Have there been other products where companies practically beg people to stop using it and fund initiatives to that end?
(I'd like to see priceonomics write a blog post about the razor blade model)
But they definitely push for whatever is the newest (and usually more expensive) option.
1. can't be set to be the default browser;
2. has no address bar, bookmarks menu, or any other "user navigation" feature besides interacting with the pages themselves;
3. and, most importantly, requires a GPO for each set of Intranet domains you want to grant it access to, with a hard-coded start page. All navigation to domains outside the allowed list would trigger the default (modern) browser to open the link instead.
This effectively would make IE6 not a web browser, but just another runtime for ordinary installable software, which just happens to run mostly by loading external code from the web. (Sort of like node-webkit, actually.) Microsoft could re-brand it, with their usual flare, as the "Legacy Intranet Services Application Framework", and tout it as a "transition tool" for any enterprise "lagging behind."
All the people needing IE6 for something could safely upgrade to a new OS, knowing their old web-apps would continue working for as long as LISAF is supported; and all the people developing for the web would be released from the burden of seeing IE6 outside an Intranet ever again.
But a browser doesn't get stuck in time like a OS does when it dies, they don't surf on the same Web as when they were popular while an old outdated OS still runs its old outdated software just fine. MS-DOS and Win16 also weren't garbage, IE6 is.
But you're very right about the legacy applications. We seem to have been able to at least upgrade to IE8...still not that good though.
There are so many downsides, but what's the upside? So that FB loads a little faster? The incentives are stacked against adopting new technology. Any new browser has to be thoroughly tested against every one of the company's apps to make sure that nothing breaks. As anyone who's done QA before will tell you, that's a tall order.
I agree that the probability of such an incident is small. However, given the disastrous consequences that would happen for a large organization should such a bug occur, it's hard to make the case that an upgrade is a good idea for the sake of "better technology."
My memory isn't that hazy. What happened was that people said the software only had to run in IE6 and Netscape wasn't important. Writing "good" web software wasn't important. Simply support Microsoft's IE6 and you're done. If you're still stuck on IE6/IE7 it really is your own fault.
1) IT departments are massively conservative (and this is not an intrinsically bad thing)
2) A lot of apps were built specifically for IE6. They still work with IE6. Many times they only work with IE6.
3) It hasn't been made worthwhile to upgrade.
> If you're still stuck on IE6/IE7 it really is your own fault.
A lot of us web developers have decided to just say, "Fuck it," and stop supporting IE6. If it works, cool; if it doesn't, we don't care. This is a luxury available to those of us who have clients who aren't supported by the aforementioned IT departments. Some of us are still required to support IE6 because we have clients who we can't drop and refuse to move off, and we don't have the leverage to persuade them otherwise.
If your entire application was created like that then you are talking about a significant overhaul.
When persuading a client to drop explicit IE6 support they said "but x00000 hits are using IE6", we looked into the stats and the vast majority of the IE6 traffic was coming from China and not buying anything.
And computers in netcafe or school are UNABLE TO UPDATE ANY SOFTWARE because all disk modifications are reverted after the computer restarts. People install a hardware called "recovery card" and it reverts all modifications on the hard disk. It sounds unbelievable but it is true. Almost all "computer rooms" (called "机房" here but i cannot come up with a good translation) in universities, even in famous universities, is still installed recovery card. The maintainers of those "computer rooms" just fix their computers while they are broken (very rare), and, install XP and old softwares.
Besides, compnies here install their own browsers, which is only a "shell" of IE, without user agreement? They put an "install XXX browser" checkbox on the install wizard of other software and make them checked by default. People here think that their browser is "upgraded" but the kernel is still IE6. (Interestingly some of the shell browsers started using webkit recently.)
Incidentally, I wonder if someone has put together an upgrade message that we could all use on our sites in the interim to visitors from China (preferably in simplified Chinese). It certainly wouldn't hurt for them to know there are other choices available besides IE or Maxthon.
I hope Canonical will stick to just getting language compatibility, streamlining and just plain consistency when they finally release rather than helping with government monitoring and censorship. If the government does take the end product and introduce these, there's nothing much that can be done, except making sure the sources are widely available for study.
At least, that would make the officials reluctant to stick blatant examples of monitoring.
