 |
 |
I guess my general philosophy is that, for any browser with a decent market share (>1% ish), it's my responsibility that the website *works*. It is not my responsibility to make it look the same or run as fast in every browser, which means IE 8 can get flat colors instead of gradients or a fallback if it's not too time-intensive to write. Google's web apps are dropping IE 8 support; visit Google Docs in IE 8 or even an older Firefox and you'll see a warning. AFAIK, Google Search works fine in almost any browser. And the jQuery thing is true but the versions are off; 2.0 will drop oldIE support, 1.9 will be the maintained branch that keeps IE support. See their announcement: http://blog.jquery.com/2013/01/15/jquery-1-9-final-jquery-2-0-beta-migrate-final-released/ Best, Eric On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 12:14 PM, Bill Dueber <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > Keep in mind that many old-IE users are there because their corporate/gov > entity requires it. Our entire univeristy health/hospital complex, for > example, was on IE6 until...last year, maybe?... because they had several > critical pieces of software written as active-x components that only ran in > IE6. Which, sure, you can say that's dumb (because it is), but at the same > time we couldn't have a setup that made it hard for the doctors > and researchers use the library. > > > On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 10:22 AM, Michael Schofield <[log in to unmask] > >wrote: > > > Hi everyone, > > > > I'm having a change of heart. > > > > It is kind of sacrilegious, especially if you-like me-evangelize > > mobile-first, progressively enhanced web design, to throw alerts when > > users hit your site using IE7 / IE8 that encourage upgrading or changing > > browsers. Especially in libraries which are legally and morally mandated > to > > be the pinnacle of accessibility, your website should - er, ideally - be > > functional in every browser. That's certainly what I say when I give a > talk. > > > > But you know what? I'm kind of starting to not care. I understand that > > patrons blah blah might not blah blah have access to anything but IE7 or > > IE8 - but, you know, if they're on anything other than Windows 95 that > > isn't true. > > > > > > * Using Old IE makes you REALLY vulnerable to malicious software. > > > > * Spriting IEs that don't support gradients, background size, CSS > > shapes, etc. and spinning-up IE friendly stylesheets (which, admittedly, > is > > REALLY easy to do with Modernizr and SASS) can be a time-sink, which I am > > starting to think is more of a disservice to the tax- and tuition-payers > > that pad my wallet. > > > > I ensure that web services are 100% functional for deprecated browsers, > > and there is lingering pressure-especially from the public wing of our > > institution (which I totally understand and, in the past, sympathized > with) > > to present identical experiences across browsers. But you know what I did > > today? I sinned. From our global script, if modernizr detects that the > > browser is lt-ie9, it appends just below the navbar a subtle notice: "Did > > you know that your version of Internet Explorer is several years old? Why > > not give Firefox, Google Chrome, or Safari a try?"* > > > > In most circles this is considered the most heinous practice. But, you > > know, I can no longer passively stand by and see IE8 rank above the > others > > when I give the analytics report to our web committee. Nope. The first > step > > in this process was dropping all support for IE7 / Compatibility Mode a > few > > months ago. Now that Google, jQuery, and others will soon drop support > for > > IE8 - its time to politely join-in and make luddite patrons aware. IMHO, > > anyway. > > > > Already, old IE users get the raw end of the bargain because just viewing > > our website makes several additional server requests to pull additional > CSS > > and JS bloat, not to mention all the images graphics they don't support. > > Thankfully, IE8 is cool with icon fonts, otherwise I'd be weeping at my > > desk. > > > > Now, why haven't I extended this behavior to browsers with limited > support > > for, say, css gradients? That's trickier. A user might have the latest > HTC > > phone but opt to surf in Opera Mini. There are too many variables and too > > many webkits (etc.). With old IE you can infer that a.) the user has a > lap- > > or desktop, and [more importantly] b.) that old IE will never be a phone. > > > > Anyway, > > > > This is a really small-potatoes rant / action, but in a culture of all > > accessibility / never pressuring the user / whatever, it feels > momentous. I > > kind of feel stupid getting all high and mighty about it. What do you > think? > > > > Michael | Front End Librarian | www.ns4lib.com > > > > * Why, you may ask, did I not suggest IE9? Well, IE9 isn't exactly the > > experience we'd prefer them to have, but also according to our analytics > > the huge majority of old IE users are on Windows XP - where 9 isn't an > > option anyway. Eventually, down the road, we'll encourage IE9ers to > upgrade > > too (once things like flexbox become standard), and at least they should > > have the option to try IE10. > > > > > > -- > Bill Dueber > Library Systems Programmer > University of Michigan Library >