Good stuff IMO; those who continue to insist on using IEIn a world where technology is developing at such a pace, it really is time we stopped worrying about old, poorly built bits of software.
JQuery 2.0 Drops Support for IE6/7/8; API-Compatible with jQuery 1.9.
221–230 of 237 posts
Re: JQuery 2.0 Drops Support for IE6/7/8; API-Compatible with jQuery 1.9.
#222Earlier quoted context omitted.
The premise is that jQuery 1.9 and 2.0 are API-compatible, so you can do something like: New browsers will get a lighter download and a faster runtime. oldIE will still work with all the hacks required to make it work.
We deal with enough conditionals already. Besides, sharing the same API won't stop you from bumping into some bug that's present in one version and not the other. We'll have to deal with two codebases. Download and runtime speed are not a problem on the Desktop. They should have had the guts to admit that this is all about mobile. Their denial at the end of the post is symptomatic.
> We'll have to deal with two codebases.
You already have to deal with two codebases, IE8 and IE9. One can have bugs that the other doesn't.
Right now, you deal with:
* IE8 + jQuery 1.9 * IE9 + jQuery 1.9
I assume you are testing both? If so, then all you will have to do is instead test:
* IE8 + jQuery 2.0 * IE9 + jQuery 2.0
Re: JQuery 2.0 Drops Support for IE6/7/8; API-Compatible with jQuery 1.9.
#223Earlier quoted context omitted.
AFAICT, jQuery is a general purpose library, not one meant to build bleeding edge web apps.
There's different versions of jQuery. If you require a version that supports older browsers, you might not be able to use the bleeding-edge version. The current libraries will continue to work as they always have. There's no reason for newer versions to be limited by outdated browsers. Developers are free to choose the version they want to use.
New versions do not need to be limited by old browsers. Why not build a mutable API? Your browser doesn't support canvas? Oh, too bad, but the Canvas module will just be undefined so you, the developer, can choose what to do with your user.
Re: JQuery 2.0 Drops Support for IE6/7/8; API-Compatible with jQuery 1.9.
#224Earlier quoted context omitted.
1. You can buy things even if they're taxed. 2. You can buy things from places that are not kogan.
And when more places start doing this, or quietly dropping support for IE6, 7 and 8? People are going to start clamoring to be able to install a decent browser.
I am extremely skeptical that more places will start imposing an IE tax. It's simply too unfriendly toward customers. And rational people drop browser support based on usage stats, because it's a cost-benefit decision, which means that this clamoring will never happen.
Re: JQuery 2.0 Drops Support for IE6/7/8; API-Compatible with jQuery 1.9.
#225Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
That "single box" needs to be able to support enough instances for our entire development team. This is more hardware and IT maintenance costs. Also, if we are doing network maintenance and wifi goes down, developers have to stop working. The point is - even that solution costs time and money.
My point was that Virtualbox with the free images is still vastly cheaper than VmWare Fusion + a bunch of Windows 7 licenses.
(And your internal network is all wifi? Seriously? With designers shuffling big files around? Then you have bigger problems)
Re: JQuery 2.0 Drops Support for IE6/7/8; API-Compatible with jQuery 1.9.
#226Earlier quoted context omitted.
I dont have any experience developing for govt, so for all I know the barrier against installation of CF may be insurmountable. Have you ever tried? It really is extremely painless and would result in a net + in terms of security.
Definitely insurmountable in the environment of many of our users. They're doctors working with medical data, so IT has to certify anything new installed. So they're stuck with IE6, because that was the latest & greatest when large custom web-based applications really took off, so they're all certified for IE6 only and would have to be replaced at enormous cost before the users can be allowed to upgrade (or install c…
This. We would ask our users why they use IE and if they would switch to using Chrome/Firefox or CF. Many of them in public education or state government offices are in a situation where the conversation is a no-starter.
Re: JQuery 2.0 Drops Support for IE6/7/8; API-Compatible with jQuery 1.9.
#227Earlier quoted context omitted.
At the same time, the pace of the cutting edge grows faster and faster. It better grow pretty fast. By late 2012, jQuery will still be supporting a browser released in 2001 but by early 2013 it won't support a browser that was only replaced by MS in 2011. Corporate America is not IE8's only domain. There are a lot of people who don't even know what a browser is. And IE8 was the default browser on Windows 7.
>> And IE8 was the default browser on Windows 7. Hasn't Microsoft decided to auto-update IE? In that case, most people who don't know what a browser is will already be using IE9 on Windows 7 by 2013 or is there reason to believe otherwise?
Yes. IE9 was an optional update.
Re: JQuery 2.0 Drops Support for IE6/7/8; API-Compatible with jQuery 1.9.
#228Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think they just realized they can continue to support the old IE versions while other JS libraries advance in functionality, or they can stay competitive.
Which other libraries would those be? (I'm serious.) There were several fairly well known libraries a couple of years ago, but as far as I can tell, jQuery won that battle decisively. It has almost 100% penetration in the projects I'm familiar with that use a general purpose JS library, and it seems to be the default for articles and blog posts I find on-line these days too. Part of that success came from the ecosyst…
> If there is something out there that is better by a wide enough margin to justify giving up that established ecosystem, I'd love to hear about it. The ecosystem has plenty of imperfections, but I haven't come across anything yet that seems nearly comprehensive enough to displace the incumbent here.
David Mark's My Library[0] is the best DOM library available by a wide margin. It has supreme browser support, and it's "modular" with a custom builder. The code is so solid that many people have borrowed from it, including the jQuery project and myself.
I've also created a DOM library, but with a more limited feature set (it's only a few months old). See my submissions for details.
Re: JQuery 2.0 Drops Support for IE6/7/8; API-Compatible with jQuery 1.9.
#229Earlier quoted context omitted.
>[IE8] was released in 2009! Yep, it's ancient. Chrome and Firefox are on average about 3 weeks old. IE8 is over 50 times older. >jQuery's main raison d'être might have gone out the window. Normalization was just one part. It still provides a much nicer API. There are also events, AJAX, effects, and some useful helpers. [].slice.call(document.querySelectorAll('p')).forEach(function (el) {console.log(el);}); vs $('p')…
Agreed, [].slice.call is show-offy and pointless. Array.prototype.slice.call is the way to go. I hope you realize that by saving yourself a few characters you've sacrificed an unknown amount of performance from your site. For such a simple query I'd use getElementsByTagName instead.
>Array.prototype.slice.call is the way to go.
The point was to demonstrate that the API is somewhat flawed since it doesn't return something usable. The "clever" short version was used to show that you have to write quite a bit more code - even if you make it really ugly.
>For such a simple query I'd use getElementsByTagName instead.
It's a generic example. The selector was kept short and simple for the sake of brevity.
Re: JQuery 2.0 Drops Support for IE6/7/8; API-Compatible with jQuery 1.9.
#230Earlier quoted context omitted.
>[IE8] was released in 2009! Yep, it's ancient. Chrome and Firefox are on average about 3 weeks old. IE8 is over 50 times older. >jQuery's main raison d'être might have gone out the window. Normalization was just one part. It still provides a much nicer API. There are also events, AJAX, effects, and some useful helpers. [].slice.call(document.querySelectorAll('p')).forEach(function (el) {console.log(el);}); vs $('p')…
Um, when did we forget how to write our own abstractions? It’s not black and white, either jQuery or vanilla JS with no helpers.
Yes, we can of course reinvent our own untested and undocumented triangular wheels.
But is that really the best possible use of your time?