Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Welcome Internet Exploder 9
- Thread starter Cabbit
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Oh, lookie, they're finally implementing parts of CSS3.
So I guess that puts the lie to their previous insistence that they wouldn't start implementing it in IE 8 because the spec wasn't complete. They've just been lagging after all.
Although honestly, it doesn't much matter to me what IE 9 will support when 15-20% of my clients' visitors are still using IE 6. *sigh*
So I guess that puts the lie to their previous insistence that they wouldn't start implementing it in IE 8 because the spec wasn't complete. They've just been lagging after all.
Although honestly, it doesn't much matter to me what IE 9 will support when 15-20% of my clients' visitors are still using IE 6. *sigh*
I've been seeing more of these headlines. Each release gets more caught up with standardized browsers. Hopefully IE9 will make it so we can use more standards. While I hate IE, it will become less of a thorn when it follows standards better. Unfortunately, as noted above, there's still a decent-size population using IE6.
What can we, as web developers, do to encourage users of outdated IE versions to move to more recent browsers... without alienating our visitors?
Is there any hope, when a large percentage of those IE 6 users are simply boxed in by corporate IT?
Is there any hope, when a large percentage of those IE 6 users are simply boxed in by corporate IT?
Unless we're developers at those companies I doubt our feelings would mean anything to them. My company has been making grounds and at least all of the web apps I need to interact with work with Firefox and other browsers except for one. Comically, it's the one for contacting the computer help desk.
Of course they don't care about our "feelings". But one does sometimes wonder whether there are any actions we could take that would make it more difficult for them to justify sticking with IE 6.
The good news is that almost nobody seems to be standardized on IE 7, so once IE 6 is out of the picture we ought to be able to at least use CSS2 without worrying about compatibility.
Our numbers are actually beginning to fall. We're showing 6% of users (Jan 1 to March 17) using IE6 on our site. Whereas for 2009 we were showing 16%. So it's going in the right direction for us at least. Towards the end of the year I started adding IE6 No More code to pages to really drive the message home, but I think it mostly comes from the fact that a lot of companies are starting to upgrade their browsers.
Also i dono about you but i have started seeing companies almost forced upgraded out of IE6 with the machines that have IE6 no longer working and the new ones coming with Vista or Windows 7 by default.
With both Google and Youtube no longer supporting IE6, my studio has ceased writing IE6 compatibility into our project contracts. We will do so if asked, but we made the decision that it was time to push things forward and no longer support it.
We have one Fortune 500 client who's employees are still stuck using IE6, but the company sees and understands this as an embarrassment.
We have one Fortune 500 client who's employees are still stuck using IE6, but the company sees and understands this as an embarrassment.
Kind of interesting IE 9 will not support Windows XP. I guess Microsoft has decided it’s finally time to move on.
Microsoft supporting H.264 in the video tag pretty much solidifies its place as the Internet video king.
Does Firefox still only support Ogg Theora in the video tag? Even if the operating system you’re running already has the H.264 codec installed?
Microsoft supporting H.264 in the video tag pretty much solidifies its place as the Internet video king.
Does Firefox still only support Ogg Theora in the video tag? Even if the operating system you’re running already has the H.264 codec installed?
Yes, they only support Ogg currently. If a page has a Ogg and h.264 version of their video, the browser will pick the first it knows how to handle. So with browsers like Chrome that support both formats, it will take whichever video source file it sees in the source code, or at least that looks like how it is.
I believe the obstacle to FF offering H.264 is licensing fees. MS, Apple, and Google can afford them for IE, Safari and Chrome; I don't know what Opera's deal is. Ogg is open source, so it can be included without worrying about payment or lawsuits.
Well Chrome might support Theora and H.264, but there's no chance in hell Google's Web properties like YouTube are going to move to Ogg Theora. They've spent the last three years building out infrastructure to encode videos in H.264.
Yeah, but the licensing point is moot if the desktop operating system already comes with the codec pre-installed like Mac OS X has since 10.4 (QuickTime 7.x) and Windows 7 does now. For older operating systems, simply installing the free version of QuickTime 7 would work. By Mozilla's own admission, the license would cost them a mere $5 million and they make something like $75+ million per year.
http://news.cnet.com/8301-30685_3-20000040-264.html
As for mobile platforms, they practically all have it built in also.
And just because Ogg Theora is open source doesn't mean it's protected against patent lawsuits. Considering the numerous patents involved with H.264 and the broadness of some of the patents, I wouldn't be surprised if Theora violates quite a few of them.
H.264 Patents
http://www.mpegla.com/main/programs/avc/Documents/avc-att1.pdf
I've decided not to support IE6 on any of my new developments. I just don't think it is worth the time or effort any more, especially as my sites tend to attract a more technically inclined audience.
I've had literally 6 page views from IE 6 on my own site in the past 3 months (out of a total in the high 5 figures), and maybe 8% of my hits are IE7/8.
But that's for a very technical site with a web-savvy audience. Some clients are getting anywhere from 60-80% IE, and as high as 25% of that from IE 6. Still. *weeps*
I don't have the stats on-hand, but last time I checked the site I manage had over 20% on IE 6. It didn't really worry me too much though; it's a government site and doesn't have anything "flashy", and getting the existing code to run on IE 6 was almost trivial. There's no browser detection anywhere in there either; every browser gets the same code and they're all happy
Edit: 21.4% on IE 6, making it the second-most popular browser on my site behind IE 7 (26.4%).
Edit: 21.4% on IE 6, making it the second-most popular browser on my site behind IE 7 (26.4%).
Well H264, we in the video world have been screaming this for years. Oh and all the flash haters out there will be so disappointed to know that adobe is developing flash in the direction of H264. So much for flash going away.
Well H264, we in the video world have been screaming this for years. Oh and all the flash haters out there will be so disappointed to know that adobe is developing flash in the direction of H264. So much for flash going away.
Flash already currently uses h.264.
Ya that is what I see happening. Pretty much anyone I talked to who still used IE6 were only using it on their work machines because they had to. It seems some companies are finally updating.
Out of the sites I main, the busiest one is a static site for an auction house. It's a site that doesn't get any specific demographic of user so I tend to use it as my 'average site'. 60% of traffic is IE, 12% of that is IE6. ON the 'bright side' (I guess) there are more IE users using 8 than 7 and 6 combined.