On Thu, 14 Jun 2012 12:18:47 -0700, Risker risker...@gmail.com wrote:
I agree with Chris and Derric here; at least in the western world, a
large percentage of IE7 users have not upgraded for Enterprise reasons.
Many of these enterprises use proprietary software that is written for
IE7,
and
!--[if lte IE 7] style * {font-family: Comic Sans;} /style ![endif]--
- d.
___
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Daniel Friesen wrote:
I do have to mention something on this whole topic. All these arguments
seem to focus on saying that that IE6/7 should be supported because
enterprises are dependent on out of date software and can't update.
This line of thought completely ignores the fact that upgrading
Daniel Friesen wrote:
IT departments need to start maintaining their computers and employees
need to start demanding that the computers they work with are kept to
modern standards.
People keep bringing up legacy apps as a reason that IT departments
cannot give employees a properly maintained
On 14 June 2012 20:49, Tyler programmer...@comcast.net wrote:
Yes, Microsoft was great when they made IE 6, but when IE 7 came out,
Microsoft killed
the Internet star. I mean, HTML 5? What? I read a book that said after HTML
4.01, it would
be XHTML 1.0, XHTML 1.1 ... not HTML 5!
I
On Fri, 15 Jun 2012 07:15:47 -0700, MZMcBride z...@mzmcbride.com wrote:
Daniel Friesen wrote:
IT departments need to start maintaining their computers and employees
need to start demanding that the computers they work with are kept to
modern standards.
People keep bringing up legacy apps as a
MZMcBride wrote:
Right... well, again, just like the OP, you're focusing on how you feel the
world should be while completely ignoring reality. It's not a matter of
catering to obstinate IT folks. It's a matter of being pragmatic about the
current landscape and its limitations.
This touches,
On 15 June 2012 01:30, Daniel Friesen li...@nadir-seen-fire.com wrote:
I do have to mention something on this whole topic. All these arguments seem
to focus on saying that that IE6/7 should be supported because enterprises
are dependent on out of date software and can't update.
This line of
On 15/06/12 14:06, David Gerard wrote:
!--[if lte IE 7] style * {font-family: Comic Sans;} /style
![endif]--
- d.
» Yes, I switched to IE because I liked better the typeface it was
showing the pages...
___
Wikitech-l mailing list
As someone who writes css, I am particularly frightened by IE7. And I can
imagine there are a lot of frontend developers and staff out there who
spend significant time on fixing things for this niche audience, when they
could be working on more constructive things. I came across this service
today
Hi,
If you didn't take the Arun Ganesh's proposition seriously, you can
ignore this mail.
On Thu, Jun 14, 2012 at 1:21 PM, Arun Ganesh arun.plane...@gmail.com wrote:
As someone who writes css, I am particularly frightened by IE7. And I can
imagine there are a lot of frontend developers and
On Thu, Jun 14, 2012 at 9:21 PM, Arun Ganesh arun.plane...@gmail.com wrote:
Maybe it time to start showing a notice to IE7
users that their days are numbered and wikipedia may no longer work as
expected unless they move forward in their lives. It has to happen some
day, so why not now and
On Thu, Jun 14, 2012 at 7:21 AM, Arun Ganesh arun.plane...@gmail.com wrote:
As one of the most visited places on the internet, it is probably in the
best interests of the planet that we decide its no longer worthwhile to
support this fallen angel. Maybe it time to start showing a notice to IE7
Absolutely not. We have debated the show notice to broken browsers
thing multiple times--and the answer is always it's annoying as hell
when sites do it and it's not our place to do so.
