Re: [AFMUG] Require Recent Web Browser?

[Steve Jones]

What I want is a damn web browser thats versatile. I really dont care on
tech use if the certificate is bad, i know im logging into it. I want to
tell my web browser what version of java to use and where. I dont want it
to resize thing on what it "thinks" is how i want to view it. I dont want
it to remember my password unless I tell it to (thats a lie, im a terrible
IT guy, i remember every password I can on my tech laptop). I want to be
able to connect to the most insecure version of anything ever because i
have some switch i touch once every 5 years that will only allow me to
access it that way. I want my web browser to NEVER assume anything. This
isnt an issue with the web interface as much as it is with web browsers
simply not being versatile enough pieces of software for purpose driven
users.
Im amazed that there hasnt been a tech browser designed. Hell, I would
actually pay for that.

On Wed, Mar 21, 2018 at 3:57 PM, Paul Stewart <p...@paulstewart.org> wrote:

> Yes – can’t stress enough what Sean is saying here…. Customers need to
> keep up, the applications/services/software should not need to slow down
> because of a small number of customers who won’t keep current.  Those same
> customers will be the one who call your technical support to complain that
> their online banking doesn’t work as well 
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Sean Heskett
>
> *Sent:* Thursday, March 15, 2018 11:14 PM
>
> *To:* af@afmug.com
>
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Require Recent Web Browser?
>
>
>
> Use modern technologies.  Your customer base is tech savvy enough and
> should not be using old browsers and if they are then too bad.
>
>
>
> 2 cents
>
>
>
> -sean
>
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Mar 14, 2018 at 5:49 PM Forrest Christian (List Account) <
> li...@packetflux.com> wrote:
>
> A bit of a survey here
>
>
>
> A couple of features I'm looking at for current/future products would be
> much easier to implement using a certain feature found only in relatively
> new web browsers, aka, Chrome/Firefox/Edge updated within the last year.
>
>
>
> One specific browser feature I'm looking at is webassembly.  Various tools
> out there indicate that around 87% of the installed/active browsers on the
> internet are recent enough for native support.   Most of the browsers
> gained support for this feature early to mid last year.   With autoupdates
> being the rule instead of the exception, anyone on a recent auto-updating
> web browser should support this.  I'm mostly concerned about 'the rest'.
>
>
>
> Support for the older browsers is possible, but it adds a level of
> complexity (specifically a level of testing) which I would prefer not to do
> if I could get away without it.
>
>
>
> To be clear:  Almost all of the functionality of the upcoming products
> won't require these functions.  A specific example of something that might
> require this is setting up the scripting functionality as I'm looking at
> various technologies which would work best if I could run a chunk of
> webassembly code in the browser as part of the code editor.  However, other
> than editing a script, the rest of the functionality would work fine.
>
>
>
> Thoughts?
>
>
>
> --
>
> *Forrest Christian* *CEO, PacketFlux Technologies, Inc.*
>
> Tel: 406-449-3345 <(406)%20449-3345> | Address: 3577 Countryside Road,
> Helena, MT 59602
> <https://maps.google.com/?q=3577+Countryside+Road,+Helena,+MT+59602=gmail=g>
>
> forre...@imach.com | http://www.packetflux.com
>
> [image: Image removed by sender.] <http://www.linkedin.com/in/fwchristian>
>  [image: Image removed by sender.] <http://facebook.com/packetflux> [image:
> Image removed by sender.] <http://twitter.com/@packetflux>
>
> [image: Image removed by sender.][image: Image removed by sender.][image:
> Image removed by sender.]
>
>

Re: [AFMUG] Require Recent Web Browser?

[Paul Stewart]

Ahhh… the good old days … 

 

From: Af <af-boun...@afmug.com> on behalf of "Forrest Christian (List Account)" 
<li...@packetflux.com>
Reply-To: <af@afmug.com>
Date: Wednesday, March 21, 2018 at 11:19 AM
To: af <af@afmug.com>
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Require Recent Web Browser?

 

I remember when lynx was an acceptable Web browser.  But again I also remember 
when the Web didn't exist and it was email, ftp, telnet, and gopher.

 

On Mar 18, 2018 12:35 AM, <ch...@wbmfg.com> wrote:

As long as netscape still works I am good.  

 

From: Sean Heskett 

Sent: Thursday, March 15, 2018 11:14 PM

To: af@afmug.com 

Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Require Recent Web Browser?

 

Use modern technologies.  Your customer base is tech savvy enough and should 
not be using old browsers and if they are then too bad.

 

2 cents

 

-sean

 

 

On Wed, Mar 14, 2018 at 5:49 PM Forrest Christian (List Account) 
<li...@packetflux.com> wrote:

A bit of a survey here 

 

A couple of features I'm looking at for current/future products would be much 
easier to implement using a certain feature found only in relatively new web 
browsers, aka, Chrome/Firefox/Edge updated within the last year.

 

One specific browser feature I'm looking at is webassembly.  Various tools out 
there indicate that around 87% of the installed/active browsers on the internet 
are recent enough for native support.   Most of the browsers gained support for 
this feature early to mid last year.   With autoupdates being the rule instead 
of the exception, anyone on a recent auto-updating web browser should support 
this.  I'm mostly concerned about 'the rest'.

 

Support for the older browsers is possible, but it adds a level of complexity 
(specifically a level of testing) which I would prefer not to do if I could get 
away without it. 

