IE6 is a browser that all web developers hate. Or at least that is the case if you tow the line.
IE6 used to be by far the most common browser and once was the most advanced. However, things have moved on since 2001. Web developers hate IE6 for its poor implementation of standards. Web developers hate the vagaries of the IE6 rendering engine and the performance of its JavaScript engine. These problems are well documented elsewhere.
However, the important people, the ones who matter, the ones who web developers do all their hard work for - the users - they don't seem to care nearly as much. This can be evidenced by the proportion of users who still use IE6. Even today, 8 years after its launch, over 15% of users typically visit a website with IE6. If I were Microsoft, I might just be congratulating myself for making a product so beloved of its users. Of course, where I to do that then I would naively be ignoring the massive proportion of users who have no idea what browser they are using, that there are other browers out there or how to switch.
We as web developers must also not ignore this set of users. There have been a lot of campaigns started recently to end IE6 support. Some have gone even further such as this one I just came across. I support the idea of getting our users using a more modern browser, but its up to them not us.
I don't get the big deal here. I stopped treating IE6 as a "fully supported browser" about 2 years ago. I think the problem here is this idea that a website must look identical in all supported browsers. What is wrong with a website looking subtly different in different browsers?
Of all the websites I have built from scratch in the last 2 years, not one has looked identical in different browsers unless it has been demanded from the client. They all worked in an identical way, but they looked subtly different - generally because browsers have different default rendering styles.
These differences have never been an issue. In IE6 you might get simpler button styles, you might get a more linear visual layout or you might find text looking slightly different. When I have shown them to a client and explained why they are different, the client does not care either - in fact they are thankful for the money and time saved!
I have only had problems with IE6 when I have been maintaining a site where the client has it in writing that browser support will include IE6 and that the site will be identical in all browsers.
In the many many demonstrations to clients that I have made in the last 2 years, I have never once been asked to use any browser other than the one I picked for the demo.
So, I just don't get the big deal with IE6 these days. Lets make a big deal about why we need to make websites look identical in different browsers on different platforms. Lets make a big deal about making websites more accessible. Lets make a big deal about building standards compliant websites with the simplest possible code.
If we spend our energies doing this, then we are more likely to have built-in zero cost support for many many browsers including mobile browsers, not just a narrow set often defined well before the release of a website and therefore out of date at its release.
Showing posts with label rant. Show all posts
Showing posts with label rant. Show all posts
2 April 2009
18 November 2008
A rant
I have tried hard not to fill this blog with random off-topic rants. I am about to break that rule. If you do not wish to read my rant, please move on - normal service will be resumed shortly.
There is some (tenuous) relevancy about this rant. I will mention user interfaces!
My rant is about iPod's. No no, sorry, its about iPod users and iPod headphones.
I use an iPod. I use it because it was given to me and is 8Gb whereas my MP3 player of choice (a Creative Zen Stone Plus) is only 4Gb. It is a 3rd gen nano and is truly wondrous to hold and behold. I find the sound quality lacking in comparison to the two Creative players I have had, but it serves my needs adequately.
I am not such a fan of using the iPod. I often find myself getting frustrated at the imprecise and slow controls - I just want to move to a position within a track and change volume without waiting for the interface to allow me!
Anyway, I was sitting on the train this morning - not listening to my iPod - and the woman sitting next to me was listening to hers with the rather poor, but iconic iPod headphones.
She felt she had to have the volume turned to maximum just to be able to hear her music through those rubbish and very leaky headphones! This resulted in the whole carriage "enjoying" her music along with her. And I got the brunt of it.
In short - if you have an iPod, buy some decent headphones!
</rant>
There is some (tenuous) relevancy about this rant. I will mention user interfaces!
My rant is about iPod's. No no, sorry, its about iPod users and iPod headphones.
I use an iPod. I use it because it was given to me and is 8Gb whereas my MP3 player of choice (a Creative Zen Stone Plus) is only 4Gb. It is a 3rd gen nano and is truly wondrous to hold and behold. I find the sound quality lacking in comparison to the two Creative players I have had, but it serves my needs adequately.
I am not such a fan of using the iPod. I often find myself getting frustrated at the imprecise and slow controls - I just want to move to a position within a track and change volume without waiting for the interface to allow me!
Anyway, I was sitting on the train this morning - not listening to my iPod - and the woman sitting next to me was listening to hers with the rather poor, but iconic iPod headphones.
She felt she had to have the volume turned to maximum just to be able to hear her music through those rubbish and very leaky headphones! This resulted in the whole carriage "enjoying" her music along with her. And I got the brunt of it.
In short - if you have an iPod, buy some decent headphones!
</rant>
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)