this is not a support question but a thought

[Dsiembab]

I keep testing my web applications in different browser versions, but am I the only one who will ever view my web app in IE 5? or IE 6? Besides the ones who use FF and use a IE standalone for testing. Do people still use IE 5? I can understand testing in firefox and IE and even opera, but testing in an older version of a browser seems a little anal. Me, personally, if a new version of a program is out then I have to download it, especially if it's free. What is new right now will eventually become the mainstay. Is testing in older browser versions good for the people who work in cubicles and cannot download a new browser version? When is someone going to step up and make a totally W3C compliant web browser? When will web 2.0 become 11.0? When will a Linux OS takeover Microsoft's lucrative deals? Personally I think the set back with the certain Linux OS's is that some of them are just a copy Microsoft windows. How about a start button that you can put anywhere, a slimmer task bar that is color coordinated to different apps, an OS that makes you go wow instead of wow that's just like windows. Thank you for your time, I just felt like ranting.

[MattEvans]

er... who's your target audience. will they be using IE5? you ( should ) know your target audience better than anyone.

i wouldn't design for IE5. It's not up-to-date with modern standards, and it'll pull your work back into the dark ages. That said, it doesn't hurt to check code in IE5; but don't design for IE5.. does that make sense?

Totally W3C compliant is an ongoing thing, the W3C make new specs every now and again, no browser version will ever meet all of those specs, and even less likely; all specs they ever intend to develop. It would be like being 'totally ISO compliant' - do you know how many ISO standards there are, and how irrelevant it is for most applications to comply with most of the standards?

What the hell is web 2.0? Is it a standard? No. It's a buzzword. web 2.0 will become web 11.0 when people get bored of claiming to be web 10.0.

Linux OS replaced Microsoft Windows on my computer, that's where it's important to me. I use Mandriva 2007. How the OS looks is of minimal importance to me honestly... I use this one because was easy for me to start using the old version ( Mandrake 10.1 ), perhaps because it felt a little like windows. I can put my 'Mandriva' button ( start button ) anywhere, apps should be color coordinated to the taskbar not the other way around, my OS makes me go wow because the insides are nicer than Windows, and I can download new, full, FREE versions of software whenever I desire, without having to search the web for time-limited trials of third-party apps that fulfil some simple utility feature. That, and I like typing obscure things into a command line, and I like the structure of the filesystem, and I like g++ and Kdevelop more than msvc++ and visual studio; and i like the linux 'mix and match library' philosophy more than the windows API... There are more reasons.. Hey, I like having 4 desktops or more; I like knowing when I install applications, they'll be versioned and well placed in the filesystem. It's a preference thing. Linux won't 'take over the world' unless everyone has the same preferences, which isn't likely.

[Dsiembab]

I tried Freespire, and I did like playing with it. I thought it was pretty neat, small and compact. I hear you on the web 2.0, maybe someone can be a web 2.0 technician, I just put that in there because it seems nowadays that everything has to have a buzzword associated with it, you know like the generation X. Buzzwords just seem to be out there to confuse the consumer.
Would it be that hard to make a browser that is totally compliant with the W3C standards? A browser that would auto update every time a new W3C standard came out? Personally I use a lot of PHP, but am thinking of learning C/C++. Thanks for the input. I did not mean to offend in any way.

[MattEvans]

Lol. I didn't mean to offend either.

The problems with making a browser that updated on every W3C change are massssive. The W3C typically leave 'implementation details unspecified', so there's always a one-to-many mapping between a standard and a correct implementation of that standard. Unless the W3C made a standard for the implementation of their standards; it wouldn't work. It wouldn't be hard to make a browser that correctly implemented the necessary browser standards as they stand today. To be honest, IE7, and the latest versions of Opera and Firefox are pretty close; at least they try to implement the present standards, which is a good thing, and the best that can be asked really; that, and frequent ( allbeit manually written and potentially bug-ridden ) update releases.