Can we trust a graph where the biggest slice is "Other". Have they been in a coma for years as well?
Kogan 'taxes' IE7 users
Australia's electronics hawker Ruslan Kogan has decided he's had enough of tuning his eponymous website for Internet Explorer 7. Shoppers who use the venerable browser to make purchases from his store will therefore be charged an additional 6.8% for goods. IE 7 users will have the tax thrust in their faces, with the popup below …
-
-
Thursday 14th June 2012 09:36 GMT Tim Parker
"Can we trust a graph where the biggest slice is "Other". Have they been in a coma for years as well?"
Does look weird doesn't it ? It is, however, the browser version chart they're showing - and they don't include all current versions in the side bar. For example, the 'others' really start to go up in usage after April 2012 and Chrome 19 was released (IIRC) at the beginning of May 2012 - but the numbered Chrome bars / lines only show Chrome versions 16, 17 and 18... similarly for other browsers I expect.
Things look a lot more sensible when you look that the un-versioned browser stats or a smaller time slice
-
-
-
Thursday 14th June 2012 11:50 GMT ghismopoipoi
Re: Posting from IE7
Have you heard of Chrome Frame ? A plugin for Internet Explorer that displays web pages with a Chrome engine - inside of Internet Explorer. Thus allowing you to view your fincance thing in IE7. And it doesn't even require admin rights to install.
Yes you have the choice.
https://developers.google.com/chrome/chrome-frame/
-
Thursday 14th June 2012 05:51 GMT Kevin Johnston
Firefox rankings?
If they didn't release a new version every week they would actually have some impressive stats here. Far from quiblling about old IE versions I would have thought they would go for Firefox who seem to do things differently in every version.
Curiously when I was trying to find a way round an issue I was having in FF it suggested I use Opera instead....wtf?
-
Thursday 14th June 2012 09:36 GMT toadwarrior
Re: Firefox rankings?
Firefox has certainly improved since it's update cycle changed. I'm not sure what it is about IT people that makes them love to repeat tired old memes that don't even apply.
I've not had one issue that required me to change my sites or employer's sites for a new version of firefox. In fact I'd go so far as to say I bet there is nearly no one in that scenario.
-
-
Thursday 14th June 2012 06:02 GMT Christian Berger
Ignoring the reality
As long as Microsoft doesn't bring out their newer browsers for their older operating systems people will not be able to upgrade. The alternative route would be to finally bring out a successor of Windows 2000 for a reasonable price. (I know the Windows Server line is a worthy successor, but that sells for astronomic prices)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_Explorer#OS_compatibility
Effectively for most users the alternatives are:
Switch to Linux/*BSD
Switch to Firefox (if you don't need ActiveX)
-
Thursday 14th June 2012 09:28 GMT Captain Underpants
Re: Ignoring the reality
@Christian:
If you want an affordable version of Windows Server you can get Home Server 2011 (which is basically a rebadged and somewhat cut-down version of Server 2008 R2) for pretty cheap. You should probably look into whether it does what you need it to do before buying, though...
-
Thursday 14th June 2012 12:47 GMT Ken Hagan
Re: Switch to Firefox (if you don't need ActiveX)
You don't need ActiveX.
The wider internet stopped *needing* ActiveX years ago.
You may still find sites that have it as an option, usually to deliver content (like SVG) that every browser *except* IE can handle natively.
If you want to carry on using IE for some internal site full of your own ActiveX controls then fine. You can do that. You can have literally TWO browsers installed on your system. Ain't life grand!
-
-
Thursday 14th June 2012 08:07 GMT Andrew 63
Re: W3 Validator
All well and good if you like minimalistic, plain, uninteractive websites, but that's the point.
IE7 doesn't fully support all of the features available to web developers of today i.e HTML5 and they are moving forward to support and embrace such standards.
The internet has changed and is always changing, and like Flares, Reflex, and Babylon bars/clubs, have got to move with the times.
-
Thursday 14th June 2012 10:52 GMT Gordon Fecyk
He needs to use W3 Validator for HTML 5 too
All well and good if you like minimalistic, plain, uninteractive websites, but that's the point.
At least a comparably plain web site would be fast, and wouldn't make visitors feel insulted. "Hey, your sysadmin sucks, get on his [censored] or pay me extra to support you."
