3 ms·

Big enterprise customers don't like change, and rapid release would frustrate their IT guys to no end. That's why we still have IE6 in lots of big companies, w

by acabal 16y ago

Big enterprise customers don't like change, and rapid release would frustrate their IT guys to no end. That's why we still have IE6 in lots of big companies, why I still see IE7 in my visitor stats even though IE8 has been out for years, and why all of these versions will be sticking around probably long after IE9 is dead.

treeface 16y ago
Sure I recognize that, and I see it as a highly valid point. But if it is in Microsoft's interests to maintain enterprise users, I don't quite see why it must be done at the expense of the non-enterprise users. Please call me out if my naïveté is showing, but couldn't MS fragment IE into consumer and enterprise versions? Surely something must be done to appeal to non-enterprise users to halt the increasingly rapid deterioration of IE market share. To expound on this idea a bit...imagine IE adopts the multiple channel approach like Chrome has. They could have the four typical channels (canary, dev, beta, stable) and add another one called "enterprise" or something like that. The first four would receive silent automatic updates while the "enterprise" channel would only be updated when the administrative user requests to do so. Furthermore, they could perhaps choose exactly which release they want. So theoretically, they could upgrade or downgrade the browser without being subjected to automatic updates. Just an idea, I know. It's probably much harder to implement in reality, but something must be done, and this sort of setup would probably be a one-up on Chrome (something I think they desperately need at the moment).
- acabal 16y ago
  I'd guess that IE is too gargantuan a project with too many people involved and too much history (read: compatibility baggage) to be able to say, "welp, let's just fork it." Doubtless internal politics and MS's own corporate shortsightedness also have a big say in it. But that's just my guess.

by acabal 16y ago

treeface 16y ago

Sure I recognize that, and I see it as a highly valid point. But if it is in Microsoft's interests to maintain enterprise users, I don't quite see why it must be done at the expense of the non-enterprise users. Please call me out if my naïveté is showing, but couldn't MS fragment IE into consumer and enterprise versions? Surely something must be done to appeal to non-enterprise users to halt the increasingly rapid deterioration of IE market share. To expound on this idea a bit...imagine IE adopts the multiple channel approach like Chrome has. They could have the four typical channels (canary, dev, beta, stable) and add another one called "enterprise" or something like that. The first four would receive silent automatic updates while the "enterprise" channel would only be updated when the administrative user requests to do so. Furthermore, they could perhaps choose exactly which release they want. So theoretically, they could upgrade or downgrade the browser without being subjected to automatic updates. Just an idea, I know. It's probably much harder to implement in reality, but something must be done, and this sort of setup would probably be a one-up on Chrome (something I think they desperately need at the moment).

acabal 16y ago
I'd guess that IE is too gargantuan a project with too many people involved and too much history (read: compatibility baggage) to be able to say, "welp, let's just fork it." Doubtless internal politics and MS's own corporate shortsightedness also have a big say in it. But that's just my guess.