Everything require IE, why?

[a_ump]

This is just something that has been puzzling me for a while n just had to ask this time. Right now i'm looking for a job and am applying online yet the online application thing requires IE. When i did FAFSA for college it said the same thing but still let me use chrome. I also noticed then when i signed up for Selective Services.

Whats with almost everything online requiring IE? i mean there are 3 other web browsers:safari, opera, and chrome; that are better and in very popular use. Is there actually a compatibility thing or are these online application web services just lazily made? I seriously can't understand why someone wouldn't make em compatible with better and more secure web browsers.

 

[r9]

We all use and prefer different browsers but when you want do something serious you use IE no mater how much we love other browsers and hate IE when you want to do the job right IE is one to go.

 

[DirectorC]

Whats with almost everything online requiring IE?

Lazy coders.

 

[pantherx12]

There's no actual incompatibility. its just the makers of the applications are stupid.

In the face.

 

[[I.R.A]_FBi]

if website makers followed stadndards we'd be ok.

 

[regexorcist]

I feel your pain.
I use the following browsers on Linux:
Firefox (Shiretoko build) 3.5.7
Opera 10.10
Konqueror 4.3.4
Lynx & Elinks

(the latest versions for all)

Quite often I'm kicked out with messages like
"unsupported browser" or "old browser, please upgrade", etc...

I figure that many web developers never even try their sites
with a browser running on Linux, but it sounds like there might be
anIE problem as well
There is no IE for Linux (THANK GOD!!!)

I know that IE impliments many features differently like
the transparency and the canvas object, etc...
I don't believe that IE is standards-compiant browser.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_Explorer

 

[eidairaman1]

IE is known to be a standard browser used on anymachine where the others are open source, In order for anything to work right standards must be established.

I feel your pain.
I use the following browsers on Linux:
Firefox (Shiretoko build) 3.5.7
Opera 10.10
Konqueror 4.3.4
Lynx & Elinks

(the latest versions for all)

Quite often I'm kicked out with messages like
"unsupported browser" or "old browser, please upgrade", etc...

I figure that many web developers never even try their sites
with a browser running on Linux, but it sounds like there might be
anIE problem as well
There is no IE for Linux (THANK GOD!!!)

I know that IE impliments many features differently like
the transparency and the canvas object, etc...
I don't believe that IE is standards-compiant browser.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_Explorer

 

[a_ump]

well i'm glad i'm not alone in my boat lol. its just a lil frustrating that Chrome or even FF isn't supported by these online things. but oh well. n thanks i figured it was just lazy coders.

 

[regexorcist]

IE is known to be a standard browser used on anymachine where the others are open source, In order for anything to work right standards must be established.

http://www.webdevout.net/browser-support

 

[newtekie1]

That is why.

And while you might think there are better browser, a browser being better essentially comes down to user preference and nothing more. So the web developers go by what browser is most used. The site is always designed for IE, and they either hope it works with the others, or they adapt it to work in the others also.

And as for IE's standard compliance, it doesn't really matter when all the sites are designed to work with it and not the other browser. In fact, while IE might be the least standards compliant of all the popular browser, it is most compatible with the websites on the internet. Which do you think is more important to the user?

 

[regexorcist]

Where did that chart come from??

How can there be such a difference in numbers??
Please look at the link below from w3schools which has Firefox at 43% in January of 2010:
http://www.w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_stats.asp

I see that the w3schools number comes from users accessing their site.

Much of the IE marketshare is probably due to IE being pre-installed on most machines,
but IMHO, that's about to change in Europe.

 

[eidairaman1]

That doesn't affect the US companies let alone the US Military.

Where did that chart come from??

How can there be such a difference in numbers??
Please look at the link below from w3schools which has Firefox at 43% in January of 2010:
http://www.w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_stats.asp

I see that the w3schools number comes from users accessing their site.

Much of the IE marketshare is probably due to IE being pre-installed on most machines,
but IMHO, that's about to change in Europe.

 

[regexorcist]

ok eidairaman1, what is your point??

 

[newtekie1]

Where did that chart come from??

How can there be such a difference in numbers??
Please look at the link below from w3schools which has Firefox at 43% in January of 2010:
http://www.w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_stats.asp

I see that the w3schools number comes from users accessing their site.

Much of the IE marketshare is probably due to IE being pre-installed on most machines,
but IMHO, that's about to change in Europe.

Net Applications: http://marketshare.hitslink.com/report.aspx?qprid=0&qpct=2
Stat Counter has similar number: http://gs.statcounter.com/#browser-ww-monthly-200901-201002-bar
Stat Owl also has similar numbers: http://statowl.com/web_browser_market_share.php

Most of these monitor multiple websites, not just the single site like w3schools.

And I don't see why it would be changing in Europe, IE will essentially still be installed by default, and the BS European regulations won't affect the rest of the world that much.

 

[regexorcist]

yes, I edited my post after a little more research
indicating where the w3schools numbers came from.

I do understand why, but I can also relate to some of the
frustrations in the original post.

 

[Polarman]

I don't know about other browsers and online job applications.

But for my part, i do know and trust only IE for my online banking & e-tail transactions.

 

[digibucc]

IE is known to be a standard browser used on anymachine where the others are open source, In order for anything to work right standards must be established.

sorry, misread

still, IE is widely know to not follow the standards set by the w3c and whoever else. while the open source browsers are MUCH better and adhering to standards, and releasing updates when new standards are set. IE is never updated on time.

the reason is simply because microsoft blackballed pc manufacturers to get IE installed on every computer sold. they succeeded pretty well, and with such a huge market share standards or not if you want an audience, you have to make it work with IE 95% pf the time.

