Hi guys,
I'm reopening this discussion to bring up an Idea that Thomas had
below: could we have an updated stat for browser market share? It
would be nice to have for a migration we're considering on ro.wp.
Thanks,
Strainu
On Sat, Jan 30, 2010 at 5:12 PM, Thomas Dalton
On 20 February 2010 10:48, Strainu strain...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi guys,
I'm reopening this discussion to bring up an Idea that Thomas had
below: could we have an updated stat for browser market share? It
would be nice to have for a migration we're considering on ro.wp.
Also, purely for the
On Sat, Feb 20, 2010 at 3:00 PM, Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.com wrote:
Also, purely for the sake of idle curiosity, I'd like to see what
impact the Windows Browser Choice thing that is launching in Europe
about now has. That means we need stats from before and after.
That option
On Thu, Feb 4, 2010 at 14:37, Aryeh Gregor
simetrical+wikil...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 5:11 PM, Trevor Parscal tpars...@wikimedia.org wrote:
Are the stats setup to differentiate between real ie6 users and bing
autosurfing?
I'd be pretty surprised if Bing is generating enough
On 20 February 2010 23:00, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason ava...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Feb 4, 2010 at 14:37, Aryeh Gregor
simetrical+wikil...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 5:11 PM, Trevor Parscal tpars...@wikimedia.org
wrote:
Are the stats setup to differentiate between real ie6 users
On Sat, Feb 20, 2010 at 5:00 PM, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
ava...@gmail.com wrote:
Bing can hit you pretty hard:
http://blogs.perl.org/users/cpan_testers/2010/01/msnbot-must-die.html
The toolserver was hit by that too:
Thomas Dalton wrote:
On 30 January 2010 14:42, Chad innocentkil...@gmail.com wrote:
Whoops, haven't had any caffeine yet this morning, left the two links
off here. They're:
[1] http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Special:Code/MediaWiki/61083
Interestingly, the revision summary for that
On Thu, Feb 4, 2010 at 8:36 PM, Daniel Friesen
li...@nadir-seen-fire.com wrote:
I read a note before that someone caught Microsoft's Bing making a
number of requests to their site with a UA that makes it look like ie6
and inflates stats.
http://opengameart.org/forumtopic/dear-microsoft
On Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 5:11 PM, Trevor Parscal tpars...@wikimedia.org wrote:
I think that's obvious. In all seriousness though, we may want to
consider the possibility of letting users know about features they are
missing out on.
If someone has a good idea of how to do this without being
On Sun, Jan 31, 2010 at 1:59 AM, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote:
http://danielrw.tumblr.com/post/266672251/hilarious-ie6-splash-screens
Yeah, but something more subtle might actually be appropriate.
Presumably IE6 lingers so long because it doesn't cause *users* any
problems. All the
On 2/3/10 1:54 PM, Steve Bennett wrote:
On Sun, Jan 31, 2010 at 1:59 AM, David Gerarddger...@gmail.com wrote:
http://danielrw.tumblr.com/post/266672251/hilarious-ie6-splash-screens
Yeah, but something more subtle might actually be appropriate.
Presumably IE6 lingers so long
On Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 4:54 PM, Steve Bennett stevag...@gmail.com wrote:
Yeah, but something more subtle might actually be appropriate.
Presumably IE6 lingers so long because it doesn't cause *users* any
problems. All the headache is on the side of web developers. If you
make it a problem for
On 2/3/10 2:01 PM, Aryeh Gregor wrote:
On Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 4:54 PM, Steve Bennettstevag...@gmail.com wrote:
Yeah, but something more subtle might actually be appropriate.
Presumably IE6 lingers so long because it doesn't cause *users* any
problems. All the headache is on the side of
On Thu, Feb 4, 2010 at 9:11 AM, Trevor Parscal tpars...@wikimedia.org wrote:
..
I think that's obvious. In all seriousness though, we may want to
consider the possibility of letting users know about features they are
missing out on. In the case of the UsabilityInitiative work I'm doing,
IE6
On Tue, Feb 2, 2010 at 00:44, Gregory Maxwell gmaxw...@gmail.com wrote:
People are really bad at complaining, especially web users. We've had
prolonged obvious glitches which must have effected hundreds of
thousands of people and maybe we get a couple of reports.
For Average Joe and Jane it
On Mon, Feb 1, 2010 at 6:44 PM, Gregory Maxwell gmaxw...@gmail.com wrote:
People are really bad at complaining, especially web users. We've had
prolonged obvious glitches which must have effected hundreds of
thousands of people and maybe we get a couple of reports.
Like this:
And in related news, the BBC have reported [1] that the UK Government have
been petitioned to upgrade away from IE6 [2]
Sam Reed
[1] http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/8492862.stm
[2] http://petitions.number10.gov.uk/ie6upgrade/
___
Wikitech-l
On Sun, Jan 31, 2010 at 9:27 PM, Gregory Maxwell gmaxw...@gmail.com wrote:
But seriously. Outright *excluding* these old things shouldn't even be
a consideration. Even a very small audience (like 0.02%) is tens of
thousands of readers. Mediawiki (and the WMF deployment) already has
many
On Mon, Feb 1, 2010 at 10:14 AM, Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.com wrote:
It's not just the clutter, though, it's the effort of maintaining it.
