As a web designer and developer, I am constantly reminded that I wear two hats: 1) to design and build websites that can reach the widest audiences, appeal to the most people and deliver rich, interactive, exciting content; and 2) design and build sites that are cost effective, timely and maintainable.

It seems that for some time now those two objectives have been at logger-heads as cross-browser, cross-OS, backwards compatible, highly portable websites have required so many “hacks” , “patches”, “tweaks” and “tricks” to keep things in order that development time increased exponentially. The result being that clients had to take an objective view – spend more money achieving the last 10%, or save money and chop off a category of potential customers.

That dilemma came one step closer this week to being removed. And not before time. There have long been calls from web developers, technologists and end users to convince Microsoft to signal the end of the IE6 browser. The basis for this is in IE6’s complete disregard for web standards, topped with security and compatibility issues. Google’s recent debacle in China proved to them at least that IE6 had not just been an inconvenient side-track, but had actually led to irrevocable damage. Google pulled out of China, and after a brief investigation announced that support for IE6 in its enhanced applications was to be removed as a direct consequence.

Google pulling out of China is not a small headline… It’s not like saying the German’s are to stop eating sausage. China is the most populated country on Earth, and currently one of the largest untapped online resources. Google “giving up” on them is an historic headline. And it seems to me that Google’s announcement to drop IE6 should be seen as the direct aftermath of those events.

Time then, has come to remove your IE6 hacks, tear down your IE6 test machines, hang up your well-used crib sheet for IE6 cross-browser tricks. Isn’t it?

Well, there’s the rub… the purists out there (and in here too) still feel an obligation, a need, a moral duty, to keep providing support for any device/browser/age/config that exists. Isn’t that our job? Shouldn’t we still take the time to explain to clients why cross-browser/cross-everything-else support is still worthy of a few extra Pounds/Dollars/Renminbi?

Of course, some clients will still see the need, and will appreciate the dedication that a good web developer can demonstrate when seventy four different browser/OS combinations are showing pixel-perfect renditions of their new website. But I fear that those clients will become fewer and fewer, and as a business I must recognise the value that is placed on perfection. I will of course always offer full cross-browser support, and will continue to provide the best possible service to my clients. But I will argue just a little less when they say “just make it work for the majority”.

Designing a website should not be considered in the same light as you would design a poster or a leaflet. All too often we see websites that would look great printed and hung on a wall, but offer the modern computer-savvy customer little in the way of interactivity, options, style, or flair.

A website is a portal into your business that can sell to customers even when your entire workforce is safely tucked up in bed – and if the website is good enough it may even do a better job, as it is inherently driven by the needs of the customer rather than a “hard-sell” salesman.

The key to good website design is identifying the expectations of the customer and how they are likely to want to use your site (NOT how you want them to use it!). This can be difficult. As a retail business you naturally want to guide customers to ensure a sale, but now you must rely on the website to do that for you.

The silver lining of this careful balancing act is that the winning formula will keep working for you on every customer, time and time again, even when you are still in your pyjamas. So, get it right and spend the right amount of time and effort doing so, because it will pay you back ten-fold.

Web standards exist to try to standardise the way website code is displayed in various different browsers. They have been created by the W3C (World Wide Web Consortium) to guide developers on the best way to code websites and to help browser manufacturers such as Microsoft, Mozilla and Google create browsers that can display websites correctly. Unfortunately, the W3C web standards are only recommendations, and although there is excellent support globally for their adoption, some browsers reflect them better than others.

So why should we develop to these standards if they’re not fully supported? The fact is that most modern ‘A’-grade browsers do implement the W3C standards very well, and problems arise mostly from older browsers. The issue for web developers is deciding which versions of old browsers to continue supporting, as customers often have browsers on their computers which are out of date. Our aim is always to make the website as accessible as possible to the most people on widely differing technology. The pay-off is more potential customers reaching your valuable information; the cost is a harder, longer development time, but by developing to the latest web standards, you are ensuring your website will reach the widest audience and support the most forms of technology available to your prospective customers, and you are building a platform for the future that will be easy to maintain and re-develop.

Whilst many people may feel one way or another about Michael Jackson, there is no debating the world-wide phenomenon that was his life. And now in death, it seems his effect is even more powerful.

As the news about Jackson’s death began to circulate, the Internet became a focal point for people everywhere trying to verify the story, find out more facts, and pass the information on to friends and family across the world.

The vast increase in traffic caused many sites to feel the strain, with Google producing error pages on related searches, and Twitter crashing for only the second recorded time. In fact, the search for more information on Michael Jackson became so feverish, that Google rated the topic as “volcanic” on their hotness meter, even considering the sudden influx as a possible attack, and BBC News received 72% more traffic around the time of his death, along with many other sites.

The fact that the Internet can be rocked by such real, physical events is somewhat reassuring – we haven’t yet reached the stage where computers, cold and unfeeling, can report the news dispassionately, without a thought for its effects on those more “fleshly”. At least not yet, and I for one think that’s a good thing.

I was amused the other evening to receive a phone call from a telemarketer selling car insurance. Normally these calls send my blood boiling, and cause me to rant prolific that “I never asked to be called”. However, the voice at the other end was a reassuringly pleasant Brummy tone that I recognised well, as my family originates from that region.

After a few minutes of sales pitch, I politely said no thank you, and asked what part of the Midlands the caller was from. She replied, “Walsall”, and I asked what the weather was like up there (a traditional Brummy passtime). Her reply astonished me: “Oh, I don’t live there any more – I was made redundant a year ago, and I’ve moved to Mumbai to join this call centre… there just aren’t enough jobs back in England…”.

So, there you have it. Britain’s latest export success story – having outsourced and off-shored all the jobs, we are now off-shoring all our people.

So next time you get a familiar accent on the phone, don’t assume they are just down the road – they may be one of the increasing numbers of Britain’s off-shoring themselves in pursuit of the ever decreasing number of jobs.