One ugly underbelly of the internet is the incompatibilites between Microsoft Internet Explorer and Netscape.  How did these dysfunctional differences occur?  Why weren't standards established and followed?

The internet has been around since 1969.  Originally named Arpanet, it was created to provide uninterrupted communication to the US government in the event of a nuclear war.  Its design utilizes multiple equal nodes, allowing point-of-failures to be circumvented.  Initially only universities and research facilities could fund the supercomputers needed for this new technology.  

By the 1980s, cheaper computers allowed many groups beyond the academic domain to tap into what was now called the Internet.  Technically, anyone with an internet connection had access to every computer on the network.  But in reality, there was no comprehensive listing of internet sites or their content.  Even if this had existed, there was no standard user-interface available to process the information.

In 1994, the Mosaic Netscape browser was released.  It sported a graphical user-interface and utilized an HTML client-server paradigm.  Mosaic was wildly successful.  It quickly dominated a browser market still in its infancy and became the de facto standard.  Netscape went public in 1995, arguably launching the internet stock market bubble.  The stock soared on its first day of trading, closing at $58 and eventually climbing to the $140s.

Meanwhile, Microsoft was also in the midst of an eventful year with the release of Windows 95.  In their pre-occupation of Windows 95, Microsoft had missed the cyberspace market shift.  Bill Gates, one of history's greatest visionaries, had misjudged the dominance of the internet.  Pundits joyfully predicted that this miscue would irreparably harm Microsoft.  But Gates wasted no time in launching a counter attack.  The 800-pound Microsoft gorilla soon released Internet Explorer.  To erode Netscape's market share, Explorer was offered free of charge.  Explorer was tied into the operating system to prevent unbundling.  OEMs were prohibited from removing the Internet Explorer icon.  Companies as powerful as Compaq were required to offer Explorer as the preferred worldwide web browser.

So began the browser wars.  In this turbulent climate, each Netscape and Explorer release was intended to "one-up" the other with proprietary extensions.  Both attempted to differentiate their product and make it more attractive than its competitor.  Even though Microsoft and Netscape are each members of the the World Wide Web Consortium (WC3) which issues code specifications and guidelines, both are guilty of deviating from the standards.  Over the course of several years and multiple releases, there exists a wide range of browser incompatibilites. 

In the end, Microsoft prevailed.  At the end of 1995, 70% of fortune 100 companies used Nestcape as their internet browser.  By the end of 1998, Explorer had edged slightly ahead of Netscape.  That same year, Netscape merged with AOL.  It was believed that the merger would breathe new life into Netscape.  Curiously, AOL continued to provide Explorer to its subscribers.  In January 2002, AOL filed a lawsuit against Microsoft based on the Sherman Antitrust Act.  By this time, Netscape's market share had significantly erodoed. Many believed the lawsuit was not so much intended to revive the browser wars, but was more a means to receive a monetary settlement.  In May of 2003, AOL won a $750 million settlement from Microsoft.  Future meaningful development of Netscape or Mozilla, another Netscape browser, is unlikely.

There remains a scattering of alternate browsers.  The Opera browser is a niche player that was also designed to interface with cell phones and web appliances.  However, it's future has become clouded as more device manufacturers opt for open-source alternatives.  It has also been hurt by Mac's introduction of Safari, it's new introduction into the browser fray.

With the Microsoft/AOL settlement, the browser wars may be stabilizing.  But left in its wake is a plethora of browsers.  In the end, it's the poor web developers who are left to sift through the carnage.