YouTube will soon be dropping support for Internet Explorer 6 as it attempts to move users to a "more modern browser". Google, who owns YouTube, is pushing for users to upgrade to Chrome, Firefox or IE 8. It's no surprise that they are pushing for users to switch to Chrome with two advertisements to download the browser which Google is using to challenge Microsoft's IE 8.TechCrunch cites that YouTube is trying to follow in Digg's footsteps where it recently expressed interest in dropping support for the legacy browser. "Digg's User Experience Architect Mark Trammell at the time wrote that the site is strongly considering removing essential features like digging and commenting for IE6 users. He explained that while IE6 users make up around 5% of site traffic, it only accounts for 1% of diggs, buries, and comments."
Is the time finally here that developers can ditch the browser and start to move closer to a unified Web 2.0 experience or should they continue to support those who have not or cannot upgrade their browsers?
With two mega-sites like Digg and YouTube pushing to drop support for IE 6 it's only a matter of time before other sites and webmasters jump on board. The ancient browser is part of a time period that represented Microsoft's dominance in the web browser market. As this era ends, so should its support.
Good move though! The more people that upgrade from IE6 the better, there really is no excuse to still be using it on a home computer.
not throw ads for various types of browsers out there, what if they were dropping support for Firefox 2.0.x ... its lame and lowbrow, getting harder and harder to place any trust in google and they want us to consider their OS a year+down the road lol
just my 2 cents
its the same as Apple throwing Safari into iTunes update, they know the cheap trick will get alot of eyes on, don't get me wrong i'm all for getting users updated but at least do it without the shady underhanded business, you know they would just love to have a lone download button to Chrome there and nothing else, if they could do that and get away with it
on another note, ISPs should just detect those running IE6, and leave users with a message that they need to upgrade to the latest IE version in order to use their service, folks that use other browsers generally keep themselves up to date regardless
Last edited by artfuldodga on 14 Jul 2009 - 17:19
Which they have.
i'm a dedicated Firefox user btw, i don't like to see this type of tactic
Last edited by artfuldodga on 14 Jul 2009 - 17:30
My ISP should not mess with my choice of browser. If I want to run IE6 that is my decision as long as i keep myself safe.
One scenario is what if I'm running NT4 for some legacy application or hardware? Latest browser supported is IE6 and its required to use windows update. Sure there are ways around it as windows update is not required to get the latest updates but it should be my choice not my ISPs.
They're promoting the 2 browsers with the largest marketshare, and their parent companys browser
It's not as if they placed Google Chrome first in the list
not throw ads for various types of browsers out there, what if they were dropping support for Firefox 2.0.x ... its lame and lowbrow, getting harder and harder to place any trust in google and they want us to consider their OS a year+down the road lol
just my 2 cents
its the same as Apple throwing Safari into iTunes update, they know the cheap trick will get alot of eyes on, don't get me wrong i'm all for getting users updated but at least do it without the shady underhanded business, you know they would just love to have a lone download button to Chrome there and nothing else, if they could do that and get away with it
on another note, ISPs should just detect those running IE6, and leave users with a message that they need to upgrade to the latest IE version in order to use their service, folks that use other browsers generally keep themselves up to date regardless
It's not shady! Their quote is:
"We will be phasing out support for your browser soon.
Please upgrade to one of these more modern browsers."
There's no where in that statement that constraints their statement to ONLY IE6! If anything, they are very meticulous. Because the title of the news contain "IE6" you've immediately concluded/interpret it as it was meant for IE6 ONLY. This means that Google preferred to give more choices to the consumer instead of just restricting their user to just ONE particular choice of browser in question. This kind of prejudice of the mind is dangerous.
anyhow, dropping support for IE6 is good, i just think they could of made it clear there is an upgrade path for any home user running IE6 directly to IE8 (anyone running IE6 willingly probably thinks the entire OS is called IE or Windows Explorer) intead of using YouTube to push another product of theirs
Last edited by artfuldodga on 14 Jul 2009 - 18:38
I've refreshed like 40 times... the order stays the same.
They should! 3.5 blows 2.x away.
Considering a lot of corporations still use XP and also rely on IE6 as for compatibility for intranet sites that could cost a lot to update and test to make sure they have a smooth transition is why XP SP3 did not include it.
Well they better get a move on as this is the trend more and more websites will begin to take.
Things can only start moving forward once we stop waiting for those falling behind.
and no Opra link? wonder if they will sue them over anti-competative behavior j/k
- payed registration for gmail
- required payed registration to run android in EU (thank god they will not require it in russian firmware)
- now a not really clear attempt to eliminate several competitors
early or later they will face a lot of problems with officials like MS, especially in EU
What? Where have you seen that?
