On Tue, Sep 5, 2017 at 11:27 AM, Joaquin Oltra Hernandez <jhernan...@wikimedia.org> wrote: > I think that people using old browsers on desktop, are most surely doing it > because they have to (company policy on locked down computers) and showing > them a banner or similar is only going to detract from their experience > with information they don't neither want nor need.
They may not be allowed to upgrade, but they must know they *should* upgrade, if they are using an insecure browser. > > In mobile the situation is a lot different, grade C doesn't mean old crappy > browser, but it means HTML only browser, and there are millions of people > opting in to those experiences to get a faster and more data constrained > experience, because of the cost of mobile data on their countries, or the > speeds of the network. > Those people are using Opera mini or UC browser at will, because it is > actually a better experience for them, and showing them a banner about > changing to a different browser when their browser is neither old, nor > outdated, is only going to be a negative experience for them on the sites. > > I personally don't think it is worth doing generally for all grade C. Maybe > it is worth identifying specific UA or UA ranges of browsers that are > specially problematic and that we know are usually used by choice and not > forced upon the user, and showing a message to those only. That way we > could avoid degrading the experience to users that are using a grade C by > choice, like the Opera mini ones. > Yes, these cases are different. From the original message I understood that this was to target old browsers only, but perhaps multiple banners could be displayed depending whether the user is browsing with an insecure browser or with one that has reduced functionality. > My 2 cents. > > On Tue, Sep 5, 2017 at 7:40 AM Gergo Tisza <gti...@wikimedia.org> wrote: > >> On Mon, Sep 4, 2017 at 6:13 PM, Bryan Davis <bd...@wikimedia.org> wrote: >> >> > In my personal past experience, >> > Firefox crashes were almost always correlated with buggy user >> > installed, community developed extensions. >> > >> >> Which are going to be axed in the next release and replaced with a >> Chrome-like limited-but-safe API for extensions, and that has everyone up >> in arms. It's hard to please users :) >> >> In any case I would care more about linking to a user-friendly and >> well-maintained landing page (e.g. does it offer useful choices if you >> visit it from a mobile device?) than the specific selection of browsers >> offered - given the relatively small ratio of grade C visits, we are >> unlikely to alter the browser landscape much either way. And I doubt we >> want to deal with maintaining such a page ourselves. >> _______________________________________________ >> Wikitech-l mailing list >> Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org >> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l > _______________________________________________ > Wikitech-l mailing list > Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l -- Pere Orga _______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
