That aside, I love how this negativity only seems to stick to Microsoft when every other major player has their own private set of bits that only work well on their platform (WebOS, Firefox OS "proposed standard" mobility APIs, Chrome endless variety of "we're doing it so it's going to be a standard" APIs, etc). It's no excuse, but it's hardly unique to MS
There is NO EXCUSE for a TOGGLE to not work, cross-browser, in the year 2014.
Doesn't work in Chrome on Ubuntu 14. Doesn't work in Firefox on Ubuntu 14.
Does work on BlackBerry Z10 - no tap to toggle, but press and drag to toggle.
all on os x 10.9.2
I think Scott Hanselman put it best with his recent 'Microsoft killed my Pappy' post...
Quote: We've open sourced Azure hardware specs, opening SDKs, and we're making systems more pluggable than ever.
Companies building their own DCs spend a lot of money on doing this, so companies like Microsoft (I think Facebook do it too) showing off their designs is really useful.
Also, ActiveX. ;)
How many security bugs does NaCl have compared to ActiveX? How do Microsoft's attempts to sandbox ActiveX compare to the efforts made to sandbox NaCl? IIRC, you could format the C: drive in ActiveX with a couple of lines of code (by design). NaCl (so far as I know) isn't supposed to allow that.
As far as I'm concerned, NaCl and ActiveX aren't even in the same ballpark.
Lucky for both of us there is a built in barometer for seeing how committed Microsoft is, in the form of the Github issues list.
Word used to describe the latest coming out of Microsoft for decades now. And each time we're left wanting.
I, for one, am no longer hopeful. Internet Explorer has been and continues to be hostile to the web.
Their reasoning was that as Microsoft is pulling the plug on Silverlight, the company did not want to implement new features in their issue manager app inside a dying platform. So they decided to first port their app to a vanilla thing and from then on continue developing their app further.
Am I comparing Silverlight with WinJS? No. But will this company rush to invest time and money into yet another pumped-up Microsoft product? No either.
"Trust, Users and the Developer Division" discussion 2 months ago - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7107544
Like any commercial vendor optimized around selling software licenses. A commercial vendor optimized around selling software-backed services and complete solutions has different incentives, since they end up eating the costs of churn. Unsurprisingly, lots of companies that do the latter are built around (and often sponsor) open source software.
(Your comment was modified since I hit reply, but I think my point still stands, especially that it isn't strictly MS-extensions, but actual standard drafts)
Working on a project that relies heavily on CSS3, I have come to the conclusion that most browsers still depend on vendor specific prefixes. Take the CSS animation for instance, without the inclusion of "-webkit-", it fails to work in the latest Chrome and Safari while having no issues on Firefox or IE.
[1] http://www.w3schools.com/cssref/tryit.asp?filename=trycss3_a...
Not much different than everyone else. Chrome, Firefox, Safari, all have features that work best in their own browsers.
If Microsoft is open sourcing this code nothing prevents from the OO community to help them from making it more compatible with rest of the browsers.
Footnote: You should read it first before jumping into a conclusion.
<h2>Bringing WinJS cross-platform</h2>
They had an actual shot on getting up to par with proper HTML5, with funky ms extensions being optional where absolutely neccessary. Instead, they rely on an astounding number of non-cross-browser methods and features, as they have done since '95
https://github.com/winjs/winjs/issues Most issues listed currently are about stuff that just doesn't work on any other browser/platform than IE
Footnote: I'm a web developer myself and I use Windows 8.1. How tempted have I been at fiddling with the winjs flavour myself? not at all.
Footnote2: I do have to give them credit for the roadmap though. It seems like they're on the right track https://github.com/winjs/winjs/wiki/Roadmap
Footnote3: I've been fooled into thinking that Microsoft was on the right track again and again.