If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(ZDNet)   Google to discontinue app support for IE8 after Windows 8 is released, thereby forcing millions of XP users to bite the bullet and buy Windows 8 machines, giving cash infusion to Microsoft to help them battle Google   (zdnet.com) divider line 72
    More: Ironic, Google Apps, Internet Explorer, Windows XP, Microsoft, Windows, application software, Net Applications, Firefox  
•       •       •

2118 clicks; posted to Geek » on 15 Sep 2012 at 10:24 AM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



72 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-09-15 03:15:00 PM

divx88: I can live without Firefox's agile development cycle.


I switched to esr - still get security updates but don't have to worry about new bugs features every 6 weeks.
 
2012-09-15 03:21:54 PM
Opera!
 
2012-09-15 03:40:24 PM

redly1: if you're still using XP.....odds are you are not using any google apps


Why not? I was supposed to purchase a Win7 upgrade for my 2.5 year old XP netbook - even though Google Apps work just fine on it? Granted I use Chrome, but that doesn't affect your comment. In fact, I'll spin yours around. Odds are that if you're heavily using Google Apps (and little else), you probably don't need a new computer every two years.
 
2012-09-15 03:43:57 PM

redly1: if you're still using XP.....odds are you are not using any google apps


odds are you do not know anything about computers....
 
2012-09-15 03:44:08 PM

clkeagle: IntertubeUser: On every one of these browser threads, I read where people just loveloveLOVE Chrome and hate Firefox. Sometimes people talk about "memory leaks" and other problems, but in nearly ten years of using Firefox, I have never experienced a problem not related to flash or Java or a buggy site itself.

On my machine, I have Firefox configured to where the very top 3/4" are the tabs, navigation, url bar, and search bar. This area also matches my system default color (a nice, dusty teal). This area used to be a rather nice image of the Seattle skyline (and still is on my girl's machine). On the bottom is the usual MS start button and Quick Start stuff. No other browser gives me that much real estate without having to go into Full Screen mode.

I have the NoScript, AdBlock, MAFIAAFire Redirector, AutoPager. and NoSquint addons. When I launch FireFox, my Fast Dial page with icons representing my usual favorites is what I see first. Though it looks a bit like what Chrome gives you, Fast Dial can be customized to display specific font colors, font sizes, background colors, hover behaviors, etc.

Finally, I can go into Firefox via about:config and tweak behaviors, try out things, etc.

So why exactly is Chrome such a big deal? What am I missing.

Well, while you spend time with add ons, configuration, layout, and behavior, Chrome users simply click on the program and access the Internet.

Your post reminds me of the difference between Linux users and Windows and Mac users:

Linux users like to work ON computers.
The rest of us like to WORK on computers.


I'm a Windows user and I don't really spend a lot of time working ON my computer.

However, I don't know how people use the Internet without NoScript and AdBlock (or inferior versions of) and how people can be satisfied with not being able to customize things.
 
2012-09-15 03:49:57 PM

clkeagle: Well, while you spend time with add ons, configuration, layout, and behavior, Chrome users simply click on the program and access the Internet.


Sure...and they have to deal with potentially malicious scripts, ads, etc. by doing so. Sure, there's Chrome extensions, but Firefox's add-ons are a bit more mature. Nearly all of them are "install-and-forget", so it's not a big deal for the average user.

I've found that Firefox works better on my Windows 7 desktop while Chrome works better on my Xubuntu 12.04 laptop. For some reason, Firefox on Linux (and I've had this happen with *buntu/Debian, Fedora, RHEL/CentOS/SL, etc.) seems to have a barely-perceptible delay when opening/changing tabs, typing, or otherwise doing ordinary things. It drives me absolutely nuts. Chrome doesn't, which is nice. Go figure.
 
2012-09-15 04:26:02 PM

spelletrader: So this is only going to effect XP users that use Google Apps and cannot use any other browser then IE?


So like, 2 people that matter and one of them is your gran?
 
2012-09-15 04:41:37 PM

Charles_Nelson_Reilly: When people complain about those who haven't upgraded their {OS, browser, office suite}, they're missing the core truth that people are not upgrading because the old thing works plenty well enough. In other words, the new thing isn't enough of an improvement for them to care. If "it's old" is the best reason to upgrade, then the case for upgrading is not very compelling.

/ just sayin
// typed on an iPhone 4s.


But "it's old" isn't the excuse to update from IE8 to IE9 or a different browser, even.

