and/or leave some really great features of CSS, unimplemented. After all, if I'm not wasting my time, I'm not really being productive. Am I?

Sincerely (a very satisfied customer),

--
Sean
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Thank You
    ... LOL...This is not Microsoft. ... Without your uncompliant web browser, ... > follow standards and lack of interest in developing proper CSS support, ... But who needs those features, ...
    (microsoft.public.windows.inetexplorer.ie6.browser)
  • Re: Cross-Browser onmousedown JavaScript
    ... It would only make sense to implement the W3C events model if there is a demand for currently unused event features; and if this were happening, nothing would prevent Microsoft from extending the current model, rather than implementing the W3C's model. ... Given this situation, two solutions are available: either change/correct the scripts, or change/evolve the browser's model. ... The choice of changing the model looks like the less painful; after all, scripts do not need to updated, and the browser ends up with more capabilities, right? ...
    (comp.lang.javascript)
  • Re: A more rational approach to Browsers - Microsoft please read this
    ... Setting security in IE is a lot closer to ALL or NONE than it should be. ... The mechanism does not allow the degree of control which the Internet ... Every new feature has the potential to interact with existing features. ... > We do need a secure browser, but that can be done with one browser, and is ...
    (microsoft.public.security)
  • Re: langua= vs type=
    ... It is certainly true that language features that have been introduced ... encountering a browser that does not support the features of JavaScript ... standard to implement as the basis for a client-side scripting language. ...
    (comp.lang.javascript)
  • Re: Cross-browser setOpacity() without browser sniffing?
    ... on the type of browser. ... Object inference might return the same results between ... but finding a browser that had a large set of features ... UA string test is that the UA string conforms with the ...
    (comp.lang.javascript)
Loading