Hopefully the companies just now upgrading to Windows 7 from XP will also deploy I.E 10, but I'm not holding my breath. On the other hand maybe Windows 7 install media will come with I.E 10 incorporated into it. A man can dream.
All the owners of the site would need to do is add this line to their HTML and it throws IE9 and later into IE8 compatibility mode:
<meta http-equiv="X-UA-Compatible" content="IE=8" />
I was surprised to notice that the BBC website does this. I noticed because a bookmarklet I wrote which requires IE9 won't work on the BBC site, which was quite disappointing.
This is why I won't work on enterprise systems.
If they're in a situation like this, it's incredibly unlikely that anyone has the knowledge necessary to do this, let alone the time, inclination, or (perhaps most importantly for enterprise companies) business approval. The vast majority of enterprises cannot just publish production code at their own discretion.
I use a win8 vm for IE10, win7 for IE9 and run copies of XP mode within win7 for IE 6-8
http://hsivonen.iki.fi/doctype/ie8-mode.png is a flow-chart of the modes and switches for them as of IE8.
I can only view my Broadband & Mobile both site in IE7,8 Mode. Other browse gave me exception "Unsupported browser".
JQuery 2.0 is a great weapon against the legacy (support only for IE9+). I hope for its swift and rapid adoption in place of 1.x version.
For my company that's just not practical. We sell to schools and many of them are still running XP.
I work at a digital agency, a lot of our larger clients still desire legacy browser support (sometimes as far as IE6). Since a lot of these clients earn some serious money, we could charge a ton and it'd still make business sense for the client to support these users. Also, some of the sectors we've worked in have had some very high IE6/7 numbers, especially in the legal sector.
To answer your question, it depends on who you ask. On here and on places like Reddit you'll find a lot of people don't offer full legacy browser support, but many of us still do because we are bound by our clients. Once Windows 8 starts to take off, probably when the first service pack comes out, I fully expect the people still using XP to begin the upgrade process.
Once Windows Vista starts to take off, probably when the first service pack comes out, I fully expect the people still using XP to begin the upgrade process.
Once Windows 7 starts to take off, probably when the first service pack comes out, I fully expect the people still using XP to begin the upgrade process.
Heard it before. I expect some people to never ever leave XP, because they'll have one little activex control that their entire multibillion dollar operation runs on, and they will continue to insists a shrinking pool of vendors support it at all costs, because any expense is worth it compared to any downtime experienced by shifting their business process to anything resembling modern technology. They will be few, but they will still exist.
It's been far too long now, and even Microsoft want it dead and buried. When April 2014 hits I expect Microsoft to halt all support, and then I'd not be shocked to see XP targeted by virus makers in order to kill it off for good. Companies won't want to pay for their applications to be ported, but if the choice is to port or have their systems wiped out then I think they'll be left with no choice.
What about the expense of the Chinese/Russian/Whatevercountry hackers totally owning them because they use IE6?
My previous school uses Internet Explorer 8, I asked the tech why he doesn't upgrade the computers to IE9, he just said he doesn't have the time.
So we now have one extra IE7 and IE9...
They put it on windows 8 because we have enterprise edition available to us at no additional cost and that ships with hyper-v at no cost.
VirtualBox is a royal POS and VMware is expensive so this means a significant cost saving.
//run some webkit sunspider code before solving a square
// run some webkit sunspider code a few times before continuing
//not done solving, run more webkit sunspider, we hear that's what users want
“Internet Explorer 10 takes the lead in browser privacy”
"Greatly enhanced and is simply delightful"
“Flip ahead feature in Internet Explorer 10 is slick”
Sources for the first two might actually be findable. "Tweet" as a front-page endorsement? I'm not sure if they're trying to be funny or serious. That looks more like something theonion.com would use.
I've seen companies (gaming companies, mostly) that display tweets as endorsements for a game and then, when I try to find the tweet in Twitter, that user mysteriously doesn't exist.
Of course it's an ironic joke.
Yes, even people in big companies like Microsoft sometimes have a sense of humor.
I understand the corporate need for browser version locking but that should be the exception (Active Directory overriding) not the norm.
As an aside the latest versions of IE seem just fine. I no longer have any skin in that game like I did in 2006-2010 where every computer I happened across would instantly have FF installed and IE hidden.
