3 ms·
> The BFED realises that while not all experiences will be identical, all browsers can be used to consume a website, even gasp, IE6 and below. Where would we b
by nahiluhmot 11y ago
> The BFED realises that while not all experiences will be identical, all browsers can be used to consume a website, even gasp, IE6 and below.
Where would we be if we supported all legacy software? Does there not come a point where cutting support for a class of platforms is a good thing? This article makes some good points, and I think a lot of frontenders (myself included) would benefit from being a bit more "boring", but this article is going a little too far the other way.
- DCoder 11y ago> Does there not come a point where cutting support for a class of platforms is a good thing? For example: An article was linked on the HN frontpage a couple days ago about how CP/M reserved names (COM1, etc) still live on in ASP.NET MVC these days. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9871014 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9871014
- minitech 11y agoIt’s not so much about supporting legacy software as having something that’s likely to show something in any browser, from Firefox to IE6 to Dillo to Lynx.
- akilism 11y agoAm I supposed to worry about IE6 when Microsoft doesn't? Can we draw the line at supporting things when their creators give up on them?
- minitech 11y agoThe point of my comment was to say you don’t have to support old or obscure browsers specifically; just have proper content in your HTML and everyone will be satisfied without additional effort on your part.