> This is getting silly. The last thing I want to do is support Netscape > 6.
The context was legacy systems. And the decision what to support or not is always here to make. > When IE5/6 were created, HTML 4.01, DOM2 and CSS 2.1 *did not exist*. IE5 - 1999, IE6 - 2001 HTML 4.01 - 1999 CSS2 - 1998 DOM2 - 2000 If I remember correctly.. They did existed and drafts started long before that.. HTML5 illustrates it well. Despite being far from recommendation, Opera, Google, Mozilla are moving forward. Again, where we see MS in this picture? (Ok, they are trying.. But really?!) > Many features in these new 'standards' STARTED as proprietary > Microsoft extensions - like IFRAMEs, zIndex, opacity, many DHTML > features, etc. If MS had 'followed standards' instead of innovating... > today's browsers would be far less capable. But lucky for us, both MS > and Netscape pushed the boundaries to advance browser technology. I've > been developing since Netscape 2 was "the next big thing", so I > welcomed, and used, each of these advancements. > Adding proprietary extensions have now become *standard* - just prefix > them like -moz- or -webkit-. The good extensions will eventually > become standards. But when "border-radius" becomes a standard, it will > not work exactly like -moz-border-radius - just as the standard box- > model is not identical to the MS box-model it evolved from. True. That's positive. But once it becomes "border-radius" start to support it and don't pretend it does not exist. > Frankly, it's a testament to IE6 that an 8-year old browser can STILL > do *almost anything* up-to-date browsers can do, with very few code > tweaks. And there should be no surprise, because the basic stack (if I omit XHTML) remains the same. The surprise comes with 'new' IE versions. Such incarnations of the same can threaten sanity of some developers (http://youngisrael- stl.org/images/webdesign.png) > No developer has to support IE6 if he doesn't want to, but these > "let's kill IE6" ideas just don't fly, for all the good reasons > already mentioned. Few people want to kill something. Let it die out. IF there is an option. No one will pay more for a browser XYZ support. The only logical reason would be: a) extra benefit to the user (user will cover the cost) b) restriction of the user (user has no choice) c) provider is vested in XYZ >And those who think MS was wrong to include > 'proprietary features' in IE should study the evolution of modern > browsers. IE6 played an important role in the history. Beyond the post browser war period, it helped to boost many communities e.g. jQuery, WaSP.. (can't remember any 'pro-IE6' group) and web standards awareness in general. > /Kevin > > On Jul 17, 11:42 am, uicoded <uico...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Jul 17, 12:02 pm, Gilles <gil...@netxtra.net> wrote: > > > > Stop supporting IE or even just IE6 would be very unprofessional, it's > > > not a question of balls, it's a question of professionalism. Not > > > supporting IE doesn't damage IE in any way, it's the end user that get > > > all the problems. > > > Then Microsoft is unprofessional. Take .doc from 97 and 2003, their > > own proprietary > > format, not backward compatible. MS says to OWN customers upgrade > > (pay) or get > > screwed. HTML is not proprietary, has no lifecycle (HTML 4.01, DOM2, > > CSS2.1 - it is still there) > > MS doesn't have balls for open competition. Only thing they are good > > at are close systems and dependent customers. > > Make something good but modify it a little (or more) so it can not be > > used to the full extend. > > > > Some company keep using IE6 not always because their employees can't > > > upgrade themselves but because some corporate have intranet system > > > which are vital to theeir work and unfortunately depending on the age > > > of the system so will only work in IE6 and nowhere else. > > > Ok. Just don't develop ""new"" applications to those systems. Maintain > > obsolete hacks and go arounds. > > Running old bulbs? Pay high bills to support utilities. > > More people are changing for better? Your old bulbs are not > > manufactured any more? > > Upgrade or build a factory for your old bulbs. > > > IE6 is not the only browser. Get some older versions of Opera, > > Netscape > > > > Support of browser should be made cleverly and it all depends on the > > > targeted audience, the number of IE6 users or even just IE is much > > > bigger from 9 to 5 than any other time, simply because companies are > > > open then. > > > > So if your website targeted visitor or companies and their employees > > > IE6 support is very high, if you are aiming for the genral public > > > support for IE7 is higher, also still need to make sure IE6 doesn't > > > look too rubbish for the computer illeterate who don't know how to > > > upgrade. If you do a website aiming at geek then it could be possible > > > to drop IE6 support all togerther I guess. > > > When you develop mail application do you care more about Outlook? Or > > any possible mail client to be able to read the message. > > Target audience has Outlook? Let's change the email... With this > > rational, MS is winning and can take advantage of more and more users. > > > Any user, corporate or not can upgrade with a simple click. > > Don't throw perls to a swine. Educate, help, be patient.. But don't > > let anyone to waste your life (and his money) with IE6-7-15. There are > > alternatives - a click away! --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "jQuery Development" group. To post to this group, send email to jquery-dev@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to jquery-dev+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/jquery-dev?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
