Dropping support for old IE versions

So in the near future (after v8) it is likely we will make the decision to scrap old versions of IE.

Useful reference: W3Counter - Global Web Stats

IE6 will definitely be dropped. It shipped with XP. It currently has about 1% of users. XP users may upgrade to IE7.

IE7 will probably be dropped. It currently has about 6% of users. It shipped with Vista. Vista users may upgrade to IE9.

IE8 will could be dropped. It currently has about 15% of users. It shipped with Windows 7. Windows 7 users may soon upgrade to IE10.


The logic is that IE6 is dead now. IE7 is dead very soon (it never had wide adoption, and only XP users are limited to it, and XP is very old now). IE8 is not the latest IE available to any particular OS (even Vista users may use IE9), and soon our official policy (which is to support the previous 2 IE versions) will mean it is not officially covered (although we've always gone a lot further than the official policy).

If we're looking a bit further into the future with ocPortal 9 it may be best to define the future as IE9+. Or at least IE8+. After all, we're building a platform for the long term, and people would have no need to upgrade to ocPortal 9.

Discuss .

Couple of reasons to not drop IE8…

1. Government often sticks to old IE versions.
2. Developing countries often stick to old IE versions due to possibly lacking skills to upgrade, or running old hardware and old OSs.

But I think at this time those arguments are bogus. IE8 is slow and bloated, it's plain horrible to use, even though it is actually pretty standards compliant. IE9 is a lot nicer to actually use. And IE9 can simulate IE8 via the compatibility mode. Given this, I don't see why people wouldn't upgrade. I mean, it's an upgrade that uses fewer system resources, is available on any OS IE8 is, and can simulate IE8 still.

It seems that MS is also pushing users to upgrade to the latest versions of IE and that hardware replacement will displace a good chunk of Vista users soon including government/corporate users.

i can't speak to use in emerging countries but the fact is that MS is anxious to move its installed base to newer technologies which I think dovetails nicely with your support policies.

Bob

BobS said

It seems that MS is also pushing users to upgrade to the latest versions of IE and that hardware replacement will displace a good chunk of Vista users soon including government/corporate users.

i can't speak to use in emerging countries but the fact is that MS is anxious to move its installed base to newer technologies which I think dovetails nicely with your support policies.

That's MS' normal stance. It never quite seems to work out for them though because their upgrade cycle never seems to gel with that of the rest of the world.

temp1024 said

That's MS' normal stance. It never quite seems to work out for them though because their upgrade cycle never seems to gel with that of the rest of the world.

Seems to me that they are pushing a lot harder this time. They really want to get that Win8/IE10 integration that moves them to at least parity in the browser game.

I really don't recall any time when MS seemed to be pushing so hard for updated technologies. Then again, I've never been in an MS shop.

Bob

What I don't really 'get' is why you can install Chrome on Windows XP, but not the latest version of IE. :/

I'm telling ya, MS is making a big push to move their base to current technologies. No need for XP to apply.

As temp points out, this may all be tempered by hardware upgrade schedules. I just read today that companies are looking to extend their upgrade cycle by an additional year so this may be a problem.

Bob

Robbie Goacher said

What I don't really 'get' is why you can install Chrome on Windows XP, but not the latest version of IE. :/

It's just MS' not so subtle way of hinting that XP is out of date.

BobS said

I'm telling ya, MS is making a big push to move their base to current technologies. No need for XP to apply.

Sorry, but MS' true motivation is to get you to buy a new OS. And once you've done that, low an behold you really should be upgrading your office suite.

That's why corporations are so slow to upgrade OS'. It's all the other stuff that has to come with it that gives them big headaches, including browsers.

BobS said

As temp points out, this may all be tempered by hardware upgrade schedules. I just read today that companies are looking to extend their upgrade cycle by an additional year so this may be a problem.

Yep, so it's messing with MS' development cycle  (sales cycle really) because it means that by the time the next OS (and office suite etc.) are ready the corporations are not going to be any any hurry at all to upgrade because it will be too way soon.

I say we encourage the world (Developers and Users alike) to drop ALL support for IE period! lol Hey one can have hopes and dreams can't they?

Duck said

I say we encourage the world (Developers and Users alike) to drop ALL support for IE period! lol Hey one can have hopes and dreams can't they?

Now there's one version of utter bliss.

Bob

I run XP.

Why?

Because vista sucked and because I am not going to give bill gates more money for yet another operating system so I can be a beta tester for him.

