Live.com now supports Firefox

Still doesn't seem to work in Safari. This is why I don't give credit to MSFT for "inventing" Ajax. The whole point of Ajax is cross-browser rich UIs.

No, the whole point of Ajax is to display stuff inside your browser without refreshing the whole page.

The cross-platform part is separate.

No support for Safari. Less useful than Google. Lame.

Another example of the power of Web apps, where the software gets updated on a continuing basis.

For me this site is still lacking, maybe Vista will change my mind.

Now you guys need to work on Opera support :-)

Now if only it would use the start.com display of individual items. I love the way Start.com works, the item pops into place, and just a tap of the ESC key snaps you right back. I'll stick with Start.com until Live.com works this way...

Am I the only one who thinks RSS should be read in a feed reader type application?

Nice but Shrug. Nothing to see here anyways. I've moved on.

For any real RSS reading I use either NewsGator or RSSBandit, but I like having Start.com for quickie peeks at what is going on in the world. Stocks and Weather aren't exactly good candidates for NewsGator, etc.

I like it. Alot. Makes Google's feel old...what do you know? Google has some catching up to do. Now if I could only use my Gmail Account here...

Why the hell doesn't it fail GRACEFULLY in Safari, or anyplace else it doesn't work right?

If a browser that it can't work with hits the site, then it has to SAY THAT. Not just display a blank friggin' page with a search box. Come on people, this is like your heart stopping because you got a sprained ankle.

Failing gracefully is a critical part of any service that you expect people to rely on. I mean, with the whole office live, what will you do to someone's setup if the connection unexpectedly dies? Based on this, the answer is, "Trash it all and not tell them".

it's not THAT hard to set up a page that says, "If you see this, then your browser may not support the following features this site needs to work correctly:"

yeesh

Sweet. I was just reading Thomas' site, too.

>he whole point of Ajax is to display stuff inside your browser without refreshing the whole page.

The whole point of browser hosted apps is to provide cross platform experiences. Otherwise you'd just do a desktop client.

And around we go....

Oh yeah, still waiting for Safari

Innocent: oh, really? Then maybe you'd like to explain the existence of this site? http://www.w3junkies.com/toocool/

Why aren't you speaking out against that?

I don't think it's still working. When I click on "Sign in" button, it takes me to www.live.com/null

Not working nicely. Middle-Click won't work and after browsing a search result, clicking back to live.com means NO SEARCH RESULTS!.

grrr. Oh well. Nice UI though. I like it better than Google's personalized homepage.

Ray - I think the clicking "back" giving no results is cross browser - that is certantly what it does in IE 6 - and it is so annoying!!!! At least you click on a search result and the back brings yuo right back to the live home page and not your results.

People don't speak out against http://www.w3junkies.com/toocool/ because it's making a point - IE can't render standards-based CSS/HTML properly. Nor can it render transparent PNGs properly - the company you work for is holding back the web and has been for years.

IE is responsible for hundreds of hours of pain for every web dev out there - at least those that care about the web, and don't assume that "jeez, surely everyone uses IE."

Get a clue.

That's it Robert, find a site that has no influence on millions of programmers whatsoever, and ask why no one is up in arms about that. Such a quintessential PRWonkCheerleader tactic.

Now, you need to bring up a few non-sequiters along the lines of "How come Safari doesn't run on Windows? See, there's nothing wrong with Live.com"

When can we expect support for the Opera browser?

Given that on occasion Microsoft has purposefully broken Opera support on their websites, I would imagine half past never, ditto for Safari.

"The cross-platform part is separate."

What is Microsoft's problem with cross-platform software - especially on the web? It's like a big, fat kid in a sandbox losing his shit any time someone asks if they can play or borrow a toy. I guess all I can say to the Live team is grow up and learn how to play well with others.

Feel free to be mad at Scoble guys, but this quote:
"No, the whole point of Ajax is to display stuff inside your browser without refreshing the whole page.

The cross-platform part is separate."
...is spot on. I was expecting some web 2.0 language from Scoble, but describing Ajax as simply something allowing communication between server and client without page loads is something more developers need to do.

Anyway, back to ragging on Microsoft :P

Ditto on what John Welch said at 9:52 about appropriate feedback to unexpected visitors.

One business approach is to focus on the biggest complainers, but a more sustainable business approach is to try to do the right thing in the first place.

Still not working in Opera.

I emailed the start.com guys once about it, and I got the typical "we're working on it." He pointed me towards a post, which then led me to another post, which included a js that helped some but not completely. The author of the script discussed the script that was written and why. I'm no programmer, but it basically said that start.com was written around IE (duh) and if coded properly would work in Opera.

I send this information to the start.com contact. Got a "thanks" back. Pretty helpful they are.

Find it here...http://nontroppo.org/wiki/PatchingStartCom

For the description of the reasons why Safari and Opera doesn't work look at:

http://spaces.msn.com/members/startcom/Blog/cns...

