- From: Paul Prescod <papresco@technologist.com>
- Date: Mon, 28 Jul 1997 17:24:53 -0400
- To: www-style@w3.org
Art Gillespie wrote: > > A resounding 'me too' > > I think it falls upon content providers/developers to help drag the user > forward in this respect. The 'this site best viewed with a > fourth-generation browser, please upgrade to either MSIE4 or NN4' campaign > should start here. Microsoft's 4.0 implementation is not even reasonably debugged yet. > I realize that it has become passe to tell a user how to > browse (i.e. resize your window here, set your fonts like this, set your > monitor gamma at, etc, etc, ad naseum), but simply informing users that > they're missing out on great content can be an effective way to bring them > kicking and screaming into the present. (I remember upgrading to NN2 way > back when for this very reason) Recently I made the decision NOT TO upgrade a user's two year old notebook to a version 4 browser because they are both too slow on my one year old desktop computer. Two years ago, 12MB was a reasonable amount of RAM for a notebook. I for one am not going to ask people to upgrade their two year old computers to view my web pages. Anyone out there have any realistic computing-power lower-bounds for these things? As well, both of them want to take over my whole computer. Microsoft's changes DLLs and OS components all over the place and I do *not* trust them that these new DLLs will not break old software. I know how hard it is to maintain that kind of code invariant. I expect you will see some MAJOR resistance to upgrading to these mammoths. Getting back to the subject line: the fact that IE4 cannot be installed on the same computer as IE3 is a bug, pure and simple. Call it a bug in Windows, or a bug in IE. It doesn't matter: they are both Microsoft. Taking away user choice is not a good thing. Paul Prescod
Received on Monday, 28 July 1997 17:24:52 UTC