MozillaZine

IE5 Released - Not HTML4, CSS1 or XML Compliant

Thursday March 18th, 1999

IE5 is out, and not only is it incompatible with CSS1, but it's DOM is faulty (and proprietary) and HTML4 support is incomplete. Also, it's XML Namespaces implementation is just plain wrong. It does poorly on the Import test, and renders the boxacidtest improperly (and badly).

On an interesting note, the article I linked to above was available this morning. Now, if you go to news.com and find the same article (it has a new link), you'll find that all of the criticism regarding MS's standards compliance has been placed on a second page of the article. Look at the two links to see what I mean. Curious, no?

In response to criticism of their standards support, Microsoft's Mike Nichols said, "It's ironic that people are challenging our standards support when we have led by a substantial margin in this area since IE4". As I mentioned before, expect Microsoft to blame Netscape for Microsoft's lack of 100% standards compliance. The first person to point us to a new article that makes this claim (Microsoft already stated something similar months ago) will get a MozillaZine T-Shirt, when they come available. Our T-Shirts are still in the design phase, but we expect to have something soon.

Folks, stay calm. The Mozilla team is working hard to get a basic browser/mail-news reader into your hands that you can start using full-time. If you need standards compatibility, just go to our fetchBuilds section and download the latest build for your platform. You can see how the new browser, "apprunner", is shaping up, and try out your pages in the testbed viewer, undeniably the most standards compliant browser on the planet.


#58 Re:IE5 Released - Not HTML4, CSS1 or XML Compliant

by Mark Wilson

Monday March 22nd, 1999 5:28 PM

You are replying to this message

"By the way, those are paragraphs, not stanzas. I'd hardly call that poetry."

Paragraphs and stanzas are the same thing, and secondly I didn't say poetic licence,I said artistic license. That is a different thing. Don't make this personal. Your tone is not welcome on an open page on the net. I assert my right to freedom of speech and I expect you to honour it and I want you to be professional and objective.

Your post about the trial is VERY justified and reasonable - but this discussion is NOT about the trial and it is NOT about right and wrong. I am NOT discussing morality. I am discussing technology.

I am saying that you have no idea what Visual Interdev can do for web developers. You keep on an on about how only IE users can make use of the extensions. If only you could open your mind and suck in your pride and have a look at Visual Interdev - you would see that the extensions and the ease of use and the wizards... and... and... result in pages which can be viewed in both (albeit better in IE when it comes to DHTML)

And your contention that only a tiny minority use the latest browsers is patently wrong. Before sprouting off, check your facts. I have checked mine. Here they are: where are yours?

I imagine this will come as a shock to you: <http://www.cc.gatech.edu/gvu/user_surveys/> more specifically: <http://www.cc.gatech.edu/…hs/graphs.html#technology> MY OPINION: users are not the dull out of date people you think they are (is based on) 56.8 of users think they are using the latest browser, 3% are using beta browsers. MY OPINION: IE on the desktop will win the users over (is based on) 63% of users NEVER switch to another browser. 22% have switched once. MY OPINION: Third party developers or company bundles to the mass market and software bundles such as Visual Studio is the primary way to get your browser out there (is based on) 64.6 of the browsers out there were bundled with other software MY OPINION: You should focus on what the user wants and NOT ONLY on standards - thats not what users want nescessarily (is based on) 10.1 of users chose their browser fro reputation, the rest had it bundled (7%) or it was already available (7%) of features (17%) or easiest (14%) MY OPINION: Win over the windows developers by building windows components (is based partly on) 44.3 of all surfers use Windows 95 browsers 17.9 use Windows 98 browsers 21% use Mac browsers that leaves 18% which may be afected by your vastly superior cross-platform plans (which amusingly dont even inlude Java or Javazilla)

8.3 of all intranets operate on MS technologies, this is twice that of NS ones! Mysteriously 18.9 ran intranets from 'OTHER' vendors??

Incredibly, only 23.7 of webs are hosted on NT boxes. This means that you can still capture these developers without having to fight MS, but I still suggest you look at Interdev and learn from it. In fact, look at the business model of MS and learn from it.

Remember, this is not a moral issue and it has nothing to do with the court case. it has everything to do with competing successfully and not losing more market share than NS already has!