 

To be clear:  Almost all of the functionality of the upcoming products won't 
require these functions.  A specific example of something that might require 
this is setting up the scripting functionality as I'm looking at various 
technologies which would work best if I could run a chunk of webassembly code 
in the browser as part of the code editor.  However, other than editing a 
script, the rest of the functionality would work fine.

 

Thoughts?

 

-- 

Forrest Christian CEO, PacketFlux Technologies, Inc.Tel: 406-449-3345 | 
Address: 3577 Countryside Road, Helena, MT 59602
forre...@imach.com | http://www.packetflux.com  

Re: [AFMUG] Require Recent Web Browser?

[Robert Andrews]

I remember how cool it was to use the first gopher GUI, and how fast 
that was followed by mosaic from ncsa...   heady times those...


this is also a test to see if the list is getting better...

On 03/21/2018 08:19 AM, Forrest Christian (List Account) wrote:
I remember when lynx was an acceptable Web browser.  But again I also 
remember when the Web didn't exist and it was email, ftp, telnet, and 
gopher.


On Mar 18, 2018 12:35 AM, <ch...@wbmfg.com <mailto:ch...@wbmfg.com>> wrote:

As long as netscape still works I am good.
*From:* Sean Heskett
*Sent:* Thursday, March 15, 2018 11:14 PM
*To:* af@afmug.com
    *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Require Recent Web Browser?
Use modern technologies.  Your customer base is tech savvy enough
and should not be using old browsers and if they are then too bad.
2 cents
-sean
On Wed, Mar 14, 2018 at 5:49 PM Forrest Christian (List Account)
<li...@packetflux.com> wrote:

A bit of a survey here
A couple of features I'm looking at for current/future products
would be much easier to implement using a certain feature found
only in relatively new web browsers, aka, Chrome/Firefox/Edge
updated within the last year.
One specific browser feature I'm looking at is webassembly. 
Various tools out there indicate that around 87% of the

installed/active browsers on the internet are recent enough for
native support.   Most of the browsers gained support for this
feature early to mid last year. With autoupdates being the rule
instead of the exception, anyone on a recent auto-updating web
browser should support this.  I'm mostly concerned about 'the rest'.
Support for the older browsers is possible, but it adds a level
of complexity (specifically a level of testing) which I would
prefer not to do if I could get away without it.
To be clear:  Almost all of the functionality of the upcoming
products won't require these functions.  A specific example of
something that might require this is setting up the scripting
functionality as I'm looking at various technologies which would
work best if I could run a chunk of webassembly code in the
browser as part of the code editor.  However, other than editing
a script, the rest of the functionality would work fine.
Thoughts?
-- 
*Forrest Christian* /CEO//, PacketFlux Technologies, Inc./

Tel: 406-449-3345 | Address: 3577 Countryside Road, Helena, MT
59602

<https://maps.google.com/?q=3577+Countryside+Road,+Helena,+MT+59602=gmail=g>
forre...@imach.com | http://www.packetflux.com
<http://www.packetflux.com/>
<http://www.linkedin.com/in/fwchristian>
<http://facebook.com/packetflux> <http://twitter.com/@packetflux>

Re: [AFMUG] Require Recent Web Browser?

[Paul Stewart]

Yes – can’t stress enough what Sean is saying here…. Customers need to keep up, 
the applications/services/software should not need to slow down because of a 
small number of customers who won’t keep current.  Those same customers will be 
the one who call your technical support to complain that their online banking 
doesn’t work as well 

 

 

From: Sean Heskett 

Sent: Thursday, March 15, 2018 11:14 PM

To: af@afmug.com 

Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Require Recent Web Browser?

 

Use modern technologies.  Your customer base is tech savvy enough and should 
not be using old browsers and if they are then too bad.

 

2 cents

 

-sean

 

 

On Wed, Mar 14, 2018 at 5:49 PM Forrest Christian (List Account) 
<li...@packetflux.com> wrote:

A bit of a survey here 

 

A couple of features I'm looking at for current/future products would be much 
easier to implement using a certain feature found only in relatively new web 
browsers, aka, Chrome/Firefox/Edge updated within the last year.

 

One specific browser feature I'm looking at is webassembly.  Various tools out 
there indicate that around 87% of the installed/active browsers on the internet 
are recent enough for native support.   Most of the browsers gained support for 
this feature early to mid last year.   With autoupdates being the rule instead 
of the exception, anyone on a recent auto-updating web browser should support 
this.  I'm mostly concerned about 'the rest'.

 

Support for the older browsers is possible, but it adds a level of complexity 
(specifically a level of testing) which I would prefer not to do if I could get 
away without it. 

 

To be clear:  Almost all of the functionality of the upcoming products won't 
require these functions.  A specific example of something that might require 
this is setting up the scripting functionality as I'm looking at various 
technologies which would work best if I could run a chunk of webassembly code 
in the browser as part of the code editor.  However, other than editing a 
script, the rest of the functionality would work fine.

 

Thoughts?

 

-- 

Forrest Christian CEO, PacketFlux Technologies, Inc.Tel: 406-449-3345 | 
Address: 3577 Countryside Road, Helena, MT 59602
forre...@imach.com | http://www.packetflux.com  

Re: [AFMUG] Require Recent Web Browser?

