Headline FeedsLinuxInsider Talkback
|
|
Re: KHTML vs. Gecko vs. Trident vs. Presto: Behind the Browser
Posted by: Jack M. Germain 2007-09-14 07:58:54
See Full Story
When a Web surfer clicks on an icon to launch his or her favorite Web browser, only the geekiest of the geeky pay any thought to which engine layout is at work. The typical Web user has no clue that a different browser choice may also include a different browser layout engine. If anything, most Internet users concern themselves about which Web browser is more secure. Should they worry instead if older versions of Apple's browser were better because they used KHTML? Or that maybe the security and usability of Mozilla's Firefox browser is better because it uses Gecko?
Re: KHTML vs. Gecko vs. Trident vs. Presto: Behind the Browser
Posted by: Nanobot 2007-09-14 10:09:56 In reply to: Jack M. Germain
As a web developer, I believe that the issues with Trident have been significantly downplayed in this article. When using arcane development techniques like table layouts which create accessibility problems, worse search engine ranking, and slower performance, it's true that compatibility issues are usually relatively insignificant. But when using the more efficient and effective techniques, Trident seems to stand alone in its grumpiness due to its uniquely poor support for modern web standards.
The problem stems from how Internet Explorer development was managed by Microsoft. Roughly five years into development, Microsoft decided to stop doing any work on it other than the occasional security patch when an extremely critical vulnerability was found. This went on for about five years. Meanwhile, the developers of the other browsers were hard at work improving their engines. So the development effort put into Trident was roughly half that of the other major layout engines, and most of the focus was on older technologies. IE7 introduced some improvement, but it wasn't dramatic; just a typical year's worth of improvement for the year they spent on it. Trident remains by far the most difficult engine to support when following the best practice techniques of modern web design.
The problem stems from how Internet Explorer development was managed by Microsoft. Roughly five years into development, Microsoft decided to stop doing any work on it other than the occasional security patch when an extremely critical vulnerability was found. This went on for about five years. Meanwhile, the developers of the other browsers were hard at work improving their engines. So the development effort put into Trident was roughly half that of the other major layout engines, and most of the focus was on older technologies. IE7 introduced some improvement, but it wasn't dramatic; just a typical year's worth of improvement for the year they spent on it. Trident remains by far the most difficult engine to support when following the best practice techniques of modern web design.
