|
By Dr. Philip Baczewski, Director of Academic Computing and User ServicesCan't we all just get along?Once upon a time there was just one graphical Web browser. It was called NCSA Mosaic. Mosaic struck out on it's own and became Netscape, but parts of Mosaic live on, incorporated in other Web browsers, including Internet Explorer. Mosaic was followed by a lot of different web browsers, but after a while, most people used Netscape, and some people used Internet Explorer. That is, until Microsoft used its monopolistic practices to ensure that most people buying PC's would use Internet Explorer by default. Now, it is assumed that everyone uses Internet Explorer. These days, however, there are a surprising number of competing Web Browsers. The list includes the upstart Firefox, Opera, Mozilla, Konqueror, Apple's Safari, Internet Explorer, and the hanger-on Netscape. However, just because there are a lot of Web browsers doesn't mean you can actually use any of them on a regular basis. This is illustrated by a description of browser support I received recently for an application we'll call "bleepersoft." "For the power user, where performance and reliability are key, Internet Explorer 6 is the recommended web browser. The following are the combinations of web browser and client operating systems bleepersoft is certifying for all bleepersoft applications:
So, you'll immediately notice that if you are a "power user" you are expected to run Internet Explorer 6, regardless of whether or not you want to use the Windows operating system. It is hard to believe that any credible technology company would actually list Netscape 4.7 as a supported browser (just try to download that one). But perhaps you're not a power user of bleepersoft. "For the Casual User, the following browsers are supported for access to bleepersoft applications:
If you use anything else, it's at your own risk because things like Opera or Mozilla's Firefox, while usable, will give you grief the minute you hit something that it may not be capable of doing with bleepersoft." It's unfair to pick on bleepersoft alone, however, since this kind of situation is found with many other applications which supposedly are served over the World Wide Web. The bigger problem is that the Web was never designed to serve applications. The Web was designed to serve information. The Internet is based on protocols. Protocols are definitions of how applications can interact and exchange information in a standardized method. Open standards protocols are those which are available to all applications, regardless of the developer. The Web protocol defines a way for a Web client (browser) to request information from a Web server and for a Web server to deliver that information. That's the limit of the Web protocol's capability. You ask, you receive, you're done. Applications, however, usually require multiple steps with decisions along the way which are dependent upon one or more transactions which came before. This problem with applications over the Web as had many attempted solutions: CGI, JavaScript, Java, ActiveX, SOAP, Zope, and probably more than we can name here. The most common of the most complex application environments may be Java and ActiveX, both of which are tightly controlled by a couple of competing corporations, Sun Microsystems and Microsoft. Java is supported on most operating systems, but better supported on some then others. Sun has done a poor job, however, of ensuring that different versions of Java can support the same applications (it doesn't seem that they've even tried). ActiveX is only supported in Internet Explorer (surprise). But in addition to all that, many Web applications tend to be written for a specific browser and web application environment, making general access even more restricted. The development of the Internet was a public effort. It was supported by the people of the United States via their government agencies. It was developed in an environment of competition and cooperation, allowing the best practices to be absorbed into open standards which still serve us well. We will not see that same innovation in an environment controlled by monopolistic corporations. Should we give up on Web applications? They've certainly changed the way we do a lot of our business and have positively affected many aspects of our 21st-centure life. A better approach would be to find ways to allow many people to explore styles of Web interaction. One solution is to stop buying applications which only support one brand of browser. Insist on open standards. Otherwise, we might as well start calling it the World Wide Internet Explorer. Microsoft would like that.
|
