Block Access To Bad Design Work

Posted by Robert on the 20th of December, 2004 at 4:16 PM GMT0. Permalink.
Tags: Rant, Web Design

The following is an advertisement.

When I posted this, I was listening to: End of Fashion - Anything Goes

I hate when websites lock browsers out because our site is optimized for blah blah blah.

It's bullshit. What it really means is I'm an inexperienced, incompetent designer who lacks the fundamental understanding that the Web is about distributing information; thus, I deny you access due to my laziness, lack of ability, or ignorance.

That said, I don't have a problem if you block people for moral reasons. I think Open Source is a communist revival (and communism is evil), so I only let Opera and IE in, or, Internet Explorer is riddled with security flaws and has horrible CSS support. Get a new browser. I'm protecting you from yourself, are good enough excuses. While I still don't approve of it, I can at least understand.

I even stuck up for Microsoft when they locked non-IE browsers out of MSN because I figured it was a corporate decision to hate on all other browsers. After all, it is their site so they can control access.

But, when it is purely because the designer isn't doing his or her job, I have a problem. No one should be locked out of a site for design reasons. It's better to show a broken site than no site at all (unless you are embarrassed that your site doesn't work and want to cover it up with a stupid optimized for page).

I'm bitching because I ran into one today. Here is the nice e-mail I sent to the webmaster (slightly modified so that Google will index the page in question under the keywords broken site).

I was visiting your broken site and was told to download the latest IE or Netscape. Since Netscape has been based on the Gecko engine since version 6.0, many Mozilla variants (including Mozilla, Firefox, Camino, Epiphany, Netscape 6+) are all compatible with one another. Therefore, suggesting the user to download Netscape when they are running FireFox, which is technically the same as Netscape, is a little odd (not to mention, I can't access the information on the site).

Furthermore, Safari, Apple's web browser based on KHTML, is a very capable standards-compliant browser. There are only a few variations in CSS handling that I've noticed between Safari and Mozilla. Opera is also a standards based browser that, last time I used it, was on par with Mozilla.

It might be worthwhile for you to modify your user agent validation to accept all Gecko based browsers, newer KHTML based browsers, and newer Opera browsers. Firefox Downloads recently topped 12,000,000 downloads...

Thanks for your time.

Robert Brodrecht

I could have been mean, but that's no way to get someone to do something for you. The pisser is, as I mentioned, Firefox is 100% compatible with Netscape.

Anyway, I've ranted long enough.

Dan, my coworker, handed out Starbucks gift cards. I wonder if they have El Pollo Loco gift cards I could get him...

Add this page to del.icio.us or email it.

Comments:

1. Untitled

   by Jeremy on the 20th of December, 2004 at 6:19 PM GMT0. Permalink.
   netscape and firefox aren't compatible, they are the same. they use the exact same engine (you touched on it, but it is a technical inaccuracy towards the end of your post). firefox didn't recently get 12,000,000 downloads... version one did. that's saying a lot more because a lot of people still use the older versions. on the site is says If you are using a Netscape 4x, AOL, Opera or Mozilla browsers you will notice a different navigation system. Which is strange because it doesn't allow you to continue, so no... you won't notice anything because you're locked out. He actually says Our website is optimized for Windows Internet Explorer-based browsers. So not only does he want you to use IE he also wants you to use Windows.

   From that front page (and it's link to Flash) I'm wondering if he realizes that Flash is usable on pretty much all the modern platforms.

2. My God

   by Erin Poe on the 20th of December, 2004 at 6:44 PM GMT0. Permalink.

   What are these people thinking? Jeez Louise, can't a person open a simple website nowadays? I'm not sure what crazy browsers you kids are using now, but I think that all should try to understand their differences and similarities, and accept them. All browsers were not created equal, but the constitution says we have to pretend they are.

3. YES!!!

   by Jeremy on the 20th of December, 2004 at 7:55 PM GMT0. Permalink.

   Exactly! My god... I couldn't have put it better myself (and I didn't).

4. Wha?

   by Bryan on the 22nd of December, 2004 at 9:04 AM GMT0. Permalink.

   ...what are you guys talking about? Where is my Start Button? =P

   Could what's left of IE 5.? for Mac be effectively called a Windows Internet Explorer based browser?

   At any rate, you have to cut Dale Gomez a little slack. He did get a difficult major in Management of Information Systems.

5. IE For Mac

   by Robert on the 22nd of December, 2004 at 3:44 PM GMT0. Permalink.

   IE for Mac is nowhere near as standards compliant as IE for Windows, and that ain't saying much. IE for Mac is probably the worst browser in existence today. It doesn't just not support things, it anti-supports them. It somehow manages to make things do what they're not supposed to instead of just ignoring them...

   Therefore, no, IE for Mac can't be called anything other than absolute shite.

Comments on this page are closed due to age. If you need to say something, e-mail me.