I dunno, Google seems to have beaten them to the punch and no matter their culture, I'd still call them a traditionally hierarchically structured organization
Unfortunately, there are a huge number of corporate environments that have virtually no reason to upgrade their browsing platforms. Many of these environments don't even really have a technical reason to not do the upgrade, they are just administered by overworked staff and upgrading IE6 to something newer and safer is just at the bottom of the list.
The bottom line is that until the end users who have to use IE6 every day become inconvenienced enough (in the form of sites blocking them out, not warning them) or the people who pay these IT admins actually think it's a priority, we're not going to make much headway on this issue.
With that said, I think that initiatives like this are a great start. What I would like to see is a distributed technical effort to encourage upgrades, which is what they are doing, followed up a technical effort to block access to IE6 starting on a specific date. Let the note of encouragement that participants place on their sites let users know that unless their browser is upgraded, they will be unable to access the site as of June 1, 2010.
Eventually these IT admins will be placed in the position of having to choose between keeping IE6 to support their legacy intranet applications and upgrading IE6 because third party sites have started to implement functionality that IE6 doesn't support.
One of my clients ships software to such an organization - several of our users had IE6 installed when Training day rolled around. Interestingly, rather than going through Tech Support to request an upgrade to IE7 (which takes a while), the users opted to just download Firefox.
More unfortunate still is the huge number of schools trapped in an IE 6 world. Primary and secondary school IT in the US must be worse off than corporate IT -- far too little money, time, and staff to worry about browser versions. Our audience is largely educators and our IE 6 percentage (12% or so) seem stuck now after a steady decline this past year.
You do realize that a large portion of people that are using IE6 are at work where they have NO control over the browser...
i hear this every time the ie6 argument comes up, and yet, i've never heard from someone that actually works in one of these IT departments that can vouch for this.
who are these unsympathetic robots who, while ironically working in an IT department, are so out of touch with technology that they fail to understand their users are stuck using insecure, out-of-date software that is now increasingly being blocked? are these users still using 500mhz machines with windows 98, too?
The problem is internal legacy applications that only work in IE6. If they upgrade browsers the apps break, so in order to support these apps they keep IE 6. The question for them is 'do we spend time and money to update all of our applications to upgrade a browser, or just leave things the way they are for now?'
Digg surveyed IE6 users. 76% of those surveyed DO NOT HAVE THE POWER/AUTHORITY/ABILITY to upgrade.
"Giving them a message saying, “Hey! Upgrade!” in this case is not only pointless; it’s sadistic.
We’re committed to developing to Web standards and building new ways to help you discover the best of the Web. Keeping an eye on what technologies folks use and why they’re being used is a big part of it."
I'm currently an intern at a large biotech company which employs over 25,000 people world-wide and all the machines come with IE6.
I'm an intern at their headquarters in a section of the IT department that doesn't deal with maintaining the software on the computers. However, there was one larger meeting where I remember someone asking about upgrading IE, and the response was something like, "Uhh, I've been pretty busy, I'll get around to it eventually." Everyone just laughed and I could tell it was a kind of ongoing joke. I think the general attitude is that no one here really cares enough to go through the work of upgrading everyone. I don't think they get many complaints, and their job isn't in jeopardy, so they just sit on it until something or someone really big makes them act.
IE6 is still very prevalent in the American school system (don't know about elsewhere). We used to sell a web product to schools and you wouldn't believe the number of districts using IE6 for "compatibility" with their network software or because they don't consider upgrading a priority.
These unsympathetic robots are all the people that are using Windows 2000. I've seen people in firms that refuse to update their version of windows. They all seem to hate this and don't expect much of a browsing experience from these machines anyway...
I know from extremely unpleasant experience that many large Canadian government organizations are still using IE6+XP. Further, I know of at least one large health region still on IE6+XP.
Change takes a while in these monolithic bureaucracies; especially when they have to ensure that any upgrades to software have no negative effects to any other software installed on the system (a lot of which can be equal parts shoddy and proprietary).
