Popularity of IE7 in Ireland ?

28064212

cormee wrote: »

Nobody's suggesting the developer supports every single browser in existence. We are, however, suggesting he supports every major browser.

People's definitions of major differ, which is my point. It's not some objective term

cormee wrote: »

Any developer/designer with even basic experience should be producing standards-compliant, browser-independent code. And they should, when necessary, be tweaking their code to make allowances for non-compliant browsers.

Or they could choose to cut down on costs by only supporting some browsers and provide a cheaper service. What's the difference between devs who support IE8+, IE7+, IE6+ and IE5.5+? At what point exactly is it a waste of time and money?

cormee wrote: »

At the end of the day it's not about the detail of the brief...

It's always about the brief, it's the only thing that actually matters.

I agree that if the brief didn't contain any mention of browser support, the onus is on the developer to clarify it, but if the brief does specify it, it's up to the customer to reject it

cormee

28064212 wrote: »

People's definitions of major differ, which is my point. It's not some objective term

Or they could choose to cut down on costs by only supporting some browsers and provide a cheaper service. What's the difference between devs who support IE8+, IE7+, IE6+ and IE5.5+? At what point exactly is it a waste of time and money?

It's always about the brief, it's the only thing that actually matters.

I agree that if the brief didn't contain any mention of browser support, the onus is on the developer to clarify it, but if the brief does specify it, it's up to the customer to reject it

Not sure we'll agree so here's my last roll of the dice .

I, and I'm sure every other site owner on the web, would see a 10-17% increase in traffic as a major increase, so it doesn't require individual interpretation, it is a major browser and therefore it needs to be supported.

Editing code to enable a page display correctly probably takes an hour or so per page on average, so it's not a big undertaking.

I'll let you decide your own standards, but I personally rank professionalism and customer satisfaction far ahead of the brief in terms of importance. If a client makes a reasonable demand of me I'll accommodate them without going back to see if it's mentioned in the brief. And - going full circle here - expecting a page to display correctly on a major browser is a reasonable demand so it's a no-brainer.

iMax

In this case, there wasn't a brief, I wen t looking for a package & this fit the bill (almost perfectly in this case). While the IE7 situation is far from an ideal perspective, I'm not going to let it hold me back.

I'll review the situation once I see some stats on my own site.

desaparecidos

developer wrote:

there is no easy fix for this as IE 7 is an old browser that doesn't support gradients or inline elements in CSS, so we don't officially support IE 7 or older

Wrong. It's as easy as eating some pie.

http://css3pie.com/

Liam Byrne

JDxtra wrote: »

Pay him 15% less then for the job and see what he has to say about that.

Even if you are aimed at home users that doesn't mean they won't be looking at your site in work.

I think that's unfair - the developer has said that there's "no easy fix" because of the browser's limitations.

There might be a difficult fix, which would be costly.

Unless they were stupid enough to put something in the core design that wasn't cross-browser and didn't degrade gracefully, it's unfair to blame the developer.

I've also had people demand an odd font which needed a graphic and then complain when they couldn't easily edit "the text"