It annoys me when websites aren't accessible to persons using a variety of web browsers. As a web developer, I see the act of blocking "incompatible" browsers as lazy. As a Firefox user, I see it as a slap in the face.
Websites shouldn't worry about meeting every browser's needs, of course. Some browsers have such a small market share they aren't worth the time to support. And beyond a certain point it's too much hassle to support an antiquated browser. No web developer in his right mind still worries about Netscape 4, for example.
Recently an employee with a local media company picked on me for not doing a better job of linking to news anywhere other than the Journal Star. Yeah, that's true. I've gotten lazy about diversifying my sources. The original reason I didn't link to, for example, KOLN/KGIN (10/11) and KLKN is because their websites were a drag to use.
10/11's website is still a cluttered mess, but it works fine for me -- including video -- so I will try to do a better job linking to it.
In contrast,
KLKN's website doesn't like Firefox, and in fact
still recommends Internet Explorer 6 and Netscape 7.1. Yikes. That's not only bad advice, it's downright dangerous. So sorry, KLKN, you still won't be getting any links from here.
I should also do a better job of linking to local radio sites, such as
KLIN and
KFOR. Speaking of which, a quick message for local radio folks, if you're reading: Have you ever considered packaging your local news headlines into a daily podcast? It could be short -- 3 to 6 minutes, say -- but would give you another way to get your voices heard.