June 10, 1996
The business of browsers
By Bob O'Donnell
Like an increasingly growing number of businesspeople throughout the world, I spend a
large portion of my day working within my Web browser. In fact, it's replaced the word
processor as my second most frequently used application (number one is e-mail, of course,
which unfortunately means Lotus Notes in our shop). For me, and many others, this is a
dramatic change in the typical desktop computing environment.
Even just a year and a half ago, browsers were a relative rarity on the average PC. As
interest in the Web has exploded, however, they've seeped into most business environments
and have begun to earn a coveted position within the standard suite of desktop
applications. The change certainly didn't occur overnight (and, to be sure, it still
hasn't happened at many companies), but browser usage is quickly reaching critical mass.
In spite of this phenomenal growth, however -- or perhaps because of it -- many
important questions about browsers aren't really being asked. Specifically, what type of
functionality does the typical user really need? And, what are the standards for
comparison? Is speed an issue, or just support for viewing, hearing, or playing different
media types? Is embedded Java support a requirement or just another bell and whistle?
The problem is confounded by the fact that Netscape, Microsoft, and others are doing
major upgrades to their respective products at a rate of once every three to four months.
I'm certainly all for competition because it spurs the creation of better products, but,
other than fanatical end-users, no one can really keep up with this pace (imagine what
word processors would be like if they were revved several times a year). Worse still, as
browsers slowly morph into application development environments, upgrading your browser
almost becomes as complicated as upgrading your OS: You have to start worrying about
whether or not all your plug-ins and other helper applications will work with the new
version. Given Netscape's oft-iterated position that their Navigator browser will become
the "new OS," this situation will probably get worse before it gets better.
Not surprisingly, the small minority of companies that are developing organized
strategies for standard browser implementations are waiting on the sidelines until the
crazy pace slows down. Unfortunately, it's still not apparent when that will be. Microsoft
and Netscape are clearly letting technology drive their development process, but it
appears to be at the average user's expense. Admittedly, the fluid nature of the Web and
its rapid expansion have put additional pressures on these companies to keep up, but I
think they're ignoring the typical user's needs. The situation is even worse for IS
professionals who are trying to plan long-term, companywide strategies.
Supporting different browser standards is also an issue for Web sites, such as
InfoWorld Electric. We use HTML tables to create our basic columnar look and feel, but
we've intentionally avoided layouts that require browser-specific extensions or other
helper applications to view. Unfortunately, not all browsers support HTML tables, so even
our relatively straightforward site causes problems for some readers. As we consider
adding other elements and capabilities to our site, the lack of clear-cut standards
becomes a difficult issue for us as well.
The pace of browser development probably won't be slowing any time soon, and as with
any other transition, the process of moving forward toward standardization will be slow,
awkward, and occasionally painful. Let's just hope someone's thinking about the users.
©
Copyright 1996, by InfoWorld Publishing Corp., a
subsidiary of IDG Communications, Inc. Reprinted from InfoWorld,
155 Bovet Road, San Mateo, CA 94402. Further reproduction is prohibited.
