I wish more companies would do something like this. Honestly, IE9 and all the surrounding tech media is really leaving an awesome impression on me. Gestures like this prove that the IE team wants to take part in a modern internet world much more than any standard compliance chart ever could.
On a side note, I found Office 2010/2011, IE9 and Windows 7 a joy to use. And this is in stark contrast to Office 2003/2008, IE8 or Vista. Some things seem to be changing in Redmond!
You're correct, during their browser war with Netscape, IE was introducing revolutionary features, albeit not all standards based. They even implemented web fonts in IE4 if I'm not mistaken.
And then they sat on it for 4 years, refusing to fully implement the CSS 2.1 spec, refusing to fix ridiculous positioning bugs, and even refusing to fix security flaws that they mandated non-critical, although several of them used together often lead to arbitrary code execution on the client.
Like it is with User Experience in general, they ruined all the positive cred they had with IE6, causing standards-aware web devs to develop for the lowest-common denominator or invest their own time on every project for Microsoft's technical debt.
It's not fair that IE6 quirking was a required skill and a to-do for web developers, only because Microsoft had a browser share monopoly. Was it to slow down the evolution towards applications/operating system in the cloud? Mere negligence? I don't care anymore, they broke my heart.
>and even refusing to fix security flaws that they mandated non-critical, although several of them used together often lead to arbitrary code execution on the client.
Source?
Anyway, even worse, back in the IE 5.x era when they added most of that stuff like XMLHTTPRequest etc., they focused on that instead of complying with even basic CSS1! (Yes, it was better than Netscape 4, but that was because the JSSS/CSS fiasco that resulted in was a lot worse) IE6 added DOCTYPE switching and a "standards" mode with better CSS1 compliance, but I don't think they touched the buggy CSS2 support, and during the time they sat on it, guess what people did with it that caused trouble when MS released IE7 that fixed some of these bugs?
You must be talking about the Msxml2.XMLHTTP ActiveX object that wasn't called XMLHttpRequest until the fine Mozilla lads decided calling ActiveX objects was not such a good idea (and wouldn't work in more... civilized operating systems), right?
Of course, Microsoft later added the proper XMLHttpRequest support that was lacking in until IE7, IIRC.
Not to mention that their newest, more standards-compatible browser is not available for their older OSes, ensuring we still have a nice long ride with their old crap browsers.
I thought you were joking about Firefox 7. From version 4 to 7 in one year, are you kidding? It turns out you're right. For some reasons, I really dislike software companies jack up version numbers: how can you have FOUR MAJOR releases within one year for a relatively complex software? That gives me an impression that they feel insecure of becoming irrelevant, instead of competing on features and usability, they choose to compete on version numbers.
I could be wrong, but I just don't feel like they fall into the same trap Netscape did a decade ago.
I could care less, but companies have done it several times.
Netscape skipped version 5 (a doomed project).
Microsoft ditched version numbers for years (95, 98, 2000), and then just names -- due to how version number increments on an existing product appear to end users.
To technically savvy it doesnt really matter "is it 5.0 or 4.5?"
But the version number or name is about trying to position the product as a "new one" or even just "mature" to the more typical end user.
I don't want to be "that guy" and I'm not trying to be a grammar Nazi. I know this is now an idiom in the USA, and therefore it doesn't have to make sense.
However ...
I've now heard it said, in four different countries, that this phrase makes the speaker sound like an idiot. I know it's now just "the norm" in the USA, but I wanted to let people here know that saying this makes a bad impression.
If you don't care how you sound to non USAians then don't bother. But if you're wondering what I'm talking about, David Mitchell does an excellent job of explaining "I couldn't care less"
Let me play devil's advocate (which might actually play in your favor, seeing as you've used that neologism). How do you think new words and phrases make it into the dictionary? It's by a proportionate amount of people using it for a specific meaning. Meaning is an abstract concept. Contrary to popular belief, language is not always logical or literal. It's an ever-changing organism: elastic and metamorphic.
The phrase you quote is not "now just" the norm. It has always been ever since I can remember living in North America. It's nobody's fault the British-speaking world has just discovered it. This reminds me a little of when the Europeans first discovered "America."
This is why Jorge Luis Borges once said, "Todas las palabras fueron alguna vez un neologismo" (All words were once a neologism).
It's common in the USA. People I've spoken to from other countries think it makes those who use it seem ignorant. I'm providing data, not making a judgement. I know that many idioms don't make sense when dissected.
The parts of the world I have regular dealings with - excluding the USA - all say "I couldn't care less," and that actually does make sense. The people I've spoken with about this have expressed bewilderment that the alternate version should be used. They say that it doesn't make sense, and it's open to misunderstanding.
When I speak with customers I don't use the same short-hand or code phrases that I use with my colleagues. Likewise students when applying for jobs or other positions use more formal language, because to do otherwise makes them look uneducated and ignorant. I'm just saying that I've seen the same attitude towards people who use this particular phrase.
Personally, I don't care. In fact, it would be hard for me to care less. I'm just offering a datum that some might find useful.
It's sarcastic in intent. Trying to condemn an idiom that is obviously logical nonsense misses the point. When I say "I could care less", it could be interpreted instead, "as if there were anything else I care less about."
On a side note, I found Office 2010/2011, IE9 and Windows 7 a joy to use. And this is in stark contrast to Office 2003/2008, IE8 or Vista. Some things seem to be changing in Redmond!