Comments on: Internet Explorer Gets The Boot

By: Bill The great One

Bill The great One — Fri, 18 Sep 2009 02:01:15 +0000

firefox is much better than IE anyway

By: Supermighty

Supermighty — Tue, 12 May 2009 19:03:12 +0000

Cheers and congratulations. It’s about time we stop pandering to the lowest common denominator.

By: Bryan V.

Bryan V. — Thu, 23 Apr 2009 18:58:34 +0000

I’m clapping for this development. I think it goes back to the question I was asking when the forums were first put up – at what point do the designers/developers step in and help push the market into a direction?

By: Todd Budnikas

Todd Budnikas — Thu, 23 Apr 2009 12:47:32 +0000

IE7 is not a dead browser, it is just not standards compliant, so I've alienated it here. In the real world, where businesses are trying to succeed, and Internet Explorer is likely 60-70% of traffic, of course I and we can't alienate such a browser. I would also say that doing what I've done here on any site but your own is dangerous. I never suggested that people do this in the business world, I actually mentioned that this was a reason for raising glasses because most of us can't do this kind of thing in our daily lives, so I was excited about my ability to do that here.

Might suggest we carry this conversation over in the forums as comments on blog posts can be make it hard to have a real dialogue. There is a link in the blog post to the forum post.

So, my glass is still raised, although my arm is getting tired.

By: whoiskevin

whoiskevin — Thu, 23 Apr 2009 12:29:12 +0000

I think that the points in this discussion have changed. Maybe I missed it but initially I was told of dead browsers and the extra work to implement features. My experience being unpleasant was never an issue. I simply pointed out you might alienate some users. I’d say I’m correct in that assumption from the comments.

Now it seems this is more about “playground” than about any extra work or dead browsers. That is fine and not an issue and a different approach than what was communicated to me when I simply commented that I didn’t think this change was a reason to “raise glasses” in celebration.

As for landing in the wrong place well I guess that is all about alienation as well because comments like using IE6 are just dumb since I never said anything about IE6. You deny IE7 which I think is a premature for any site besides your own personal space but ultimately I don’t really care.

Perhaps back to the subject. Do I support dead browsers? No.

Now the follow up. Do you and the users of this site believe IE7 is a dead browser and do you think that would alienate some users?

By: Todd Budnikas

Todd Budnikas — Thu, 23 Apr 2009 03:16:14 +0000

hmm, is using -moz and -webkit applying standards… Good question I suppose. Is it going against standards? It’s a temporary solution while the W3C works through the CSS3 spec to implement the border-radius properties, etc. If you feel really strongly about it Kevin, I might consider removing the advanced CSS features.

These choices, just like the choices made and referenced in this post, are not harming anyone’s experience, no more than my choice of blue and orange is for palette. These few advanced effects don’t move us further away from or close to standards, they are merely experiments in modern technology. Worth mentioning that those effects were not added by Dennis, but by myself as I’m using this site as a tiny playground to expand my understanding of CSS, PHP and other things, so please know that I’ve made these terrible decisions that make your experience here unpleasant. Might I suggest browsing the site using Internet Explorer 6 if you don’t like them Kevin? I’m not sure how else I can help you. Seems like you’ve landed in the wrong place my friend.

How’s that for warm and fuzzy?

/*edit*/
Damn, i knew that the comment numbering would fail when we reached double digits. Bah! Also, more edits to what I wrote just above for those keeping track…

By: whoiskevin

whoiskevin — Thu, 23 Apr 2009 02:20:32 +0000

So is using browser specific css settings like -mozand -webkit borders applying standards? I know these are for “new” features of css but it looks more like it was coded for these browsers than for standards or saving time.
Maybe snottylouisville.org is available.

By: denniss

denniss — Thu, 23 Apr 2009 00:40:17 +0000

In all seriousness, I think one of the most important considerations when building a website is your audience.

I don’t understand why the audience for this site would care about IE6, other than having it irritate them in the development process.

Regarding the snotty thing. I hope no one really feels that way. Being a New Yorker, Todd may not always give you the warm fuzzies …jk

But I did watch him give up at least a dozen lunch breaks and several nights to finish this site, only to hand it over to the community to be led by whoever wants to step up. Sounds more like philanthropy than anything, though there is much to gain.

I think you’re a swell guy too, Drew. You should come out for the May event.

By: Drew

Drew — Wed, 22 Apr 2009 18:31:31 +0000

I think if you were redirecting people using IE6 to something with a humorous tone about using a real browser, and then didn’t announce it, that would be cool. Like an easter egg.

But since you announced it, I opened up the site in IEtester to see what it looked like, and it just struck me as a little snotty having the page look like that. I get the intent, standards are important and we all wish people would stop using old browsers. It’s just that the execution comes off as hollier than thou.

By: denniss

denniss — Wed, 22 Apr 2009 14:41:54 +0000

Ehh… Is this a joke?

@whoiskevin and Drew -

This is a community designed to refresh the collective wisdom of web professionals in our city. You don’t need a membership card, but asking that you at least care enough about advancing technology to upgrade to a modern web browser is not an unreasonable point of entry.

I believe stagnatelouisville.org may be available