|IE - die die die|
how for are we on getting people to quit using "that" browser
Almost everybody trying to do standards compliant stuff feels the annoyance of IE's old versions out there hurting any attempt at making something of the new features we could use were it not for "that" browser and its former dominance.
Yet with some efforts of the industry as a whole IE6, IE7 are clearly slowing down.
I quit testing IE6 when my virtual image updated itself unasked for to IE8 (it seems it only had the IE7 blocker on it and someday it decided IE8 would be better for me - not).
I check stat of browsers regularly and see a declining trend. I'm quite aware some of my audiences are different in demographics (work-home young-old nerd-technophobic.)
I'm also very aware that how you measure (and deal with bots in there) makes a big difference.
So on my biggest site (which still works quite well in IE6 and IE7), which attracts a bit an older crowd, mostly for leisure, and are not specifically technical in nature, as measured by google analytics:
- IE: 33.55 % of the visits are:
----- IE 6: 0.83 % = 0.28% overall
----- IE 7: 7.18 % = 2.41% overall
----- IE 8: 38.98 % = 13,08% overall
----- IE 9: 52.84 % = 17,73% overall
----- IE10: 0.15 % = 0,05% overall
Which clearly makes IE6 a non-issue on this site (less than 0.3% of visits overall). IE7 at a total of 2.41% overall is still quite a few users, but I might well let them go on the next update. Esp. since IE7 really is retarded and causing me a lot of stress.
That just over 13% in total share of IE8 is the worst of it all: it'll block much for a long time to come (at least some of those users need to be weened off of IE and/or XP) - and it has plenty bugs that annoy me a lot.
I think for established sites we know the effort obsolete version of IE cause us , and we can predict the loss if we stop supporting one of them.
For new sites it's all much less easy to predict. I recently did a few pages on a new site and I had them made in polyglot xhtml5, CSS3 features, even using svg graphics as stretching backgrounds etc. I had anticipated some fall-back, and I was surprised at not having to do anything for any version of IE I tested (did not test IE6, for me that one is dead and buried) - they used the fallback I already had in the the CSS.
What continues to rise is safari on iOS: serious second place behind IE on windows, I think I'll put some more effort in the iPad.
So the question then:
- your demographics ?
- how are your statistics ?
- which IE versions do you test for ?
I guess I'm one of the odd ones out because I still test for IE6. My main reason is because if it works in that beast it'll work in anything.
|My main reason is because if it works in that beast it'll work in anything. |
That's a terrible assumption. IE6 has a different box model. If you're not careful, something that looks good in IE6 might be terribly ugly in other browsers.
For the type of CSS I use it works for me. I get everything uniform across all browsers right down to the pixel. But I will certainly be glad when they are finally gone. I've restricted myself in using things I want to use because I don't want to exclude anyone from using the site.
Whey XP finally goes completely from the corporate sector I believe that IE will have a lower market share, but I doubt it'll die.
Yes but those corporate end-of-lease PCs, or non-supported O/S often get donated to schools and/or community outreach places which teach basic computer skills for the underprivileged. It helps when those types of users can still see what everyone else is seeing. IE6 may soon be gone the way of the dodo bird but I think the XP IE7/8 legacy will be with us for a few more years.
I design for AppleWebKit compatible browsers and if it flat doesn't work on IE I'll obviously fix it.
However, if it's just slightly imperfect on IE? bummer dude.
I'm starting to think it's time to revise the old battle cry of the 90s and start telling people using the "wrong" browser to switch. At this point, since everything else uses AppleWebKit, it doesn't really matter which browser, just anything other than IE.
|something that looks good in IE6 might be terribly ugly in other browsers. |
IE 6? Seriously?
Many big sites deprecate support for anything more than 3 versions old and I gave up the backwards compatibility thing a couple of years ago so I don't test on anything other than the current version, really don't care about laggards (XP) anymore.
Also, Apple recently dropped support for Windows on Safari 6 so I don't bother testing Safari anymore either. Not buying overpriced iCrap just to test for Apple iVisitors but when I find myself near an Apple iDevice I'll check my sites just for iGiggles ;)
|It helps when those types of users can still see what everyone else is seeing |
Let them upgrade to any other current browser that still supports their OS.
Firefox 14 runs on:
* Windows XP SP2
* Windows Server 2003
* Windows Vista
* Windows 7
Therefore, running XP is not a valid excuse to run old MSIE 6 or 7.
