3 ms·

Web apps that only officially support older versions of IE. In some cases, blocking entirely other browsers even if they would work. And even when they don't, t

Web apps that only officially support older versions of IE. In some cases, blocking entirely other browsers even if they would work. And even when they don't, the vendor only officially supports certain browsers and rejects any incidents logged using other ones. The exact same thing is a key reason why XP has remained in use for so long.

TillE 13y ago
This is what VMs are for. If you really really absolutely must run one piece of ancient software, it doesn't need to hold back everything else you do.
- bruceboughton 13y ago
  XP in your VM is still EOL. Doesn't really help you. Also, you double your licensing costs.
  - eleitl 13y ago
    > XP in your VM is still EOL Doesn't matter that much if it's on a private network. > Also, you double your licensing costs. Not if the OS and virtualization solution require no license.
- dspillett 13y ago
  For you or I that is an easy solution. For a large organisation IT/TS cost is a problem with that solution. As well as managing everything else about their user's machines they'd have an extra app/service to maintain (whichever VM solution they go for) and an extra OS (XP in the VM) to somehow keep up-to-date for each user. Not insurmountable by any means, but far from zero hassle/cost. Once an ancient version of IE is out of support, assuming that is the app you are running in a VM in this case, you also have an extra complication: making sure the VMs can only talk to your intranet sites that require it, as you don't want your users browsing more public hosts with a potentially insecure UA. Again not rocket science, just some routing/firewall tweaks, but something that has to be added to the support cost of your environments. Depending on the licensing deal the company has with MS (or relevant distributor) there might also be extra cost involved in providing a second OS instance to all your users.
- wil421 13y ago
  Try explaining what a VMs and why they are needing to use it to C-Level or VPs that dont understand technology.
wil421 13y ago
I have even seen old webapps that are handled better with newer browsers be restriced to the old versions of IE because of "security reasons."

TillE 13y ago

This is what VMs are for. If you really really absolutely must run one piece of ancient software, it doesn't need to hold back everything else you do.

bruceboughton 13y ago
XP in your VM is still EOL. Doesn't really help you. Also, you double your licensing costs.
- eleitl 13y ago
  > XP in your VM is still EOL Doesn't matter that much if it's on a private network. > Also, you double your licensing costs. Not if the OS and virtualization solution require no license.
dspillett 13y ago
For you or I that is an easy solution. For a large organisation IT/TS cost is a problem with that solution. As well as managing everything else about their user's machines they'd have an extra app/service to maintain (whichever VM solution they go for) and an extra OS (XP in the VM) to somehow keep up-to-date for each user. Not insurmountable by any means, but far from zero hassle/cost. Once an ancient version of IE is out of support, assuming that is the app you are running in a VM in this case, you also have an extra complication: making sure the VMs can only talk to your intranet sites that require it, as you don't want your users browsing more public hosts with a potentially insecure UA. Again not rocket science, just some routing/firewall tweaks, but something that has to be added to the support cost of your environments. Depending on the licensing deal the company has with MS (or relevant distributor) there might also be extra cost involved in providing a second OS instance to all your users.
wil421 13y ago
Try explaining what a VMs and why they are needing to use it to C-Level or VPs that dont understand technology.

wil421 13y ago

I have even seen old webapps that are handled better with newer browsers be restriced to the old versions of IE because of "security reasons."