It tells you precisely which features are missing from those browsers that prevent the site from working.

Well it may work in Firefox, but the mail beta does not, they really need to add that support! I have to switch to IE just to view my email...

Rather than show me all the neat stuff Microsoft can do, perhaps somebody could tell me why I need this. What does it do for me?

Yes there are all kinds of neat technology solutions that we could build. Drag and drop everything. But what problem is it solving? Or are we just throwing stuff together because we can?

AJAX used to alter a map that I am scrolling is cool. AJAX used to change a web page that I probably won't change anyway seems a bit of a waste.

But it sure does look neat.

"It tells you precisely which features are missing from those browsers that prevent the site from working."

Well, Google can do it, seemingly quite easier. So, does that mean that Google has the better programmers or that Microsoft just doesn't bother satisfying all their customers?

But why do I need a hotmail account:

http://spaces.msn.com/members/iancooper/

The Live.com site seems like a cheap imitation of Netvibes ( http://www.netvibes.com ) to me or even Google's "Personal homepage".

RE: TooCool
>Why aren’t you speaking out against that?

'cause I never heard of it before? I think its silly too although given the current level of quality and adherence to web standards in IE6, I can understand it.

You didn't address my assertion though. You tossed a straw man. If you don't care about cross platform, why would you build a browser based app? It makes no sense.

A little objectivity would go a long way towards credibility here.

robert's not after credibility, he's too busy trying to be first.

>If you don’t care about cross platform, why would you build a browser based app?

Innocent: maybe we care about cross platform, but it's #3 on our list of priorities. I can understand those of you who say it always belongs on #1. But, I can also see the point of those who see hundreds of millions of people who use IE and want to focus on that market first before going after the other hundreds of millions of people who use other browsers.

Are you going to use the new Canvas tag that Firefox just added? Why or why not?

Would you yell and scream about any Web app that only supported Firefox?

Robert, I can agree that sometimes group priorities require some tiering like that. But I'm hoping to see agreement among us all that every visitor needs a good experience -- no blank pages, no unexpected failures for the time they invested in visiting.

If the schedule was too tight for anything but IE6+/Win or whatever, or if other browsers are still locked out, then that info should be presented upfront, right?

I mean, it's a slight extra cost for the developer, but a *much* lower cost for the audience... right now what's happening is that the frustrating user experience is polarizing the audience, making as many devangelists as evangelists.

Better and more timely info to unexpected visitors... can we agree that this is a better path...?

jd/mm

I find it interesting that only Microsoft has such problems supporting Firefox. Everyone else seems to be able to handle it. Maybe the live.com team should hire a second dev capable of writing code for !IE, so that way, if one's sick, you can still get stuff done.

Of course, if MS spent half of the time getting stuff done, as they do justifying their half-assed approach to heterogeneous interoperability, they wouldn't have these problems.

>Are you going to use the new Canvas tag that Firefox just added? Why or why not?

No, it reduces my audience which is much of the reason for doing the browser thing in the first place.

>Would you yell and scream about any Web app that only supported Firefox?

I hassle any developer who develops browser based apps that don't adhere (as much as possible given the fairly crummy compliance of the browsers today) to web standards .

You seem to think this is all about you and your company. Its not. If you're gonna play on the web (and by 'you' I mean anybody listening), play cross platform or get the hell off and write a proper desktop app.

Incidentally, I think MS's avalon strategy and ActiveX are both equally stupid for this reason. MS either needs to develop runtimes that work equally well on macs and linux, or work with the w3c like the rest of us. To do otherwise makes MS a rotten citizen worthy of boycott on all levels.

Now you have my full exposition so there's no more confusion here.

I spoke too soon on Canvas. After doing a little digging, I see that Safari and Firefox 1.5 implement the canvas tag. Its a cool tag. I'd like to use it. The thing preventing me from adopting it just now is lack of support for it in IE and FireFox 1.5 adoption rates. I can push the 1.5 thing but perhaps you can tell me just how long your company intends to leave us saddled with that boat anchor you call a web browser.

Now we see why monopolies are bad and regulation is sometimes necessary.

I agree with the majority here -- this is just poor execution in the user experience field. Manage your visitor's expectations UP -- it's like the same clue train the MSN people need to be on when they pop open a window that says "MSN video is not supported on your operating system" -- come on! You expect me to believe the OS I use which plays like a gajillion media formats (and that's just in one player and is covered by a few other players too) can't at the very least talk simple to me?

The browser that passes the acid test does not get supported! LOL LOL

Bah, Live.com, Start.com...none of them can compete with Apple's fearsome EULA NINJA TECHNOLOGY!!!!

NOW we see who is superior, and who shall QUAKE IN FEAR!!!!

everytime i use my yahoo search firefox stops and shuts down why? my wife has the same program with no problems