Internet Explorer 7.0 adoption prospects

Discussion in 'NZ Computing' started by Lawrence D'Oliveiro, Oct 12, 2006.

  1. Anybody started testing their Web sites against MSIE7? According to this
    <http://arstechnica.com/journals/microsoft.ars/2006/8/22/5078>, there are
    some backward-incompatible CSS changes which were necessary to fix bugs.

    Myself, just a few weeks ago I did my most major bit of JavaScript/DHTML
    programming, involving adding a photo-cropping function to a client's Web
    site. Took a few days to put together a mockup that worked OK in Firefox.
    Then a few more days to munge it in various ugly ways, introducing
    deliberately wrong numbers to work around bugs in IE6. I'm not really
    looking forward to seeing how it'll render in IE7...
     
    Lawrence D'Oliveiro, Oct 12, 2006
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    MaHogany Guest

    On Thu, 12 Oct 2006 22:02:27 +1300, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:

    > Anybody started testing their Web sites against MSIE7? According to this
    > <http://arstechnica.com/journals/microsoft.ars/2006/8/22/5078>, there are
    > some backward-incompatible CSS changes which were necessary to fix bugs.


    Why are you writing pages to suit broken browsers?

    You should be developing sites that conform to published standards - not
    developing sites that conform to broken browsers.


    Ma Hogany

    --
    "The average user doesn't know what he wants. The average user wants
    fries with that, if prompted."
     
    MaHogany, Oct 12, 2006
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    MaHogany Guest

    On Thu, 12 Oct 2006 22:02:27 +1300, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:

    > there are
    > some backward-incompatible CSS changes which were necessary to fix bugs.


    I understand that IE7 wil also have at lest *some* CSS3 stuff.

    Konquerer is already 100% CSS3 compliant, and Firefox & Opera have most of
    CSS3 already implemented.

    It's really only M$IE that is lagging behind in supporting the published
    standards.


    Ma Hogany

    --
    "The average user doesn't know what he wants. The average user wants
    fries with that, if prompted."
     
    MaHogany, Oct 12, 2006
    #3
  4. In message <>, MaHogany wrote:

    > Konquerer is already 100% CSS3 compliant...


    I just checked with Konqueror 3.5.4, and it doesn't seem to pay any
    attention to the CSS3 opacity attribute.
     
    Lawrence D'Oliveiro, Oct 12, 2006
    #4
  5. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    juicyjuice Guest

    "MaHogany" <> wrote in message
    news:p...
    > On Thu, 12 Oct 2006 22:02:27 +1300, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
    >
    >> Anybody started testing their Web sites against MSIE7? According to this
    >> <http://arstechnica.com/journals/microsoft.ars/2006/8/22/5078>, there are
    >> some backward-incompatible CSS changes which were necessary to fix bugs.

    >
    > Why are you writing pages to suit broken browsers?
    >
    > You should be developing sites that conform to published standards - not
    > developing sites that conform to broken browsers.
    >
    >

    That would be nice in a perfect world, but unfortuantely most of the planet
    uses the 'broken browser' therefore you have to write a broken version of
    the site so most of the planet can see it.
     
    juicyjuice, Oct 12, 2006
    #5
  6. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    impossible Guest

    "MaHogany" <> wrote in message
    news:p...
    > On Thu, 12 Oct 2006 22:02:27 +1300, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
    >
    >> Anybody started testing their Web sites against MSIE7? According to
    >> this
    >> <http://arstechnica.com/journals/microsoft.ars/2006/8/22/5078>,
    >> there are
    >> some backward-incompatible CSS changes which were necessary to fix
    >> bugs.