[Forrest Christian (List Account)]

I remember when lynx was an acceptable Web browser.  But again I also
remember when the Web didn't exist and it was email, ftp, telnet, and
gopher.

On Mar 18, 2018 12:35 AM, <ch...@wbmfg.com> wrote:

> As long as netscape still works I am good.
>
> *From:* Sean Heskett
> *Sent:* Thursday, March 15, 2018 11:14 PM
> *To:* af@afmug.com
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Require Recent Web Browser?
>
> Use modern technologies.  Your customer base is tech savvy enough and
> should not be using old browsers and if they are then too bad.
>
> 2 cents
>
> -sean
>
>
> On Wed, Mar 14, 2018 at 5:49 PM Forrest Christian (List Account) <
> li...@packetflux.com> wrote:
>
>> A bit of a survey here
>>
>> A couple of features I'm looking at for current/future products would be
>> much easier to implement using a certain feature found only in relatively
>> new web browsers, aka, Chrome/Firefox/Edge updated within the last year.
>>
>> One specific browser feature I'm looking at is webassembly.  Various
>> tools out there indicate that around 87% of the installed/active browsers
>> on the internet are recent enough for native support.   Most of the
>> browsers gained support for this feature early to mid last year.   With
>> autoupdates being the rule instead of the exception, anyone on a recent
>> auto-updating web browser should support this.  I'm mostly concerned about
>> 'the rest'.
>>
>> Support for the older browsers is possible, but it adds a level of
>> complexity (specifically a level of testing) which I would prefer not to do
>> if I could get away without it.
>>
>> To be clear:  Almost all of the functionality of the upcoming products
>> won't require these functions.  A specific example of something that might
>> require this is setting up the scripting functionality as I'm looking at
>> various technologies which would work best if I could run a chunk of
>> webassembly code in the browser as part of the code editor.  However, other
>> than editing a script, the rest of the functionality would work fine.
>>
>> Thoughts?
>>
>> --
>> *Forrest Christian* *CEO**, PacketFlux Technologies, Inc.*
>> Tel: 406-449-3345 | Address: 3577 Countryside Road, Helena, MT 59602
>> <https://maps.google.com/?q=3577+Countryside+Road,+Helena,+MT+59602=gmail=g>
>> forre...@imach.com | http://www.packetflux.com
>> <http://www.linkedin.com/in/fwchristian>
>> <http://facebook.com/packetflux>  <http://twitter.com/@packetflux>
>>
>>

Re: [AFMUG] Require Recent Web Browser?

[Steve Jones]

Ditto this, as expected... as in doesnt do something ot shouldnt

On Sat, Mar 17, 2018, 10:58 AM Mathew Howard  wrote:

> As I see it, the only time it might be a problem, is if I'm using a field
> laptop that lives in the truck and doesn't get updated very often... but as
> long as the basic functions work with old browsers, it really shouldn't be
> a big deal.
>
> On Thu, Mar 15, 2018 at 10:38 PM, Darin Steffl 
> wrote:
>
>> Don't worry about the 5-10% of people running old browsers. It's easy to
>> tell customers to use a modern browser to gain full functionality. It's
>> easy and free to upgrade browsers.
>>
>> On Wed, Mar 14, 2018 at 6:49 PM, Forrest Christian (List Account) <
>> li...@packetflux.com> wrote:
>>
>>> A bit of a survey here
>>>
>>> A couple of features I'm looking at for current/future products would be
>>> much easier to implement using a certain feature found only in relatively
>>> new web browsers, aka, Chrome/Firefox/Edge updated within the last year.
>>>
>>> One specific browser feature I'm looking at is webassembly.  Various
>>> tools out there indicate that around 87% of the installed/active browsers
>>> on the internet are recent enough for native support.   Most of the
>>> browsers gained support for this feature early to mid last year.   With
>>> autoupdates being the rule instead of the exception, anyone on a recent
>>> auto-updating web browser should support this.  I'm mostly concerned about
>>> 'the rest'.
>>>
>>> Support for the older browsers is possible, but it adds a level of
>>> complexity (specifically a level of testing) which I would prefer not to do
>>> if I could get away without it.
>>>
>>> To be clear:  Almost all of the functionality of the upcoming products
>>> won't require these functions.  A specific example of something that might
>>> require this is setting up the scripting functionality as I'm looking at
>>> various technologies which would work best if I could run a chunk of
>>> webassembly code in the browser as part of the code editor.  However, other
>>> than editing a script, the rest of the functionality would work fine.
>>>
>>> Thoughts?
>>>
>>> --
>>> *Forrest Christian* *CEO**, PacketFlux Technologies, Inc.*
>>> Tel: 406-449-3345 | Address: 3577 Countryside Road, Helena, MT 59602
>>> 
>>> forre...@imach.com | http://www.packetflux.com
>>> 
>>>   
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Darin Steffl
>> Minnesota WiFi
>> www.mnwifi.com
>> 507-634-WiFi
>>  Like us on Facebook
>> 
>>
>
>

Re: [AFMUG] Require Recent Web Browser?

[Christopher Tyler]

That's what VM's are for.

-- 
Christopher Tyler 
MTCRE/MTCNA/MTCTCE/MTCWE 
Total Highspeed Internet Services 
417.851.1107

- Original Message -
From: "Adam Moffett" <dmmoff...@gmail.com>
To: af@afmug.com
Sent: Friday, March 16, 2018 3:17:54 PM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Require Recent Web Browser?

