Educating clients about browsers
Recently I have had some success in changing browser usage within a client network. Here's a short summary of what I have learnt.
A disclaimer ¶
Before I start I should note that I do not spit every time the word Microsoft is mentioned. The advice I give to clients is purely based on the quality of products and I am not running an agenda that Microsoft is bad whatever they do.
Explaining browsers ¶
I have learnt to assume that clients generally have no knowledge of the choice they have in the browser market. It is normal for most clients to be using Internet Explorer 6 or 7 and that this will be their only experience of using the web. In proposals I list the browsers that will be supported on the project and even when this is explicitly stated in proposals clients do not understand that there is more than one browser in the market. Whether clients choose to take my advice or not I see part of my job in a web project is to ensure clients understand that there are different browsers in the market and what this means for the end user.
Explaining security ¶
I have a real world example of a medium to large sized arts organisation whose network was entirely compromised by using Internet Explorer 6. This was in part down to the IT setup but according to the IT company who took over the contract, would have been prevented via the use of Firefox. Through naive user actions a virus compromised the network including financial data, and sensitive commercial information. With Firefox being regularly updated for any security faults and the fact that these patches are pushed immediately to users I recommend that IE6 networks switch to Firefox, or at very least upgrade to IE7. Following this discussion several clients have switched the default browser they use within their network.
Explaining display ¶
Product v. Market Share ¶
Clients are often amazed that there such a clear disparity of product and market share (this is still the case with IE7). In any transparent market, market share is driven by cost and the quality of a product. With browsers there is no cost so it is purely down to the quality of the product. It is clear however that on display and security the market share does not reflect the quality of the product. Every single client I have explained browsers to has understood the presentation of facts and made their own conclusion. As I mentioned at the beginning of this article I am not anti-Microsoft, I merely present the facts. Opera are looking to do the same with their antitrust action against Microsoft. Quite how this progresses will be very interesting as for me the browser market is not transparent and users do not realise they have a choice.
The browser market is broken ¶
We have been through Browser Wars and I have no doubt we will continue to see huge competition in the market. It is simple for me to explain the browser market to clients. They understand the facts and make informed decisions. I wonder though why this should be necessary? Through real world experience I conclude that it is because clients do not understand they have a choice. In any other industry in the UK the government would ensure this was not the case. All I am looking for is a transparent and fair browser market where the best product rises to the top. By any measure Microsoft has the worst product with the biggest market share. This is an unsatisfactory situation for both users and the web in general and one that I will continue to help my clients understand.
Can you help make this article better? You can edit it here and send me a pull request.
IE8 - The Good, The Bad and The Ugly
The news that IE8 is considering using meta tags to determine rendering modes is a bad idea from everyone's perspective and Microsoft should reconsider.
Opera's Antitrust Action With Microsoft
Opera have filed an antitrust complaint with the European Commission stating that Microsoft is abusing its market position by selling the Windows operating system together with its Internet Explorer browser.
Embracing progressive enhancement
Striving to make sites the same cross-browser at the presentation and behaviour layers is a bad philosophy for the web and for the browser market. Instead designers and developers should embrace Progressive Enhancement and accept a lesser experience for less capable browsers.