Comments on: How Do You Deal With A Web Site That Refuses To Upgrade?

By: Mark

Mark — Fri, 16 Oct 2009 18:21:34 +0000

The problem to me seems to be Microsoft assuming that everyone will conform with the needs of their programmes instead of writing programmes that work with what is actually there. It’s ridiculous that a new browser won’t read older sites. Why should a site have to completely upgrade just because Microsoft decides to produce a programme that won’t read it. And why should website designers optimise their sites for IE?
Anyway, if website designers conformed to web standards, this problem wouldn’t arise.
My advice – use Firefox. It’s a lot smarter.

By: Pieter

Pieter — Thu, 15 Oct 2009 14:44:59 +0000

Both the website and browser should comply with HTML (and other) standards. A website should not have to adjust itself to non-compliant browsers. Or make special code for certain browsers.

If a browser is not compatible, the browser should adjust itself, not the site!

By: David

David — Thu, 15 Oct 2009 01:43:56 +0000

As part of my business I practically live on browsers. 90% of the time is on Firefox and 9.99% on Chrome. The other .01% is on IE. Furthermore, in the last 3 months I haven’t used it at all until last week when I couldn’t connect to one particular site – IE couldn’t cut it either because the site was the problem. Any company, organization or person with an IE optimized web site needs to get out of the dark ages – it’s not even difficult.

In the next year and beyond I expect my IE usage to drop by 2 decimal places regardless of what version of bloated IE (or whatever masquerade Microsoft re-brand it as) is available.

The thought of dual booting, virtulizing or using WINE just so I can run IE is quite bizarre (even though I can do all three if I ever have some (currently and unlikely forseeable) need is just mental torture.

For a little brainfood – check out anybrowser.org/campaign/

By: David K.

David K. — Sun, 11 Oct 2009 20:23:55 +0000

Hey, I’m with you. Just realize, it’s not always an option.

As the sole IT person for a small company with 6 websites, I can tell my boss I need time to ensure compatibility. At the moment, with pressing projects, that’s not going to happen. BUT, if I have emails with customers or potential customer complaints, that speaks a whole lot louder.

By: David M

David M — Sun, 11 Oct 2009 15:48:22 +0000

Good points and I tend to agree. Any outside help is useful, but I do not think that puts any less responsibility on the webmaster to make sure his website is compatible with the newer browsers. That’s called staying competitive and doing this always costs money. Free help is nice but don’t depend on it in order to stay in business.

By: David K.

David K. — Sun, 11 Oct 2009 14:27:33 +0000

Exactly right, Jase.

You can be helpful to the webmasters, or you can be militant, your choice. I’m just saying, the militant route will more likely result in the website being shut down rather than upgraded.

On even an average sized website, there could be 100s of pages to mull through. That takes time and money, and the business case for we need to do this “so it works like it always has” is not an easy think for decision makers to swallow. And even if they do, forget to click one button on one page that doesn’t work, and maybe they’ve missed something that’s important to you.

By: S.C

S.C — Sun, 11 Oct 2009 10:56:08 +0000

Um, if you’re using Firefox there’re plugins that simulate Internet Explorer available, such as Coral IE Tab.

By: Jase

Jase — Sun, 11 Oct 2009 06:45:57 +0000

“Why would it be the users responsibility to inform them of their problems?”

because things get overlooked, I was maintaining a website for a small town a few years ago, where each business who agreed had a link to their own respective page and/or a page was created for them in the case of being non existant.

long story short, I’d messed up the code for the link of the local real estate firm, and I wouldnt have spotted it unless I’d been told specifically that it didnt work correctly.

By: David M

David M — Sun, 11 Oct 2009 02:11:13 +0000

“You best bet is to email the webmasters of any specific problems you are having. It’s very hard to track issues like that on large sites.”
Why would it be the users responsibility to inform them of their problems? Why don’t they just download the new browser and then go look at their own website using the new browser?

By: David K.

David K. — Sat, 10 Oct 2009 19:50:23 +0000

You do realize that sites with no traffic end up shut down. Look at Geocities. Great idea if that’s what you’re after.

You best bet is to email the webmasters of any specific problems you are having. It’s very hard to track issues like that on large sites. Plus, with IT departments more “minimalist” than usual, there is less staff available to work on them. Ultimately, the business has to decide between spending money on new features or on making the website work like it always has.

To me, the biggest culprit is the browsers like IE that suddenly change the way the browser works. Quit ragging on the businesses that have to spend money because of this just to keep the lights on.

I will agree, though, a lot of sites will put browser checks just because they don’t know if it works on different browsers. I’ve seen this a lot using Chrome. There are less issues than you might expect. At worst, they should put “This site best in IE X” and let your user decide if it works for them.