Speaking as a web developer who spends a lot of time browser testing, the browser bugs in IE7 are annoying but fixable, but in IE8 they're annoying and difficult to root out, AND IE8 doesn't support half of CSS2, and none of CSS3.

IE9 is ok, but it still goofs up code in amusing and (as of yet) unfixable ways. And Microsoft, instead of building their browsers to use the same CSS properties that everyone else uses, makes up their own nonsense that we have to go out of our way to accommodate.

As somebody who builds websites for a living, it really sucks when you want to do something cool, but IE won't support it.

/anything is better than IE, wharrgarbl
 
2012-09-15 05:06:24 PM

rideaurocks: I don't think there's a lot of people who are using Windows XP while also using IE8 only for Google plugins. Most people still using XP are either geeks running it in a VM, dinosaurs who won't update because it's fine and eff Microsoft anyway, or people whose children have already switched them to a better browser to lighten their PC-repair workload


I still use XP for most of my web surfing. Mostly because it's easier for me to read on my old P4 on the desk in my bedroom than the quad core running 7 in the living room on the TV.
 
2012-09-15 05:20:26 PM

Mr. Holmes: As somebody who builds websites for a living, it really sucks when you want to do something cool, but IE won't support it.


so it's business as usual with IE then?
 
2012-09-15 06:56:59 PM

IntertubeUser:
However, I don't know how people use the Internet without NoScript and AdBlock (or inferior versions of) and how people can be satisfied with not being able to customize things.


In relation to the final part of your comment and Linux, I suspect it's because Linux is a wholly incompatible mess, it won't event speak to itself half the time. It's built by software engineers to be compatible with standards (POSIX, etc, etc, etc) thus to them it is compatible. That word means a totally different thing to an end user.

Install a Suse RPM in to Ubuntu. Use only the GUI of the software installer (Synaptics). Will this work? No. Now explain to your grandmother why Linux isn't incompatible with Linux, after all BOTH of those packages were marked as "Linux" on their respective websites. Explain what they highly detailed and useful (to either of us) error message means to that same person to whom it's just random bollocks that means nothing.

Feed Win7 (32bit as 64bit lacks the WoW-16 stuff) a 16bit Win3.1 executable, it will work. It won't even biatch & moan about it just *poof* there's your program and look it even kinda maybe looks a little better than you remember it. Hell until very recently you could drop a PPC compiled application on to OS X (10.6.x or under though) and it'd jump up and go "Hey, you need X. I'll install it k?" and presto chango there is your old application running (and Rosetta was damn good, even had Homeworld 2 running in it at one point) and Apple (quite rightly IMHO) get a good kicking over their lack of backwards compatibility.

Then you come up to the claim of "It'll run your Windows software" that a lot of people make. Yeah... it might... kinda... unless it's Microsoft Office in which case the installer WILL explode on certain versions of WINE or you need .net (not mono, actual .net) or the legion of other software people have that does weird things that WINE can't cope with. That's assuming PuleAudio doesn't throw a massive shiat fit and you end up with zero audio from WINE... again.

Hell half of this famed customisability, which would be an awesome selling point I agree, requires using hacked together tools most of which have a help system that can be summed up as "Lol n00b" OR you can use the stuff that's had a bit more loving spent on it and you end up being able to change the desktop theme... or icon set... which is pretty much all you can do in Windows (or indeed OS X).
 
2012-09-15 08:07:08 PM
This seems like a non-issue. Microsoft soon won't support Windows XP anymore, why should google worry about it?


Support for Windows XP is ending on April 8, 2014.
Support for Windows Vista Service Pack 1 (SP1) ended on July 12, 2011.
Support for Windows XP with Service Pack 2 (SP2) ended on July 13, 2010.*

If you're running one of these versions after support ends, you won't get security updates for Windows.

 
2012-09-15 08:36:23 PM
Man, what a bad idea. It's not just XP users - do you know just HOW MANY ordinary users are still on 8? I worked as a computer tech at a store for two years up to July, and probably 80% of the systems that came in, even the Win7 systems, were still using IE8.

Normal people just don't know that Windows Update exists, and the only way they get another browser installed is if they go to download another poker game, it makes them update flash, and the download bundles Chrome with it.

An awful lot of "normal" users are going to be locked out of Google apps when they do this, and only a portion of them will be able to figure out how to run updates or install and use a different browser.

Then again, maybe they're hoping that they can just give IE8 users a Chrome download link and pick up some market share.
 