The stance on supporting crappy old browsers has largely over time
turned into--continue supporting all
On Thu, Jun 14, 2012 at 5:21 AM, Arun Ganesh arun.plane...@gmail.comwrote:
6% of wikimedia project page views are from IE6/7 - because of the
following:
- IE6 ships default with XP
- Legal users with SP2+ can upgrade to IE8
- If you have 90s era hardware, no SP for you. Can only be solved by
Second is certain types of Enterprise shops. Before I was hired at WMF,
I worked for a company that processes complex financial records for
pharmacies participating in a US federal program that reimburses
pharmacies for the cost of drugs prescribed for indigent patients. Well
over 50% of
our
On Thu, Jun 14, 2012 at 9:57 AM, Chris McMahon cmcma...@wikimedia.org wrote:
On Thu, Jun 14, 2012 at 5:21 AM, Arun Ganesh arun.plane...@gmail.comwrote:
6% of wikimedia project page views are from IE6/7 - because of the
following:
- IE6 ships default with XP
- Legal users with SP2+ can
No, I'm pretty sure that's not true at all. Even if they are running a
pirated version they can still update their browsers.
Not sure about Internet Explorer 8, but as of October 2007, you don't need a
genuine copy of Windows XP to move from IE6 to IE7. [1]
I'm not sure when they made this
On 14.06.2012, 18:20 Derric wrote:
No, I'm pretty sure that's not true at all. Even if they are running a
pirated version they can still update their browsers.
Not sure about Internet Explorer 8, but as of October 2007, you don't need a
genuine copy of Windows XP to move from IE6 to IE7. [1]
2012/6/14 Max Semenik maxsem.w...@gmail.com:
Furthermore, whatever Windows you have or whether you paid for it or
not, there are lots of free browsers that are much better than even
newest IE anyway.
+1.
But in any case, we must not annoy any significant
part of our audience.
We are site
On Thu, Jun 14, 2012 at 11:10 AM, Amir E. Aharoni
amir.ahar...@mail.huji.ac.il wrote:
2012/6/14 Max Semenik maxsem.w...@gmail.com:
But in any case, we must not annoy any significant
part of our audience.
We are site number 5 in popularity, more or less. We are talking about
annoying less
That's their prerogative--they're trying to sell a product.
I personally think IE6/7 users would be better served by
ditching IE entirely--preferably to a WebKit-based browser.
Others might suggest Firefox. Others would say to grab
the latest IE. There's even some weird kids who might
suggest
On Thu, Jun 14, 2012 at 1:46 PM, Chad innocentkil...@gmail.com wrote:
Absolutely not. We have debated the show notice to broken browsers
thing multiple times--and the answer is always it's annoying as hell
when sites do it and it's not our place to do so.
The stance on supporting crappy old
Yes, Microsoft was great when they made IE 6, but when IE 7 came out, Microsoft
killed
the Internet star. I mean, HTML 5? What? I read a book that said after HTML
4.01, it would
be XHTML 1.0, XHTML 1.1 ... not HTML 5!
Tyler Z
On Thu, 14 Jun 2012 20:45:20 +0200, Andre Engels wrote:
On Thu,
You do know we still support IE6 right? We should probably discuss dropping IE6
support before IE7 :)
Ryan Kaldari
On Jun 14, 2012, at 11:45 AM, Andre Engels andreeng...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Jun 14, 2012 at 1:46 PM, Chad innocentkil...@gmail.com wrote:
Absolutely not. We have debated
I agree with Chris and Derric here; at least in the western world, a
large percentage of IE7 users have not upgraded for Enterprise reasons.
Many of these enterprises use proprietary software that is written for IE7,
and upgrading to the IE9 versions can be cost-prohibitive. Often by waiting
Another approach to consider for IE6/7 users is where it makes sense ship a
stylesheet which hides everything other than the content. I believe
Wikipedia should be accessible to all regardless of their browser choices.
Here is the IE6 one for those who haven't seen it - there is also an IE7
On Thu, Jun 14, 2012 at 12:19 PM, Jon Robson jdlrob...@gmail.com wrote:
Another approach to consider for IE6/7 users is where it makes sense ship a
stylesheet which hides everything other than the content. I believe
Wikipedia should be accessible to all regardless of their browser choices.
Max Semenik wrote:
But in any case, we must not annoy any significant part of our audience.
Let's put that in a sitenotice. :-)
MZMcBride
___
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
29 matches
Mail list logo
