191–200 of 226 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Exactly. What does "several" mean? Are we talking two years? Five? A decade? Until jQuery changes their minds?
IE8 dropped under 10% for me last month. Several years seems fine to me.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You wouldn't say it like that, I hope. You would say, “Here's a link to a browser upgrade that will allow you to enjoy the best product we can offer you. It's completely free, and takes only a few minutes to install!” Also, IE8 accounts for less than 10% of browser usage worldwide now, so the odds of a company having it be 40% are rather slim, unless they specifically target enterprise in which case they dug their ow…
Are you really going to give them better experience (IE8 vs whatever latest chrome)? What is it going to be?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How relevant will IE8 be in just two years, though? If it's 3-5 which is what it sounds like, then that's just more of a nail in the coffin for IE8 support.
> How relevant will IE8 be in just two years, though? That very much depends on your target audience. For home users IE8 is pretty much dead already, the only subset of people stuck there are the few who are using XP and have not switched to Firefox/Chrome/other. As more and more game-y things on the web start demanding newer features rather than creating/using/supporting fallback options for IE8 (canvas in particula…
Once you're on non-antique Windows, there's nothing preventing you from going all the way to IE10 which, again, starts getting into situations where not upgrading for security reasons starts approaching negligence.
So I find that the majority of people are missing a very LARGE improvement that I value far beyond any of the stated benefits by the jQuery team: -One of the most popular libraries is dropping support for IE 6,7, and 8. Thus, yet another cornerstone of the web is going to push users forward and increase the chance that those miserable browsers will disappear. The most disturbing thing I find is that there are develop…
The main problem I see is that IE9 does not work on windows XP. How long will we continue to see Windows XP machines in the wild?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Don't get me wrong. I agree with you, and I don't think it's really a problem. Hell, if it is it's not a problem to use both libraries, and to serve 1.x to those using older browsers. It's just a shift in the core mentality of what people view jQuery as. Many of us use jQuery because it works, regardless of what browser a user is on. For a lot of others, jQuery IS JavaScript. If they want to do something on their sit…
I think we'll get a lot less from the open source community if they think they have to support all legacy crap for all time. Eventually there comes a time to move on. We're just arguing about if its time yet. People can still keep using IE 6/7 for the shitty inhouse apps written for it by their company a decade ago, and use a damn modern browser for everything else.
You should try working for an agency that handles large clients.
A year ago I was still building pages for an airport that needed to support IE6 to a functional level. We charged a huge number for that support, but this was such a large client that had a proven need for it (analytics and sales data) that they would happily pay several thousand for us to build a section that supported these users. Luckily we left that client, but we still have a number of clients that want IE7 browser support.
I'd like nothing more than to ditch older browsers, but until XP dies many of us will still have to support older browsers. Once XP is gone, the older browsers are gone.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There is zero problem with hosting your own copy. Lots of people do. The main advantage to using a CDN is that a single copy can be cached across multiple websites, meaning that the first time someone visits your site, there's a good chance your version of jQuery already sits on their computer. Plus, the Google CDN will often serve content faster than your own site. And, since jQuery is now so "integral" to websites,…
You can use a CDN and fallback to local if it goes down. http://stackoverflow.com/questions/5257923/how-to-load-local...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't work on jQuery any more but I (and I know many others on the jQuery team) all build web sites as part of their day jobs (and, thus, need to continuing supporting IE 8). It's going to be a very long time before support for the 1.x branch is dropped. But hopefully soon, death of IE 8 willing.
Is there any list of companies that currently require old versions of IE? I know a lot of hospitals do, and people handwave banks and whatnot. If there was a big list of "These people still use old versions of IE", then we could: A. Properly shame/advertise for attack/avoid getting work from these people. B. Expose a dedicated market audience for compatibility-minded dev shops Either of these would seem to be a Good…
I don't understand why the smaller file size is such a big deal. The file is going to be cached, and with the use of CDNs, is more than likely already cached before the client ever visits my website. So if the Query team is still going to support these browsers in 1.9, why even make the 2.0 version?
So I find that the majority of people are missing a very LARGE improvement that I value far beyond any of the stated benefits by the jQuery team: -One of the most popular libraries is dropping support for IE 6,7, and 8. Thus, yet another cornerstone of the web is going to push users forward and increase the chance that those miserable browsers will disappear. The most disturbing thing I find is that there are develop…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>They will stay on XP for ages because it works with everything they bought when they last "modernized" their practice ten years ago. AFAIK the only reason XP was supported for more than that was the Longhorn delays.
Many of these people don't care about "support" from Microsoft. They care about compatibility with some piece of mission critical software, whether it's a DOS-based app, an old FoxPro database that won't run on a newer release (compatibility mode what?), or an ancient version of Peachtree that can't be upgraded without going through ten intermediate versions. Whether it's XP, 98, 95, NT, OS9, SCO, OS/360, etc. isn't…
Or, for a significant number of businesses, support for some expensive custom hardware that came with a software package that runs on (for example) Windows XP, but doesn't work because of the device driver architecture changes on Windows 7. The odds of places like that upgrading just to get a new version of IE are approximately zero, and even less if part of that software solution actually uses IE specifically.