[TwinsX2Dad]

Originally Posted by Dean C

It's not rocket-science making cross-browser compatible sites.

It isn't rocket science, but you will lose functionality. Internet Explorer is used by 95 percent of the world. Firefox's fan base adds up to 2% at most. So why bother?

Mozilla is nothing but a last ditch bit of desperation to save Netscape. With it, you lose ActiveX. You lose other functionalities and you gain a huge hole where Firefox's XPInstall system can be tricked into installing myriad bits of malware. All for what? A gain in tabbed browsing? That is an idea stolen from previous alternate browsers, Opera & Lynx to name two.

So why go through the effort to make something work for less than 2% of the users out there, if you're not a Firefox fan? You don't, especially if you want the features everyone has and everyone wants.

Microsoft wiped out Netscape in the Browser Wars of the late 1990s not only because the company's management pushed the bounds of business ethics, but also because its engineers built a better browser. When Netscape CEO Jim Barksdale approved the Mozilla project, an open-source browser based on Netscape's code in 1998, it seemed then like a futile act of desperation. Now, over six years later, it still does.

The Firefox/Mozilla bandwagon claiming that there is a better browser out there are is correct. The problem is, it hasn't been developed yet.

In the meantime, do we optimize for 95+% or do we shaft the 95% to appease the remainder? In this case, I stand by the developers of vB & IPB in going with the majority.

RIP Netscape. We really don't miss you.