4 ms·
If I'm not going to support IE 6, I'd rather have something like this than for my site to just be broken.
by jmtulloss 18y ago
If I'm not going to support IE 6, I'd rather have something like this than for my site to just be broken.
- erlanger 18y agoEver heard of "wasted clicks"?
- newmediaclay 18y ago"I'm not going to support IE 6" I think you're missing his point...you should support IE6. We all know it sucks, but why risk alienating 20% of the Internet just because you don't want to take the time to make sure your site complies?
- goodkarma 18y agoIt may not be 20% of the internet, depending on who actually uses your site/app. Check your analytics.
- axod 18y agoPoint of reference, (Mibbit) IE6: 5.7% IE7: 11% IE8: 1% FX1: <1% FX2: 3% FX3: 63% SF: 2% OP: 5% CH: 6% Really cool how Chrome has overtaken Safari, Opera, and IE6 (Admittedly it's a webapp, for which Chrome is well suited). Also Firefox does a really great job of upgrading its users to the latest version. At the moment I support IE6, but I'll probably stop soon. It's just too much extra work for not a lot of payoff.
- tomjen 18y agoIf it takes twice the work. Anyway I would just add a small notices on the top of the page saying something like you have an old browser, so this page may not render correctly.
- wmeredith 18y agoI concur. Yesterday I spent an hour building a dropdown menu for a client that rendered correctly in Safari 2+, Firefox 2+ and Opera. Then I spent two-and-a-half more hours getting it to render correctly in IE6 and 7, rendering my page invalid in the process. Ick.
- Jem 18y agoYesterday I spent 10 minutes implementing the 'Son of Suckerfish Dropdowns' that works in all of those browsers. Why make more work for yourself if there are solutions already out there? :) (I am of course assuming you mean a standard css navigational drop-down menu - you didn't specify.)