This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand this format, some or all of this message may not be legible. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C162F9.28416E40 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" > -----Original Message----- > From: Steve Bush [mailto:stevebu@bushchang.com] Thanks for the high quality bits! > So, back to the original question: did Microsoft intentionally prevent some browsers from > visiting MSN.com. Answer: Yes (just my view). Why? Not because it wanted some competitive > advantage over Netscape, Opera, or Brand X. It seems strange that if the goal was to deal with 'browsers that are not IE' that the user agent detection would be keyed to specific user agent strings (as reported by an Opera person) rather than patterns that don't fit the IE pattern. > It was just a matter of trading off a writing > special case code, running through a larger testing matrix, and shipping on the Windows XP > launch date. For over 2 weeks, MSN.com had a public beta of their home page, beta.msn.com. > The goal of a beta is to help catch issues like this. If Opera couldn't view the MSN site, how did anyone know the experience wouldn't be optimal? I would assume that someone in browser compatibility testing would have been running Opera. > I propose another question: if you were Microsoft how would you do it differently? Use patterns of 'non-ie' browers rather than specific 'if opera' detection. > Where would you draw the line? In the sand. > Would you increase your testing matrix to include every browser? No. > Would you go for lowest common denominator and remove features that only work in > current generation browsers? Yes and no - I'd try to have two versions. An optimized IE version and a W3C compatible version. This probably isn't realistic for the full MSN site, and perhaps would only be feasible for the start page. mike ------_=_NextPart_001_01C162F9.28416E40 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN">RE: MSN.com (Another viewpoint)
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Steve Bush [mailto:stevebu@bushchang.com]<= /FONT>Thanks for the high quality bits!
> So, back to the original question: did = Microsoft intentionally prevent some browsers from
> visiting MSN.com. Answer: Yes (just my = view). Why? Not because it wanted some competitive
> advantage over Netscape, Opera, or Brand = X.
It seems strange that if the goal was to deal with = 'browsers that are not IE' that the user agent detection would be keyed = to specific user agent strings (as reported by an Opera person) rather = than patterns that don't fit the IE pattern.> It was just a matter of trading off a writing =
> special case code, running through a larger = testing matrix, and shipping on the Windows XP
> launch date. For over 2 weeks, MSN.com = had a public beta of their home page, beta.msn.com.
> The goal of a beta is to help catch issues like = this.
If Opera couldn't view the MSN site, how did anyone = know the experience wouldn't be optimal? I would assume that someone in = browser compatibility testing would have been running Opera.> I propose another question: if you were = Microsoft how would you do it differently?
Use patterns of 'non-ie' browers rather than = specific 'if opera' detection.> Where would you draw the line?
In the sand.> Would you increase your testing matrix to = include every browser?
No.> Would you go for lowest common denominator and = remove features that only work in
> current generation browsers?
Yes and no - I'd try to have two versions. An = optimized IE version and a W3C compatible version. This probably isn't = realistic for the full MSN site, and perhaps would only be feasible for = the start page.mike
------_=_NextPart_001_01C162F9.28416E40--