Personally, I'm less concerned about requiring a recent browser as I am 
about requiring an antique one.  I have a Windows XP VM with IE6 just to 
manage certain old devices that won't work in a recent browser.

If you have some Timelord magic to make an application that will work in 
the recent browsers 10 years from now, then please do that.


-- Original Message --
From: "Forrest Christian (List Account)" <li...@packetflux.com>
To: "af" <af@afmug.com>
Sent: 3/14/2018 7:49:36 PM
Subject: [AFMUG] Require Recent Web Browser?

>A bit of a survey here
>
>A couple of features I'm looking at for current/future products would 
>be much easier to implement using a certain feature found only in 
>relatively new web browsers, aka, Chrome/Firefox/Edge updated within 
>the last year.
>
>One specific browser feature I'm looking at is webassembly.  Various 
>tools out there indicate that around 87% of the installed/active 
>browsers on the internet are recent enough for native support.   Most 
>of the browsers gained support for this feature early to mid last year. 
>   With autoupdates being the rule instead of the exception, anyone on a 
>recent auto-updating web browser should support this.  I'm mostly 
>concerned about 'the rest'.
>
>Support for the older browsers is possible, but it adds a level of 
>complexity (specifically a level of testing) which I would prefer not 
>to do if I could get away without it.
>
>To be clear:  Almost all of the functionality of the upcoming products 
>won't require these functions.  A specific example of something that 
>might require this is setting up the scripting functionality as I'm 
>looking at various technologies which would work best if I could run a 
>chunk of webassembly code in the browser as part of the code editor.  
>However, other than editing a script, the rest of the functionality 
>would work fine.
>
>Thoughts?
>
>--
>Forrest Christian CEO, PacketFlux Technologies, Inc.
>Tel: 406-449-3345 | Address: 3577 Countryside Road, Helena, MT 59602
>forre...@imach.com | http://www.packetflux.com 
><http://www.packetflux.com/>
><http://www.linkedin.com/in/fwchristian>  
><http://facebook.com/packetflux>  <http://twitter.com/@packetflux>
>

Re: [AFMUG] Require Recent Web Browser?

[Mathew Howard]

True. I keep an XP VM running for the same reasons...

On Fri, Mar 16, 2018 at 3:17 PM, Adam Moffett  wrote:

> Personally, I'm less concerned about requiring a recent browser as I am
> about requiring an antique one.  I have a Windows XP VM with IE6 just to
> manage certain old devices that won't work in a recent browser.
>
> If you have some Timelord magic to make an application that will work in
> the recent browsers 10 years from now, then please do that.
>
>
> -- Original Message --
> From: "Forrest Christian (List Account)" 
> To: "af" 
> Sent: 3/14/2018 7:49:36 PM
> Subject: [AFMUG] Require Recent Web Browser?
>
> A bit of a survey here
>
> A couple of features I'm looking at for current/future products would be
> much easier to implement using a certain feature found only in relatively
> new web browsers, aka, Chrome/Firefox/Edge updated within the last year.
>
> One specific browser feature I'm looking at is webassembly.  Various tools
> out there indicate that around 87% of the installed/active browsers on the
> internet are recent enough for native support.   Most of the browsers
> gained support for this feature early to mid last year.   With autoupdates
> being the rule instead of the exception, anyone on a recent auto-updating
> web browser should support this.  I'm mostly concerned about 'the rest'.
>
> Support for the older browsers is possible, but it adds a level of
> complexity (specifically a level of testing) which I would prefer not to do
> if I could get away without it.
>
> To be clear:  Almost all of the functionality of the upcoming products
> won't require these functions.  A specific example of something that might
> require this is setting up the scripting functionality as I'm looking at
> various technologies which would work best if I could run a chunk of
> webassembly code in the browser as part of the code editor.  However, other
> than editing a script, the rest of the functionality would work fine.
>
> Thoughts?
>
> --
> *Forrest Christian* *CEO**, PacketFlux Technologies, Inc.*
> Tel: 406-449-3345 | Address: 3577 Countryside Road, Helena, MT 59602
> 
> forre...@imach.com | http://www.packetflux.com
>   
>   
>
>

Re: [AFMUG] Require Recent Web Browser?

[Keefe John]

Upgrade browser or GTFO. :)


On 3/16/2018 2:11 PM, Simon Westlake wrote:
I can't speak for your customers, but we 100% require a modern browser 
for Sonar due to similar requirements, and it has yet to be an issue. 
I think the days of people squatting on Internet Explorer 6 are over 
for technical users. In the extremely rare cases that someone is using 
an older browser, asking them to update has never been met with any 
resistance.


On 3/14/2018 6:49 PM, Forrest Christian (List Account) wrote:

A bit of a survey here

A couple of features I'm looking at for current/future products would 
be much easier to implement using a certain feature found only in 
relatively new web browsers, aka, Chrome/Firefox/Edge updated within 
the last year.


One specific browser feature I'm looking at is webassembly.  Various 
tools out there indicate that around 87% of the installed/active 
browsers on the internet are recent enough for native support.   Most 
of the browsers gained support for this feature early to mid last 
year.  With autoupdates being the rule instead of the exception, 
anyone on a recent auto-updating web browser should support this.  
I'm mostly concerned about 'the rest'.


Support for the older browsers is possible, but it adds a level of 
complexity (specifically a level of testing) which I would prefer not 
to do if I could get away without it.