I have to deal with this every day at work. Something that works perfect on everything but IE has to be "fixed" because IE happens to have 98% of our user share. and note, it's not actually fixing, it's breaking. I have to break standards to make something work with IE, that worked with other browsers under standard rules.

seriously, those who trust IE - it's not backed up by any real world data. the only reason you trust it is because it's what you've known since the beginning. i have never heard of anyone who has actually looked at (& understood) the differences and still thought IE was a superior piece of software. it IS the most vulnerable widely used browser. on top of that most people don't update it when Microsoft actually releases an update, as it's tied to windows update which most people ignore. if it was tied with IE on launch it would stay up to date, and have a better chance of not exposing you to danger on every click

 

[digibucc]

In fact, while IE might be the least standards compliant of all the popular browser, it is most compatible with the websites on the internet. Which do you think is more important to the user?

that's because we web designers have to follow IE rules instead of STANDARDS if we want users to not have problems. It's users stubborn unwillingness to switch that makes IE stay compatible with every website, not that designers just LOVE to spend ours hacking their own code just to make it work with IE.

sry didn't think and double posted, but this seriously infuriates me. IE makes my job so much harder and then I get people who don't understand it and try and defend IE. it is bad for the internet plain and simple. I could go on forever with this.

@jizzler - less testing , but it takes about the same time because features that are standard , and "Standard" on other browsers, require work arounds on IE. not the other way around... at least in my experience.

 

[Disparia]

Businesses, organizations, etc, that need to contract out web work can save money by only requiring IE compatibility. Less testing by the developer, implementing workarounds, and such.

Sept stats from one of the sites at my last job:

Now we were running eComm sites, so the goal was to support as many browsers as possible. But others without this concern know that easily 80% of FireFox/Chrome users would open IE if they had to.

 

[DirectorC]

I think people are missing the point though.

'Popular' or not, designing web apps that only work on IE is lazy, stupid and boorish. We live in an age where people access their media and the internet in a huge variety of ways. Requiring IE makes me go 'drop that company, stupid assholes they are!'

My mom signed up for real estate classes online and they required IE. I told her to find a better company (she couldn't of course, as she was tied in).

I got a bank that required IE to use the online banking features and I went and found another bank.

 

[digibucc]

@DirectorC i'd almost agree, except for the fact that developers only have so much time. I have MORE work than I can do, my company couldn't afford any more devs - and I would be surprised if 2 out of our 1000 daily visitors used anything other than IE. seriously. our market happens to encompass those who barely know how to use their computer, let alone use anything other than IE.

so I should be spending my free time making these pages fully standards compliant instead of making them work with the one browser everyone who uses our site uses?

now, in actuality most of the "hacks" don't disrupt other browsers, so the site is compliant anyway. but if i had to choose to put the extra time in, i don't have a choice - the time just isn't there.

and to clarify, i'm not saying i like it. it makes me feel dirty. i just don't have a choice ...if i want a job

edit: no new posts, i promise.

i did misread, thanks for correcting.

@Pc-Myths yes, I use ie-tab for Firefox whenever the need arises.

 

[newtekie1]

where did you get that idea? IE is widely know to not follow the standards set by the w3c and whoever else.

I think you have mis-read his post. He said it is a standard browser, as in used most and available on pretty much every computer, NOT a standard compliant browser. His comment had nothing to do with standards set by the w3c.

that's because we web designers have to follow IE rules instead of STANDARDS if we want users to not have problems. It's users stubborn unwillingness to switch that makes IE stay compatible with every website, not that designers just LOVE to spend ours hacking their own code just to make it work with IE.

sry didn't think and double posted, but this seriously infuriates me. IE makes my job so much harder and then I get people who don't understand it and try and defend IE. it is bad for the internet plain and simple. I could go on forever with this.

@jizzler - less testing , but it takes about the same time because features that are standard , and "Standard" on other browsers, require work arounds on IE. not the other way around... at least in my experience.

Yes, it is a rather crappy cycle. Users don't want to move away from IE because it works with all the sites they want while the others don't, and the developers can't, or don't want to, move away from designing code that works with IE for fear of loosing users.

@DirectorC i'd almost agree, except for the fact that developers only have so much time. I have MORE work than I can do, my company couldn't afford any more devs - and I would be surprised if 2 out of our 1000 daily visitors used anything other than IE. seriously. our market happens to encompass those who barely know how to use their computer, let alone use anything other than IE.

so I should be spending my free time making these pages fully standards compliant instead of making them work with the one browser everyone who uses our site uses?

now, in actuality most of the "hacks" don't disrupt other browsers, so the site is compliant anyway. but if i had to choose to put the extra time in, i don't have a choice - the time just isn't there.

edit: no new posts, i promise.

i did misread, thanks for correcting.

I was going to post something very similar to this, but you've already said it better than I could have.

 

[Disparia]

I don't disagree digi, and I applaud you DirectorC.

Just that I see a lot of it coming from that point of view: People that use IE + people that can use IE = let's design for IE... sadly...

 

[PC-Myths]

Ok so I've not read everything in this thread so clearly but didn't notice anyone point out the IE tab extension for Google Chrome...

Here is a link what should download the IE tab instantly.

However if you prefer the Source then here that is too.

 

[[I.R.A]_FBi]

IE is known to be a standard browser used on anymachine where the others are open source, In order for anything to work right standards must be established.

Its a standard browser on windows machines .. doesnt mean it is following any standards