Now about IE, I still don’t see any problem with them not supporting IE. Any webdesigner/master would not only have Firefox, IE, and Opera. And if they don’t - they must still be making their websites with FrontPage or Yahoo’s site builder… o.O If webmaster paid $30 bucks for this don’t you think they would use/download one of the supported FREE browsers to check their stats?

You said it your self, “Developing webstandard comliant sites” Mint has done that. “w3.org” - IE/MS havent, the are behind and don’t meet the current standards or care to. because they are M$ an they think they are the standard and with being the standard you can do things like re-naming RSS “web feeds” or even Podcasting to something that lasted only about 20 seconds to which I can’t even remember what they were changing it to. Because the www Community don’t look to them the as the standard anymore.

I wrote IE5 when I meant IE (all versions), sorry…

…but I still think that no support for IE/Win is bad. Yeah, you are correct when you are saying that this product is aminging at web developers which mostly uses better alternatives. But I still think that developing for a certain browser is not good. It is just like when people develop sites just for IE. That is not good either. Developing webstandard comliant sites is for all browsers not just one.

I know that support for IE is planned. Also, I write mostly about web developing and such. I still have about 25-30% of IE (less than 2% is IE5.5 and IE5) users on my site, hopefully this will decrease in the future.

Within 456 Berea Street, from which I followed the link to your site, MSIE only accounted for 36.2% of visitors back in Nov 2004. I’d guarantee it’s less than that now.