Browser war shame

The Independent Electoral Commission (IEC) had a budget of R200 million for technology to run the 2009 elections, including the scanning equipment and Web site to allow people to check their details via the Internet.

In September 2008, the IEC proudly launched its new, more powerful Web site, and seemed genuinely astonished by the hail of criticism that followed: the site seemed to only support Microsoft Internet Explorer.

Several months and a reported R3 million later, the site was fixed. But the damage was done. Not only did the IEC appear to be technically clueless, it also appeared to have used a technology provider that was allowed to build a system without concern for browser compatibility (no one is stepping forward to take one on the chin, but Accenture was the main technology provider in 1999 and 2004, and appears to still be the primary systems integrator).

Now, before you shake your heads and moan about how backwards we are in SA, try log on to KLM's 'Air Miles' system. “Helaas ondersteunt de KLM Air Miles website uitsluitend Internet Explorer als internet browser. KLM Air Miles tickets zijn uitsluitend online te boeken.”

So large global multinationals also do it. Step forward as well, BBC iPlayer.

“So who cares?” you may ask. “Old problem, nothing new here.”

Companies used to spend millions on sites with limited browser support and feel no pain - Apple was a speck on the demographics chart, Firefox or Opera were only for open source Nazis and the hopelessly geeky. But now we're looking at 67% share for IE, 22% for Firefox, 8% Safari (Net Applications). Fully a third of the world's Internet users don't use IE.

Again, you say, what's new? Rage against non-standards compliant sites is as old as the Internet.

There are two reasons why technical people should be paying attention to this: firstly, non-IE browsers are going mainstream, especially as the various extremely popular Linux-based netbooks such as the Asus Eee, MSI Wind or Acer One create a foot in the door for a non-Windows “utility computer” in the mass market. Having a site that does not support all browsers used to be an irritant, but most users would grudgingly tolerate it. No more. If your site doesn't work, goodbye visitor. In fact, goodbye possibly a third of your visitors. The sales director would go ballistic if only he knew.

In September 2008, the IEC proudly launched its new, more powerful Web site, and seemed genuinely astonished by the hail of criticism that followed.

Roger Hislop, head of digital division at Sentient Communications.

Browser support has become a customer service, customer acquisition and a brand issue, not just a technical issue. So if you're a technical person in a company fighting with the marketing department that uses a Web design company that's convinced them supporting IE only is fine, show them this.

The second reason is more important. If you thought having a site working properly in IE, FF, Opera and Safari across PC and Mac was an achievement, now you have to also have an eye on ensuring your site works on mobile phone browsers.

Services delivered via mobile phones are going to explode. There are 4 billion mobile phone users in the world (give or take a few hundred million) compared to 1.2 billion computer users.

Phones are getting more powerful every day - a typical standard entry-level handset now has colour screen and a Web browser, with at least GPRS data. Mobile applications have not been a particularly huge market compared to the user base - because people don't like downloading and installing stuff. Now, with tech like dotmobi, creating an “application-like” experience via the browser is increasingly easy.

Long-term technology choices need to be made with this in mind. Flash, or Microsoft's new Silverlight? New and sexy, or tried and tested and available on almost any platform? Or avoid needing closed plug-ins altogether? ASP? PHP? LSD? Your technical choices for Web need to be made in light of the commercial requirements of reaching your users. All of them.

So your Web site architecture had better be designed to work according to broadly supported browser and server standards, so that come the day you need to tweak it to work nicely with iPhone, you won't end up spending two months and R3 million while the open source world scolds you publicly.

* Roger Hislop heads up the digital division at Sentient Communications.