Louis Gray wrote a recap of the various incarnations of his LouisGray.com website, from personal site to sports comics site to his current blog where he discusses developments in technology under the subhead "Silicon Valley Blog."

It's interesting to see how Louis' online presence has changed as the available technology has changed. Also interesting how a connection with a well-known blogger, in this case Robert Scoble, made such a difference in the success of the blog as well as its eventual editorial direction. After Scoble linked to LouisGray.com, Louis was

...excited, but nervous too. For if I didn't start writing about stuff that Scoble wanted, he would unsubscribe. He wouldn't share my items in his link reader, and that'd be the end of that little experiment. Luckily, I started to arc my coverage even more toward tech, and more toward those things he liked, including Google Reader and RSS.

I suspect that many of us who've been online in one form or another have similar experiences, but I enjoyed reading Louis' trip down his virtual memory lane.

Many web developers breathed a sigh of relief yesterday, myself included, when Microsoft announced that the new version of Internet Explorer would adhere to current web standards by default. Originally, the idea was to make IE8 more backward-compatible, using IE7's "standards" mode by default, and forcing web programmers who wanted to use IE8's "standards" mode to specify that in a page's HTML code. With yesterday's decision, IE8 will default instead to its own "standards" mode.

Why is this important? Doesn't it mean a lot of work to update and add code to older web pages? Probably. All current browsers have two main rendering modes: "quirks" and "standards." When a browser is asked to load a web page that requests a current DOCTYPE in its code, the browser uses its own standards mode to render the page. Older or improperly-formed web pages, that either reference older standards or have no specific reference to a standard, are rendered using "quirks" mode, where the browser tries to emulate an older version in order to display the page.

The problem is standards change over time, as new technology creates needs for browsers to handle content they didn't need to before. Plus each browser has its own way of implementing "standards," so you can see the dilemma web developers are faced with when creating web pages.

When Microsoft released IE7 in October 2006, some web pages that had rendered correctly in IE6 looked bad in the new browser. This was due to changes in the "standards" mode between the two versions, which also exposed some workarounds developers had used during the five years IE6 was the dominant Windows-based browser to get it to render certain objects properly. One example was the incomplete support for alpha-channel transparency in PNG images in IE6 and earlier. Developers had to use code that determined which version of which browser the site visitor was using, and apply a workaround if IE6 or earlier was detected.

When three out of four computer users are viewing web pages in a browser made by Microsoft, whatever decision Microsoft makes carries a lot of weight. Microsoft's original decision to set IE7 "standards" by default, while understandable from a compatibility standpoint, would have crippled future development of web technology by tying standards to the older, IE7-era.

Dean Hachamovich, Microsoft's General Manager for Internet Explorer, summarized the company's decision this way:

"Long term, we believe this is the right thing for the web. Shorter term, leading up not just to IE8’s release but broader IE8 adoption, this choice creates a clear call to action to site developers to make sure their web content works well in IE."

It may mean some short-term pain for web developers who have to upgrade older pages, but Microsoft's announcement yesterday that IE8 will embrace current web standards by default, whether prompted by pending litigation or a newfound love of open standards, means the future development of the web will be looking forward instead of backward. In the long run, that's good for both users and web professionals.

Sarah Braun posted today about the increased presence of new media in the television and movie industry. The income from online versions of TV shows and movies was a major sticking point in the recent Writers' Guild strike against the networks and producers, and the importance of these new media will continue to grow. Sarah describes the website for NBC's "Heroes," which, like many TV shows today, is regularly mentioned during promos for the broadcast episodes. Sarah describes the site's many attractive features (which include an interactive graphic novel), and concludes:

"I think that this sort of digital content is EXACTLY what a television show’s website should be, particularly for a show like Heroes. Lost’s website is similar, though not nearly as expansive. Promises of online exclusives that turn into hours of extra content and an experience that truly immerses the viewer into the show is a surefire way to keep them coming back for more. I think as technology continues to expand and the entertainment industry continues to move towards digital media, we’ll begin to see more and more websites of that quality."

Quality content keeps eyeballs on the site, interacting with the content - and reading and watching the advertising.

(BTW, Sarah also drops a reference to The Spot in her post, just a week after our New Tech Heroes flashback on the original "webisodic fiction." Spotfans, another blogger shows the love! :) )

Sarah's post is well worth a complete read.

Has the emergence of the mobile web destroyed the market for native applications for mobile devices? Michael Mace, a former VP of Product Planning at Palm who's now a principal at Rubicon Consulting, says yes on his blog today. He notes that although the number of smartphones has increased, the "attractiveness" to potential developers has been decreasing. And now with the growth of the mobile web, those developers are likely to be working on applications that can be delivered over a fast mobile connection to a handheld or smartphone browser.

Michael notes:

"If you're a mobile developer, you should consider stopping native app development and shifting to a mobile-optimized website. That's what Elia [Freedman, CEO of Infinity Softworks] did, and he said it's amazing how much easier it is to get things done. Even mobile game developers, who you'd think would be the last to abandon native development, are looking at web distribution."

The advent of Adobe AIR, which I discussed earlier today, and other similar technologies from Google, Microsoft and others, would seem to hasten that trend. Apple is set to release development tools for the iPhone sometime soon, which could spur creation of native applications at least on that platform, but personally, the "feature" I was looking for recently when I upgraded my mobile phone was how reliable and faithful were the mobile versions of the Google applicatons, including Gmail and Google Calendar, that I use at home and work everyday. No more syncing; I want the same data wherever I go.