Microsoft released Internet Explorer 3.0 for Windows 3.1 recently. Although this isn't terribly significant in the scope of the Web-client industry, there are a few interesting tidbits we can draw from this move.
The browser itself contains everything it should with a couple of notable exceptions. Competing scripting languages J Script and VB Script are on board now, as is support for Netscape plug-ins. Most of the Win95 interface is in this version, as is all the security and multimedia support we've come to expect. But you already know about all of this since we covered the first beta a little while back.
The browser still lacks Java support, however. Microsoft says it should be available as a separate download in a couple of weeks. That would make it the first to ship a consumer-level version of the language (not counting IBM's developer release). There's also a possibility of an interim release of IE3 for Win3.1 in early '97, which would include the cascading stylesheets and PICS content-rating support that this version is missing.
But the most significant omission in this version is ActiveX. While Microsoft has been aggressively marketing the technology to developers for dynamic content on the Web, it's been carefully sidestepping the cross-platform issue. ActiveX controls need to be almost completely rewritten for every platform supported by Internet Explorer, and that means different code for Mac, Win95, Win3.1, and even different flavors of WinNT. But after talking to a Microsoft product manager, I found out that the Win3.1 version doesn't support ActiveX due to a "lack of developer demand." In other words, not one ActiveX control exists for that platform, and no one is really interested in investing in creating any. But why is there ActiveX for the Mac, where the situation is similar if not worse? An interesting question, indeed.
Cross-platform decisions are nothing new to software developers, who have faced the prospect of either choosing one and limiting their audience, or finding the resources to port. But this is something totally alien to the world of publishing. Content providers who've come to the Web from more traditional forms of publishing are used to the ubiquity of paper, NTSC television broadcasts, or AM/FM radio. Everyone can get your content. Period.
Will content providers have to start aligning themselves with operating systems and browser platforms? You bet. It's not pretty, but it's happening right now across the Web. Look for those little banners that say "Netscape Now!" or "Activate the Internet with Microsoft!" Do you think publishers put those on their homepages out of goodwill? Guess again. These little banners, and the technology they represent, are the result of carefully negotiated marketing deals between the software companies and content providers.
And that's where the situation gets a bit troubling. Publishers want new technologies as well as people to view them. Software developers can provide both. But when a company like Microsoft decides not to provide a technology like ActiveX to a customer base like the huge Win3.1 community, we start to see a rift in the availability of content. And content is merely ideas. Ideas served only to those with powerful browsers. This is a whole new issue for publishers, and it's a dilemma that everyone is going to have to deal with in a hurry.
