On Wed, 2010-02-10 at 09:41 -0500, tedd wrote:

> At 7:02 AM -0600 2/10/10, Shawn McKenzie wrote:
> >Lester Caine wrote:
> >>  Since a large section of our USER base is still tied to W2k and does not
> >>  have access to install other software, the call for IE6 to die is STILL
> >>  somewhat premature!
> >>  What is needed is someone to kick M$ to sort the mess out by at least
> >>  allowing IE8 to install on W2k machines, rather than telling hundreds of
> >>  councils they have to replace ALL their computers :(
> >>
> >>  The alternative is to convince M$ controlled councils that Firefox is OK
> >>  and that using it will not invalidate their contracts - but then all the
> >>  work currently being done to convert legacy setups to work with *IE7*
> >>  would have to be scrapped and reworked on Firefox. Many of my customers
> >>  have only just got funds to start an *IE7* roll out! Redoing all that
> >>  work for IE8 is yet another problem for which money is not available.
> >>
> >
> >Support of any type for Win2K is over in 5 months.  Better upgrade.
> >
> >--
> >Thanks!
> >-Shawn
> In addition to that, the "stats" on visitors show that IE6 popularity 
> is dropping at around one percent per month. In January it was around 
> 10 percent. As such, I believe that before the end of this year IE6 
> will be history regardless of IF management wants to upgrade or not.
> Lastly, I think I have a good feel for the general consensus of 
> developers regards to IE6. I won't be considering it any longer for 
> web development before the end of this year and I don't think I'm 
> alone.
> Cheers,
> tedd
> -- 
> -------
> http://sperling.com  http://ancientstones.com  http://earthstones.com

My own stats on my site put it at about 1.2% of my total visitors this
year, which is half of what it was in 2009.

As for developing for it, I don't really think it's worth my time any
more. Unless a client specifically asked for it, and I was not able to
dissuade them, then IE6 is left out of my testing now.


Reply via email to