3 ms·
>Flexbox is well past the point where you should be "playing around" with it. It's time to straight-up learn it, if not start using it in production. I dont th
by wnevets 12y ago
>Flexbox is well past the point where you should be "playing around" with it. It's time to straight-up learn it, if not start using it in production.
I dont think that is 100% true quite yet. IE9 for example is still quite popular, not to mention the bugs in modern browsers.
http://philipwalton.com/articles/normalizing-cross-browser-flexbox-bugs/ http://philipwalton.com/articles/normalizing-cross-browser-f...
- freshyill 12y agoIE9's global share is 2.13% and 3.84% in the US. It's 2.38% for the sites I'm supporting. Here's the simple answer for supporting old IE: http://dowebsitesneedtolookexactlythesameineverybrowser.com/ http://dowebsitesneedtolookexactlythesameineverybrowser.com/ But to be more precise, graceful degradation is the answer. I'm building an interface that needs to last for several years, and IE9 is circling the drain. I can't justify making too many decisions around browsers that will be gone soon at the expense of the experience in all the browsers that fully support modern properties now. IE 8 and 9 will get a degraded experience, but the content will all still be there, and it will look pretty good. But it won't look exactly the same.
- thejosh 12y agoDepending on your industry, IE is still a major player. But people should be more worried about how it looks on a mobile device, at least 50% of our clients traffic are from mobile devices now a days...
- freshyill 12y agoThat's correct. The plan for IE 8 and 9 when I'm building heavily with flexbox will be for them to resemble the mobile breakpoints of the site. Since we build mobile-first, they'll pick most of this up without any extra work.
- deleted 12y ago[deleted]