Yeah, there's probably 30% of our user-base which is still using IE8 (mostly on XP), and I'm really, really hoping that the EOL of XP also causes most of them to jump to Win7 with SP1 and an updated IE. I know it's probably wishful thinking, but every engineer we've got here is ready to head to the pub the moment that we officially decide to retire IE8 support (and the first round is on me).
Originally Posted by AJenbo
I honestly don't mind supporting IE10+, and IE9 is acceptable. The compatibility and JS performance of IE8, however, is only decent if you compare it to IE7... it's like asking someone if they'd rather catch the bubonic plague or a flesh-eating virus... bad either way.
I could see some IT departments in the industry limiting upgrades from XP to running Windows 7 with IE8 to reduce the number of moving parts in their acceptance testing, but I do reserve the right to shake my head at them and look disapproving. Especially the shops that mandate that users MUST run IE, and that no other browsers are allowed to be installed.
Bless them... I wish I was in the same boat. I'm mostly interacting with healthcare and academic treatment research IT crowds, and they're not really known for jumping on new technology quickly.
Originally Posted by AJenbo
Some of our customers do stay on top of new browsers and versions, but some of the customers have corporate/university policies that mandate a single-browser policy which centers on IE for windows.
But either way, there's no way I'll ever use this ease.js library. Sorry, but I'm not about to allow the GPL to force my entire company's code into the open (and me out of a job). We use plenty of JS and Java libraries all over the place, but none of it is GPL for that reason. That being said, we contribute bug reports and patches back upstream anytime we find issues and functionality gaps in the 3rd party libraries that we do use. The improvements DO NOT disappear into a corporate black hole. We just make a point of using Apache/MIT/BSD licensed stuff instead of GPL.
Well, free would actually help in this case.
Originally Posted by curaga
Currently, you just have to put up with whatever the clueless JS dev decided to throw at you.
(For the obvious purpose of saving server bandwidth, and the underhanded purpose of making it harder to reverse engineer the code).
In a "perfect freesoftware world", you should be provided with all the necessary tools to be able to change this: both legal rights (through a copyleft license like LGPL, GPL, etc.) and technical possibility by getting the actual source code. Then you (or actually someone else) could provide a fix.
And either overload a fix while browsing, or even submitting a patch with a nice detailed explanation to the clueless JS dev, making that one a bit less clueless.
And so do several FireFox extensions.
Originally Posted by toyotabedzrock
Userscripts also exist on Firefox (and indeed, sometime ago, there where quite a few popular which injected custom code into Facebook to make a bit better. Saddly, they can't pick upquickly enough, given that Facebook seems to do complete rewrtie of their interface on an almost-weekly basis).
So the solutions do exist. We simply aren't currently living in a culture where this is considered usual.
Mixing and remixing whatever is on the web doesn't seem natural.
Instead, we're used to have to put up with all the shit that popular website throw at us.
Tags for this Thread