151–160 of 226 posts
I cannot believe IE8 is now considered 'old'. It is the second most used browser+version on our site, and has about 80% as much usage as the leader, IE9. Can't see IE8 support being droppable for many years yet.
Our users: IE8: 40% IE9: 25% Chrome: 15% Firefox: 10% iOS: 5% Others: 5% The majority of our clients are businesses with 50 to 500 employees in Australasia.
This is a welcome change. Considering the market share of IE 6, 7 and 8 is pretty minuscule and Google dropping support for IE8 back in November 2012 should be cause enough to drop it from jQuery too. It's great to hear they'll be supporting the older 1.9 branch for users who need to support older versions of IE as not everyone has the luxury of being able to ditch older versions of IE like that. There's no cause for…
Is 31.37% pretty minuscule? I don't think so... Source: http://www.netmarketshare.com/
StatCounter tracks 3 million websites vs 40k for NetMarketShare.
[1] http://gs.statcounter.com/
[2] http://gs.statcounter.com/#browser_version_partially_combine...
[3] http://gs.statcounter.com/#browser_version_partially_combine...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Our users: IE8: 40% IE9: 25% Chrome: 15% Firefox: 10% iOS: 5% Others: 5% The majority of our clients are businesses with 50 to 500 employees in Australasia.
Have you tried educating your users about other browsers? Has it worked?
We presume the IT staff of our clients know what they are doing (and if they don't, why waste our time and theirs?).
We did drop IE6 support late last year once usage dropped well below 1%, and now that IE7 users have just dropped below 1%, we are warning that we will be dropping IE7 support.
We try not to presume to tell our clients how to run their businesses, and we try to make it effortless for them to use our service... that is the point of browser based services.
> If you want, you can serve 2.0 to newer browsers and 1.9 to older ones using our conditional comment trick I'm really surprised they would suggest doing this. The two APIs are quite different since many functions from the 1.x branch have been removed in the 2.x or sometime behave differently (for instance `$("some bold text")` will be parsed as HTML in 1.x but considered a CSS selector in 2.x). Basically, I really…
Am I the only one who can not use Closure Compiler with jquery 2.0.0? ( http://closure-compiler.appspot.com/ )
You can try it out on http://skalman.github.io/UglifyJS-online/. It's just a light-weight wrapper.
> If you want, you can serve 2.0 to newer browsers and 1.9 to older ones using our conditional comment trick I'm really surprised they would suggest doing this. The two APIs are quite different since many functions from the 1.x branch have been removed in the 2.x or sometime behave differently (for instance `$("some bold text")` will be parsed as HTML in 1.x but considered a CSS selector in 2.x). Basically, I really…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You're missing an important part of this. There's a large number of companies whose web capabilities need to support people who use their website while working at the companies that have older versions of IE. The company I'm with has embedded video players on a large number of web retailer's pages (we're hiring a javascript+flash developer in Austin, TX right now, particularly around video players. If you're interest…
There's a large number of companies whose web capabilities need to support people who use their website while working at the companies that have older versions of IE. Like who? Honest question. I know that not all users currently have modern browsers (which is total bullshit, by the way--with free, open-source browsers as well as Chrome and the like, there is no excuse for this) but this isn't something we should tre…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is 31.37% pretty minuscule? I don't think so... Source: http://www.netmarketshare.com/
Statcounter[1] puts IE8 at ~10%, 12% for the US[2]. In some markets it's even lower[3]. This matches what I see from non-tech client websites. For anything related to software, IE as a whole is close to zero. StatCounter tracks 3 million websites vs 40k for NetMarketShare. [1] http://gs.statcounter.com/ [2] http://gs.statcounter.com/#browser_version_partially_combine... [3] http://gs.statcounter.com/#browser_version_…
This is a welcome change. Considering the market share of IE 6, 7 and 8 is pretty minuscule and Google dropping support for IE8 back in November 2012 should be cause enough to drop it from jQuery too. It's great to hear they'll be supporting the older 1.9 branch for users who need to support older versions of IE as not everyone has the luxury of being able to ditch older versions of IE like that. There's no cause for…
Is 31.37% pretty minuscule? I don't think so... Source: http://www.netmarketshare.com/
Well one of the websites I'm working on is a fairly big one in germany and only about 4% of all visitors are using IE8 or below. Guess what! We now only support IE9+.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It looks to me like he's worried (or saying that other people are/might be worried) about how long 1.9 will continue to be supported for.
Well, it's an open source community project so the answer is obvious. 1.9 will be supported for as long as people care about to support it. Do those complaining want to somehow tell the developers what they should be working on? Where does the sense of entitlement come? Even if the whole core team insists on going 2.0 only at some point (high unlikely), it's not like it needs any highly technical skills for intereste…
This is what worries me. You only need to spend an hour on HN or Reddit to see that web devs couldn't care less about legacy browsers, even when most businesses need to support them.
I support the decision to fork jQuery, but I too am worried about whether the 1.x branch will continue to be supported, and also whether we'll see people releasing plugins that work well for both versions. It sounds like a 1.9 plugin will largely work on 2.0, and vice versa, but we'll have to see.