To be clear:  Almost all of the functionality of the upcoming 
products won't require these functions.  A specific example of 
something that might require this is setting up the scripting 
functionality as I'm looking at various technologies which would work 
best if I could run a chunk of webassembly code in the browser as 
part of the code editor. However, other than editing a script, the 
rest of the functionality would work fine.


Thoughts?

--
*Forrest Christian* /CEO//, PacketFlux Technologies, Inc./
Tel: 406-449-3345 | Address: 3577 Countryside Road, Helena, MT 59602
forre...@imach.com  | 
http://www.packetflux.com 
 
 





--
Simon Westlake | CEO
simon@sonar.software
(702) 447-1247
https://sonar.software

Re: [AFMUG] Require Recent Web Browser?

[chuck]

As long as netscape still works I am good.  

From: Sean Heskett 
Sent: Thursday, March 15, 2018 11:14 PM
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Require Recent Web Browser?

Use modern technologies.  Your customer base is tech savvy enough and should 
not be using old browsers and if they are then too bad.

2 cents

-sean


On Wed, Mar 14, 2018 at 5:49 PM Forrest Christian (List Account) 
<li...@packetflux.com> wrote:

  A bit of a survey here 

  A couple of features I'm looking at for current/future products would be much 
easier to implement using a certain feature found only in relatively new web 
browsers, aka, Chrome/Firefox/Edge updated within the last year.

  One specific browser feature I'm looking at is webassembly.  Various tools 
out there indicate that around 87% of the installed/active browsers on the 
internet are recent enough for native support.   Most of the browsers gained 
support for this feature early to mid last year.   With autoupdates being the 
rule instead of the exception, anyone on a recent auto-updating web browser 
should support this.  I'm mostly concerned about 'the rest'.

  Support for the older browsers is possible, but it adds a level of complexity 
(specifically a level of testing) which I would prefer not to do if I could get 
away without it. 

  To be clear:  Almost all of the functionality of the upcoming products won't 
require these functions.  A specific example of something that might require 
this is setting up the scripting functionality as I'm looking at various 
technologies which would work best if I could run a chunk of webassembly code 
in the browser as part of the code editor.  However, other than editing a 
script, the rest of the functionality would work fine.

  Thoughts?

  -- 

Forrest Christian CEO, PacketFlux Technologies, Inc.

Tel: 406-449-3345 | Address: 3577 Countryside Road, Helena, MT 59602
forre...@imach.com | http://www.packetflux.com

   

Re: [AFMUG] Require Recent Web Browser?

[Forrest Christian (List Account)]

Yes, that would be perfect.  Actually what I want to use is a java applet
for part of the interface and webassembly for part.   I think that all
browsers stopped supporting java applets before they added webassembly.
 So you'll have to install both an ancient browser from around 2015 and a
modern browser in the last year to fully use the interface.

In relation to the more serious question about Edge, yep, as of version 16
(released in October of last year)...

On Fri, Mar 16, 2018 at 3:27 AM, Steve Jones 
wrote:

> We have to maintain so many versions of web browsers ro access all the
> gear we touch, i dont think its a big deal. Edge has turned out to be a
> good browser so far. Is this included?
>
> Know what you should do is make it require a new browser but toss in some
> really old java stuff. Everybody loves dicking with java security.
>
> On Mar 14, 2018 6:49 PM, "Forrest Christian (List Account)" <
> li...@packetflux.com> wrote:
>
>> A bit of a survey here
>>
>> A couple of features I'm looking at for current/future products would be
>> much easier to implement using a certain feature found only in relatively
>> new web browsers, aka, Chrome/Firefox/Edge updated within the last year.
>>
>> One specific browser feature I'm looking at is webassembly.  Various
>> tools out there indicate that around 87% of the installed/active browsers
>> on the internet are recent enough for native support.   Most of the
>> browsers gained support for this feature early to mid last year.   With
>> autoupdates being the rule instead of the exception, anyone on a recent
>> auto-updating web browser should support this.  I'm mostly concerned about
>> 'the rest'.
>>
>> Support for the older browsers is possible, but it adds a level of
>> complexity (specifically a level of testing) which I would prefer not to do
>> if I could get away without it.
>>
>> To be clear:  Almost all of the functionality of the upcoming products
>> won't require these functions.  A specific example of something that might
>> require this is setting up the scripting functionality as I'm looking at
>> various technologies which would work best if I could run a chunk of
>> webassembly code in the browser as part of the code editor.  However, other
>> than editing a script, the rest of the functionality would work fine.
>>
>> Thoughts?
>>
>> --
>> *Forrest Christian* *CEO**, PacketFlux Technologies, Inc.*
>> Tel: 406-449-3345 | Address: 3577 Countryside Road, Helena, MT 59602
>> 
>> forre...@imach.com | http://www.packetflux.com
>> 
>>   
>>
>>


-- 
*Forrest Christian* *CEO**, PacketFlux Technologies, Inc.*
Tel: 406-449-3345 | Address: 3577 Countryside Road, Helena, MT 59602
forre...@imach.com | http://www.packetflux.com
  

Re: [AFMUG] Require Recent Web Browser?

[Mathew Howard]

As I see it, the only time it might be a problem, is if I'm using a field
laptop that lives in the truck and doesn't get updated very often... but as
long as the basic functions work with old browsers, it really shouldn't be
a big deal.