"Force" in that context means proliferation by standardization at work, trickling down to home, not in terms of "use this or else..."
Now I don't know to what degree console adoption fares in China, but if it's high enough, PC gaming won't deter enough users to prevent it actually becoming a viable alternative on par with Windows at some point.
Another reason why they use it is because XP came out before WGA (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_Genuine_Advantage). This made pirating newer versions a bit more inconvenient (but certainly not enough to stop piracy all the way to Win8, I'm sure). So that leaves the more easily pirated pre-WGA XP
Hours of work? I think if you combine all of the work put into getting sites to work on IE6, it'll be measured in decades, if not centuries.
Edit: Domain was actually registered over 3.5 years ago
I appreciate there's some HN submission guideline about keeping the same title as the pages you are linking to, but surely a slight bending of the rules is the much better choice in this case? The link isn't really to the page, but a specific data point on that page.
Thus, the outward-facing website has:
1% the rest
while the intranet is 100% IE obviously (and it's VBScript-based).
I've pitched the last 3 IT bosses, but they don't want to hear and don't care about the Web (not even as a sales channel). I wish I could disrupt the industry, but it's basically a monopoly (you need government leverage and a lot of money to get in). I'll leave my job as soon as I can (I don't want to move sideways into a similar job, as the local laws harshly penalize switching jobs - you lose all unemployment benefits, pension, holidays, etc.)
When you switch jobs voluntarily, the unemployment benefits and holidays "counters" reset, so if you get fired within the first 3 months you get nothing, during the 1st year afterwards you get 1 month unemployment, etc.. This does not happen if you get fired (I'm currently almost unfireable since the company has to pay me the maximum amount of pay by law if I get fired without a serious offense, 12 months of my salary in addition to accrued wages).
This of course makes switching jobs once you have job security very hard.
In my office, most users can only access 2 or 3 webpages anyway. When I did development for a financial company, I had a separate computer for internet access, on a separate network (shared by several devs).
Saw that in a former job, and when inquired about updating, "it would cost too much" was the typical response.
The "why upgrade when I'll have to just upgrade again later" logic is clearly not a healthy long term strategy for any business (even outside of IT). Skipping a generation to saves costs may work but how many do you skip before your risk and cost to catch up becomes too much?
We don't expect to be able to run real-mode DOS programs "on the metal" any more; instead, they're virtualized. Why is running IE6 on the metal any less ridiculous?
Now we just need to wait for IE8's disappearance (http://theie8countdown.com/). And then IE9's (http://theie9countdown.com/), because it doesn't support text-shadow, transitions, filters, the File API, FormData, gradients, columns, classList, flex-box or WebGL...
"Hopefully there will be no Internet Explorer 10…"
"We won't need a countdown to extinction of IE10 if you don't use the piece of shit to begin with."
Ahh, here we go: https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120507/12295718818/south...
The trick is to make supporting IE 6 cost effective. You can still use semantic markup and CSS layout, it would just be a simplified version of what you serve modern browsers. It's called graceful degradation, and with a well defined templating system, it's feasible without laborious adjustments and hacks.
Some enterprises really can't upgrade, and if you are willing to support that one troublesome browser, you can still sell the product behind it, which can be innovative and useful.
Solomon Islands 1.18
Not backed by Microsoft though.
That said, I'd love to know what the usage stats look like from the perspective of ChinaCache.
the good news though is that people who still have android 2.x phones don't seem too interested in using them as mobile internet devices. Actual browser usage share for android 2.x is pretty minimal on my sites, despite its supposed market share.
Two years later it's on the HN front page. Come on kids...
It's under 5%.
On another note, IE7 is probably under 1% in most of the world. IE8 is the new minimum browser for developers?
People using IE6 are unlikely to be heavy web surfers so they are more heavily weighted on the Net application numbers (which ironically Microsoft generally prefers, as it makes IE look more important.)
Since XP has a year left to live and then probably another year or two of stubborn folks after that, IE8 will be with us well through 2015.
The other explanation is that China just pirates really old versions of windows for everything.
Not that strange given the rampant using of pirated Windows XP and the lack of skill and/or will to upgrade.
They made a snippet that displays a red box on the page with a warning if you are using IE6 and this got picked up by a lot of other sites. As you can see from the post above, this was in February of 2009.