I am so tired!!!!!!!!

[ChicoWeb]

...Of designing for backward compliant web standards!!! We spend so much time go backwards in time for IE6, and going back AGAIN and fixing bugs for IE8!! It seems like all profit margin is lost by the time we debug IE6, IE7, IE8, Safari 4, I just want to go bananas. We can spend 25 hours creating a 4.01 strict valid site, and another 10 hours making it work in all browsers.

Okay, end rant, but seriously we need to do something about this. I can't take it anymore. We need to take a stand.

 

[Maxington]

/agreed

I personally hate the process and think something should have already been done to establish better cross-browser compliance.

 

[Not Available]

Well... I'll have to agree, as well.

Unfortunately, Microsoft has this retarded attitude of let's make it differently. If there is an international standard already, why should we come with ours?

Fortunately, YouTube is dropping IE6 support, as written here. And, in Europe, they say Microsoft is not allowed to ship Windows 7 with Internet Explorer installed, so I'd say this provides an awesome opportunity for Firefox and Opera to gain European users on their side. It's just that this has to be done more intensively than the usual GET FIREFOX sigs.

By the way, why HTML 4.01? Try XHTML 1.0, or 1.1, untill HTML 5 comes out (although I like 1.0 Strict best).

 

[angelwatt]

And, in Europe, they say Microsoft is not allowed to ship Windows 7 with Internet Explorer installed

This has been reversed. Win7 will have IE8 installed, but they will have a ballot page where the user can choose a different browser to install. This was kind of needed because if IE wasn't installed, how would you download your preferred browser? They didn't want to have to install all possible alternative browsers. The EU seems to have agreed with this, at least for now. Things are not final yet.

There's plenty of web designers/developers that feel this way. That's why sites like Kill IE6 exist. And just the other day this site came through my RSS feeds. For myself, I just provide a message for <IE8 visitors at the top of my site suggesting they need a better browser. IE8 doesn't get it because it renders my site rather well currently.

 

[Not Available]

Yes, this was the main argument against the EU , but it couldn't have been that hard to implement it like they do with the system updates. When you first boot the PC, get asked which browser you would like to download and install, and that's it. Like installing packages through the command-line in Linux (well, I've only tried Ubuntu and Fedora).

 

[eleven2brett]

this site came through my RSS feeds. .

I support this! I'm pretty sure that I've seen evidence that IE 6 also kills human babies.

 

[DaReal_Dionysus]

I'm pretty sure that I've seen evidence that IE 6 also kills human babies.

Thats funny as hell!!!!! LMAO

 

[Greedo]

We can spend 25 hours creating a 4.01 strict valid site, and another 10 hours making it work in all browsers.

sounds like 35 hours of billable time instead of 25 to me

but, i agree. i always wonder at what point do i stop worrying about certain browsers; eg. if i only get 1% of my traffic from IE6, do i bother worrying about it, etc..

 

[jrrdnx]

Completely agree, IE6 just needs to die.

But as far as IE8, we don't worry about it at all where i work. We just use

<meta http-equiv=“X-UA-Compatible” content=“IE=7” />

in the head section and make IE8 work exactly like IE7. No need to waste extra time when you can just make it work like something you've already fixed it for (unless you want to charge those extra hours )

 

[Sijmen]

Completely agree, IE6 just needs to die.

But as far as IE8, we don't worry about it at all where i work. We just use

<meta http-equiv=“X-UA-Compatible” content=“IE=7” />

in the head section and make IE8 work exactly like IE7. No need to waste extra time when you can just make it work like something you've already fixed it for (unless you want to charge those extra hours )

When I make a website, I usually test with Firefox, Safari, or Chrome – whatever I'm using at the moment. Then when I go testing, most of the time, IE 8 has only minor issues. Backporting to IE 7 is what's taking a bit of time sometimes.

(Not testing on IE 6. At all. The best way to get rid of it is to ignore it, I think.)

 

[Cabbit]

I hate to say this but 20% - 30% of our clients use IE6, we design for the client not ourselves. Though i do want to shove a knife in the back of IE.

 

[dmmcintyre3]

I call IE Internet Exploder.

Why can't people just update their web browsers? I would love to see google block all internet exploder versions on their site (or at least make it look bad with a message "This site will work/look better with FireFox or Chrome installed"

 

[angelwatt]

Why can't people just update their web browsers?

It's not always their choice. My work place technically only supports IE6 and doesn't allow upgrading (enforced through software). They're steadily getting systems upgraded, and for myself I can get by with Firefox for all the work-related web apps I need to use, most of the time.

 

[Mitthrawnuruodo]

I've stopped checking MSIE6 with new implementations (and a few of which I've cheched stopped woking, so we used a variant of the no IE6 message on a couple of those ).

I just got too fed up with it. Unless the customer asks specifically - and pays for it - I just cannot be bothered.

And cross platform/browser implementation is a lot easier after we began using YUI, and threathened the designers to follow a few guidelines to stay within the standard YUI ways of doing it (plus a few extra to accommodate our in house CMS).

Life has gotten way, way easier...

I call IE Internet Exploder.

I use that and a**ploder interchangeably...

 

[&Ingonyama]

Just insert..

<script>for (x in document.write) { document.write(x);}</script>

..in the head

 

[wheezy]

Completely agree, IE6 just needs to die.

But as far as IE8, we don't worry about it at all where i work. We just use

<meta http-equiv=“X-UA-Compatible” content=“IE=7” />

in the head section and make IE8 work exactly like IE7. No need to waste extra time when you can just make it work like something you've already fixed it for (unless you want to charge those extra hours )

Do that exactly and you'll have no problems, it's almost like IE8 never existed

(Not testing on IE 6. At all. The best way to get rid of it is to ignore it, I think.)

My rule of thumb exactly as well. If we continue to build hacks for it, then companies that refuse to upgrade / people that refuse to upgrade will just have to have a miserable web experience - it's what they're choosing!! If every site they visit looks and works like garbage, then they'll finally take the initiative to upgrade. WE, as developers, should not have to suffer for their incompetence. However, as long as WE, as developers, continue to cater to them, then THEY have the power over us and will never see a need to upgrade.

By the way, why HTML 4.01? Try XHTML 1.0, or 1.1, untill HTML 5 comes out (although I like 1.0 Strict best).

They're have been a few debates on the matter, but XHTML is not the next iteration of the web, HTML 5 will be, so we might as well get used to coding with the few differing HTML declarations right now so a transition to HTML 5 will be smoother.

Coding like it's 1999

Also, here's an informative comic strip on the issue, cleared things up for me!