A little walk down memory lane : In defense and condemnation of Microsoft

I have always been a vocal proponent for the implementation of javascript in the client with the intent to push processing cycles out unto the client machines, to reduce the hurry-up-n-wait, to reduce bandwidth and load on the server and increase it's ability to handle more concurrent sessions, to realize the vastly scalable thick-client application.

Indeed, it was Microsoft's Internet Explorer version 4.0 (released in beta and final through 1997) that was turning point for me. With it's improved support of CSS, Dom, Javascript... the fundamental changes that integrated it with the OS and Windows domain security... the new functionality that distinguished itself (from Netscape) as the "real" browser.

But there was something beyond all those features, something that we take for granted today that really turned my crank, that really converted me into a serious Microsoft acolyte. It drove me to study like mad and achieve Microsoft certifications at a furious pace.

The little feature was called Remote Data Services (RDS), an Active-x object that you could embed in your html and access via [java]script. It could be used to fetch data from a server, via script, without requiring a refresh of the page and waiting for all the redundant data on a page to be retransferred over the puny pipes of the 33.8k modems available at the time. [Note: I have always been like Ebenezer Scrooge about data transfer since my formative years as a 16-year old kid driving my parents nuts running a Wildcat Dungeon and Dragons bbs in the evenings using a 300 baud accoustic coupler connected to my father's IBM 8086 - sloooooow.] It meant a new breed of applications could be built, delivered via the web, that would connect you to the world with the ease of simply visiting a webpage.

I found many uses for it whilst working for a large bank in Canada that (wisely) implemented Internet Explorer version 4.5 throughout their entire infrastructure. Mostly in updating parts of pages to display near real-time data or to populate components of a form as the user completed them. I cannot recount how many times I used RDS to populate select lists in a form as the user selected an item higher in the hierarchy; think Country - State/Provice - City - etcetera...

It was during this time I tried to coin my own term for this kind of application: the "rich client". It didn't stick with anyone and thankfully, someone else popularized "thick client" which was the perfect term for a concept that stood between "thin client" and "fat client". It is my feeling that we have Microsoft to thank for the innovations that allowed us to conceive and realize the "thick client". It wasn't perfect but it was a reasonable start that you could realize solutions with. But Microsoft didn't stop there.

They followed with Internet Explorer 5 that, in addition to improved CSS, javascript, and XML/XSLT, included a new ActiveX object called XMLHttpRequest to which many attribute the birth of AJAX (coined many years later). Microsoft's dominance in the browser wars was clear and deserved as they were the innovators of the day - paving the way to Web 2.0.

Today, Microsoft has taken years of beatings for their browsers that stood still and ignored innovating standards years later. Versions 6, 7, and to a lesser degree version 8 all forced designers to hack and double-design CSS for multiple browsers - a painful exercise and all Microsoft's fault for trying to write it's own standard.

Finally, in version 9, and in recognition of HTML5 (and the obvious opportunity to kick Flash out of the marketplace), and the realization that they have lost the battle for control of the standards helm, Microsoft has finally released a beta that complies with standards as much or more than it's competitors.

But, I warn you, do no let the Microsoft harassment end - there is still a vast installed base of versions 5.5, 6, 7, and 8. You'll find them on Gramma's computer or on the majority of computers hosting pirated copies of Windows (found largely in the developing world).

Microsoft has been very lax about updating the installed base of old browsers claiming that they should not be expected to update browsers on pirated versions of their software. I'm sure the hackers of the world rejoice daily that there still remains a huge base of infected or infect-able machines. Designers cry when usage numbers point to still significant numbers of these browsers in the market place and are forced by their employers to "support it all".

While I congratulate Microsoft for finally doing the right thing and properly supporting standards, and I continue to respect them for their past innovation towards what we now refer to as Web 2.0, I demand that they clean up the mess they left, pirated or not, and update older browsers to version 9 on all machines possible. This old mess is their sole responsibility.