game
photo
retro
rant
Not logged in. · Lost password · Register

All content © NFGworld, unless otherwise noted, except for stuff we stole. Contact the editor-in-chief : baldbutsuave@thissitesdomain, especially if you are an attractive young female willing to do nude photography modelling. All rights reversed. 722

Author name (Administrator) #1
Avatar
Member since May 2011 · 2485 posts · Location: Brisbane
Group memberships: Administrators, Members
Show profile · Link to this post
Subject: I predicted the end of the web browser.
Back in 1995, the internet was brand new.  In 1996, bookstores were filled with esoteric tomes instructing newbs on things like IRC, Gopher, and e-mail (back when it still had a hyphen).  In the nineties it was still hard to find many companies with a website, and in 1993 someone who didn't sell hamburgers registered MacDonalds.com

And around 2000, when the pace of change was staggering, when gopher was long dead, IRC was a hangout for the techie elite (ie: geeks) and the mainstream was discovering wowie programs like Internet Explorer and Netscape, I predicted the web browser would be dead in five years, replaced by things we couldn't even imagine.

And why wouldn't it be?  All the other programs were falling down and being replaced by other things.  Instant messaging arrived with ICQ, and later MSN and Y!M.  The web browser was one more myopic viewport through which we surfed the cyberspaces exploding into existance around us.  And really, the web browser was just gopher plus images, an interconnected HyperCard.

Who could have imagined that the myriad changes happening all around would implode into a razor focus on one single app?  I still can't believe the shit crammed into my web browser, and with the ridiculous things promised by HTML5, there's just no end to the browser innovation.

I mean, if Microsoft had its way, browser innovation would have stopped dead with IE6, but luckily we had companies like Opera and Mozilla flogging this horse, so that now it's a massive zombie horse with laser eyes, powered by Flash and javascript and other crazed technologies that, quite succinctly, moves our world.

And my     belaboured point is that I predicted the death of the browser.  In writing this disgusting prose fart, I thought of something else:

This is why standards are so important.  This is why we must support interoperability between browsers, why we cannot grant a monopoly to any one company.  The web is everything, the internet synonymous with web browser for vast swathes of people. 

Keep the web open, 'cause it is everything for the forseeable future.

And hey, I was right with the last prediction, so I must be right this time, right?  Right.  =)
BLEARGH
Author name #2
Avatar
User title: Kitten Blaster
Member since Feb 2010 · 89 posts
Group memberships: Citizens, Members
Show profile · Link to this post
Quote by NFG on 2009-08-27, 21:14:
This is why standards are so important.  This is why we must support interoperability between browsers, why we cannot grant a monopoly to any one company.  The web is everything, the internet synonymous with web browser for vast swathes of people.

you two-faced sack of crap!

Quote by IRC_log:
Mar 01 21:23:38 <Gravis> NFGwork: no, the <td><a href="lol"><img></td> <-- seeing the issue here?
<confusion as to what i meant>
Mar 01 21:25:49 <Gravis> NFGwork: no, fucktard.  the link <a href="LINK"> <-- here
Mar 01 21:26:00 <Gravis> it's not closed
Mar 01 21:26:12 <NFGwork> Didn't we discuss that yesterday?

couldnt find it but you previously said if it worked it didnt matter if tags were closed, so long as it worked in most current browsers.

Quote by IRC_log:
Mar 09 06:40:09 <Gravis> not saying you should go all crazy but it may be helpful if you try to get rid of the big errors using the w3c validator
Mar 09 06:40:34 <Gravis> like making sure all your tags are closed
Mar 09 06:41:15 <NFGpop> dude that’s crazy talk.  Do you even think before saying things like that?  ;)

overall, you have ignored standards with the "well... if it works on stuff [that i care about (which isnt much!)] it's ok"

i suppose standards are important to you so long as you dont have to bother with adhering them.

PWN3D  :-p
Author name (Administrator) #3
Avatar
Member since May 2011 · 2485 posts · Location: Brisbane
Group memberships: Administrators, Members
Show profile · Link to this post
Ohmigosh, and all this time I thought the winky face could be used to indicate sarcasm.

As for the closing tag, we were arguing about the IMG tag, not the missing </a>.  I still maintain that <img src="link"> is just as valid as <img src="link" />.  Same as <BR> and <BR />.  If the whole world recognizes that there's no end tag for a BR element, then there's no sane reason for adding one.  It's pedantry.
BLEARGH
Author name #4
Avatar
User title: Kitten Blaster
Member since Feb 2010 · 89 posts
Group memberships: Citizens, Members
Show profile · Link to this post
Quote by NFG on 2010-07-24, 07:20:
As for the closing tag, we were arguing about the IMG tag, not the missing </a>.

we were and then we werent.  you did finally fix it so it's resolved... for now.

Quote by NFG on 2010-07-24, 07:20:
I still maintain that <img src="link"> is just as valid as <img src="link" />.  Same as <BR> and <BR />.  If the whole world recognizes that there's no end tag for a BR element, then there's no sane reason for adding one.  It's pedantry.

pedantry? conforming to standards IS pedantry! "quirks mode" exists because people dont follow the standard because it's "pedantry" and they dont feel like writing valid code!  in the same way, people use colloquialisms which dont make sense to people that arent in your area.  but hey, who cares about non-popular browsers, right?

and for the record, your site doesnt conform to ANY w3c standard.
Close Smaller – Larger + Reply to this post:
Smileys: :-) ;-) :-D :-p :blush: :cool: :rolleyes: :huh: :-/ <_< :-( :'( :#: :scared: 8-( :nuts: :-O
Special characters:
We love UNB by Yves Goergen!