As an aside, I've been working with a large government client for 2.5 years now, and I still haven't been able to get their IT dept. to add Flash to their image to support the streaming video site they paid my company to build (hooray for Windows Media Player).
i've never heard from someone that actually works in one of these IT departments
Hi!
who are these unsympathetic robots who, while ironically working in an IT department, are so out of touch with technology
The same people who get emails from vendors warning us off upgrading to IE7 or certain programs will break. The same people who have had such pain from flakey apps for all sorts of reasons that we just don't dare upgrade. The same people who use anti-virus, non-administrator accounts and gateway HTTP, FTP and SMTP proxies with scanners to reduce the risks.
The same people who've learned to beat their inner geek into submission to the principle of 'if it's not broken, and you don't want it broken, leave it alone. Companies want sameness, predictability and uptime, not features, novelty, CSS compliance or security'.
I am currently working at one of the largest beverage corporations of the world, and not only they continue to use IE6 but also they methodically inspect every Windows OS update, even if its a security patch, it can be months until they decide to update the network with such patches and updates.
At my day job we have some (unpatched?) Windows 2000 machine (no service packs) running IE 5.5 (I think?). I carry around a flash drive with a Portable Firefox (among other apps) install on it for browsing at work.
They're 2.0 gHz P4 Dell machines if you're really interested in the specs. :p
The official browser at my office is IE6. Of course I have chrome, firefox and safari installed, but most employees here don't have local admin access.
GM requires the use of IE6, or it at least did when my father last worked there (about a year and a half, two years ago). It could have changed by now but considering they were just moving from 95 to 98 when he left I doubt it.
In a lot of cases (including mine), IT operators are working with zero budget. While there's the obvious argument that upgrading from a free browser to another free browser doesn't cost any money, it does cost time; I work at a federal agency in which their web applications HAVE to work, and unfortunately, many of them were written for IE6. Rewriting those applications to support a new browser isn't free either.
In addition that that, there is time spent securing the installation. In the case of IE it's a little easier as I can manage it with policies, but it is absolutely critical that we're following DOD stigs regarding security, and setting up a central policy isn't free.
Regarding the PC comment, the laptop I replaced a month ago was a 1.0Ghz Pentium with 512M RAM. This was the upgraded laptop at the time, that I needed for java development. Compiling code with 512M on XP was adventurous. For the last 8 months I had it, the internal LCD had died, most of the keys didn't work, the WiFi radio was completely dead, and the power button would only work if I wiggled the frame and monitor. I made sure to use it on a plugged-in (ethernet network) to bypass the WiFi, plugged into an external monitor to get around the LCD, grabbed an external keyboard to type on, and wiggled it every day to power it on.
Before deeming it dead, they replaced the motherboard 3 times and the hard drive twice. I kept using the decrepit old machine because frankly, it was the nicest laptop anyone had on the team. They're refreshing the machines now, but we've only had IE7 in the environment for about a month. I am lucky in that I can use Firefox, but only within the firewall, and not at all to browse any external sites.
Sorry, I kind of got off on a tangent here, but it's perfectly reasonable to understand that there ARE in fact reasons why it takes a long time to get off of IE6.
I have worked at a place like this. You clearly have never worked for a large bank, or financial institution. Or a company that has a lot of internal processes designed for ie6/active-x. It is great, like stepping back into the past, but not the good past of dinosaurs or gladiators, but the shit past of 6 years ago, when we didn't know any better. You no longer want to use a computer at home, since you are constantly reminded of the shit you are using at work.
They're people who work in firms that have intranet applications that were written specifically for IE6. Its cheaper to keep the browser than update some very badly written software.
From my comment on VB:
"That's exactly the idea. Even if a bunch of the remaining IE 6 users are corporate, hopefully a few of them will become aware of the fact that their browser is almost 9 years old and start putting pressure on IT to upgrade."
The more prompts that are posted across the web, the more pressure the IT department will be getting to get their ass in gear and upgrade their decade old computer systems.
