Forum Moderators: open
Both sites have enough traffic for such analysis (2-4k/day).
I still use IE6 only because I don’t want to have my site broken there, and because I assume that in the very most cases, if it works in IE6, it’ll work in IE7.
Yet, I see sites of reputable companies being broken in IE6. Those would include some of the major affiliate networks.
I wonder why they forget about such considerable number of their users. It can only work against them.
I will continue using IE6 until I see a drop to below 5% (of total IE), at least.
I wonder why they forget about such considerable number of their users.
The answer to this almost invariably always begins with, "They need to . . . . "
- update their browser
- get with the technology man!
- Use FireFox
- modify their environment to suit ours.
We're all hoping IE6 will go away soon, but agreed, it shouldn't be ignored. Many do, and justify it from (IMO) an arrogant standpoint.
Many do, and justify it from (IMO) an arrogant standpoint.
We all have to draw our own lines about low to let the lowest common denominator get before moving on. Carrying obsolete users can, and does, become counter productive; a drag on progress for all. Depends upon the site, the purpose, the $$$. Arrogant - sometimes. Smart play to dump obsolete users and raise standards - always - when the time is right. That time differs according to the designer, owner, user base of the specific site, $$$.....
The only good thing about IE6 right now is that if the site works on it, then it is probably bullet proof and will work on anything:)) But, with one exception on my ecommerce sites, IE6 is now under 25% of IE users, and we are getting really close to moving on and raising coding standards. The closer one gets to the bottom of the barrel, the closer one gets to users that aren't worth having, IMO. They have lower ticket averages, are higher maintenance, and the point always comes when I am fine with their going somewhere else.
Arrogant - maybe - but we would rather put our efforts into upgrading what we offer the overwhelming majority of our users than carry the deadwood too far. It's only worth hacking in conditionals for IE6 for so long and it's time is running out. IE6 is like an old worn out toy. Finally take it away and people will simply have to get over it.
When they visit my site with an outdated browser. I redirect them to a page explain why a updated browser is safer and provide links to the newest release.
I also give them a link to ignore the warning page and enter my site.
I have even seen sites with splash pages that list the minimum requirements to browse the site... like flash x.x and js enabled.. that kind of stuff.
I am pretty much done supporting IE6 and if a client wants it I will charge extra for any extra work.
In my contracts I no longer list IE6 as a browser I will make the site compliant with.
Arrogant? I don't think so, just proactive about progress.
If AOL had their way, their customers would still be viewing your site in Netscape 8. IE8 is coming out soon and we are talking about IE6?
[edited by: Demaestro at 5:14 pm (utc) on Sep. 10, 2008]
Arrogant? I don't think so, just proactive about progress.
I visit a lot of sites with Opera 9.52, or Firefox 3, or the latest Safari, or Kmeleon. When I get those warning messages, I find it upsetting to be asked to upgrade to something older or lousier than what I'm already using.
So I hope your browser tests are technically thorough and you don't bounce people to a warning who are really doing just fine.
If you came to one of these sites with Netscape 4 it would let you in without redirect since I am not looking to trap that browser. Don't want to maintain a huge list like that but IE6 and FF2 I encourage people to update.
I also set a cookie global to all the sites that I do this on so that if a user ever skipped the warning page on siteA then goes to a unrelated siteB site then siteB will see the cookie from siteA and not bug the user with another redirect attempt. This of course only works in my network of sites but at least I am not hounding people about it too bad.
we are talking about IE6?
We're talking about 1/4 of total IE users. From that standpoint, I don't care about what's safe or not, what renders better or not.
That is because those 25% don't care or better say, don't know. They just use their PC for whatever their need is. They don’t care about upgrades until they buy new computer.
My goal is to get their page rendered properly so they do whatever needs to be done on the site.
It's like running a collision shop and returning gas run vehicles but fixing hydrogen based only.
From $$$ perspective, based on percentage of browser usage, it would be better to turn down Firefox users regardless of its version, then IE6.
I see no single business justification for not supporting IE6, fully. IMO, not just that is arrogant, but ignorant, too.
That was exactly the cause of my post. Not really to comment what I do (except giving some background), but to ask why other companies DO NOT do it, while people are definitely out, not being aware their browsers are outdated.
I’m aware of corp IT managers enjoying their “free” MSDN software and installing beta’s onto their (second) PCs, putting customers behind and pushing the latest to their marketing and other depts while they all say “uh”. Plus, pumping up the budget.
In real life, once everybody stops supporting XP and less than 10% or even 5% of people run it, then we can talk about “forget IE6”.
And yes, Windows XP is the exact reason why people still run IE6. All those that said NO to IE7, for whatever reason (including automatic updates turned OFF).
In $$$, if our earning per visitor is $1, with proper support for IE6, it may be $1.25. Certainly, all this minus the fact that many pages would render properly anyway, regardless the browser support.
It would be nice if browser developers did bit more of collaboration, all to make life easier for their customers, including web developers.
If we say (or know) that Firefox renders stuff well, what is Microsoft doing? Like it’s a big deal for MS’s team to render stuff like Firefox.
Actually would it really be a big deal to make i.e. IE8 do it in the way so we don’t need any IE fix in place?
There come times and places where I diverge from how far I am willing to carry that through 'graceful degradation' though. Nevertheless, your point on 'pretty design' and 'ego' is well taken, especially on money sites. That's what my 'play' sites are for. Ego is fine for one group. No BS, personal or otherwise is required for the other:))
the content is always accessible to *ANY* browser or client
Not starting with that as a base of reference at minimum is probably a huge mistake
That's it! :)
I have too large a volume to keep all this old stuff working. I have picked my supported browsers and I am not ashamed.
Having graceful degradation is great but it also results in spaghetti code with more exceptions then the English language.
If flash version > 6 do this
If flash version <= 6 do that
If js version > x do this
If ie6 do this
If safari on windows do this
If gecko do this
If netscape do this
If cookies turned off do this
<snip 50 more lines of this crap>
At some point you have to draw the line and bil while I completely agree with where you are coming from, I am over hand holding the progressively challenged.
All my career I have been calling for more standards compliant browsers and now that we are almost there I don't know why I should be defending leaving that old crap in the dust.
Also I get about 14% IE6 usage over most of my sites, a little lower then some but on some of the older sites it is as high as 50% IE users using 6. But I have also had 6 unique visitors to one site this month using IE5.01 I am not going to add code to that site to support it though.
