Don't worry G, it didn't make sense to me either. In my memory, when IE6 was released it's implementations of HTML and CSS didn't meet the 'standards' set forth by the existing W3C specs either. If you were writing to standards you were writing it for the brand new Firefox browser, then writing hacks to also make it work in IE (kind of like we have to do now).
This conversation is going nowhere. The point is, closed system development is still very common because there are still companies and governments that can not/will not move beyond IE6. This is a fact, period. Although these organizations will, one day, upgrade, the reality of it is that pushing HTML5 adoption in this current environment is still a pipe dream in anything other than a consumer market. And *applications*, like those we develop day to day, are written more for internal enterprise and government users more than general consumers (not always the case, and an assumption on my part based on my experience). The one advantage we have today over the past is that we have cross browser libraries like JQueryUI and Ext JS, and technologies like Flex (in orgs that allow the Flash player, of which their are still many that do not). In my last gig, we had a large CMS that served up sites for the auto-dealer industry. This had two pieces, the CMS (administered by the dealerships) and the sites themselves. Because dealerships had internal applications they would not replace, our application (the CMS) had to be supported in IE6, even though the sites themselves went out to the general public. If we didn't support IE6 then we wouldn't have those clients, which would have cost us millions in annual revenue. Tell me about the markets you serve? And how is that vertical different? Steve 'Cutter' Blades Adobe Community Professional Adobe Certified Expert Advanced Macromedia ColdFusion MX 7 Developer ____________ http://cutterscrossing.com Co-Author "Learning Ext JS 3.2" Packt Publishing 2010 https://www.packtpub.com/learning-ext-js-3-2-for-building-dynamic-desktop-style-user-interfaces/book "The best way to predict the future is to help create it" On 11/17/2011 3:29 PM, Gerald Guido wrote: >>> Common sense says: write to standards, > Color me stupid but I am not understanding what that means, "Write to > standards". I ran across the same thing here on this page. > > http://paulirish.com/2011/browser-market-pollution-iex-is-the-new-ie6/ > > Corporate users should be testing their applications against standards, > not browser version numbers. > > > What does that mean, " testing their applications against standards"? Any > elucidation, or clarification would be greatly appreciated. > > Many TIA, > G! > > > On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 3:17 PM, Judah McAuley<ju...@wiredotter.com> wrote: > >> Oh, I agree Russ, but you were making absolutist statements, not using >> common sense. Common sense says: write to standards, tweak as required >> for individual customer needs, plan periodic refreshes to better take >> advantage of improving/changing technology. >> >> Cheers, >> Judah >> >> On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 12:13 PM, Russ Michaels<r...@michaels.me.uk> >> wrote: >>> you have to use a bit of common sense here, obviously every app in the >>> world was not written by you and does not work the same as yours, if >>> they did then this thread would not exist nor would the previous >>> comments. >>> >>> >>> On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 7:01 PM, Judah McAuley<ju...@wiredotter.com> >> wrote: >>>> Not at all true, Russ. >>>> >>>> Here's a website that I wrote in 1994 that is archived (archive.org >>>> only has it back through 1996) that works just fine in Chrome 16, IE 9 >>>> and FireFox 8 on a Windows 7 box. >>>> >>>> >> http://web.archive.org/web/19961018091409/http://babel.uoregon.edu/yamada/guides.html >>>> None of those browsers even existed when I started that in 94. I was >>>> targeting HTML specs and, lo and behold, still works fine 15+ years >>>> later on browsers I could not have imagined at the time. >>>> >>>> Judah >>>> >>>> On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 9:45 AM, Russ Michaels<r...@michaels.me.uk> >> wrote: >>>>> not exactly true. >>>>> If you have a 5 year old app that was written for the browsers of the >>>>> time, it wont matter whether it was written for just 1 browser or for >>>>> all browsers, it will still be out of date now and will still need >>>>> updating for the latest browsers. >>>>> If however it was only written to work for say IE then it only needs >>>>> to be fixed for IE, much less work/time and cost. >>>>> Making an app cross browser does not magically make it future proof. >> > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Order the Adobe Coldfusion Anthology now! http://www.amazon.com/Adobe-Coldfusion-Anthology/dp/1430272155/?tag=houseoffusion Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/message.cfm/messageid:348804 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/unsubscribe.cfm