Apparently he can't do HTML 5 either, as in IE9 Strict Mode his animations cause his main auto-changing graphic to switch places on screen on every rotation. I've seen this technique in use before and haven't seen that end result until now.
Until he fixes his HTML 5 he has no right to insult the likes of me for 'being in a coma.' Pardon me while I add his site to the corporate filter with, 'the operator is a twit, don't waste your time with him.'
-
-
-
-
Thursday 14th June 2012 08:58 GMT Tim Parker
Re: I can see tha man's got no patience at all...
"Instead, he's made himself look like the biggest fool of all."
Well, as pointed out in the article, this will bringing them publicity and attention, much of which may come from people who aren't just there to slag him off - seems to be working so far perhaps not quite the biggest fool of all ?
-
-
-
Thursday 14th June 2012 14:12 GMT Anonymous Coward
A feature not a bug.
Kogan are a very new company which cultivate an image of rebelliousness. Their founder is in his twenties. Calling out customers who waste money is a great wheeze. Also, for every customer they lose they gain four. Saying 'we don't want to cost you their with your up-to-date Chrome money because that retard over there is still on IE7' is a great way to get attention.
Here's how to phrase it diplomatically:
"You seem to be using an outdated internet browser. It was replaced by a newer and more secure version three years ago, which is more secure and has great new features. You can download a better version here:
[link]
Developing for outdated technology costs us a lot of money. To sell our products at a fair price, we'll be offering a discount of 3% for users with an up-to-date browser from next year."
You don't even need to impose the charge (billed as a discount) next year. You could just obsolete IE6/7 and say you changed your mind. If I ran an e-commerce store I'd be considering this.
-
Thursday 14th June 2012 09:03 GMT Jacqui
UK == IE6
There are a number of UK companies who still insist on IE6 compatability. A few months ago we did a portal demo to a certain UK telco who only had IE6 on thier corporate presentation system.
In the end they did the demo using a company laptop and the point that IE6 browser share is nominal but they still consider IE6 as the standard browser for internal systems and request internal systems are designed for it.
-
Thursday 14th June 2012 10:30 GMT Anonymous Coward
Re: UK == IE6
Maybe you should adopt the same stance - work costs £X and if you want obsolete browsers supported then that is £y per browser/OS combination.
I really hope more web sites do something like this, so IE6/7 gets an obvious "out of date - do something" warning to prompt bosses that they have to move on.
-
-
Thursday 14th June 2012 12:55 GMT Ken Hagan
Re: We're upgrading
IE7, eh? As in "released October 2006"?
If they finish the upgrade within the next 3 months you congratulate/thank them by sending a birthday card with "Now you are six" written all over it.
Sounds like they are too effing stupid to get the joke, but it might make *you* feel better.
-
-
Thursday 14th June 2012 13:32 GMT Smithson
They make it look like a broader anti-IE whinge when they don't include later version/s of IE in their "better browser" box. And while I'd occasionally like to tell a customer that they "appear to have been in a coma for five years", even I know that talking to customers, especially prospective ones, like that is liable to make them go elsewhere. To say nothing of adding a "tax" to their bill for using a browser I don't like. Publicity stunt maybe, but it does make them look a bit wanky.
-
Thursday 14th June 2012 14:05 GMT Jess
Simple answer
Produce a simple javascript free, plug-in free, w3 compliant site that is delivered to all browsers that are not on your target list.
All targeted browsers (with scripts enabled) would get the full site.
IE7 would get the simple site.
(Though this might be an incentive to retain IE7)
-
Saturday 16th June 2012 22:57 GMT Diogenes
Excellent - he actually called it a tax !
Given that under 1900 chapter 12: 63 and 64 Vict of the Westminster Parlt (aka Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act 1900) only the Commonwealth may impose taxes I am almost tempted to fire up on old machine with IE7 on it, buy something small and then sue the c**p out of him for charging an illegal tax.
-
Tuesday 19th June 2012 03:58 GMT Veldan
He's right though...
As a web dev who just the other day (ok, last week) had to go back and fix a whole bunch of display/logic bugs due to IE7, I feel his pain.
We said "We only support the latest browsers" but when a big enough client kicks up a stink the work has to be done. We also charge them for it as it is not a standard feature to support IE7.