On Thu, Mar 15, 2018 at 10:38 PM, Darin Steffl 
wrote:

> Don't worry about the 5-10% of people running old browsers. It's easy to
> tell customers to use a modern browser to gain full functionality. It's
> easy and free to upgrade browsers.
>
> On Wed, Mar 14, 2018 at 6:49 PM, Forrest Christian (List Account) <
> li...@packetflux.com> wrote:
>
>> A bit of a survey here
>>
>> A couple of features I'm looking at for current/future products would be
>> much easier to implement using a certain feature found only in relatively
>> new web browsers, aka, Chrome/Firefox/Edge updated within the last year.
>>
>> One specific browser feature I'm looking at is webassembly.  Various
>> tools out there indicate that around 87% of the installed/active browsers
>> on the internet are recent enough for native support.   Most of the
>> browsers gained support for this feature early to mid last year.   With
>> autoupdates being the rule instead of the exception, anyone on a recent
>> auto-updating web browser should support this.  I'm mostly concerned about
>> 'the rest'.
>>
>> Support for the older browsers is possible, but it adds a level of
>> complexity (specifically a level of testing) which I would prefer not to do
>> if I could get away without it.
>>
>> To be clear:  Almost all of the functionality of the upcoming products
>> won't require these functions.  A specific example of something that might
>> require this is setting up the scripting functionality as I'm looking at
>> various technologies which would work best if I could run a chunk of
>> webassembly code in the browser as part of the code editor.  However, other
>> than editing a script, the rest of the functionality would work fine.
>>
>> Thoughts?
>>
>> --
>> *Forrest Christian* *CEO**, PacketFlux Technologies, Inc.*
>> Tel: 406-449-3345 | Address: 3577 Countryside Road, Helena, MT 59602
>> 
>> forre...@imach.com | http://www.packetflux.com
>> 
>>   
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Darin Steffl
> Minnesota WiFi
> www.mnwifi.com
> 507-634-WiFi
>  Like us on Facebook
> 
>

Re: [AFMUG] Require Recent Web Browser?

[Bill Prince]

So what's the exact question Forrest? How many of us are using outdated 
browsers? I'm betting that the 87% number looks more like 97% within 
this group.


The other question is what portion of your user base is not on this list?


bp


On 3/14/2018 4:49 PM, Forrest Christian (List Account) wrote:

A bit of a survey here

A couple of features I'm looking at for current/future products would 
be much easier to implement using a certain feature found only in 
relatively new web browsers, aka, Chrome/Firefox/Edge updated within 
the last year.


One specific browser feature I'm looking at is webassembly.  Various 
tools out there indicate that around 87% of the installed/active 
browsers on the internet are recent enough for native support.   Most 
of the browsers gained support for this feature early to mid last 
year.   With autoupdates being the rule instead of the exception, 
anyone on a recent auto-updating web browser should support this.  I'm 
mostly concerned about 'the rest'.


Support for the older browsers is possible, but it adds a level of 
complexity (specifically a level of testing) which I would prefer not 
to do if I could get away without it.


To be clear:  Almost all of the functionality of the upcoming products 
won't require these functions.  A specific example of something that 
might require this is setting up the scripting functionality as I'm 
looking at various technologies which would work best if I could run a 
chunk of webassembly code in the browser as part of the code editor.  
However, other than editing a script, the rest of the functionality 
would work fine.


Thoughts?

--
*Forrest Christian* /CEO//, PacketFlux Technologies, Inc./
Tel: 406-449-3345 | Address: 3577 Countryside Road, Helena, MT 59602
forre...@imach.com  | 
http://www.packetflux.com 
 
 

Re: [AFMUG] Require Recent Web Browser?

[Dave]

Do like all other developers make it the standard because it will change 
again in a year,but wont be a standard till the next.
If folks are still running XP then it may force them to find a better 
solution.
 I have used Firefox for as long as I can remember and only because I 
live in a linux world.
I am hoping for more great solutions to port to linux natively without 
wine but it only takes time.




On 03/14/2018 06:49 PM, Forrest Christian (List Account) wrote:

A bit of a survey here

A couple of features I'm looking at for current/future products would 
be much easier to implement using a certain feature found only in 
relatively new web browsers, aka, Chrome/Firefox/Edge updated within 
the last year.


One specific browser feature I'm looking at is webassembly.  Various 
tools out there indicate that around 87% of the installed/active 
browsers on the internet are recent enough for native support.   Most 
of the browsers gained support for this feature early to mid last 
year.   With autoupdates being the rule instead of the exception, 
anyone on a recent auto-updating web browser should support this.  I'm 
mostly concerned about 'the rest'.


Support for the older browsers is possible, but it adds a level of 
complexity (specifically a level of testing) which I would prefer not 
to do if I could get away without it.


To be clear:  Almost all of the functionality of the upcoming products 
won't require these functions.  A specific example of something that 
might require this is setting up the scripting functionality as I'm 
looking at various technologies which would work best if I could run a 
chunk of webassembly code in the browser as part of the code editor.  
However, other than editing a script, the rest of the functionality 
would work fine.


Thoughts?

--
*Forrest Christian* /CEO//, PacketFlux Technologies, Inc./
Tel: 406-449-3345 | Address: 3577 Countryside Road, Helena, MT 59602
forre...@imach.com  | 
http://www.packetflux.com 
 
 





--

Re: [AFMUG] Require Recent Web Browser?