    >
    > Why are you writing pages to suit broken browsers?
    >
    > You should be developing sites that conform to published standards -
    > not
    > developing sites that conform to broken browsers.
    >


    You'd be in trouble then. Every browser is "broken" in the sense that
    none is ever 100% compatible with an an evolving set of "standards".
    And how couild it be otherwise? Standards evolve so as to catch up
    with innovation, not the other way around, and so it's up to both web
    developers to continually push the design boundaries. Standards are a
    convenience for web developers, because they simplify coding, but the
    good ones learn to live with inconvenience because their customers
    couldn't care less. In competitive markets, no one wants to be stuck
    on "standard", waiting for the approval of some global committee. And
    unless they're catering to a niche audience of self-styled technical
    purists, having an "approved" browser is not likely to be a condition
    of access they'd want to impose on anyone. Given that 85% of users are
    rendering web pages in some version of IE, developers darn well better
    learn how to cope with its idiosyncracies, whether they like them or
    not.
     
    impossible, Oct 12, 2006
    #6
  7. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    MaHogany Guest

    On Fri, 13 Oct 2006 00:15:15 +1300, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:

    >> Konquerer is already 100% CSS3 compliant...

    >
    > I just checked with Konqueror 3.5.4, and it doesn't seem to pay any
    > attention to the CSS3 opacity attribute.


    Hasn't 3.5.5 recently been released?

    Maybe what I read yesterday wasn't accurate.


    Ma Hogany

    --
    "The average user doesn't know what he wants. The average user wants
    fries with that, if prompted."
     
    MaHogany, Oct 12, 2006
    #7
  8. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    MaHogany Guest

    On Thu, 12 Oct 2006 09:50:20 -0400, impossible wrote:

    > Given that 85% of users are
    > rendering web pages in some version of IE, developers darn well better
    > learn how to cope with its idiosyncracies, whether they like them or
    > not.


    Latest report says IE is now down to 82% - and falling.


    Ma Hogany

    --
    "The average user doesn't know what he wants. The average user wants
    fries with that, if prompted."
     
    MaHogany, Oct 12, 2006
    #8
  9. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    MaHogany Guest

    On Fri, 13 Oct 2006 02:15:31 +1300, juicyjuice wrote:

    > That would be nice in a perfect world, but unfortuantely most of the planet
    > uses the 'broken browser' therefore you have to write a broken version of
    > the site so most of the planet can see it.


    But if most developers didn't accept what the broken browser did - if most
    developers coded their sites to conform to the published standards, then
    the creators of the broken browsers would be embarrased by their defective
    products, and the public would be more encouraged to seek out browsers
    that worked properly.


    Ma Hogany

    --
    "The average user doesn't know what he wants. The average user wants
    fries with that, if prompted."
     
    MaHogany, Oct 12, 2006
    #9
  10. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    impossible Guest

    "MaHogany" <> wrote in message
    news:p...
    > On Thu, 12 Oct 2006 09:50:20 -0400, impossible wrote:
    >
    >> Given that 85% of users are
    >> rendering web pages in some version of IE, developers darn well
    >> better
    >> learn how to cope with its idiosyncracies, whether they like them
    >> or
    >> not.

    >
    > Latest report says IE is now down to 82% - and falling.
    >


    Good reason for developers to ignore it, is that what you're saying?
     
    impossible, Oct 12, 2006
    #10
  11. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    impossible Guest

    "MaHogany" <> wrote in message
    news:p...
    > On Fri, 13 Oct 2006 02:15:31 +1300, juicyjuice wrote:
    >
    >> That would be nice in a perfect world, but unfortuantely most of
    >> the planet
    >> uses the 'broken browser' therefore you have to write a broken
    >> version of
    >> the site so most of the planet can see it.

    >
    > But if most developers didn't accept what the broken browser did -
    > if most
    > developers coded their sites to conform to the published standards,
    > then
    > the creators of the broken browsers would be embarrased by their
    > defective
    > products, and the public would be more encouraged to seek out
    > browsers
    > that worked properly.
    >


    Calling something "broken" because it doesn't work exactly the way
    you'd like is pretty childish. If a developer can't manage the minor
    coding adjustments needed to have their pages rendered on IE, Firefox,
    and, Opera, they should find another way to earn a living.
     
    impossible, Oct 12, 2006
    #11
  12. In message <>, impossible wrote:

    > "MaHogany" <> wrote in message
    > news:p...
    >> On Thu, 12 Oct 2006 09:50:20 -0400, impossible wrote:
    >>
    >>> Given that 85% of users are
    >>> rendering web pages in some version of IE, developers darn well
    >>> better
    >>> learn how to cope with its idiosyncracies, whether they like them
    >>> or
    >>> not.

