A Brief History of the Web- Part eight...

Tweet

   Here it is, the much awaited part eight of my 'A Brief History of the Web' series.   I've been super busy, between the lab, Blogcritics and Dragon Blogger, but I apologize for the delay.


   Here's your opportunity to catch up with the series, my most popular to date:

• Part one
• Part two
• Part three
• Part four
• Part five
• Part six
• Part seven

   In this part, we return to the browser wars.


   In the 1990s, the fight was between Netscape Navigator and Microsoft Internet Explorer.  Netscape's browser debuted in 1994, and IE debuted in 1995.  People used to design web pages better for the standards of one browser or another.   Many web designers thought, if you're using Netscape, for instance, and their site says 'Best Viewed In Internet Explorer', you would of course click on the download link, and install IE just to view their website!  Of course, their website was so awesome that you'd be compelled to do just that.  Well... no, not really.

Ha, I think this is the only time I'll ever use an animated GIF in this blog...

    As the year 2000 passed, Netscape quickly lost market share.   But, that wasn't the end for Netscape's Mozilla user agent string!


    Mozilla was originally a codename for Netscape Navigator.  As of 1994, the main web browser was Mosaic (see parts one and two) and Mozilla meant 'Mosaic Killer'.

  The Mozilla Organization was founded in 1998, by Netscape programmers, to create a successor to Netscape Navigator.   By 2003, it became a funded non-profit organization renamed the Mozilla Foundation.

   In 1998, the source code behind the Netscape Communicator suite was released open source under the new Netscape Public License.  The first web browser to come out of the new Mozilla project was Phoenix 0.1,  released in September 2002, but only as a binary for testing.

This image, and the other browser shots here are courtesy of Wikipedia

   The first publicly available version was Firefox 1.0, in late 2004.  They couldn't use the Phoenix name,    a company named Phoenix Technologies weren't very happy.  So then, Mozilla tried the name Firebird, but the Firebird Database Server wasn't happy with that either.   Firefox was the next option, and the one that stuck.


   Here's what that very first public version, Mozilla Firefox 1.0 looked like:

    As Firefox 2 and 3 were released, the browser quickly gained market share, taking a major bite out of IE.   The browser wars were changed, forever.


  Firefox was the browser to introduce tabbed browsing, something I would've loved to have as a teenager in the 1990s.   I used to run multiple browsers, so that I could enjoy a web page while waiting for another to DOWNLOAD.   It was kind of taxing for a system using 128 MB RAM.   Ah, those were the days.


   Opera, which didn't gain major market share, but has a significant sliver of the pie (about 4%), was actually introduced in December 1996 by Norway's Opera Software.   They are now up to an initial alpha release of 11.

   Aside from Opera's relatively lean code, what also sets Opera apart is their focus on accessibility.  Options include having key commands for all actions, mouse gesturing, and voice control.  


   Apple entered the browser wars a lot later than Microsoft did.  Their Safari browser publicly debuted in January 2003, and became the default web browser for Mac OS X 10.3 'Panther'.   Before Safari, the web browser most frequently used on Macs was the Mac version of IE.  Microsoft no longer supports a Mac version of their browser, so IE now only runs in Windows OSes.

   Safari is now up to 5.0.2.  It's a pretty good browser, it works really well with HTML5 and CSS3.   They started a Windows version in 2007.  The main reason why I wouldn't recommend Safari is because it's Crapple!  (See Why I'll never spend a dime on Apple products...)   There's no version of Safari for GNU/Linux OSes like the one I'm using, as Apple likes to pretend that Linux distros don't exist.  I could run Safari for Windows in Wine, but why would I want to?


   My 'A Brief History of the Web' will continue soon.  Until then, I have lots more in store for you!











kimcrawley.com



twitter.com/kim_crawley



blogcritics.org/writers/kim-crawley/

Getting ready for HTML5- no more delays!

  It's time for some good news.  In my first HTML5 post, Getting ready for HTML5, dated September 19th, 2010, I stated that I set November 13th as my deadline to ready kimcrawley.com and buchalterconsulting.ca for HTML5 and CSS3.  Well, it turns out I'm well ahead of schedule.  My sites will now be HTML5 ready the day after tomorrow, Friday, October 8th.

  In this post, I'll describe how I'll be doing it, and why I think it's time to upgrade NOW.  If you're a web designer, you may be curious about how I came to that conclusion, and what I'm going to do about Internet Explorer.  You may want to review my previous posts in the Project HTML5 series:

• Getting ready for HTML5
• Getting ready for HTML5- New tags, part one
• Getting ready for HTML5- The video tag...
• Getting ready for HTML5- New tags, part two
• Getting ready for HTML5- Browser support...
• Getting ready for HTML5- New tags, part three
• Getting ready for HTML5- Which tags have been dropped?

