Let’s Retire IE6 Already

I disagree on 2 points.

Ie6 is not inherently worse or less secure than ie7 or ie8. Most of the security benefits from running these newer browsers come from running on vista/windows7, not from the browser itself. Just look at the security updates for ie released each month which apply to every version from 5 to 8.

Upgrading a browser in a large company is a huge undertaking. Most firms have large numbers of often custom written inhouse apps that need thoroughly testing before this can take place and inevitably newer browsers break some of these apps which might be business critical.

This whole drop ie6 business is about web designers and website owners sick of supporting multiple browsers and not about the users and companies actually visiting their sites.

IE8 is just plain awful. It continually hangs when trying to access sites and crashes in java apps many times. Went back to IE7 and no more problems. I would cut the same address out of IE* and paste it in Chrome and every time chrome went to the sites that IE8 would hang in. This was my second attempt to use IE8. No sir I will stick with 7 and Chrome. Yes I have all my updates, and MS tries to blame my software… ha it’s Vista OS go figure.

Because IE is so intertwined into the OS, some applications only work with a particular version. AutoCAD, for instance, forced us to stay with IE6 for a long time as there were known “issues” with the version of AutoCAD that we were using and IE7.

We do encourage our people to use Firefox when ever possible but there are times where some web sites won’t work correctly with Firefox and we have to resort to IE. It’s sad but fairly common with government web sites that rely on Java scripting and we need to use those sites a lot.

I agree with ABC. If you’ve actually ever worked in a large company or one governed by various authorities that set standards, you would know that it’s not “just as simple as running Windows Update.” As the Microsoft rep quoted in the article noted, many businesses have home-grown apps designed around a certain browser and/or have vendor apps that are only certified to run on specific OS/browser configurations. In many industries, applications need to be certified by government agencies to be approved and this process usually takes several years. Your idea that you can willy-nilly go around upgrading everything on a whim just because it seems better demonstrates an ignorance of the “IT Professional” world that is somewhat shocking considering your column title.

“But Microsoft’s own general manager for Internet Explorer had the stomach to seriously suggest that in some business environments, it would be cavalier to tell the company to upgrade.”

I have a feeling that they’re talking about it not being as simple as a click-to-upgrade since there are probably still some businesses that use Windows NT or 2000. Any IE above 6.0 does not work in those OS versions.

Hey, Matt,

It seems you don’t squeeze enough the hardware and software you are working with… If you like having last software and necessarily the last hardware, it means you have money to lose or you are really in top 0.01% who needs it, like cinema industry for computer stunts.

Now when the economics limps, it is already late. We did it before happening.

I do not see anything on this page what cannot be done with a text processor like Notepad from 1990. Even the graphics can be done with an ASCII processor (well, less the photos).

I am working for an extra large business with 20k users in Montreal area only (where I live), and many-many others in CA-US-rest of the world. It happens that starting from last winter we do not re-image anymore with Widows 2K + Office 2000, but we upgrade to XP Pro + Office 2003. Yes, same MSIE 6…

Why are we so… late, well, please think on how quickly could run XP + Office 2003 on a “Vista” hardware, and how badly it performs if just update it to Office 2007.

Same for MSIE 6 versus MSIE 8. Why should I need to use MSIE 8 with “compatibility view” on, if I can use MSIE 6 itself!

By the way, we have flash disabled; if you work with “info” you do not need “fancy setup” to show it; well, once in a while, 2% of time need to enable since we have to go to a crazy designer having all but flash on his site; but we disable after solving the issue.

Do you know how quick is loading this page with flash off then on? For me, it pay the difference, also I’m less interested in ads, which need flash instead a plain graphic. Maybe if you need to see how the engine works, a flash is needed, else you need just specifications, as specialist you know how its working…

Since most users, 99.5% use the same functionality as for Office 2 - for DOS, generally speaking the Office 2003 is much more than necessary.

And yes, the guys who need Office or Project 2007 do receive powerful computers almost like the graphical stations, 8GB ram, 2 or 4 cores… but still XP Pro and they are less than 0.5%.

First this is “productivity” and then is “economy”.
And we avoid “marketing” just for “marketing”.
We still have a bad habit, we still use MS Windows, but with “Vista” or “7″ ahead, this could be repaired too.

Well, really considering, Vista was not made for professionals.

Why should a browser need more than HTML4, CSS2 and Java support; for movies in a web page, please use… movies, not flashes. Well, maybe except for cartons - flash offer better scalability.

I guess any site can be converted to “compatibility” for MSIE5. Why 6, or 7, or 8… or do you think MS will stop at 8?

Why not patch a MSIE5 properly instead of new versions and patch them all.

Same diagnostic, too much “marketing”.
Wake up!