I don't suggest we maintain it. Just leave it alone. If other
changes happen to cause IE5 to break, then remove it, but don't remove
*existing*
On 1 February 2010 15:43, Aryeh Gregor simetrical+wikil...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Feb 1, 2010 at 10:14 AM, Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.com
wrote:
It's not just the clutter, though, it's the effort of maintaining it.
I don't suggest we maintain it. Just leave it alone. If other
On Mon, Feb 1, 2010 at 1:28 PM, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote:
On 1 February 2010 15:43, Aryeh Gregor simetrical+wikil...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Feb 1, 2010 at 10:14 AM, Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.com
wrote:
It's not just the clutter, though, it's the effort of maintaining
On Mon, Feb 1, 2010 at 21:06, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote:
I didn't mean bloody-minded as a bad thing - I'm presently compiling
Xorg from source on various virtualised OSes just for the fun of it
and noting that no-one at all could have done a complete Xorg compile
in the last year or
On Mon, Feb 1, 2010 at 6:31 PM, Schneelocke schneelo...@gmail.com wrote:
Maybe we should do the same - introduce bugs that will cause subtle
breakages on browsers we'd rather not go out of our way to
specifically support any longer, and see if anyone'll actually
complain. :)
People are really
Aryeh Gregor Simetrical+wikilist at gmail.com writes:
I don't think reducing head clutter is enough of a reason to drop
support here. The clutter will go away anyway if/when Vector becomes
the default skin -- then IE5 users can still use Monobook. Why not
let them?
By the same line of
On 1 February 2010 23:44, Gregory Maxwell gmaxw...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Feb 1, 2010 at 6:31 PM, Schneelocke schneelo...@gmail.com wrote:
Maybe we should do the same - introduce bugs that will cause subtle
breakages on browsers we'd rather not go out of our way to
specifically support any
On Sun, Jan 31, 2010 at 8:28 PM, Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.com wrote:
On 31 January 2010 05:07, John Vandenberg jay...@gmail.com wrote:
An important distinction is that IE for Mac users on Mac OS (classic)
don't have the copious upgrade options available to IE 5.5 users on
Windows.
I
On 31 January 2010 20:49, John Vandenberg jay...@gmail.com wrote:
If I'm reading that right, only 0.02% of users are using Mac OS
classic (although I suppose there could be some more that have been
grouped into Other, but that won't be many).
That is still at least 1000 pageviews per month.
On Sun, Jan 31, 2010 at 8:57 PM, Daniel Schwen li...@schwen.de wrote:
That is still at least 1000 pageviews per month. If it does not
degrade gracefully, we would be telling them to buy a new computer in
order to view Wikipedia.
This is completely wrong. You do know that it is possible to
On Mon, Feb 1, 2010 at 10:45 AM, Ryan Kaldari kald...@gmail.com wrote:
This entire discussion about support for IE 5 Mac is pointless. IE for
Mac used a completely different rendering engine than IE for Windows
and was actually (pretty-much) standards compliant. We don't need to
worry about
I would definitely agree with that. We may be the last site on the
Internet to customize our CSS for Mac IE :)
Ryan Kaldari
On Sun, Jan 31, 2010 at 5:53 PM, John Vandenberg jay...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Feb 1, 2010 at 10:45 AM, Ryan Kaldari kald...@gmail.com wrote:
This entire discussion
On Sun, Jan 31, 2010 at 6:34 PM, John Vandenberg jay...@gmail.com wrote:
Even then, there is
http://www.askvg.com/download-mozilla-firefox-30-portable-edition-no-installation-needed/
Excuse me? please read the earlier posts in this thread.
I am talking about IE for Mac Classic.
iCab
Who said anything about dropping support for basic use? I would be
surprised if you could tell much difference on Mac IE between
Wikipedia with the custom stylesheet and without. But perhaps you
could give it a try and report back to us, rather than relying on my
wild speculations :)
Ryan Kaldari
On Mon, Feb 1, 2010 at 2:37 PM, Ryan Kaldari kald...@gmail.com wrote:
Who said anything about dropping support for basic use? I would be
surprised if you could tell much difference on Mac IE between
Wikipedia with the custom stylesheet and without. But perhaps you
could give it a try and
What about creating an monobo'oldies theme for them? I mean, move
current stuff to oldies, and drop elders support from monobook.
--
byte-byte,
grin
___
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Google phases out support for IE6
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/8488751.stm
It's only a small step, but it is one more step towards the end of IE6
and the nightmare of supporting it!
___
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
On Sat, Jan 30, 2010 at 9:37 AM, Chad innocentkil...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Jan 30, 2010 at 6:58 AM, Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.com
wrote:
Google phases out support for IE6
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/8488751.stm
It's only a small step, but it is one more step towards the
On 30 January 2010 14:37, Chad innocentkil...@gmail.com wrote:
As has been stated in many places by many people: IE6's penetration
remains mostly in corporate environments, where users don't have a
choice in browsers and the company doesn't want risk breaking working
web applications. The
On 30 January 2010 14:42, Chad innocentkil...@gmail.com wrote:
Whoops, haven't had any caffeine yet this morning, left the two links
off here. They're:
[1] http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Special:Code/MediaWiki/61083
Interestingly, the revision summary for that revision gives a link to
general
On Sat, Jan 30, 2010 at 10:12 AM, Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.com wrote:
On 30 January 2010 14:42, Chad innocentkil...@gmail.com wrote:
Whoops, haven't had any caffeine yet this morning, left the two links
off here. They're:
[1] http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Special:Code/MediaWiki/61083
39 matches
Mail list logo