[Adam Moffett]

Personally, I'm less concerned about requiring a recent browser as I am 
about requiring an antique one.  I have a Windows XP VM with IE6 just to 
manage certain old devices that won't work in a recent browser.


If you have some Timelord magic to make an application that will work in 
the recent browsers 10 years from now, then please do that.



-- Original Message --
From: "Forrest Christian (List Account)" 
To: "af" 
Sent: 3/14/2018 7:49:36 PM
Subject: [AFMUG] Require Recent Web Browser?


A bit of a survey here

A couple of features I'm looking at for current/future products would 
be much easier to implement using a certain feature found only in 
relatively new web browsers, aka, Chrome/Firefox/Edge updated within 
the last year.


One specific browser feature I'm looking at is webassembly.  Various 
tools out there indicate that around 87% of the installed/active 
browsers on the internet are recent enough for native support.   Most 
of the browsers gained support for this feature early to mid last year. 
  With autoupdates being the rule instead of the exception, anyone on a 
recent auto-updating web browser should support this.  I'm mostly 
concerned about 'the rest'.


Support for the older browsers is possible, but it adds a level of 
complexity (specifically a level of testing) which I would prefer not 
to do if I could get away without it.


To be clear:  Almost all of the functionality of the upcoming products 
won't require these functions.  A specific example of something that 
might require this is setting up the scripting functionality as I'm 
looking at various technologies which would work best if I could run a 
chunk of webassembly code in the browser as part of the code editor.  
However, other than editing a script, the rest of the functionality 
would work fine.


Thoughts?

--
Forrest Christian CEO, PacketFlux Technologies, Inc.
Tel: 406-449-3345 | Address: 3577 Countryside Road, Helena, MT 59602
forre...@imach.com | http://www.packetflux.com 

  
  

Re: [AFMUG] Require Recent Web Browser?

[Simon Westlake]

I can't speak for your customers, but we 100% require a modern browser 
for Sonar due to similar requirements, and it has yet to be an issue. I 
think the days of people squatting on Internet Explorer 6 are over for 
technical users. In the extremely rare cases that someone is using an 
older browser, asking them to update has never been met with any resistance.


On 3/14/2018 6:49 PM, Forrest Christian (List Account) wrote:

A bit of a survey here

A couple of features I'm looking at for current/future products would 
be much easier to implement using a certain feature found only in 
relatively new web browsers, aka, Chrome/Firefox/Edge updated within 
the last year.


One specific browser feature I'm looking at is webassembly.  Various 
tools out there indicate that around 87% of the installed/active 
browsers on the internet are recent enough for native support.   Most 
of the browsers gained support for this feature early to mid last 
year.   With autoupdates being the rule instead of the exception, 
anyone on a recent auto-updating web browser should support this.  I'm 
mostly concerned about 'the rest'.


Support for the older browsers is possible, but it adds a level of 
complexity (specifically a level of testing) which I would prefer not 
to do if I could get away without it.


To be clear:  Almost all of the functionality of the upcoming products 
won't require these functions.  A specific example of something that 
might require this is setting up the scripting functionality as I'm 
looking at various technologies which would work best if I could run a 
chunk of webassembly code in the browser as part of the code editor.  
However, other than editing a script, the rest of the functionality 
would work fine.


Thoughts?

--
*Forrest Christian* /CEO//, PacketFlux Technologies, Inc./
Tel: 406-449-3345 | Address: 3577 Countryside Road, Helena, MT 59602
forre...@imach.com  | 
http://www.packetflux.com 
 
 





--
Simon Westlake | CEO
simon@sonar.software
(702) 447-1247
https://sonar.software

Re: [AFMUG] Require Recent Web Browser?

[Steve Jones]

We have to maintain so many versions of web browsers ro access all the gear
we touch, i dont think its a big deal. Edge has turned out to be a good
browser so far. Is this included?

Know what you should do is make it require a new browser but toss in some
really old java stuff. Everybody loves dicking with java security.

On Mar 14, 2018 6:49 PM, "Forrest Christian (List Account)" <
li...@packetflux.com> wrote:

> A bit of a survey here
>
> A couple of features I'm looking at for current/future products would be
> much easier to implement using a certain feature found only in relatively
> new web browsers, aka, Chrome/Firefox/Edge updated within the last year.
>
> One specific browser feature I'm looking at is webassembly.  Various tools
> out there indicate that around 87% of the installed/active browsers on the
> internet are recent enough for native support.   Most of the browsers
> gained support for this feature early to mid last year.   With autoupdates
> being the rule instead of the exception, anyone on a recent auto-updating
> web browser should support this.  I'm mostly concerned about 'the rest'.
>
> Support for the older browsers is possible, but it adds a level of
> complexity (specifically a level of testing) which I would prefer not to do
> if I could get away without it.
>
> To be clear:  Almost all of the functionality of the upcoming products
> won't require these functions.  A specific example of something that might
> require this is setting up the scripting functionality as I'm looking at
> various technologies which would work best if I could run a chunk of
> webassembly code in the browser as part of the code editor.  However, other
> than editing a script, the rest of the functionality would work fine.
>
> Thoughts?
>
> --
> *Forrest Christian* *CEO**, PacketFlux Technologies, Inc.*
> Tel: 406-449-3345 | Address: 3577 Countryside Road, Helena, MT 59602
> 
> forre...@imach.com | http://www.packetflux.com
>   
>   
>
>

Re: [AFMUG] Require Recent Web Browser?

