Linked by Kroc Camen on Thu 25th Feb 2010 10:18 UTC
Humor BBC News reports "Mark your diaries for 4 March because in Denver the funeral arrangements are well underway for the planned passing that day of Internet Explorer 6". There's a phobia of being buried alive but I think in this case, it's the living that are all too quick to be shoveling the dirt over as IE6 doesn't officially die until 2014 when Microsoft pull the life-support.
Thread beginning with comment 411075
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[3]: I like IE6, really
by Delgarde on Thu 25th Feb 2010 21:04 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: I like IE6, really"
Delgarde
Member since:
2008-08-19

FLickr works OK - IE6 is fine with JPGs. Point taken about flash video, but Flash is a resource hog and overused anyway.


Right, but you were the one who raised the subject of text-mode browsers, something virtually useless on the internet today (if still occasionally useful for reading HTML-formatted log/report files over an SSH connection).

As to IE6, you're right that it's adequate for basic content. But only adequate, and that barely. Try to do fancy layouts, to make the content look nicer? That's a struggle. Try to make a more interactive page, to make things like navigation a bit more usable? Again, a struggle. These days, it's share is small enough that it's just not worth the huge extra effort to support it.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[4]: I like IE6, really
by Luke8844 on Thu 25th Feb 2010 21:39 in reply to "RE[3]: I like IE6, really"
Luke8844 Member since:
2010-02-25

Right, but you were the one who raised the subject of text-mode browsers, something virtually useless on the internet today (if still occasionally useful for reading HTML-formatted log/report files over an SSH connection).


Yes I did bring them into it - but the point I was trying to make (not perhaps expressed very well) was about loss of diversity, and whether the only "acceptable" clients on the web are those that support all the latest revisions of the standards.

[...] These days, it's share is small enough that it's just not worth the huge extra effort to support it.


If by that you mean its not worth implementing some particular features to support IE6 as such, I might probably agree. But I'm not sure I relish a web where you have to support every aspect of CSS version N (for some value of N). Why do we still use HTML heading and link tags, when each site can implement its own styling and interaction? Has javascript now become mandatory to view the web? Not yet, but maybe soon.

It seems the loss of client diversity, and a shift towards layout-focussed approaches could become a reason to add more and more complexity to the browser space. I hearby evoke the spirit of Tim Berners-Lee (my selective reading of his vision anyway!)

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[5]: I like IE6, really
by Delgarde on Thu 25th Feb 2010 22:39 in reply to "RE[4]: I like IE6, really"
Delgarde Member since:
2008-08-19

Has javascript now become mandatory to view the web? Not yet, but maybe soon.


Define 'view the web'? For static content, perhaps not - a page for an open-source project say, with documentation, screenshots, info for developers. Gnome.org or KDE.org, for example. Such sites can, and generally do, get by without scripting.

But the web isn't just static content, and hasn't been for a long time now. Can you really picture a Facebook-like site implemented without scripting? Or compare GMail with some of the ghastly non-scripted webmail services of a decade ago.

Reply Parent Score: 2