  Like most vigilant web developers, I keep a careful eye on my hits.  I check hits for this blog, kimcrawley.com, and buchalterconsulting.ca on nearly a daily basis.  I use handy, free tools that Google has available.  For this blog, blogger.com keeps a Stats tab in my user profile.  For the two domain name sites, I use Google Analytics.  Both tools offer very similar metrics.  I can analyze where my hits are coming from (Directly? Using a search engine?  From a link on an external site, which one?), which OS or devices visitors are using, which screen resolutions users have, and which web browsers, down to version numbers, visitors are using to access my websites.  That last measure can help me determine if I should implement HTML5/CSS3, and how.

  For the curious, here's a screenshot of the browsers visitors have been using in the last week to visit kimcrawley.com:

  So, despite the commonly spoken about statistic that Internet Explorer (IE) makes up about 40% of web use these days, my visitors have been using IE to visit kimcrawley.com only 25.95% of the time.  Considering IE's shoddy support for HTML5 and more recent features of JavaScript (see Getting ready for HTML5- Browser support...), I suppose that's a bit of a relief to me.  As I mentioned before, Google Analytics also breaks down which browser versions visitors are using.

  Here's a screenshot of last week's Firefox stats:

  More of my visitors have used Firefox last week than any other browser.  Firefox 3.5 (beta 4) and above have some good support of HTML5/CSS3.  87.66% of my Firefox visitors are using 3.5+.  That's very reassuring.

  Here's the breakdown for IE:

 Only the brand new IE9 has some substantial support for HTML5.  And even IE9 has weak support of HTML5 in contrast to the other major browsers' newer versions.  None of kimcrawley.com's hits in the last week came from IE9.  Considering my IE hits made up 25.95%, that's a significant percentage of my visitors that don't have HTML5 ready browsers.

 My Chrome stats:

   I'm currently using the latest version of Google Chrome at the time of this post, 7.0.517.24 beta, to surf the web.  Google Analytics makes it possible for me to store a cookie in my browser so that Analytics doesn't track my own page views of kimcrawley.com, kimcrawley.blogspot.com (this blog), and buchalterconsulting.ca.  That's crucial, because I don't want my own hits to skewer my metrics.  So, my own visits aren't included in these Chrome stats.  Chrome 6 has some HTML5 support, and Chrome 7 has even more.  Only 3.23% of my Chrome hits last week for kimcrawley.com are from Chrome 5.  So my Chrome visitors are pretty much ready for HTML5 and CSS3.  I've got to consider that some of my Chrome hits are coming from Android phones.  So, I've just got to consider how my websites look on a smartphone.

  Here are my Apple Safari stats:

  All of those versions of Safari have pretty good support of HTML5/CSS3.  Nothing to worry about there.  I've got to keep in mind, though, that some of my Safari hits are coming from iPads and iPhones.  As I don't use Flash in kimcrawley.com and buchalterconsulting.ca, that shouldn't be too much of a concern.  I've just got to make sure that those sites look good at lower screen resolutions.  This blog HAS embedded some Youtube videos, and those DO require Flash.  People visiting this blog with an iPad or an iPhone won't be able to enjoy those videos.

  Finally, my Opera stats:

  Opera 10.6 has excellent support for HTML5/CSS3.  Each Opera hit kimcrawley.com got in the last week was from a different version.  Two of those hits are 10.6+.  I expect, fairly soon, I'll stop getting hits from older versions of Opera.  But for now, a number of my Opera hits are from older versions.  That's something to consider in my readying for HTML5.

  Other browsers (including BlackBerry) made up about 6% of kimcrawley.com's hits in the past week.  I assume BlackBerry 9700's browser supports HTML 4.1 instead of HTML5.  But, RIM promises excellent HTML5 support on the new BlackBerry PlayBook coming out in early 2011.  (See Don't get an iPad, wait for RIM's PlayBook.)

  In conclusion, about 70% of my visitors are already ready for HTML5.  By 2011, especially since I think the PlayBook will be a commercial success, that number will be quite a bit higher.  

  But, in readying my websites for HTML5, Internet Explorer's continued popularity is a major hurdle.  I was thinking recently, there should be a way to get around that with JavaScript.  It turns out I was correct!

  I found a freely available JavaScript applet for enabling HTML5 on Remy Sharp's blog.  So, by Friday, I'll be using that applet on both kimcrawley.com and buchalterconsulting.ca.  Thanks, Remy!