- payed registration for gmail
- required payed registration to run android in EU (thank god they will not require it in russian firmware)
- now a not really clear attempt to eliminate several competitors
early or later they will face a lot of problems with officials like MS, especially in EU
What the hell? I have signed up several friends to Gmail with no fees, and I have also been using Android on my G1 for about 8 months, and I haven't been charged for using it yet, especially seeing as it is an Open Source project. If you are referring to charges for actual applications that is down to the makers, not Google
I don't really like the fact that they haven't got an Opera link there (guess they probably refused to cough up any more advertising money), but seriously, where are you getting this crap from?
SMS activation for gmail is now required in many countries.
you sure that's the reason MS upgraded IE? Because I'm thinking the reason could be that MS will update IE only when a new Windows is on the horizon.
IE7 for Vista - IE8 for 7 and so on...
Last edited by Aquarian on 14 Jul 2009 - 19:07
IE7 for Vista - IE8 for 7 and so on...
It's unlikely they would have put as much time and effort into it, though.
The IE team likes Mozilla, they keep them in their jobs :p
No, it will NOT use IE6.
Um, yes you should - if it's work related.
If you work in insurance or fraud, YouTube is a tool of choice because people post anything up there that could incriminate them.
If you work in insurance or fraud, YouTube is a tool of choice because people post anything up there that could incriminate them.
wow that's evil
If you work in insurance or fraud, YouTube is a tool of choice because people post anything up there that could incriminate them.
If someone needs YouTube for work, then it's his IT department's job to make sure he can access YouTube at work, which means rolling out an updated browser, which means upgrading the company intranet software, which means spending money. Oh no! God forbid a company has to deal with COSTS.
Yes, they should have not included only their own browser Chrome, Microsoft IE8, and Mozilla Firefox 3.5 as the only options, and should have just had icon/banner for people to click to look at what browsers to choose from.
As for the browser selection, I see nothing wrong with it. How long should this list have been? They included the only two browsers with an even registerable market share, and their new one as an option. If people wanted something with 1% of the market share like Opera they could always download that... Regardless though, most people using IE6 are not tech savvy. The odds of them trying a new browser is unlikely, so I suspect the vast majority would just click on IE anyway. If you are tech savvy enough to even know who Opera is, you're not running IE6...
Irrelevant. An update to IE7 contains a lot of core code fixes for security to the browser and as its tied into the Kernal that itself. for this reason it IS a high priority update. WGA Notifications is also marked as high/recommended I think but your computer probably runs better off without it.
What a dumb comment - MS pushing out to businesses - c'mon, you seriously do not work in a large Corporate environment where that isn't possible!
Last edited by rm20010 on 16 Jul 2009 - 02:26
Thankfully, I've developed a nifty arsenal of tools and scripts to make even the most challenging site work in IE6.
It doesn't stop me from praying for the day I can ditch it though.
Opera is one of the great WebBrowsers.....
This kind of behavior is perpetuated by the EU, a coddling, slightly offbeat aunt who seems to be the only one who listens, and forcibly tries to even out the amount of pie.
... I sense some kind of sitcom here.
Thank God, glad to see the end of this era (hopefully).
I really wish Microsoft had allowed IE7 to run side-by-side with IE6, though. Or provided a compatibility mode like they did in IE8. Then all of the businesses would have upgraded a long time ago.
I think that firefox opera and chrome do not support anything below xp neither...
update: firefox seems to support windows 2000 and opera support windows 95 and above.
Last edited by eilegz on 14 Jul 2009 - 18:49
only google chrome and apple safari browsers require at least winxp to use
Come to think of it, Win2K pre-dates most of "web 2.0" by quite a long time, it's a surprise they hadn't been suffering sooner.
It's the third one on the list...
Yes, and studies have shown that a person always looks from the left top to the right bottom. So the browser on the absolute left is the one that gets the most attention.
XD
Without comparing MS browsers to any MODERN browsers, if it is IE8 that kills off IE6 rather than FF, Opera or Safari (regardless of monopolistic tactics), it would be a dream come true.
The playing field might be skewed towards MS, but it's the competition itself that got MS off their ass to finally make a decent browser, if the result unfairly lands you in IE8 rather than FF3.5, it would be a huge upgrade to the web regardless.
Personally I'm doing same thing for Chrome on my site: "You are using an unfinished, buggy, unsecure-to-increase-speed javascript engine and a browser making you think you are going faster without checking new version of pages and showing you all from cache browser... Please upgrade to modern browsers: IE8, Firefox
And about Opera? They really should get a different life...
Those screaming Opera isn't on the list, well neither is Safari. I'm sure Google primarily went with the two major players and their own browser. If they listed every browser the people still using IE6 would most likely just get confused. Remember, these people can be the kind who just doesn't understand to update because IE6 to them works "good enough". I've met people like that and it was quite a job to get them to update even to IE7.
YouTube sucks.
We would browse any website any version of any browser...
So I've switched to Firefox 3.5, and I doubt I'll use IE8 as my default browser now. I'll see what IE9 is like, if they bring one out that is
Commenting has either been disabled on this article or you are not logged in. Click here to login or register, its free!
Note: Anonymous commenting is disabled in order to keep the quality of responses to a high standard.