For 'drop in code', it would be nice if they cleaned it up a bit... Removed redundant whitespace in css, redundant white space between divs and used better quoting e.g. the following
I applaud everyone who participates in this for having the gumption to add some inertia to the situation. It's ok to give the plebs some incentive to user better, safer technologies. And furthermore, three cheers for the realization that small, progressive companies can use consumer impact to positively change the greater technological environment and accelerate the pace of widespread adoption. Booya!
The vast majority of machines running IE6 have requirements that see no advantage to an upgrade. Example: corporate machine where the internet is not used - in that case an IE upgrade is pointless, but the employee might still surf the web.
How many home users are still using IE6? I doubt all that many TBH.
I wonder how many organizations use separate test environments; because parallelism is really useful for this kind of migration.
In the case of IE6, it would mean setting up some machines with $NEXT_GEN_BROWSER and some side servers with copies of the antiquated "web" apps. Gradually, everything that's broken without IE6 is fixed by tinkering with the side copy that no one is really using. Sometimes, the company's been really stupid and doesn't even have source code, etc. so "tinkering" might really mean "try something new entirely", but at least they'd be showing interest in modernizing (however long it takes).
The simple fact is that all companies should have this kind of "beta flow", in which they can basically try whatever they want (time permitting). Today it's IE6, tomorrow it could be something entirely different; there will always something new that "might" vastly improve efficiency, and a company that can give these things an honest trial is way ahead. I cringe when I see change-averse IT groups, because deep down I know they're shooting themselves in the foot.
Wow, I hadn't checked my site stats for a while, I thought IE6 browser share was a lot higher. For me it's ~18% of total visits, ~30% IE7, ~12% IE8, 30% Firefox, 7% Chrome, 2% Safari.
Isn't just about everyone left using IE6 a corporate user whose employer won't let them upgrade? While I'd love to see the death of IE6 & 7 as much as anyone, I think most people using IE6 probably have firewalls that block Reddit and Justin.tv.
I'm guessing most of the remaining IE6 installs are inside corporations and government departments and are necessary to run legacy internal web applications.
True... but not by choice since some government agencies are still using Windows 2000 (which doesn't support IE7+). Some might say a move to FF would be beneficial, but the overhead of having to manage and secure FF is far greater when they can just stay on IE6.
Still using IE6 means avoiding forced updates from MS, so, they probably were disabled security updates. It means they are the source of bootnets and hosting for trojans and viruses.
It's not a boycott, just a dismissible nag message. Did you read the article?
Also, the number of people from these startups is approximately (data from quantcast):
4.1 million (jtv us) + 1.3 million (weebly us) + 1.7 million (reddit us) + 1.3 million (posterous) + 0.5 million (disqus us) = 8.9 million US people. Global reach is probably 2-3x that much, but quantcast doesn't offer global numbers for all of them (JTV has 26 million globally).
[+] [-] pg|16 years ago|reply
I've been looking forward to seeing what this type of network can do that a traditionally hierarchically structured organization can't.
[+] [-] vaksel|16 years ago|reply
[+] [-] lawrence_ll|16 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] brandon272|16 years ago|reply
The bottom line is that until the end users who have to use IE6 every day become inconvenienced enough (in the form of sites blocking them out, not warning them) or the people who pay these IT admins actually think it's a priority, we're not going to make much headway on this issue.
With that said, I think that initiatives like this are a great start. What I would like to see is a distributed technical effort to encourage upgrades, which is what they are doing, followed up a technical effort to block access to IE6 starting on a specific date. Let the note of encouragement that participants place on their sites let users know that unless their browser is upgraded, they will be unable to access the site as of June 1, 2010.
Eventually these IT admins will be placed in the position of having to choose between keeping IE6 to support their legacy intranet applications and upgrading IE6 because third party sites have started to implement functionality that IE6 doesn't support.