  So, in addition to using Remy's applet, these are the other major changes that will be made to my websites early this Friday:

• I'll be getting rid of all occurrences of <center>, <font>, etc. and make sure that I only use tags that are supported by HTML5.  Obviously, I'll be using more CSS, but it'll become a habit for me sooner rather than later.
• This blog will finally be using video that can be enjoyed without Flash.  (Cough, cough, iPhone... Cough, cough, iPad...)  What I'll do for videos in this blog for now on is that I'll use the new <video> tag.  In between <video> and </video> is where the code goes for browsers without <video> tag support.  In THAT space, I'll embed Flash.  That way, if visitors have support for EITHER Flash or the <video> tag, they'll be able to enjoy video in my postings from October 8th, on.
• I can finally slap <!DOCTYPE html5> on the top of all of my webpages in kimcrawley.com and buchalterconsulting.ca.  Newer browsers will no longer be forced to run QuirksMode, and I can submit them to html5gallery.com and html5websites.net.  More importantly, I can validate the webpages on both sites through W3C's Markup Validation Service.

  All of that should be ready no later than 2pm EST, October 8th.  Yay!

  That doesn't conclude the Project HTML5 series on this blog.  In the near future, I'll conclude the series with a post or two about CSS.

kimcrawley.com



twitter.com/kim_crawley

Why I will never spend a dime on Apple products...

  Steve, I'll 'think differently', rather than 'think different', thank you very much.


  Some days, I just have it 'up to here' with all those Apple fans who've really been drinking the Kool-Aid.


  Those of us who are more perceptive and savvy, we don't buy the idea that Apple is some clever underdog. We know Apple is a big corporation that has gone evil, much more so than even Microsoft.


  Apple has been trying to sell an image of being progressive, anti-'Big Brother' innovators since I was born.  I mean that quite literally.  I was born on January 13th, 1984.  (It was a Friday, which my friends and family believe explains everything about me.)  Apple's iconic Ridley Scott directed, George Orwell themed commercial, introducing the Macintosh computer, was televised only twice, once on December 31st, 1983 in the Idaho area, and once during Super Bowl XVIII on January 22nd, 1984.  I was born almost halfway between the two airings.  See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1984_(advertisement)











  Gee, I'm just a week and a half older than Apple's first Macintosh.  And the idea behind that iconic commercial was pretty simple to grasp- Apple's progressive innovation will shatter the 'Big Brother' like hold of their tech competitors!  1984 won't be like (George Orwell's) '1984'!  And ever since, in various ads, commercials, and in various ways, Apple's been trying to convince consumers of that image.


  So, let me sarcastically play with that concept for a while!  Yes, Steve Jobs, Apple is soooo anti-Big Brother!  It's soooo anti-Big Brother to:

• Feature really restrictive DRM in your products!

 If you have a non-Apple media playing device, you can pretty much use any music or video on your device that's in a compatible format.  Whether your mp3 was free (or pirated) off of P2P networks or BitTorrent or purchased from a non-iTunes music store, it's no problem to transfer the file from your computer to your portable device, and then start enjoying it right away.


  But if Apple fits anywhere in the equation, whether you're using iTunes, an iPod, an iPhone, and/or an iPad, Apple makes damn well sure you must buy from iTunes (not their legal competition) and only enjoy it on that one device.  Transfer an iTunes purchased song or video from your iPod to your friend's iPhone?  Unless you're a competent hacker, that's a no-go.


  The DRM is obviously not just about making sure that musicians and copyright holders see some money, because they make less money (as a percentage of retail price) off of music and videos sold on iTunes than they do from Apple's legal competition.  Musicians make 13% of iTunes' retail price on average, and Apple wants to see that lowered to 4%.  See http://applesucks.wordpress.com/2008/02/05/apple-wants-artist-royalties-lowered/ and http://torrentfreak.com/pirated-by-itunes-artist-turns-to-bittorrent-080206/.




  Spiritually related to that, it's soooo anti-Big Brother to:

• Deliberately limit what your products can do, both to screw your competition and to limit adult access to pornography!

 Steve Jobs has made it clear.  He doesn't like Flash, and he doesn't like porn.  (How many guys go around saying they don't like porn, but privately whack off to porn more often than less prudish people?)


  Most people agree that it's very important to keep porn out of the hands of children.  But usually, only people on the religious right want to keep porn made by consenting adults out of the hands of other adults.  Mr. Jobs hardly strikes me as a born-again Christian, so what the hell's his problem?


  Ol' Steve says: "We do believe we have a moral responsibility to keep porn off the iPhone. Folks who want porn can buy an Android phone."