FWIW, people using donated machines typically don't turn into money therefore they aren't part of my business model, don't think twice about them except every 2-3 years when I donate old computers to GoodWill or something. Many big sites use technology that won't work in MSIE 6 and I doubt you could use Yahoo! Mail, GMail, etc. for starters.
On the one site I track systematically, human visits break down to:
40-41% MSIE (down from upper 40's just a year ago, with the difference about equally divided between Chrome and mobiles)
within MSIE (that's how I count):
10 too small to measure
9 37% (up from 20% a year ago in a couple of striking leaps)
8 42% (down from 47%)
7 18% (this number has held remarkably steady)
6 3% (down from 15% of MSIE a year ago-- but the holdouts are stuck* and can't be discounted)
5 seems finally to have disappeared (5.2 for Mac, so they really had no excuse)
Chrome and Safari have each gone up around 4%, but most of the Safaris are assorted mobiles using webkit. It is doubly tricky since Chrome's UA string includes the complete word "Safari". Opera is surprisingly low, hovering right at the edge of measurability.
* For a given definition of "stuck". Looks like NT 5.1 will run MSIE 8-- unless there's some additional variable I don't know about-- so it's just a matter of waiting for the technicians to get around to upgrading. That's assuming for the sake of discussion that they have technicians.
FWIW: Firefox 15.0.1 is the current version :-), 14 is old.
Aside of that, webkit powers both Safari (on mac and on iOS) and Chrome (all platforms) finding differences between the two means you need to go very on the edge of things.
Opera and Firefox use different engines, but all of them adhere pretty well to the standards, and bugs that are reported typically do get fixed.
IE OTOH: it's not adhering to standards, or if it does the standards are ancient by the time they get adhered by the folks in Redmond. As such they only evolve for security bugs or patent infringements. All other bugs - even if they get so well known that they get named - remain unfixed forever. To add insult to the injury there are the widely publicized blocker settings to prevent machines from forcing an update - widely deployed by corporations.
Compare that to e.g. chrome: it updates itself to the most recent stable version - and it "just works". Firefox seems to be ready to do the same updates, even if it's declining in market share that's a good thing in itself.
We really need an IE tax ;^)
IE for Mac ? That has not been available for quite some years anymore. Last I saw it was on OS X 10.3 . It's also a powerpc application - requiring rosetta (which is only available on 10.6 or earlier. Any fanboy will have a more recent mac and only uses such a machine to show hes a hardcore fan keeping a working museum.
IE for Mac is moreover in my mind about the about the worst version of IE ever, luckily it never got any significant market share.
|FWIW: Firefox 15.0.1 is the current version :-), 14 is old. |
I run 15.0.1, 14 was just what came up in Google when I searched for the OS versions :)
Old... like a week? LOL
|6 3% (down from 15% of MSIE a year ago-- but the holdouts are stuck* and can't be discounted) |
I assume most that out of date that bad probably can't afford to upgrade and most likely won't be buying what I'm selling either. Probably not right in all cases but they're so statistically insignificant to build a business case that it's wasting more time or money to address than it's worth.
|IE for Mac ? That has not been available for quite some years anymore. |
Yes, I was thinking 2001 but the datestamp on my copy says 2003. Whoop de do.
|It's also a powerpc application - requiring rosetta (which is only available on 10.6 or earlier. |
I have no idea where on my Mac Rosetta is hiding. It keeps a very low profile.
|Any fanboy will have a more recent mac and only uses such a machine to show hes a hardcore fan keeping a working museum. |
Well, I'm not really targeting "fanboys". But my audience does include people in low-budget areas.
Quick look over the last 5 days stats:
Firefox 15 is the largest single browser version at 22.2% but IE versions 6 through 9 is the largest browser overall at 31%. The older versions of IE seem far more "sticky" than other FF.
I really should take a closer look at mobile browsers and screen resolutions.
|The older versions of IE seem far more "sticky" than other FF. |
Makes sense. (Did you mean "older FF"? Not important, really.) FF-- and also Chrome and Opera-- are voluntary installations. IE comes with the computer, so its users include people who don't have the power to change their software, and also the "What's a browser?" group.
In the fwiw category, most of my clients target the under-30 crowd. The logs we keep on those sites show less than 15% IE usage for all of them (I just looked at one a few minutes ago, it was 9%). This is a trend I've noticed for several years. People under 30 do not use IE.