[+] [-] jon_dahl|16 years ago|reply
[+] [-] jbyers|16 years ago|reply
[+] [-] there|16 years ago|reply
You do realize that a large portion of people that are using IE6 are at work where they have NO control over the browser...
i hear this every time the ie6 argument comes up, and yet, i've never heard from someone that actually works in one of these IT departments that can vouch for this.
who are these unsympathetic robots who, while ironically working in an IT department, are so out of touch with technology that they fail to understand their users are stuck using insecure, out-of-date software that is now increasingly being blocked? are these users still using 500mhz machines with windows 98, too?
[+] [-] aichcon|16 years ago|reply
[+] [-] webwright|16 years ago|reply
Digg surveyed IE6 users. 76% of those surveyed DO NOT HAVE THE POWER/AUTHORITY/ABILITY to upgrade.
"Giving them a message saying, “Hey! Upgrade!” in this case is not only pointless; it’s sadistic.
We’re committed to developing to Web standards and building new ways to help you discover the best of the Web. Keeping an eye on what technologies folks use and why they’re being used is a big part of it."
[+] [-] czstrong|16 years ago|reply
I'm an intern at their headquarters in a section of the IT department that doesn't deal with maintaining the software on the computers. However, there was one larger meeting where I remember someone asking about upgrading IE, and the response was something like, "Uhh, I've been pretty busy, I'll get around to it eventually." Everyone just laughed and I could tell it was a kind of ongoing joke. I think the general attitude is that no one here really cares enough to go through the work of upgrading everyone. I don't think they get many complaints, and their job isn't in jeopardy, so they just sit on it until something or someone really big makes them act.
[+] [-] jmcannon|16 years ago|reply
[+] [-] j2d2|16 years ago|reply
[+] [-] ironkeith|16 years ago|reply
Change takes a while in these monolithic bureaucracies; especially when they have to ensure that any upgrades to software have no negative effects to any other software installed on the system (a lot of which can be equal parts shoddy and proprietary).
As an aside, I've been working with a large government client for 2.5 years now, and I still haven't been able to get their IT dept. to add Flash to their image to support the streaming video site they paid my company to build (hooray for Windows Media Player).
[+] [-] tedunangst|16 years ago|reply
Next you'll say that nobody ever calls their computer case the CPU because you haven't seen anybody do it here.
[+] [-] jodrellblank|16 years ago|reply
Hi!
who are these unsympathetic robots who, while ironically working in an IT department, are so out of touch with technology
The same people who get emails from vendors warning us off upgrading to IE7 or certain programs will break. The same people who have had such pain from flakey apps for all sorts of reasons that we just don't dare upgrade. The same people who use anti-virus, non-administrator accounts and gateway HTTP, FTP and SMTP proxies with scanners to reduce the risks.
The same people who've learned to beat their inner geek into submission to the principle of 'if it's not broken, and you don't want it broken, leave it alone. Companies want sameness, predictability and uptime, not features, novelty, CSS compliance or security'.
[+] [-] unknown|16 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] sepa|16 years ago|reply
[+] [-] sjs382|16 years ago|reply
They're 2.0 gHz P4 Dell machines if you're really interested in the specs. :p
[+] [-] run4yourlives|16 years ago|reply
>who are these unsympathetic robots who
The enterprise IT department that's who.
[+] [-] Dobbs|16 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Jem|16 years ago|reply
They have different financial priorities than spending time on upgrading software that "just works".
[+] [-] alextp|16 years ago|reply
It was not pretty, although I managed to install XEmacs and survive.
[+] [-] alaskamiller|16 years ago|reply
[+] [-] jadence|16 years ago|reply
[+] [-] bmelton|16 years ago|reply
In addition that that, there is time spent securing the installation. In the case of IE it's a little easier as I can manage it with policies, but it is absolutely critical that we're following DOD stigs regarding security, and setting up a central policy isn't free.
