[thelist] MSN locks out non IE browsers

[Jeremy Ashcraft]

On Monday 29 October 2001 13:52, you wrote:
>
> and if they choose to guarantee that browsers that'll make their site look
> "fucked up" can't see the site at all, that's their right.
>

I never said they don't have the right to, but 

> doing what?
>
> pop quiz:  what software vendor makes the most software for the mac?

I meant what's stopping them from only allowing you to use/view/contact 
<Microsoft Service X> if you have/use <Microsoft Product Y> for <Action Z>

X=Exchange Server where your POP mail sits, Y=Outlook, Z=email
X=sites served by IIS, Y=IE6, Z=web browsing
X=SQL Server, Y=ASP, Z=web development

unlikely? yes, but I could see it happening......

> not if they want to prevent the site from being displayed in a messed up
> manner.  how would you do it?

Lots of people have the nice "This site looks best in somebrowser" messages 
on their sites.  How hard would that be?  If I went to an art museum without 
my glasses, the paintings would look messed up, but I wouldn't be turned away 
at the door by the artist saying "Glasses wearers have to have their glasses 
on to view this art.  Go get your glasses and come back."

The web is supposed to be open, right?

http://web.siliconvalley.com/content/sv/2001/10/26/opinion/dgillmor/weblog/tbl.htm

> is nn6 completely standards compliant?  does it have all css and javascript
> bugs worked out yet?

Don't know, but MSN had no problem in letting NN6.1 users view their site

> dunno.  why isn't it already?  how long has it been in the making anyway?
> will it ever be standards compliant?

I'm sure it will be.  Its still in development.  Full compliance is one of 
their main goals.

> ><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><
> > MSN is just a portal and has nothing to do with IE,
> > right?
> ><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><
>
> it's just a portal that happens to be funded by the vendor of a browser.

I was being sarcastic, but you said it.  MS never tries to leverage their 
other products through each other., do they?  :)

> ><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><
> >
> > > and had those charges summarily dropped as well.
> >
> > Actually no, just the ruling to split up the company.
> > The new judge did uphold the findings of guilt, just
> > said that a new punishment needed to be found.
> ><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><
>
> don't go trying to confuse me with the facts.  *grin*

http://news.cnet.com/news/0-1005-200-7667367.html

this has been an interesting discussion and has given me a good  view from 
the vendor side(even though I still don't really agree with it)