5 ms·
This isn't really true anymore. All the major browser vendors push out new releases pretty frequently. Even Apple and Microsoft tend to put out a new release at
by stupidcar 10y ago
This isn't really true anymore. All the major browser vendors push out new releases pretty frequently. Even Apple and Microsoft tend to put out a new release at least every six months or so. And because of the ubiquity of software / OS updates, these tend to get deployed to the majority of users fairly rapidly.
For example, consider a feature like arrow function support in JavaScript: http://caniuse.com/#feat=arrow-functions http://caniuse.com/#feat=arrow-functions
Click "usage relative" to scale by the relative popularity of different browser versions.
Despite only being standardised and implemented in browsers last year, arrow functions are already supported in the large majority of deployed web clients, including Edge, Firefox, Chrome and Safari, both desktop and mobile.
Nowadays, new features, particularly relatively small and uncontroversial ones like display: flex-root, can get implemented across browsers very quickly.
- Bahamut 10y agoA lot of people still have to support IE10/11, including myself - until browser support is mostly on evergreen browsers & browsers keep up to date on implementing the new standards, ability to use the standards hinges upon a couple of years buffer in some cases. It still is largely true unfortunately.
- stupidcar 10y agoAs I already said: browser support is mostly on evergreen browsers, and browsers do keep up to date implementing the new standards. The stats make this very clear. To say otherwise is to promote a view of the world that is ten years out of date. IE10/11 are at about ~4% global usage. Less than Opera Mini. And a large number of those users will have access to another browser. We've found many enterprises keep IE around to access legacy services, but let people install Chrome in order to access things that need a modern browser. The days when it was worth supporting IE for new development work has long since passed. Company policies that mandate doing so should be challenged as a waste of time and money.
- camus2 10y ago> IE10/11 are at about ~4% global usage it doesn't mean anything for a business. for all you know 50% of users visiting a specific website could still be using IE10/11. global numbers were always irrelevant.
- inopinatus 10y ago4% is a high number in this context. If I cause a problem for 4% of my users, I will be spending the next week answering support issues and nothing else. When it is two orders of magnitude less, then we can talk.
- saurik 10y agoYeah: 4% of users of my site means like 40,000 people :/. For websites that sell things, I always think of it in terms of "if you could do some more engineering work and get 4% more revenue, would you?". I do not understand people who feel like 4% is some tiny number.
- matt4077 10y agoI'm not sure if users on a 4-year-old browser are as valuable as the others.
- recursive 10y agoI suppose it would be useful to find out then.
- stupidcar 10y agoBut that revenue isn't free. It has a cost in terms of time and effort in engineering the IE support, and then maintaining it. This is time and effort that could be better spent enhancing the site in other ways. For example, ~20% of the US population has a disability[1]. Investing effort in improving accessibility would be more sensible, economically speaking, than maintaining IE support, but I still see developers spending hours working around IE CSS bugs, while doing almost nothing to improve accessibility. [1] http://www.census.gov/newsroom/releases/archives/facts_for_features_special_editions/cb12-ff16.html http://www.census.gov/newsroom/releases/archives/facts_for_f...
- Zardoz84 10y agoCould be worse ... could be IE 8 and 9 (my case)
- gm-conspiracy 10y agoI work with a large enterprise client still utilizing IE9.