Author Topic: Google says goobye to Internet Explorer 8 (Read 11133 times)

Giampy · « **on:** September 18, 2012, 06:19 AM »

http://googleappsupd...owsers-internet.html

wraith808 · « **Reply #1 on:** September 18, 2012, 09:09 AM »

So that means no google apps on XP unless you use something other than IE.

Hmmm... that's going to go over well, I'm sure. I only have Chrome/FF at work because I'm a developer and have admin privileges. A lot of our internal apps don't support anything but IE. But we use Google apps.

I see a definite conflict there...

f0dder · « **Reply #2 on:** September 22, 2012, 06:36 AM »

It's a nice move, really.

Hopefully it's going to cause enough trouble that boneheaded IT departments will finally realize that having the default browser as IE isn't really what they should be doing. (Several places will still be forced to using IE alongside a better browser, because of retarded internal apps coded by slopmonkeys - but at least the default browser can be FF or Chrome).

wraith808 · « **Reply #3 on:** September 22, 2012, 09:29 AM »

because of retarded internal apps coded by slopmonkeys
-f0dder (September 22, 2012, 06:36 AM)

Why blame the coders for the requirements of management? That seems somewhat ... wrong.

f0dder · « **Reply #4 on:** September 22, 2012, 09:32 AM »

because of retarded internal apps coded by slopmonkeys
-f0dder (September 22, 2012, 06:36 AM)
Why blame the coders for the requirements of management? That seems somewhat ... wrong.
-wraith808 (September 22, 2012, 09:29 AM)

Because the coders wrote stuff that breaks in all other browsers, instead of Doing Things Right, with some abstraction layer for IE support?

wraith808 · « **Reply #5 on:** September 22, 2012, 09:50 AM »

because of retarded internal apps coded by slopmonkeys
-f0dder (September 22, 2012, 06:36 AM)
Why blame the coders for the requirements of management? That seems somewhat ... wrong.
-wraith808 (September 22, 2012, 09:29 AM)
Because the coders wrote stuff that breaks in all other browsers, instead of Doing Things Right, with some abstraction layer for IE support?
-f0dder (September 22, 2012, 09:32 AM)

Nope. Doesn't hold water. We had a requirement to use Sharepoint for internal applications for tracking and document management and other things. We railed against it because Sharepoint sucks- but we had to get paid. Eventually, we were able to get them to move to a google platform and to TFS for source control and scrum... but that was eventually. We still have many years worth of baggage in sharepoint, and the ROI for changing it isn't enough.

There are other examples, but I think that gets the point across.

f0dder · « **Reply #6 on:** September 22, 2012, 10:04 AM »

There are other examples, but I think that gets the point across.
-wraith808 (September 22, 2012, 09:50 AM)

You've listed one specific issue where there's - supposedly - some IE requirements going on (I haven't had the misfortune of dealing with SharePoint, I pity you

). Lots of stuff doesn't require IE because of crappy ActiveX controls, but because of jscript vs. javascript or DOM differences (or, in the old days, MS-Java specifics) - the kind of stuff there's really no excuse for.

wraith808 · « **Reply #7 on:** September 22, 2012, 10:45 AM »

There are other examples, but I think that gets the point across.
-wraith808 (September 22, 2012, 09:50 AM)
You've listed one specific issue where there's - supposedly - some IE requirements going on (I haven't had the misfortune of dealing with SharePoint, I pity you ). Lots of stuff doesn't require IE because of crappy ActiveX controls, but because of jscript vs. javascript or DOM differences (or, in the old days, MS-Java specifics) - the kind of stuff there's really no excuse for.
-f0dder (September 22, 2012, 10:04 AM)

Not supposedly - Sharepoint just won't work under anything but IE. And there's a *lot* of sharepoint out there- I know a few people who made their living as a Sharepoint developer (ick). If you code open platforms for a specific browser, that's one thing. But I know quite a few things that are limited specifically because of ActiveX controls. Or the need to have an embedded browser- it's easier to just embed IE- and they're using IE specific stuff. And this doesn't just go away. It would be different if newer versions of the browser supported older operating systems, but they don't. So the 2 generations is pretty disingenuous when people can't upgrade for other reasons, and have to use IE. Basically it's 'stuck on XP and have to use IE? You're part of the 47%!'

f0dder · « **Reply #8 on:** September 22, 2012, 11:21 AM »