2012-09-15 09:23:30 PM

theflatline: redly1: if you're still using XP.....odds are you are not using any google apps

odds are you do not know anything about computers....


I had a computer than ran XP until May of this year. It lasted for 7 years and I still made $50 when I sold it and the lcd screen. My new computer runs Windows 7 64 bit,it's like all the good things of xp but prettier.
 
2012-09-15 09:36:32 PM

BolloxReader: So has anyone figured out how to play all those xp games like Diablo 2 and Starcraft on Windows 7 without paying for the Professional upgrade for XP compatibility mode? Last time I searched for a workaround nobody seemed to have an answer. I'm not upgrading my desktop until I know I can play my games without paying Microsoft's gamer extortion fee.


Never had an issue - especially if you use the current installers from Blizzard (go to www.battle.net, register your CD Key to your account, download installer. Done.)
 
2012-09-15 09:42:45 PM

steamingpile: LouDobbsAwaaaay: Wait, people use Internet Explorer?

People still have XP? That's been obsolete for a while now and since 7 came out we have no need for it.


At least 70k machines at my company do. You'd be surprised...
 
2012-09-15 11:54:27 PM
There are still companies out there that have to log onto websites that are NOT IE9 compatible...STILL! There is one law firm that I know of that downloads case information that is ONLY IE7 compatible. It's a sad state of affairs...

/Love Firefox
//Dislike Chrome
///LOL@IE
 
2012-09-16 12:42:44 AM

diaphoresis: There are still companies out there that have to log onto websites that are NOT IE9 compatible...STILL! There is one law firm that I know of that downloads case information that is ONLY IE7 compatible. It's a sad state of affairs...

/Love Firefox
//Dislike Chrome
///LOL@IE


That's why they do application virtualization (VMware ThinApp). Works like a charm for one of our older apps.
 
2012-09-16 04:53:39 PM
I still can't get ie9 on my parents vista box. It won't install the "platform update" or some damn net framework update from 2010.

And I've scoured the web for the last 2 years looking for a solution and trying everything suggested by microsoft and anybody else who offers a solution.

Only thing left is to reinstall vista for them, which I wouldn't do if they bought me a house. They backup nothing, and it would take me a week to get it back to the way they have it now. IF I could find all the original install disks for the dozens of crappy programs they have on it. 

And from what I gather, it is a pretty widespread problem.
 
2012-09-16 10:43:04 PM

Generation_D: ADP Payroll app required IE to work right a few years ago; does it still?


Yep.
 
2012-09-17 07:44:04 AM
Subby apparently doesn't understand Windows, Windows users, or the relationship between Windows and IE. IE8 =/= Win8, and vice versa. I'm running IE9 under my Win7 side right now, and have been for some time: it was released over a year ago, and is not tied to OS versions. Dropping support doesn't mean that the thing stops working: it keeps working, just gets buggier over time, and more vulnerable. The very fact that there are still people using XP, or using *any* version of IE, should sugggest how sensitive typical Windows users are to such issues: not very. Many of them will keep using it until it just doesn't work at all or something bad happens to their computer, and only then will they upgrade. Subby is right that for a lot of them, this will happen during the Win8 release cycle, but that's unrelated and, more to the point, inconsequential: a breakdown in IE8 forces no one to buy Win8, because IE9 runs perfectly fine under Win7 (and, I presume Vista; maybe even XP?).

For those complaining about page requirement issues, you should at least try spoofing first. I find this fools most of the pages that 'require' IE (including, amusingly enough, nearly all Microsoft pages). The much smaller proportion that apparently do some sekrit behind-the-back handshake to verify that you're really using IE (such as a few MS pages) will indeed require IE, but this isn't a big deal. If that's happening to you all the time, then you're either doing business with MS all the time -- in which case, it's not really out of line for them to encourage you to use *their* product -- or you need to ask some third-party webmaster what the hell he's doing and why. Anyway, this is also unrelated to either IE or Win versions. (Are there any sites *requiring* IE versions above 7?)

It's a cute headline, just very mistaken.
 
2012-09-17 01:10:53 PM
There are people in offices that have IE 8? What luxury! We're still running IE 7 and 32-bit XP on systems that were clearly designed for 64-bit 7 Pro. Yeah, I have an i7 2600 with vPro in my work desktop and I'm only running 4GB ram and XP. IT claims 7 is too problematic for their network of 25,000 PCs or so. More like they're too freaking lazy.
 
Displayed 22 of 72 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report