[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
One argument for XHTML 2.0,
and for the advancement of Browser technology in general is that the browser
provides a common platform upon which developers can build complex web driven
applications. The more capabilities that the browser has, the better is
the end-user experience. having spent the last five years building
browser-based applications, I can tell you that the end-user experience for
browser-based applications has quite a ways to go over thick-client applications
that run on <pick-your-favorite-GUI/>. This creates a financial
incentive for companies like <fill-in-the-blank/> to invest in and promote
the advancement of browser technology using new standards
because:
1) In
making the client platform more capable and more ubiquitous, such that anyone
using a computer can access applications driven by <fill-in-the-blank/>
servers, <fill-in-the-blank/> can create a demand for its server
products. The revenue generated by server software is likely much larger
than that for client software.
2)
Supporting new standards with desirable functionality creates additional
barriers to entry against other companies products. Although the standards
process is "open", the bigger the new standard, the better in this case, because
the harder it is to support the standard, the more likely it is that
<fill-in-the-blank/>'s products will be the first to support it, and so
they have a better chance of obtaining market share.
3) From a vendor's
perspective, change is good, because it frequently is a driver for new
software purchases. Since many standards bodies are funded by vendors, not
users, the desire for change and forward motion will drive the development of
new standards regardless of whether the user's see a need for the new
functionality. This is not necessarily a bad thing. End users often
don't know what they want until they can actually see it.
Keith
|
