> Are you offering to pay them to do it?
No, they paid someone to make it incompatable. Accessiblity is easy. Making things inaccessible takes a degree (It was probably some phd trying to justify their 6 figure silicon valley salary).
Lets remember that Gmail isn't the original sin. There are other parts of Google that are not accessible either.
Very strange headline on the front page? I'm reading my Gmail on Linux running Mozilla. Checking with Mozilla on the Windows box--yup, works fine there too.
Give 'em a break. Brett, ever wonder what "BETA" means?
Yah, it is beta and now is a good time to make sure they get it right..
How about you give WebmasterWorld users gmail accounts? Then you'd see some pretty valuable feedback..
|Maybe it is time for Opera to move to a Yahoo as default? |
Yes, especially since Yahoo! are proudly displaying their Opera compatibility [alltheweb.com]. Don't see it on Yahoo! search though.
|There are other parts of Google that are not accessible either. |
Yes sir, Adsense control panel.
[edited by: Birdman at 6:31 pm (utc) on April 12, 2004]
You'd think Google would be smart enough to realize that the fewer browsers there are the weaker they are when it comes to competing against Windows.
But maybe they don't think they are competing against Microsoft?
The enemy of my enemy is my friend!
I think there are some smart techies there, but their business skills leave a little to be desired..
I for one am glad to see the word Mozilla Mozilla Mozilla, sprayed all over this thread and in Google's documentation. It'll arouse courisioty and hopefully get the installed base up
There isn't room for 3-4 browsers...what is needed is a stronger Mozilla to challenge IE.
Please bear in mind that this is still quite early in the public beta for Gmail as well.
There should be 100+ browsers. Microsoft must not be allowed to "extend and embrace" (read: hijack) the standard.
>Please bear in mind that this is still quite early in the public beta for Gmail as well.
WebmasterWorld has always been a great source of contributions to beta's and even influenced the shape and function of some services out there. So i'd say there's no need to appologize for being beta. Just pass the sugesstions to the techies. ;)
[btw, what was the answer to my mac compatibility question?;)]
From another Mac user ... I too wonder if Google will support Macs? Modern day Macs embrace open standards, surely it would be easy enough for them to make Gmail work on a Mac running Camino / Firefox / IE / Safari?
Hopefully they will will not neglect the minority again, just as they have shown by not releasing their toolbar for Mac users.
I think the accessibility issues are certainly a valid concern.
What I'd like to know is how Gmail compares -- accessibility-wise -- with other Webmail offerings. Are there examples of Webmail companies that are doing things right... and if so, are they also providing services that appeal well to various niches?
In other words, is there evidence to suggest that it's currently possible to create feature-rich and general-customer-popular Webmail services that still can be profitable endeavors?
Geez we're talking about a webmail system here. What little feature is so important as to lock out Opera and Safari? From webmail to banking systems, I've never seen a good reason other than ignorance. I just don't get why developers do this.
I know, from public comments by Gmail team members on the Web, that Google will DEFINITELY be shooting for greater compatibility.
But it's not easy, and sometimes (not talking about Gmail here), it's actually impossible.
For instance, OddPost (a competing email service), will only work on IE, and they have no near-term plans to make it available on other browsers. This because its drag-and-drop functionality and other excellent features are SIMPLY NOT FEASIBLE on other browsers at this time. You can rant about how this is ruining standards and yadda yadda, but in some case in trying to be honestly consumer-centric, companies must decide to either skip support for some browsers, or at least defer building in support until a later time.
I know, for instance, that Gmail is not yet compatible with Safari, but I also have read that the Gmail folks are DEFINITELY hoping to make it compatible at a later time.
|Please bear in mind that this is still quite early in the public beta for Gmail as well. |
In which case a statement of intent to support Opera and standards in the final release would surely be an appropriate response.
Unless, of course, a decision had already been made to the contrary...
|The logo is slick, though |
I think the logo is really cheesy - looks very 80's and if not mistaken the M is a different font?
IMHO of course and excuse the off-topic post!
Allright.... I'm confused.
The title of this thread is: "Gmail only supports Microsoft IE 5.5+"
But then the first post says
"Gmail currently supports the following:
* Microsoft IE 5.5 and newer (Windows)
* Netscape 7.1 and newer (Windows, Macintosh, Linux)
* Mozilla 1.4 and newer (Windows, Macintosh, Linux)
* Mozilla Firefox 0.8 and newer (Windows, Macintosh, Linux)"
So perhaps the title should be "Gmail only supports NEWish browsers"? Or is it just me. heh.
>>Or is it just me. heh.
yeah, there are some people who are so obsessed with "advanced browsers" like opera, that they like to think Moz on IE level and fail to distinguish it. In reality, it rocks!
|people who are so obsessed with "advanced browsers" |
I wouldn't call it obsession. I tried it(Opera), as well as Moz and IE, and found it to be faster and have better features. So, what's not to like, besides the fact that some websites won't function properly because the developers don't really care.
> Gmail only supports NEWish browsers
Actually, it is the other way around - it is only supporting "oldish" browsers.
Opera, Pocket IE, Palm, Symbian, etal are all newer than IE 6/Moz 1.4.
Well yes people do need to upgrade at SOME point its just that I work with people who are unaware that you CAN upgrade.
They see a site that doesnt work and call me thinking their machine is bust. True. So why take a swipe at those that dont understand?
Google is switching away from the things that made it great, ease of use cross browser compatibility etc, and appears to be going the Mico$oft route of force feeding people.
Ok so its harder to knock out the big guy but theres always someone lurking ready to pinch your crown.
Is that Mr Gates I see lurking in the shadows?
|Actually, it is the other way around - it is only supporting "oldish" browsers. |
Opera, Pocket IE, Palm, Symbian, etal are all newer than IE 6/Moz 1.4.
Fair enough. But really my gripe is with the title: "only supports Microsoft 5.5+". When I first read that, I was angry and disappointed with Google. But I held my breath and clicked for details, only to find out that, well, Mozilla, Netscape, Firefox work too!
The fact that Opera doesn't work with it is a surprise. But its only a beta at this point so in the future I'm sure it'll support more browsers.
I figure the reason they say other browsers aren't compatible is because of the special features they've added in (use of keyboard to navigate messages/etc)-- Google should make a "compatibility mode" of some sort that disables these advanced features so all browsers will work. Somehow I doubt the keyboard shortcuts gmail offers are going to make or break their service's popularity.
Well - ycelerityfm is right - you should all cool down a bit and get real.
You should start bashing those websites who are only compatible with MS IE browsers - they're really a problem. The title of this article on the front-page is highly misleading as "Gmail Only Supports Microsoft IE 5.5+ Posted in Google Gmail ... and "requires leading Microsoft browsers" is really a very bad style of misrepresentation. Those Mozilla-based browsers that aren't supported anymore contain too many unpatched serious security-problems that can be exploited that you shouldn't use them anyway. The onliest full-featured desktop-pc browser (leaving mobile browsers out) is the Opera series but the text suggest that it _may_ work but wasn't tested using these browsers.
- antique Netscape 4.x users are somewhat out of this world and using up2date web-techniques isn't possible without coding a new interface only for NN 4.x users.
- supporting mobile browsers (Palm, Symbian, WindowsCE, Wap, whatever) is definitely a great plus for such application - but I simply don't WANT all the web features on my Symbian based phone (SE P900) as the screen is way too small and the connection often too slow to use a complete site. I want a slimmed-down version with the basic functionality for my mobile and there's hope that Google might build something like that.
Written on a Mac using Mozilla, my keyboard and a bit of brain...
| This 53 message thread spans 2 pages: < < 53 ( 1  ) |