> When you are experienced at developing apps for all browsers, it becomes > harder to develop one for a single browser, than it is for all.
Most moderately complex apps have a great many screens. Some of these screens can only be invoked by forcing error situations or validation messages. Since we're talking dynamic apps built at runtime, we have to account for page layout issues (i.e. did you hard set the width of the select list and now the right hand portion of the data is truncated? Does the drop down expand past the hard set width at least providing a method for the user to see the full string?) My point is that each browser you choose to support adds a lot more overhead to the entire development process. This translates into a longer timeline and bigger project cost. Depending on the size and scope of the project, it could affect the price dramatically. That said, sometimes, companies require that apps developed for them support multiple browsers. However, there's always a limit. It's always something like: Internet Explorer 5.5 on Windows 2000 Service Pack 1, Internet Explorer 5.1 on Windows 98 Service Release 2, Internet Explorer 4 on Mac OS 9. And because these are the project requirements, you target for and test on these platforms. > There are a few exceptions, mostly dealing with activeX (though FF has a > plugin for that), html text areas (though fckeditor 2 will be released > soon), and VBScripting (does anyone actually use that?). These are very > minor. Have you ever tried walking into a corporate environment and telling them that you're application will work, but you're going to need to install a couple of plug-ins from some no name companies -- or worse open source projects without official support channels? The same goes for ActiveX controls in my experience. Quite simply, most companies developing intranet apps for large corporations target Internet Explorer because the vast majority of computers already have Internet Explorer installed. This way, you can roll your application out without having to install anything on 20,000 desks. > If you can't develop the app talked about in this thread to be > cross-browser compatable, it's my theory that you're just inexperienced > at cross-browser development. Obviously, I can't speak for the app that's being discussed. However, every project has requirements. Though support for multiple platforms and browsers is sometimes one of them, I've never seen "cross browser" listed as a requirement for any intranet site. It's an open ended term that is impossible to define in a practical sense. Insulting someone because he's more concerned about meeting tangible requirements than adhering to some pure aesthetic does not further your argument. Ben Rogers http://www.c4.net v.508.240.0051 f.508.240.0057 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Special thanks to the CF Community Suite Gold Sponsor - CFHosting.net http://www.cfhosting.net Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:186635 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:4 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