The most recent version of chrome on Mac OS X has broken me watching videos on itv.com. Manual downgrading is really painful, so I've just switched to Firefox for a while. But if this was a website important to my business, I would be livid.
This is great news, as they really need to ramp up the pace with "frequent bite sized updates".
But I have no idea (and it will be interesting to find out) if IE11 will run on Windows 7 ever; or if as usual this is the end of the line and older OS versions will be the enabling factor of older versions of IE still being used. This is important since not everyone likes and wants Win8, so Win7 will be around for a while to come.
Does this mean they'll try to update everyone on Windows 7 to IE10? I'm hoping so, but don't know enough about the policies around MS updates to grok what the impact will be in the coming weeks.
It won't reach those who don't update their Windows, though. And that's probably a large part of users who are still on older IE versions.
I can't tell for FF, but Chrome has no problem with that demo.
I am not sure if the cute penguin one was intentionally made as a tongue-in-cheek friendly jab at Linux.
For the penguins I noticed a few graphics glitches on IE 10, though, namely that penguins sliding in from the bottom or right are not rendered completely immediately, so you get only half a penguin until it redraws completely. In other sites IE tends to skip frames to keep up with rendering sometimes (although that was on an old Intel graphics chip, so might not have been that comparable).
But I use VirtualBox and take advantage of "snapshots" -- this way I have a virtual hard drive with "XP" and separate snapshots with IE6, 7, and 8 installed. And I have a separate virtual hard drive with Windows 8 installed, with separate snapshots for IE8, 9, and now 10.
This way you can save a LOT of disk space. And as a side benefit, once you set your snapshot point, every time you switch between snapshots, you lose the VM history since the snapshot, so you can start testing sites with a "clean" version of IE everytime, uncluttered with cache, history, etc.
Use "default" for IE10 (the IE10 button stays greyed-out which is confusing)
This is my major objection when people insist that "Internet Explorer has caught up". It's true that the latest IE isn't light-years behind it's rivals anymore, but it doesn't matter if people are forced to use older versions of the browser because they don't constantly change their OS.
My family's laptop runs Windows 7. What's the point of talking about all the advantages IE10 offers if they couldn't even use it?
IE10 is doing something weird with fonts: everything is bolded and blurred.
When I switch to Compatibility view - it looks better less blurred but strange anyway.
And also, to make it more complete let's add in Safari. Released (as a beta) in 2003, with its first Windows version in 2007. The Windows version's last (read: no more releases after this) release was Safari 5.
Are we to take Apple seriously since they only support iOS and OSX?
Besides, OS X has moved towards multi-touch gestures, for example, which Safari supports. It makes sense that they'd have to give up on Windows.
They should focus on perfect support of web standards already, instead of trying to invent the next big thing.
It doesn't mean that most consumers won't take the IE10 upgrade. IE10 will be double-digit by this time next year.
Nice. But getting this flag on by default in most browsers will give the advertisers the excuse to keep doing the same old practices even with DNT on.
It should be opt-in, as the spec says. Microsoft made DNT useless on IE to get some good PR.
IE still has to do a lot to catch up and the Windows 7 desktop version's GUI is same old IE9 without any changes.
I raised this with them 4 months ago: both Pizza Hut and Microsoft and neither give a shit about their customers.
Fix: Clicked on the "Compatibility View" icon at the top on the browser and the order went through fine.
They treat us like criminals by throwing us through audits, never fix a defect we raise and stop us ordering pizza through trivial bugs which may or may not also affect our 2mloc financial platform.
So, no apologies due. And if you work for MSFT, you're adding to the problem. 94000 people doesn't mean it isn't a ship of fools.
And for reference, its not going to be pizza that kills me - I have a degenerative neurological condition (neurofibromatosis) that will get me first.
By the way I don't work for MSFT.
I wish you all the best from bottom of my heart.
Take care my friend.
You are largely correct in the bigger picture, but it's still surprising how popular it is in some areas.
IEtester has started to crash on me lately.
“Incredibly fast” —Tweet
OK, who sent that tweet ;) ?
It sneakily wanted me to make Bing and MSN defaults so I'll wait.