Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

JQuery 2.0 Drops Support for IE6/7/8; API-Compatible with jQuery 1.9.

blog.jquery.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 237 posts

Re: JQuery 2.0 Drops Support for IE6/7/8; API-Compatible with jQuery 1.9.

#151

Post by gouranga »

sanswork wrote: post #147
gouranga wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Forced obsolescence doesn't mean people aren't still using it and it doesn't mean that because Microsoft stop patching that it's still vulnerable. Using it after April 2014 is not a problem. The NHS in the UK has over 1 million Windows XP deployments out there still on NHSnet which is a nationwide secure private WAN. A lot of software vendors have to support that. Your view is popular but naive.

Ok how about this then. If you're still supporting an unsupported OS why do you care about using the cutting edge version of a JS library?

Because historically jQuery has been a buggy pos that we've had to work around a lot.

Re: JQuery 2.0 Drops Support for IE6/7/8; API-Compatible with jQuery 1.9.

#152

Post by louischatriot »

tomjen3 wrote: post #135
Supermighty wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, it's not difficult to support oldIE. Single Column, nothing fancy. But the business people don't want that. They want it to look identical in every browser, and the web designers are scared shitless of losing money to tell them different. The problem is that business people don't know that hours of extra work are required to do this. And when they are told they don't care.

An old boring website? No, that isn't that difficult. Try to do an interactive webap.

Definitely. Something as simple as a bookmarklet can become hell with all the IE-specific rules for cross domain messaging, third party cookies and the like. We're still trying to be IE-compatible but man it does take a hell lot of time.

Re: JQuery 2.0 Drops Support for IE6/7/8; API-Compatible with jQuery 1.9.

#153

Post by salmanapk »

apendleton wrote: post #130
salmanapk wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Good point. BTW that could be written like this:- [].forEach.call(document.querySelectorAll('p'), function (el) { console.log(el); });

Array.prototype.forEach didn't arrive in IE until 9, so if the point is that you can do anything that jquery can do, this won't work.

huh? Might want to check the comment I was replying to.

Re: JQuery 2.0 Drops Support for IE6/7/8; API-Compatible with jQuery 1.9.

#154

Post by sanswork »

gouranga wrote: post #151
sanswork wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ok how about this then. If you're still supporting an unsupported OS why do you care about using the cutting edge version of a JS library?

Because historically jQuery has been a buggy pos that we've had to work around a lot.

That argument doesn't really hold though. You're not upgrading your base(the OS) to fix the problems with it yet you're complaining about a minor(in the grand scheme of things) library removing support in a modern version. If your network is closed off like the NHS one you mention, why not just stick with the old versions you've already fixed?

It's like complaining your 56' Chevy doesn't work with the new battery technology coming out in the Chevy Volt.

Re: JQuery 2.0 Drops Support for IE6/7/8; API-Compatible with jQuery 1.9.

#155

Post by akash123 »

chris_wot wrote: post #131
notJim wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We're talking about supporting IE8, not every version of every browser that's ever been made. Where I work, we support browsers with over 2% of traffic, which means IE7,8,9, Chrome (latest), FF (latest and possibly 3.6 or something like that) and Safari (latest, IIRC, possibly latest + 1 older version.) The last 4 are largely the same, except for small bugs, and minor visual degradation is fine for the IEs. If your w…

I might have been a little unclear - I'm not currently developing (hope to soon). Of course it depends on your market - if your market is a whole bunch of corporations that have IE8, then use jquery 1.9.x... if 2% of your clients bring in a substantial amount of money and it's worth your while, then by all means develop for them. But at some point, it becomes a zero-sum game. I believe this is what is happening with…

fgnfgfghfghfgh

Re: JQuery 2.0 Drops Support for IE6/7/8; API-Compatible with jQuery 1.9.

#156

Post by zanny »

barryfandango wrote: post #65
zanny wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here is the magic: IE 6 - 8 are not popular browsers. They are only used if the person using them doesn't know what a browser is. And all it would take for them to switch is one webpage they use popping up "You are using an outdated unsupported vulnerable awful browser, here are Firefox or Chrome, take your pick and don't ruin your web experience any more". And the corporate clients could finally get through their he…

Unfortunately it's not a matter of sticking fingers in your ears, I can tell you. If you've got 50-100,000 workstations to worry about, and a couple of intranet apps that only run in older versions (there are more of these than you might think,) upgrading IE could be a fabulously large and expensive project. Still you gotta catch up at some point. The product I work on is dropping IE8 in January, which will cause som…

It isn't sticking fingers in ears, it is yelling at business that software can not be treated like vending machines where you buy one model that lasts decades on end regardless of what new revisions come out. The vulnerabilities and inefficiencies of the old IE browsers are detrimental to the businesses that are resisting change, and the entire web supporting the bad habit is why change doesn't come.

Re: JQuery 2.0 Drops Support for IE6/7/8; API-Compatible with jQuery 1.9.

#157

Post by _puk »

chris_wot wrote: post #129
chris_wot wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What, nobody uses Windows update?

Oh come on - this is voted down? Firefox and Chrome do automatic updates, and almost never has issues. That's because they stick to standards in an open and transparent manner. Why wouldn't Windows Update be able to do the same thing? Are the Microsoft software developers really that bad that they can't do what the Chrome and Firefox developers can do already?

This grates me.. I'm sure the MS devs are more than capable of doing what Chrome / Firefox "do already".

This looks far more likely to be a political decision to avoid whatever backlash even a single failed update would produce.

Help, i've lost all 93 of my open tabs..

Re: JQuery 2.0 Drops Support for IE6/7/8; API-Compatible with jQuery 1.9.

#158

Post by steve-sanderson »

gouranga wrote: post #151
sanswork wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ok how about this then. If you're still supporting an unsupported OS why do you care about using the cutting edge version of a JS library?

Because historically jQuery has been a buggy pos that we've had to work around a lot.

Really? That seems a little harsh. It's free, it's open source, and it's made web development hugely more productive for massive numbers of us for the last 5 years or so.

Re: JQuery 2.0 Drops Support for IE6/7/8; API-Compatible with jQuery 1.9.

#160

Post by gouranga »

sanswork wrote: post #154
gouranga wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because historically jQuery has been a buggy pos that we've had to work around a lot.

That argument doesn't really hold though. You're not upgrading your base(the OS) to fix the problems with it yet you're complaining about a minor(in the grand scheme of things) library removing support in a modern version. If your network is closed off like the NHS one you mention, why not just stick with the old versions you've already fixed? It's like complaining your 56' Chevy doesn't work with the new battery tec…

The problem comes is that the older versions that we've fixed have the fixes integrated in later versions.

We really don't want to have to maintain the versions that we've fixed as that kills the entire value proposition of using it in the first place.

It's nothing like the 56' Chevy / Volt analogy. The technology is the same - they just can't be bothered with supporting one vendor's product any more.

Post reply on HN