Read more: http://news.cnet.com/8301-17852_3-20002922-71.html#ixzz11WY9TzHO

  You heard it straight from the horse's mouth, folks.  The Apple CEO believes he has a 'moral responsibility' to keep adults from enjoying porn.

  If you're a parent, and you want to keep content that's inappropriate for children away from your kids, Apple's competition makes that possible.  I own both a PSP (a Sony product) and an Xbox 360 (a Microsoft product).  There is parental control software on both devices.  I don't use any of it, because I love M rated video games (I'm particularly fond of the Grand Theft Auto and Call of Duty franchises), and my fiancé and I are both childless adults.  But Sony and Microsoft make it really simple to set up parental control accounts for children that won't play M or T rated games.  If I had kids and I wanted a parental control-free account for myself, I could set it up to be password protected from my kids.

  Plus, I have popular erotica novelists in my family.  My dad is 'Morgana Baron' and 'Felix Baron' and my stepmother is 'Madeline Moore'.  They would be glad to sell adults e-book versions of their works.  But, I don't think Steve wants you to enjoy them on your iPad or iPhone.

  Now, on to the Flash issue.

 “The primary goal of Flash has always been to enable cross-browser, platform and device development,”  (Adobe product manager Mike) Chambers wrote in a blog post. “This is the exact opposite of what Apple wants. They want to tie developers down to their platform, and restrict their options to make it difficult for developers to target other platforms.”

Read More http://www.wired.com/gadgetlab/2010/04/adobe-flash-iphone/#ixzz11Wb5Ilsm

  Now, why wouldn't Apple want the iPhone and iPad to be able to access Flash content?  Could it be because Apple doesn't want you to play games on those devices that you didn't have to buy from Apple's App store?  Or could it be because Apple wants you to be buying videos from iTunes instead of watching them for free via Youtube or Veoh?

  Also, it's soooo anti-Big Brother to:

  Treat your customers like crap!  

  Remember the antenna issue with the launch of the iPhone 4 earlier this year?  At first, Steve Jobs wanted his customers to quit whining about the iPhone 4 having a defect.  See these quick videos:

  Eventually, Mr. Jobs was forced to admit that the iPhone 4 had a serious antenna problem.  And he HATED  to have to offer consumers a fix.  Listen to his tone of voice, and watch his body language in this video:







Gee, ol' Steve sounds pretty pissed off while rambling off with his doublespeak! (A SMALL number of phones, how about ALL iPhone 4s, Mr. Jobs?) Doublespeak... hmmm... doesn't sound like 'Big Brother' at all!




Occasionally, this high and mighty billionaire has direct communication with his customers. When he does, he makes it clear he doesn't give a rat's ass about them. See this news reported on Gawker.com:


  Long Island University senior Chelsea Kate Isaacs, 22, emailed Jobs Thursday with a complaint: Her journalism professor had assigned her a story on a new initiative at her college to buy iPads for all incoming students. She wanted to get a quote from Apple about the use of iPads in academic settings. But when she repeatedly called Apple's PR department, leaving six voice messages, they never got back to her.


   "My friend just jokingly suggested I email Steve Jobs," Isaacs told us over the phone. "I wrote him a long email not expecting that he would get back to me."


  Ms. Isaacs:  "Mr. Jobs, I humbly ask why Apple is so wonderfully attentive to the needs of students, whether it be with the latest, greatest invention or the company's helpful customer service line, and yet, ironically, the Media Relations Department fails to answer any of my questions which are, as I have repeatedly told them, essential to my academic performance."


  Mr. Jobs:  "Our goals do not include helping you get a good grade. Sorry."


 Ms. Isaacs:  "I never said that your goal should be to "help me get a good grade." Rather, I politely asked why your media relations team does not respond to emails, which consequently, decreases my chances of getting a good grade."


 Mr. Jobs:  "Nope. We have over 300 million users and we can't respond to their requests unless they involve a problem of some kind. Sorry."


  Ms. Isaacs:  "You're absolutely right, and I do meet your criteria for being a customer who deserves a response:

1. I AM one of your 300 million users.
2. I DO have a problem; I need answers that only Apple Media Relations can answer."

 Mr. Jobs:  "Please leave us alone."

See http://gawker.com/5641211/steve-jobs-in-email-pissing-match-with-college-journalism-student.

  So, my conclusion is glaringly obvious.  Apple has sold itself as anti-Big Brother since I was born, but just like a used car salesman who tells you he's 'really, really honest", Apple is anything but.


  Don't buy ANYTHING Apple!  Unless you hate yourself!


 You might want to read this previous post of mine:


Don't Get an iPad, Wait for RIM's PlayBook

kimcrawley.com



twitter.com/kim_crawley