191–200 of 237 posts
The real losers will probably be the public libraries that provide Internet access, but don't have the resources to afford equipment or manpower to upgrade machines and browsers.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You realize IE8 is the default browser that shipped with Windows 7, right?
I fail to see your reasoning. IE6 was (I believe) the default in Windows XP, which people are still using. Should we demand that JQuery support every default browser on every default OS until they're all end-of-lifed?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why not use chrome frame for ie users? If you're building a 'sophisticated web app' then you really are nuts to try to support way back to ie7. Chrome frame takes about 30-45 sec to DL & install. Doesn't require a browser restart and doesn't require admin rights. Its incredibly slick. and then you're free to work with HTML5 and CSS3 in ie6+
We have no control over whether or not our users use chrome frame. Asking them to install it isn't always an option, especially for government installations.
Even though jQuery handles most of my cross-browser issues I still have to test and worry, create workarounds and lots of additional code, consider it in my architecture, take care in the design and handle it in the application lifecycle.
I have been looking for and at able framework that DON’T support old browsers. Thank you for not supporting IE-ancient in your 2.+ releases, I will continue using you jQuery!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
FYI: you didn't mention any numbers like you promised.
Sorry - you are right. 1) 90% of our visual front-end bugs come from IE, sometimes only showing up in certain versions of IE7. 2) Our mac developers either need a license for VMware fusion or multiple boxes/VMs to test IE 7/8/9 which of course behave very differently. Maintaining these boxes, Windows licenses, and VMware licenses adds additional stress to IT, and the context switching for our developers is expensive.…
Sorry, but this is a disaster. Dropping support for IE6 may be OK, IE7 is a bit too soon, but IE8? I haven't tested my stuff on IE6 and IE7 for a long time, but I still do it on IE8 everyday. It was released in 2009! And it's decent enough, PNG transparencies, etc. jQuery's main raison d'être might have gone out the window.
It's a little like saying "the main sole goal of your existence".
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you look at the second conditional comment, it will not be parsed as a comment in browsers without conditional comment support. In other words, it will correctly use jQuery 2.0, like any other browser without conditional comment support.
It's a conditional conditional comment. I feel ill.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sorry - you are right. 1) 90% of our visual front-end bugs come from IE, sometimes only showing up in certain versions of IE7. 2) Our mac developers either need a license for VMware fusion or multiple boxes/VMs to test IE 7/8/9 which of course behave very differently. Maintaining these boxes, Windows licenses, and VMware licenses adds additional stress to IT, and the context switching for our developers is expensive.…
For 2: Any reason why your developers can't use VirtualBox with the free IE-test VM images that Microsoft provides? I don't know if the license allows them to run on a non-MS OS, but you can at the very least have several of them run on a single box and enable RDP in VirtualBox.
The point is - even that solution costs time and money.
I don't know if I can get behind this or not. I understand their desire but I don't see this as a viable option just yet. I'm not so concerned with 2.0 and 1.9 as you can load the right one, but what about when 2.1 comes out? Are they going to back-port all the new features to 1.9.1? If not then I now have a big fragmentation issue if I rely on anything specific to 2.1. Don't forget that IE 8 is the last version XP w…
> JQuery has just set a time limit on proper web access for an entire OS. What time limit? The blog post says jQuery 1.9 will be supported even after 2.0 is released, and that the two APIs will be the same.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You know what? At this point I'm not sure it's worth catering to people who "don't even know what a browser is." They've had nearly 20 years to hop on the bandwagon and start understanding this crazy "internet" thing, and they haven't. A person that behind the times isn't going to buy anything on the internet anyway.
I can't imagine the internet is very useful or fun for those people either. Every other site must be broken in some way. And that's still not enough for them to ask someone about it.
I'm not much of a car guy, but I like my car just fine. Someone who's really into cars and has test-driven hundreds of them could probably point out dozens of deficiencies in my car and the way I drive it that I'm totally oblivious to. He might not like my car at all, but I'm happy with it and see no reason to 'upgrade' it.
Same goes for any other product field, hobby, interest, etc. People who are more interested are better acquainted with what's available and the way to get the best experience, and people who are less interested are happy enough with their point of view and oblivious to any short-comings.