And therein lies the rub. Panic is hardly alone, but where once stood a legion of Mac users screaming bloody murder (and rightly so) at websites that were "Designed for IE on Windows", now there is a generation of "Works in Safari? Looks good on my iPad? Ship it!" designers and developers.

Let he who casts aspersions actually check to make sure he doesn't make a fool of himself.

The Panic guys definitely did work to make the site work in different browsers. There's some notes up on their blog at http://www.panic.com/blog/2012/05/notes-from-the-bleeding-br.... Of interest is the fact that they spent a day trying to figure out why Firefox was broken, but stopped when they discovered that Firefox 13 Beta 1 fixes it. They also put in workarounds for Chrome/Firefox bugs.

In any case, even if they hadn't done that, there's a far cry between "Designed for IE on Windows", and using new web standards that aren't fully implemented in all browsers yet.

Nobody's specified the browser where CSS3 animations look bad yet. I'm not a web developer, but I use Safari, Chrome, and Firefox to varying degrees, and I don't see single-browser breakage going on.

True, unusued CPU power is "going to waste", but when an i7 950 overclocked to 3.5GHz, running of an SSD and 1600MHz memory with Chrome 18 uses 20% of CPU for a transition that's a problem (though with what is a different argument).

My point, though, was that to me it highlighted a more symptomatic issue, that a certain segment of the population, who used to rail against discrimination against their chosen platform, are more than happy to cheerlead / defend / exonerate discrimination for their chosen platform.