[RooneyX]

I just read the MacNN front page and was kind of not surprised to read that a certain bank's website suddenly stopped supporting Safari.

Last week I read an article about a bank refusing the support Safari. Certainly mine doesn't.

Now, is this Safari's fault or are there games being played behind the scenes between the banks and a company like Microsoft? Would it be plausible to suppose a company like Microsoft could pay bribes or make certain demands in order to squish the browser competition and thus also the OS competition?

After all, they've dropped IE for Mac even though version 6 was in development. And if people can't use their Macs for online banking or other features that Microsoft might force on a widescale in the future then that could damage acceptance of OSX and Macs. People might not make the Switch.

Likewise, Microsoft has ownership of Virtual PC now. Like Sony did when they bought the Playstation emulator, don't expect to see anything come out of this. It was more likely a pay off so people wouldn't be able to run Windows applications on a Mac and thus easing the transition for Switchers.

And as for Real PC? Well...

[Superchicken]

Couldn't apple just make safari pretend to be IE?

[MacGorilla]

Originally posted by Superchic[k]en:
Couldn't apple just make safari pretend to be IE?

There is an app on VersionTracker (name eldues me) that will let you do this.

[DeathMan]

And its name was Safari Enhancer

Be careful when you pretend to be another browser. Its most likely not tested very well on this browser. The javascript in Safari may be accurate as far as the standard goes, but people don't always dev by the standard.

[RooneyX]

But for how long will it have to pretend to be IE? Standards should be open so that any browser should function with any site.

[OptimusG4]

Originally posted by RooneyX:
But for how long will it have to pretend to be IE? Standards should be open so that any browser should function with any site.

And they are, but a certain monopoly also has their own standards.

[dampeoples]

I wonder how much of it is big business, vs. some lazy webmaster not wanting to fix his code. The bank president probably thinks this cat is speaking Greek when he talks about compatibility, then the web guy mentions downtime, and all bets are off.
Or not.

[Brass]

Note that Microsoft has in fact completed building Internet Explorer 6.0 for OS X, but they just wont release it as a stand-along product. Instead it is only available as the web browser component of the MSN service for OS X.

EVERYTHING MS says is marketing speak. Nothing is entirely true.

[suthercd]

I was on a bank board for 20+ years, during which time they went "on-line". Here's my take on this. There was a very very big resistance to having bank data, especially customer's data, being exposed to the internet. Both real and imagined security breaches were the main reason.

Data processing had evolved department by department and was scattered across a hodge podge of platforms and software solutions. PCs became more powerful and commercial solutions for different bank departments were presented and sold to the bank. These were outside of the traditional mainframe packages that handled the banks assets and liabilities. As in many other industries, there was a strong ethic to not share information outside of the MIS department. PC solutions became more prevelant, and the IBM, DEC, etc mainframes were becoming obviously outdated. Then developed a need to bring under one discipline all these disparate systems.

The one vendor that the MIS managers looked to was Microsoft. They marketed their capabilities in a way that convinced MIS persons that Microsoft solutions were secure. The lock in on IE as a part of the Microsoft solution was an easy sell. Use our browser with our web and net software and there will be no problems with security.

Banks tend to be monolithic and MIS departments in banks even more so. The false security of MS servers was never questioned- and still is not because the bank management has been sold on MS for 8+ years. If you admit your servers are vulnerable then you are soon looking for new opportunities elsewhere.

MS dominance is impressive. They know how to use fear very effectively and subtly to keep their customers. Giving access to the bank's data through products other than Microsoft's is foolish and dangerous is their mantra.

Craig

[SKP07]

>>>MS dominance is impressive. They know how to use fear very effectively and subtly to keep their customers. Giving access to the bank's data through products other than Microsoft's is foolish and dangerous is their mantra.<<<

heh quote wont work on this shite MS browser..

Anyway good points, Once the fear has gone and ppl start to see what a load of crap MS is (and makes) well, hopefully we'll see a larger market share 4 apple...As it is i rekon i am seeing more and more apple macs everywhere, more ppl i talk to are getting Macs, i hope this trend means something?

[SKP07]

PS) i am at work on a crap PC and yeah we use windows..95 !!! hah

[RooneyX]

The quicker Apple gets its act together the better. They need to contact the banks and make things happen or make Safari pretend to be IE themselves.

Then they've still got to fix a number of bugs and add some features that are costing them (parental controls, etc).

[kcmac]

Our bank which we have used for years and have taken out many loans with did not allow Macs to access their online banking. We sent many emails and talked to them many times in person about this.

Finally, we sent a letter to the bank president telling him we were switching banks and why.

We did get a call from him, believe it or not and he said they may someday support the mac. We told him we had waited long enough.

Banks are a dime a dozen. Use someone that cares about all of their customers. We are just as happy now if not more so with our switch.

[KidRed]

Originally posted by suthercd:
I was on a bank board for 20+ years, during which time they went "on-line". Here's my take on this. There was a very very big resistance to having bank data, especially customer's data, being exposed to the internet. Both real and imagined security breaches were the main reason.

Data processing had evolved department by department and was scattered across a hodge podge of platforms and software solutions. PCs became more powerful and commercial solutions for different bank departments were presented and sold to the bank. These were outside of the traditional mainframe packages that handled the banks assets and liabilities. As in many other industries, there was a strong ethic to not share information outside of the MIS department. PC solutions became more prevelant, and the IBM, DEC, etc mainframes were becoming obviously outdated. Then developed a need to bring under one discipline all these disparate systems.

The one vendor that the MIS managers looked to was Microsoft. They marketed their capabilities in a way that convinced MIS persons that Microsoft solutions were secure. The lock in on IE as a part of the Microsoft solution was an easy sell. Use our browser with our web and net software and there will be no problems with security.

Banks tend to be monolithic and MIS departments in banks even more so. The false security of MS servers was never questioned- and still is not because the bank management has been sold on MS for 8+ years. If you admit your servers are vulnerable then you are soon looking for new opportunities elsewhere.

MS dominance is impressive. They know how to use fear very effectively and subtly to keep their customers. Giving access to the bank's data through products other than Microsoft's is foolish and dangerous is their mantra.

Craig

That 'fear factor' is exactly the reason many are now switching to linux.