Re: Basic Browser Requirements?

From: ncarroll (
Date: Sat Aug 12 2000 - 21:56:25 PDT

Joe D Williams wrote:

> ncarroll
> > They have the savvy to know that if you want to code for a GUI
> > browser, you need to have a GUI broswer.
> Maybe we have to educate them that if they want a live page for editing and
> adding comments, and if they want us to do it effectively, then they need a
> DOM1 or DOM2 browser. At this point, anyone that holds onto a 3 browser
> isn't really interested in an interactive web.

Agree absolutely. Yet put yourself in the user frame of mind. They
don't want interactivity, because they've been taught that the web
site designers don't care about users -- they just want to manipulate
them and show cool graphics. Are we to follow in the folly of the
creative designers, by offering "cool code"? The public has been
offered many better mousetraps. I believe Missouri is called the
"Show Me" state. The web is a lot that like now. Don't tell me
to upgrade; show me why I should upgrade. Do not reach for your
vertical controls; this is the Web; and I, the user, am in control....

> Anyone that holds onto a 4
> browser expects special DOM0 scripting to accomodate them. Let's just not do
> it. NS6.2, IE5+ and Mozilla M12 or maybe M14 will all work the same. Within
> 6 months, most everyone can be convinced to try one of these.

Most hackers with a fast connection can. That leaves the rest of the
world -- the Augment goal.


> > They have been using PCs 10-15 years. They have set ways of doing
> > things, and legacy software they don't like to give up -- including 3.02
> > NS and IE.
> They will need to play in a different sandbox. [snip]

<Nicholas treads wearily to podium, slowly picks up microphone.>

They won't. I go through this all the time: "They'll just have to
My answer is to hand the programmers the San Francisco white pages, and
say, "Fine. Give 'em a call and tell 'em so." Yep, I can also supply an
NYC white pages. Your dime.

Sure, they will upgrade for overwhelming need or want. Show them free
riches, fame, and sex, and I will show you a stampede to the download
sites. But OHS doesn't have that kind of pull. As I learned at the
demo, this is sort of like Post-Its; you don't get it until you see it.

I suggest that OHS show them -- before Bill Gates stuffs it down our
throats with a second-rate add-in to Windows 2002.

> Thanks and you are doing good thinking on this.
> Joe

Thenk yew, thenk yew.
> PS. From my experience, I feel so strongly about this - about how good the
> DOM2 and XML enabled browsers are - that when I saw a note from a top
> ranking Mozilla eng or eng admin and he said that he still uses
> NS4.something as a day to day browser. This concerns me because no one using
> that old stuff can really have any idea of what it is to work with a truly
> live page.

Joe, I shall flog you with garlic/mushroom pizza over this issue.
I get what XML can do -- just saw a *very* cool interface. It's the
experienced-but-not-into-cool-hacks users that concern me. They like
the idea of rocket science -- but they buy Ford.

Trust me; when it comes to interfaces, I'm as crazy as any of you.
(Actually, I'm a lot crazier, just ask for my full rant some time.)
But for now, I'm just deeply concerned about spreading a functional
OHS throughout the world.


Or hear this same rant from Jakob Nielsen:


Nicholas Carroll Email: Alternate: ______________________________________________________

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0.0 : Tue Aug 21 2001 - 17:57:50 PDT