I guess down the road my arm will finally be twisted and I will make the total jump to linux.

if you are nervous and fear the jump to Linux I recommend using Linux Mint. Very user friendly for beginners. It usually works out of the box better than any version when it comes to drivers etc. Then you'll be impressed by 30 something thousand FREE apps to do all you can do in windows. You can set it up along side windows easily to dual boot and test it out. Actually you can even test it out without actually installing it if you like. It boots into memory so you can give it a whirl before deciding to install.

I do not fear it.  I just have some CAD/CAM programs I use for my CNC router that do not work under linux.   I know there are programs to emulate windows, but I do not feel like formatting my HD to find out they do not run the programs I need.

I will probably need to just do a dual boot and keep xp on one to run that stuff when the time comes.

Arbo said

Because vista sucked and because I am not going to give bill gates more money for yet another operating system so I can be a beta tester for him.

Could you be more specific? Have you actually used Vista?

Vista wasn't the upgrade I was hoping for, but it wasn't a bad operating system. It brought great networking and graphical enhancements to the platform.

I'm a die-hard Mac user, so it's painful for me to say this: I genuinely didn't think that Vista was as bad as its reputation.

I concur with Arbo. Vista did suck. Vista was ME revisited.  Vista was the transitory phase for 7 which is actually not bad.

The reason Vista sucked is cause it was still full of bugs had horrible driver support. Lots of software failed to work on it easily. But by 7 the worked those kinks out and Vista was jujst another ME. Here today gone tomorrow.

Robbie Goacher said

Have you actually used Vista?

Vista wasn't the upgrade I was hoping for, but it wasn't a bad operating system.

I have, and it really did SUCK!

It brought great networking and graphical enhancements to the platform.

The problem was they focused far too much on the eye candy at the expense of usability. Improved networking (or other largely under-the-hood changes) become moot when the interface is sacrificed to the point where is is painful to use.

The default state was pop-up hell. Just about every corner you turned you were greeted with a wall of security prompts. From there it just kept going down hill.

I'm a die-hard Mac user, so it's painful for me to say this: I genuinely didn't think that Vista was as bad as its reputation.

I think MS was trying to make it more Mac like, so I sort of understand your reaction to it.

Yep, it sucked. I've never had it myself, but staff and colleagues have, and ever time I've had to go over to help them, or use their machines for IE testing, I've wanted to scream, without exception.
It grinds and grinds to get anything done (maybe on a really high-spec machine it's okay, but on any typical business spec one it's not), and often it grinds only to ask you for permission to do something that you triggered that only an admin could trigger anyway, and then it grinds again. It's a horrible combination between being slow and needing your continual attention so you can't do something else whilst you wait.

I must have got lucky then; once I turned off that 'User Account Control' rubbish, it worked well enough.

Robbie Goacher said

I must have got lucky then; once I turned off that 'User Account Control' rubbish, it worked well enough.

Long term satisfied users in this locale - both, the wife and I.

Like Robbie, once I'd turned off UAC and elected to use the version(s) as 'Admin' (yeah, yeah, I've read all the horror stories about doing so), everything ran as smoothly as I expected it to. I've never been infected, but I am careful enough to run strong firewalls (sit down at the back - not at the same time!) and AV software, and regularly conduct root-kit searches.

We've jumped straight into each new OS that M$ has rolled out, and without exception they've been 'better' than the previous one. I agree ME ultimately turned out to be disappointing, and in a small way so was Vista. I expect both suffered from what I call the 'XP-factor'. Neither matched up to a very strong OS, but cast your mind back to the 'nay-sayers' when it was first released. If you believed everything they wrote at the time, XP was just another of M$'s offerings that just wasn't going to live up to expectations! You have to wonder whose expectations they were talking about. 3 SP's later, and a distinct reluctance by governments and industry to leave XP behind, the same detractors can't say enough good things about it. Unfortunately, perception often tends to disguise itself as reality.

My only grumble, and it has been a grumble for all new releases since Win98, is the pricing module that M$ adopts. It really does irritate when the product is almost priced out of the market here in Europe when compared to what a US citizen has to pay. That's OK guys, we've got so used to paying 'high' for stuff like petrol at the pumps for years now, so we have become accustomed (almost) to the bias.

Here endeth the rant!

 

Yeah, pricing is a little horrific. I guess that's a drawback of Microsoft being a software company. I certainly enjoy getting only having to spend £30 on each Mac OS X version!