On X-UA-Compatible

There's been so much said about this...

• Chris Wilson spells out the need for it.
• Aaron Gustafson explains the details on A List Apart (!).
• Eric Meyer welcomes it.
• So does Jonathan Snook.
• Anne Van Kesteren thinks it's an IE lock-in all over again.
• Mozilla devs have questions.
• PPK observes quitely.
• WaSP guys clarify that they were not necessarily involved, though MS claims so.
• Jeremy Keith thinks MS's got it backwards.
• Andy Budd thinks IE just shot itself in the foot.
• Jeffery Zeldman defends the idea anyway.
• John Resig thinks the trouble is worthless.
• Dean Edwards sits on the fence and snickers.
• Roger Johansson is not convinced that it's a good idea.
• Rachel Andrew thinks this is a step backwards.
• Safari says they are not going to implement it.
• Ian Hickson thinks MS is going to be in trouble.
• Mike Davies says that it's the end of the line for IE.

... that if I write an opinion piece, it will go unnoticed.

So, what do I think anyway? If this is MS's only chance at fixing the web, I love the idea. However, this is a drastic step, and MS cannot botch this up. If they do, no one will want to work for their browser anymore. If no sites are written for their browser, users won't use their browser anymore. As a front-end developer, having to cater to three different browser types (IE6, IE7 and good browsers) with HUGE differences between them, is already a pain in the wrong spots. Adding one more to the mix will only worsen the situation. But if IE8 starts actually behaving like the good browsers, we can finally hope that all our problems will vanish with IE6 and IE7 - whenever that happens.

So, if MS thinks that this is the solution to all their problems, so be it. The world will comply this one last time. This is a lot of trouble. It better be worth it. If this ends up having a less-than-desirable result, MS is doomed. IE is doomed. And the web will be a better place anyway, IE or otherwise.