Regarding the PC comment, the laptop I replaced a month ago was a 1.0Ghz Pentium with 512M RAM. This was the upgraded laptop at the time, that I needed for java development. Compiling code with 512M on XP was adventurous. For the last 8 months I had it, the internal LCD had died, most of the keys didn't work, the WiFi radio was completely dead, and the power button would only work if I wiggled the frame and monitor. I made sure to use it on a plugged-in (ethernet network) to bypass the WiFi, plugged into an external monitor to get around the LCD, grabbed an external keyboard to type on, and wiggled it every day to power it on.
Before deeming it dead, they replaced the motherboard 3 times and the hard drive twice. I kept using the decrepit old machine because frankly, it was the nicest laptop anyone had on the team. They're refreshing the machines now, but we've only had IE7 in the environment for about a month. I am lucky in that I can use Firefox, but only within the firewall, and not at all to browse any external sites.
Sorry, I kind of got off on a tangent here, but it's perfectly reasonable to understand that there ARE in fact reasons why it takes a long time to get off of IE6.
[+] [-] cakesy|16 years ago|reply
[+] [-] clistctrl|16 years ago|reply
[+] [-] jcdreads|16 years ago|reply
[+] [-] bradgessler|16 years ago|reply
[+] [-] ujeezy|16 years ago|reply
[+] [-] drusenko|16 years ago|reply
The more prompts that are posted across the web, the more pressure the IT department will be getting to get their ass in gear and upgrade their decade old computer systems.
[+] [-] gcheong|16 years ago|reply
[+] [-] fhub|16 years ago|reply
<a href='#' onclick='javascript:this.parentNode.parentNode.style.display='none'; return false;'>
could be written as:-
<a href='#' onclick="this.parentNode.parentNode.style.display='none'; return false">
Wouldn't be suprised if the same effect could be created in 1/2 the size (pre deflate/gzip).
[+] [-] tripngroove|16 years ago|reply
[+] [-] ErrantX|16 years ago|reply
The vast majority of machines running IE6 have requirements that see no advantage to an upgrade. Example: corporate machine where the internet is not used - in that case an IE upgrade is pointless, but the employee might still surf the web.
How many home users are still using IE6? I doubt all that many TBH.
[+] [-] ddispaltro|16 years ago|reply
[+] [-] makecheck|16 years ago|reply
In the case of IE6, it would mean setting up some machines with $NEXT_GEN_BROWSER and some side servers with copies of the antiquated "web" apps. Gradually, everything that's broken without IE6 is fixed by tinkering with the side copy that no one is really using. Sometimes, the company's been really stupid and doesn't even have source code, etc. so "tinkering" might really mean "try something new entirely", but at least they'd be showing interest in modernizing (however long it takes).
The simple fact is that all companies should have this kind of "beta flow", in which they can basically try whatever they want (time permitting). Today it's IE6, tomorrow it could be something entirely different; there will always something new that "might" vastly improve efficiency, and a company that can give these things an honest trial is way ahead. I cringe when I see change-averse IT groups, because deep down I know they're shooting themselves in the foot.
[+] [-] nico|16 years ago|reply
[+] [-] mattmaroon|16 years ago|reply
On the other hand, this certainly cannot hurt.
[+] [-] Klonoar|16 years ago|reply
We've been advocating that all users drop IE6 at http://webs.com/ since December. Are you only listing those who've thrown up your widget?
[+] [-] cakesy|16 years ago|reply
[+] [-] jgilliam|16 years ago|reply
[+] [-] RyanMcGreal|16 years ago|reply
[+] [-] fname|16 years ago|reply
[+] [-] unknown|16 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] quellhorst|16 years ago|reply
[+] [-] c00p3r|16 years ago|reply
[+] [-] rawr|16 years ago|reply
This will get the grannies to upgrade their computer machines for sure.
[+] [-] emmett|16 years ago|reply
Also, the number of people from these startups is approximately (data from quantcast):
4.1 million (jtv us) + 1.3 million (weebly us) + 1.7 million (reddit us) + 1.3 million (posterous) + 0.5 million (disqus us) = 8.9 million US people. Global reach is probably 2-3x that much, but quantcast doesn't offer global numbers for all of them (JTV has 26 million globally).
I'd say that counts as an established user base.