I enjoyed this article and thought it was very insightful. To me the only point that lacked merit was the one about telling users to use a specific browser; the motivation for that practice was very different in the early 90s than it is today.
In the 90s I think it was common for sites to demand that users switch to a certain browser because they wanted to avoid compatibility issues related to CSS and JavaScript. It wasn't (at least according to my observation) usually about providing the user with a strikingly new experience.
By contrast, most modern sites that require a certain browser do so because they're flirting with an interesting technology that offers the user something new. For example the example the author cites was a demonstration, funded by Google, to promote a use of WebGL technology that allowed users to explore sprawling real 3D environments in their browsers.
Of course, restricting a user's choice of browser is never desirable and it limits your audience. Just saying I think the motivation for doing so and the payoffs we experience today aren't comparable to those of the 90s.
I think in the 90's the motivation was the same. Sure for some folks it was just about being lazy and only supporting one browser, but I think for a lot of people it was taking advantage of CSS and Javascript only available in one browser.
In those days a lot of the functionality that we take for granted as cross-browser was only available on the bleeding edge of one or another browser. I think for a mainstream audience, those badges were more appropriate then than they are now.
In the 90s I think it was common for sites to demand that users switch to a certain browser because they wanted to avoid compatibility issues related to CSS and JavaScript. It wasn't (at least according to my observation) usually about providing the user with a strikingly new experience.
By contrast, most modern sites that require a certain browser do so because they're flirting with an interesting technology that offers the user something new. For example the example the author cites was a demonstration, funded by Google, to promote a use of WebGL technology that allowed users to explore sprawling real 3D environments in their browsers.
Of course, restricting a user's choice of browser is never desirable and it limits your audience. Just saying I think the motivation for doing so and the payoffs we experience today aren't comparable to those of the 90s.