    >>
    >> Latest report says IE is now down to 82% - and falling.

    >
    > Good reason for developers to ignore it, is that what you're saying?


    It's certainly getting to the point where, when users complain about
    problems, it's easier to say "use Firefox".
     
    Lawrence D'Oliveiro, Oct 12, 2006
    #12
  13. In message <>, impossible wrote:

    > Calling something "broken" because it doesn't work exactly the way
    > you'd like is pretty childish.


    Calling something "broken" because it doesn't work the way it's _supposed_
    to is not childish. It's just calling a spade a spade.

    > If a developer can't manage the minor
    > coding adjustments needed to have their pages rendered on IE, Firefox,
    > and, Opera, they should find another way to earn a living.


    Some of those adjustments are hardly "minor".
     
    Lawrence D'Oliveiro, Oct 12, 2006
    #13
  14. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    Adam Cameron Guest

    > But if most developers didn't accept what the broken browser did - if most

    Web developers are the only people who *give a shit* about these standards,
    and most web developers are not the decision makers in what it is they are
    developing.

    I am not saying that is a good thing, but it is a *relevant* thing.

    --
    Adam
     
    Adam Cameron, Oct 12, 2006
    #14
  15. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    Adam Cameron Guest

    >> Given that 85% of users are
    >> rendering web pages in some version of IE,


    > Latest report says IE is now down to 82% - and falling.


    I dunno why IE naesayers tout these percentages around like it's some sort
    of victory.

    IE could lose a third of its current market and STILL have more bums on
    seats than *all the rest of the other browsers combined*.

    I dislike IE as a browser, only use it in emergencies (dunno what would be
    "an emergency", but you know what I mean), and will be unlikely to upgrade
    to IE7 unless for some reason I aam forced to. But it's just a bit silly
    to cite IE's popularity dropping to a measly 82% as some sort of
    achievement by the competitors. Basically what it says is that despite
    everything, IE simply doesn't actually *have* any serious competitor.

    --
    Adam
     
    Adam Cameron, Oct 12, 2006
    #15
  16. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    Shane Guest

    Adam Cameron wrote:

    >>> Given that 85% of users are
    >>> rendering web pages in some version of IE,

    >
    >> Latest report says IE is now down to 82% - and falling.

    >
    > I dunno why IE naesayers tout these percentages around like it's some sort
    > of victory.
    >
    > IE could lose a third of its current market and STILL have more bums on
    > seats than *all the rest of the other browsers combined*.
    >
    > I dislike IE as a browser, only use it in emergencies (dunno what would be
    > "an emergency", but you know what I mean), and will be unlikely to upgrade
    > to IE7 unless for some reason I aam forced to. But it's just a bit silly
    > to cite IE's popularity dropping to a measly 82% as some sort of
    > achievement by the competitors. Basically what it says is that despite
    > everything, IE simply doesn't actually *have* any serious competitor.
    >



    I agree, its exactly the same with webserver software, a change of +/- 2
    percentage points gets people worked up
    --
    Fry: Why aren't we moving?
    Leela: I don't know! Usually when I do stuff like this, the ship moves!

    blog: http://shanes.dyndns.org
     
    Shane, Oct 12, 2006
    #16
  17. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    impossible Guest

    "Lawrence D'Oliveiro" <_zealand> wrote in
    message news:egmd42$ur5$...
    > In message <>,
    > impossible wrote:
    >
    >> "MaHogany" <> wrote in message
    >> news:p...
    >>> On Thu, 12 Oct 2006 09:50:20 -0400, impossible wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> Given that 85% of users are
    >>>> rendering web pages in some version of IE, developers darn well
    >>>> better
    >>>> learn how to cope with its idiosyncracies, whether they like them
    >>>> or
    >>>> not.
    >>>
    >>> Latest report says IE is now down to 82% - and falling.

    >>
    >> Good reason for developers to ignore it, is that what you're
    >> saying?

    >
    > It's certainly getting to the point where, when users complain about
    > problems, it's easier to say "use Firefox".