There are other examples, but I think that gets the point across.
-wraith808 (September 22, 2012, 09:50 AM)
You've listed one specific issue where there's - supposedly - some IE requirements going on (I haven't had the misfortune of dealing with SharePoint, I pity you ). Lots of stuff doesn't require IE because of crappy ActiveX controls, but because of jscript vs. javascript or DOM differences (or, in the old days, MS-Java specifics) - the kind of stuff there's really no excuse for.
-f0dder (September 22, 2012, 10:04 AM)
Not supposedly - Sharepoint just won't work under anything but IE.
-wraith808 (September 22, 2012, 10:45 AM)

I guess that depends on the level of sharepoint support you want - the (horrible!) office integration crap might require IE, but basic site functionality works fine (as "fine" as you can manage to get with sharepoint

) with other browsers - at least the school intranet system some years back did. Of course the site as a whole was a catastrophe of sharepoint dimensions, so was eventually scrapped again in favor of something simpler, that actually worked.

Or the need to have an embedded browser- it's easier to just embed IE- and they're using IE specific stuff.
-wraith808 (September 22, 2012, 10:45 AM)

And I'm kinda glad when that bites people in the behind, since embedded browsers is almost always a horrible end-user experience. There's a (very!) few pieces of software where this makes sense, but mostly it's just a very very bad idea. (I remember a certain antivirus package that decided using embedded IE for it's user interface was a good idea... yeah.)

wraith808 · « **Reply #9 on:** September 22, 2012, 12:27 PM »

There are other examples, but I think that gets the point across.
-wraith808 (September 22, 2012, 09:50 AM)
You've listed one specific issue where there's - supposedly - some IE requirements going on (I haven't had the misfortune of dealing with SharePoint, I pity you ). Lots of stuff doesn't require IE because of crappy ActiveX controls, but because of jscript vs. javascript or DOM differences (or, in the old days, MS-Java specifics) - the kind of stuff there's really no excuse for.
-f0dder (September 22, 2012, 10:04 AM)
Not supposedly - Sharepoint just won't work under anything but IE.
-wraith808 (September 22, 2012, 10:45 AM)
I guess that depends on the level of sharepoint support you want - the (horrible!) office integration crap might require IE, but basic site functionality works fine (as "fine" as you can manage to get with sharepoint ) with other browsers - at least the school intranet system some years back did. Of course the site as a whole was a catastrophe of sharepoint dimensions, so was eventually scrapped again in favor of something simpler, that actually worked.
-f0dder (September 22, 2012, 11:21 AM)

We don't have office integration... just using basics like document storage and documentation page (we have over a decade, and most likely more of documentation in sharepoint, so it's definitely not going away anytime soon). It just doesn't work in anything other than IE. I don't know the specifics why...but believe me, I've tried.

Or the need to have an embedded browser- it's easier to just embed IE- and they're using IE specific stuff.
-wraith808 (September 22, 2012, 10:45 AM)
And I'm kinda glad when that bites people in the behind, since embedded browsers is almost always a horrible end-user experience. There's a (very!) few pieces of software where this makes sense, but mostly it's just a very very bad idea. (I remember a certain antivirus package that decided using embedded IE for it's user interface was a good idea... yeah.)
-f0dder (September 22, 2012, 11:21 AM)

In our case, it's a necessity. We have documents from the SEC and other filings type documents that don't display correctly in anything but IE. And since the application has to do with extracting data exactly as it appears in the documents, then mapping it to standard data in the database, and seeing where those numbers match up with the calculations, and then being able to go from our site (which doesn't require IE anymore thank goodness) back to the documents. We're trapped in a world we never made. And we can't dictate to those firms how to report, and since the SEC and doesn't standardize EDGAR documents, there's nothing we can do other than try to deal with what's there.

TaoPhoenix · « **Reply #10 on:** September 22, 2012, 02:24 PM »

Would the official end of support for XP be a big enough event to force those kinds of agencies to make the necessary changes? As long as it's "merely corporate bickering with the users" vs versions, life trundles along. But I'd ... uh ... hope that the security-conscious agencies might see a wee little problem with producing data that requires, by a couple steps of logical reasoning, to use an OS that officially has no more security updates as of X date.

wraith808 · « **Reply #11 on:** September 22, 2012, 10:48 PM »