[Sean Heskett]

Use modern technologies.  Your customer base is tech savvy enough and
should not be using old browsers and if they are then too bad.

2 cents

-sean


On Wed, Mar 14, 2018 at 5:49 PM Forrest Christian (List Account) <
li...@packetflux.com> wrote:

> A bit of a survey here
>
> A couple of features I'm looking at for current/future products would be
> much easier to implement using a certain feature found only in relatively
> new web browsers, aka, Chrome/Firefox/Edge updated within the last year.
>
> One specific browser feature I'm looking at is webassembly.  Various tools
> out there indicate that around 87% of the installed/active browsers on the
> internet are recent enough for native support.   Most of the browsers
> gained support for this feature early to mid last year.   With autoupdates
> being the rule instead of the exception, anyone on a recent auto-updating
> web browser should support this.  I'm mostly concerned about 'the rest'.
>
> Support for the older browsers is possible, but it adds a level of
> complexity (specifically a level of testing) which I would prefer not to do
> if I could get away without it.
>
> To be clear:  Almost all of the functionality of the upcoming products
> won't require these functions.  A specific example of something that might
> require this is setting up the scripting functionality as I'm looking at
> various technologies which would work best if I could run a chunk of
> webassembly code in the browser as part of the code editor.  However, other
> than editing a script, the rest of the functionality would work fine.
>
> Thoughts?
>
> --
> *Forrest Christian* *CEO**, PacketFlux Technologies, Inc.*
> Tel: 406-449-3345 | Address: 3577 Countryside Road, Helena, MT 59602
> 
> forre...@imach.com | http://www.packetflux.com
>   
>   
>
>

Re: [AFMUG] Require Recent Web Browser?

[can...@believewireless.net]

You are selling a product to technology folks. Requiring the latest browser
shouldn't be an issue. Although,
I'm sure they are some WISPs still running their business on XP.

On Wed, Mar 14, 2018 at 7:49 PM, Forrest Christian (List Account) <
li...@packetflux.com> wrote:

> A bit of a survey here
>
> A couple of features I'm looking at for current/future products would be
> much easier to implement using a certain feature found only in relatively
> new web browsers, aka, Chrome/Firefox/Edge updated within the last year.
>
> One specific browser feature I'm looking at is webassembly.  Various tools
> out there indicate that around 87% of the installed/active browsers on the
> internet are recent enough for native support.   Most of the browsers
> gained support for this feature early to mid last year.   With autoupdates
> being the rule instead of the exception, anyone on a recent auto-updating
> web browser should support this.  I'm mostly concerned about 'the rest'.
>
> Support for the older browsers is possible, but it adds a level of
> complexity (specifically a level of testing) which I would prefer not to do
> if I could get away without it.
>
> To be clear:  Almost all of the functionality of the upcoming products
> won't require these functions.  A specific example of something that might
> require this is setting up the scripting functionality as I'm looking at
> various technologies which would work best if I could run a chunk of
> webassembly code in the browser as part of the code editor.  However, other
> than editing a script, the rest of the functionality would work fine.
>
> Thoughts?
>
> --
> *Forrest Christian* *CEO**, PacketFlux Technologies, Inc.*
> Tel: 406-449-3345 | Address: 3577 Countryside Road, Helena, MT 59602
> 
> forre...@imach.com | http://www.packetflux.com
>   
>   
>
>

Re: [AFMUG] Require Recent Web Browser?

[Darin Steffl]

Don't worry about the 5-10% of people running old browsers. It's easy to
tell customers to use a modern browser to gain full functionality. It's
easy and free to upgrade browsers.

On Wed, Mar 14, 2018 at 6:49 PM, Forrest Christian (List Account) <
li...@packetflux.com> wrote:

> A bit of a survey here
>
> A couple of features I'm looking at for current/future products would be
> much easier to implement using a certain feature found only in relatively
> new web browsers, aka, Chrome/Firefox/Edge updated within the last year.
>
> One specific browser feature I'm looking at is webassembly.  Various tools
> out there indicate that around 87% of the installed/active browsers on the
> internet are recent enough for native support.   Most of the browsers
> gained support for this feature early to mid last year.   With autoupdates
> being the rule instead of the exception, anyone on a recent auto-updating
> web browser should support this.  I'm mostly concerned about 'the rest'.
>
> Support for the older browsers is possible, but it adds a level of
> complexity (specifically a level of testing) which I would prefer not to do
> if I could get away without it.
>
> To be clear:  Almost all of the functionality of the upcoming products
> won't require these functions.  A specific example of something that might
> require this is setting up the scripting functionality as I'm looking at
> various technologies which would work best if I could run a chunk of
> webassembly code in the browser as part of the code editor.  However, other
> than editing a script, the rest of the functionality would work fine.
>
> Thoughts?
>
> --
> *Forrest Christian* *CEO**, PacketFlux Technologies, Inc.*
> Tel: 406-449-3345 | Address: 3577 Countryside Road, Helena, MT 59602
> 
> forre...@imach.com | http://www.packetflux.com
>   
>   
>
>


-- 
Darin Steffl
Minnesota WiFi
www.mnwifi.com
507-634-WiFi
 Like us on Facebook