    What problems? Or is this just one of those throw-away lines you use
    when you can't be bothered investigating the real source of the
    trouble someone might be having?
     
    impossible, Oct 13, 2006
    #17
  18. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    -=rjh=- Guest

    Adam Cameron wrote:
    >>> Given that 85% of users are
    >>> rendering web pages in some version of IE,

    >
    >> Latest report says IE is now down to 82% - and falling.

    >
    > I dunno why IE naesayers tout these percentages around like it's some sort
    > of victory.
    >
    > IE could lose a third of its current market and STILL have more bums on
    > seats than *all the rest of the other browsers combined*.
    >
    > I dislike IE as a browser, only use it in emergencies (dunno what would be
    > "an emergency", but you know what I mean), and will be unlikely to upgrade
    > to IE7 unless for some reason I aam forced to. But it's just a bit silly
    > to cite IE's popularity dropping to a measly 82% as some sort of
    > achievement by the competitors. Basically what it says is that despite
    > everything, IE simply doesn't actually *have* any serious competitor.
    >


    It is even more ridiculous in the context of IE originally going from
    <20% to 40% in something less than a year (1997), eventually getting
    almost 100% of the market.
     
    -=rjh=-, Oct 13, 2006
    #18
  19. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    juicyjuice Guest

    Haha, microsoft embarrased! haha, since when did microsoft listen to its
    users?
    I think you've forgotten that they like to dictate what is right and wrong
    and I find it hard to recall many instances when they conform to 'standards'
    without modification.

    Don't get me wrong, I agree with you 100%, but unfortuately I and other
    designers would like our sites usable now on all browsers including the most
    popular (broken or not) not sometime in the future when some boycott might
    happen when all developers will join together to fight this cause! We have
    functions that need to work and deadlines to meet and the big guy making out
    our paycheques dosnt care how it works as long as it works. I would like to
    see you explain to him why most can't see his new site because of your
    broken browser cause.

    "MaHogany" <> wrote in message
    news:p...
    > On Fri, 13 Oct 2006 02:15:31 +1300, juicyjuice wrote:
    >
    >> That would be nice in a perfect world, but unfortuantely most of the
    >> planet
    >> uses the 'broken browser' therefore you have to write a broken version of
    >> the site so most of the planet can see it.

    >
    > But if most developers didn't accept what the broken browser did - if most
    > developers coded their sites to conform to the published standards, then
    > the creators of the broken browsers would be embarrased by their defective
    > products, and the public would be more encouraged to seek out browsers
    > that worked properly.
    >
    >
    > Ma Hogany
    >
    > --
    > "The average user doesn't know what he wants. The average user wants
    > fries with that, if prompted."
    >
     
    juicyjuice, Oct 13, 2006
    #19
  20. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    impossible Guest

    "Lawrence D'Oliveiro" <_zealand> wrote in
    message news:egmd6p$ur5$...
    > In message <>,
    > impossible wrote:
    >
    >> Calling something "broken" because it doesn't work exactly the way
    >> you'd like is pretty childish.

    >
    > Calling something "broken" because it doesn't work the way it's
    > _supposed_
    > to is not childish. It's just calling a spade a spade.
    >
    >> If a developer can't manage the minor
    >> coding adjustments needed to have their pages rendered on IE,
    >> Firefox,
    >> and, Opera, they should find another way to earn a living.

    >
    > Some of those adjustments are hardly "minor".


    Then leave it to the professionals. There are hundreds of millions of
    web pages out there that render perfectly well in any browser -- it's
    clearly not that big a deal.
     
    impossible, Oct 13, 2006
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. 7
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    410
  2. steve

    Linux Adoption in Asia - Business Week

    steve, Jan 7, 2004, in forum: NZ Computing
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    281
    steve
    Jan 7, 2004
  3. The alMIGHTY N
    Replies:
    10
    Views:
    863
    Derek Janssen
    May 28, 2008
  4. Robo-man

    Blu-ray has outpaced DVD adoption

    Robo-man, Jul 12, 2008, in forum: DVD Video
    Replies:
    10
    Views:
    843
    CLicker
    Jul 17, 2008
  5. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    The Five States Of FOSS Adoption

    Lawrence D'Oliveiro, Aug 13, 2010, in forum: NZ Computing
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    294
    Lawrence D'Oliveiro
    Aug 13, 2010
Loading...

Share This Page