Would the official end of support for XP be a big enough event to force those kinds of agencies to make the necessary changes? As long as it's "merely corporate bickering with the users" vs versions, life trundles along. But I'd ... uh ... hope that the security-conscious agencies might see a wee little problem with producing data that requires, by a couple steps of logical reasoning, to use an OS that officially has no more security updates as of X date.
-TaoPhoenix (September 22, 2012, 02:24 PM)

I'm sure they'll change by that time. But as of right now, XP hasn't reached end of life. Neither has IE 7 nor 8. So because of a quick turnaround on versions- quicker than IE was updating when they made that policy- they are discontinuing support for a viable browser. This isn't so much serving as self-serving. They are very much aware of this. So that means that anyone on XP will have to switch. Not saying anything one way or another about the browsers. It just smacks of the same thing we saw with the whole go dark for ie thing. Elitism.

f0dder · « **Reply #12 on:** September 23, 2012, 11:26 AM »

It just smacks of the same thing we saw with the whole go dark for ie thing. Elitism.
-wraith808 (September 22, 2012, 10:48 PM)

...or making the world a better place :-)

app103 · « **Reply #13 on:** September 24, 2012, 10:21 AM »

It just smacks of the same thing we saw with the whole go dark for ie thing. Elitism.
-wraith808 (September 22, 2012, 10:48 PM)
...or making the world a better place :-)
-f0dder (September 23, 2012, 11:26 AM)

Normally I would consider this to be another case of browser bigotry (and you know how I hate that!), but we are talking about Google Apps and not some smug elitist web designer that just doesn't feel like fixing his CSS to look right in some older versions of IE.

There is an issue of what is and isn't supported by some versions of IE...some newer things like HTML5, which is not purely aesthetic. If Google has plans on incorporating more HTML5 stuff into their Google Apps, things not supported by IE8 and older, then it could make perfect sense not to support browsers in which these things will not work.

And IE8 has hit a stage where no new features will be added, only security updates, so this will not change. What IE8 supports is pretty much set in stone at this point.

And while they won't be cutting off IE8 users from using Google Apps (yet), the message displayed telling them to upgrade their browser, I think should be more accurately stated as "Buy a new OS, or perhaps a new computer."

wraith808 · « **Reply #14 on:** September 24, 2012, 12:02 PM »

Well, when App starts to stand up for something along these lines, that's my cue to back off as she's usually the one on the frontlines waving her fist.

40hz · « **Reply #15 on:** September 24, 2012, 12:14 PM »

.
.
.
And while they won't be cutting off IE8 users from using Google Apps (yet), the message displayed telling them to upgrade their browser, I think should be more accurately stated as "Buy a new OS, or perhaps a new computer."
-app103 (September 24, 2012, 10:21 AM)

LOL!

True too. I see Pentium machines with Win-XP brought to a crawl by more and more websites. Like Bobby-D said:

Gather 'round people
Wherever you roam
And admit that the waters
Around you have grown

And accept it that soon
You'll be drenched to the bone

If your time to you is worth savin'

Then you better start swimmin'
Or you'll sink like a stone

For the times they are a-changin'

Tinman57 · « **Reply #16 on:** September 25, 2012, 06:36 PM »

http://googleappsupd...owsers-internet.html
-Giampy (September 18, 2012, 06:19 AM)

Tis why I use Avant Browser Ultimate. I can switch on the fly from IE > Chrome > Firefox in any combination. Plus it has a huge assortment of bells n whistles and almost every aspect of it is configurable....

techidave · « **Reply #17 on:** September 27, 2012, 04:55 AM »

I had not heard about the Ultimate version of Advant. I shall have to try it.

Tinman57 · « **Reply #18 on:** September 27, 2012, 06:41 PM »

I had not heard about the Ultimate version of Advant. I shall have to try it.
-techidave (September 27, 2012, 04:55 AM)

I think you'll find that it's got the nicest interface you could ask for. It don't have a few quirky plug-ins that other browsers can use, but it's got a lot more things that the others don't have as well. lol

TaoPhoenix · « **Reply #19 on:** September 27, 2012, 07:05 PM »

Tangentially about Google dropping stuff, they're also dropping the classic doc formats. So this is a big move in the strategy game.

tomos · « **Reply #20 on:** September 28, 2012, 03:12 AM »

Tangentially about Google dropping stuff, they're also dropping the classic doc formats. So this is a big move in the strategy game.
-TaoPhoenix (September 27, 2012, 07:05 PM)

I noticed that lately with spreadsheets (unfortunately their xlsx support is not as good

)