111–120 of 151 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Bob sells software. To run that software Ann needs X, Y, and Z. When Bob tells Ann that she must have X, Y, and Z to run the software he is giving her important information. When Bob tells Ann (who is blind, or deaf, or has a motor-control disability (or just likes the software she uses), but who also buys the software her engineers use) that she cannot get information about the product that he sells because she uses…
This all sounds nice and reasonable, until you realize that these companies have to pay people to actually make it work in a browser that's 10 years old. Their website is a product, and they can choose who to offer it to. This is like complaining that this android app won't work on your 10 year old dumbphone. Yes, it sucks that some screen reading software depends on outdated browsers, but the fault lies at the manuf…
Still waiting for someone to tell me exactly which brand of "assistive technology" absolutely requires IE<8, and why Chrome Frame can't fix it.
I doubt their userbase using IE7 is large enough for this to be a big deal. This tax's real goal is PR for Kogan.
Either way, I bet the developers had fun with this feature.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
But IE6 won't even run on new versions of Windows. You'd need to run up a VM on a user's machine with a copy of XP. What's the refresh cycle at DoD? Two decades?
If you have thousands of machines running an OS that works perfectly well for your purposes, then you only upgrade when support lapses, which is 2014 in this case.
I've also seen universities with faculty and staff still using IE7 not because of infrastructure requirements, but just because nobody had come around to upgrade because they hadn't bitched loudly enough.
I doubt their userbase using IE7 is large enough for this to be a big deal. This tax's real goal is PR for Kogan.
It's about converting one IE7 user at a time. Either way, I bet the developers had fun with this feature.
I doubt their userbase using IE7 is large enough for this to be a big deal. This tax's real goal is PR for Kogan.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Most people aren't forced to browse the web by their company.
You're not forced to enter a shop, either, but it's mighty inconvenient to be prevented from doing so.
You're free to do whatever you want on your own personal time. You don't have to shop online while you're at work (and it's a huge security risk to do so), so complaining that it's inconvenient doesn't really fly.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
not really - during the browser wars, ie had such a large share of the market that if you didn't support it, your site was considered broken, not the browser.
No it didn't. If it had, it wouldn't have been a "war" - it would have just been IE just dominating. In fact, Netscape started with a massive lead. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usage_share_of_web_browsers#GV...
a) Try to get the web hooked on nonstandard behavior such as lenient parsing.
b) Charge money for the browser.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
While you may be right about browser elitism your tone suggests coder elitism. Yeah, we can often allow sites to degrade gracefully but the old web is dying. The days of static sites are almost totally behind us. We're entering a new era in development and sometimes supporting those old browsers is more trouble than it's worth. Penalizing users of older browsers gives them incentive to upgrade. It really is a win win…
I realize that a certain line must be drawn. However, a large subset of browsers can still be supported. I've found that I can support scripted pages until IE 4, wherein `throw` and `try/catch` are not supported. Niceties such as `Object.prototype.hasOwnProperty` and `Function.prototype.call` were introduced in IE 6⁰, so I can accept complaints about IE 5. A SyntaxError followed by a termination of script seem accept…