Some data points: One of my client’s recently reported browser usage from a sampling of close to 70,000 users. (IE 11 is the only version of IE that’s supported.)
Chrome was the #1 browser at 53.5%. IE 11 was #2 at 24% 3, 4, and 5 were Safari, Firefox and Edge respectively. With those kinds of percentages, I don’t think we should be dropping IE 11 support. I’m not sure about IE 10 or IE 9. Harbs > On Feb 25, 2018, at 10:56 AM, Piotr Zarzycki <[email protected]> > wrote: > > I've been working as a web developer many many years ago. You can't even > imagine what kind of hacks we had to do in order to dispay something > sophisticated in IE. > My colleague who took from time to time some freelance job when Client > wanted to be compatible with IE8 or whatever next version - always trippled > the price because it was a nightmare. :) > > I've been working for a Client (large corporation with thousends of > thousends clients) 6 months ago who had big app in Flex. Where the time has > come to move forward from Flex to modern web browser technology - There > were absolutely no talk about supporting anything like IE. :) > > IE - in whatever version for me -1 (Binding). :) > > Thanks, > Piotr > > On Sun, Feb 25, 2018, 09:31 Carlos Rovira <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> my opinion about fallback compatibility is that I expect people creating >> Royale Apps in 2018 and beyond with actual browsers and systems, not with >> old ones. >> If a client has IE8 support, then normaly will have Edge, Chrome and >> Firefox as well, or if target Android devices, they will be in at least in >> Android 4 or 5. So it seems to me a hard task if we should take into >> account older systems that nowadays has very low user base, and even a >> nightmare since we should have to focus in test compatibility while we >> don't have people to do so. So that's not doable by us. >> >> So for me the plan should be to focus in the actual systems widely used and >> when we get a state near 1.0 (not talking about the number itself, but the >> feeling that we can make a Royale App with certain easeness and have almost >> all the functionality we need), maybe it would be ok to look at what system >> versions are most used and make a plan to stick with them as long as we >> can, or at least taking care of how to evolve royale without breaking >> things for that systems since we'll have users and Royale Apps out there >> that needs to have that support. >> >> >> >> 2018-02-25 9:02 GMT+01:00 Carlos Rovira <[email protected]>: >> >>> Hi Harbs, >>> >>> if ObjectMap is a Dictionary, why don't you rename it to that? I think it >>> will make more easy for new comers to get it >>> >>> Thanks >>> >>> 2018-02-24 21:59 GMT+01:00 Gabe Harbs <[email protected]>: >>> >>>> There is a ObjectMap class which uses WeakMap or Map and falls back to >>>> regular objects on platforms whether that is not supported. >>>> http://royale.apache.org/asdoc/#!org.apache.royale.utils/ObjectMap < >>>> http://royale.apache.org/asdoc/#!org.apache.royale.utils/ObjectMap> >>>> >>>> It should be a decent replacement for Dictionary (including weak >>>> references). The only caveat is you need to use get() and set() instead >> of >>>> bracket access. >>>> >>>> I just added documentation and cleaned it up a bit. >>>> >>>> What’s interesting about that class is I needed to do some weird things >>>> with the methods to reassign them. They are not showing up in the ASDoc >>>> very well… >>>> >>>> There might be a better way to declare the method (variable) proxies. >> Not >>>> sure… >>>> >>>> HTH, >>>> Harbs >>>> >>>>> On Feb 24, 2018, at 9:10 PM, Greg Dove <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> That might make porting some legacy Flex code a >>>>> lot easier, for example because (iiuc) I think that means Dictionary >>>> with >>>>> weak keys could be supported. [3] (and I know Harbs did something >>>> related >>>>> to this in the past, maybe some sort of polyfill, can't recall >> exactly) >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Carlos Rovira >>> http://about.me/carlosrovira >>> >>> >> >> >> -- >> Carlos Rovira >> http://about.me/carlosrovira >>
