jQuery 2.0 Kills IE 6,7,8 Support

[Sador]

If X company can not afford to upgrade after 10 years... I would think about finding a new job as X company will not be around much longer.

1) Clearly it is not making money to spend
2) The tech world does not wait for anyone and on that path, X company's current business model will no longer work

On another subject....

IE6 can never be secure. There is a root flaw in the product its self. So unless you make your own custom ie6, which would be more timely and costly, than updating and would most likely make you incompatible with everyone else......

It's not about not being able to afford it, it's about costs vs advantages. Most of the time, companies consider their money better spent elsewhere. Whether they are wrong or right doesn't matter, many of them still feel like this, so they won't upgrade.

 

[Adam Howard]

It's not about not being able to afford it, it's about costs vs advantages. Most of the time, companies consider their money better spent elsewhere. Whether they are wrong or right doesn't matter, many of them still feel like this, so they won't upgrade.

They'll be forced too or one day find they'll be unable to do business with others.

You either compete or fail

If I wanted X product or service, but was told I had to downgrade or bend over to get it from Y company... I would look else where or produce X product or service myself.

 

[Paul M]

Nonsense they can't. That is an excuse. A network admin can package an upgrade and deploy it within minutes.

Nonsense.

The system requirements for IE9 is Vista or W7, most companies on IE8 are using it because they are on XP.

 

[ManagerJosh]

While I'm OK with this very old versions of Internet Explorer - there are many companies using IE 8 without a chance to upgrade quickly to IE 9.

Spoken like someone who has never worked in an enterprise environment with legacy applications that only work with older versions of IE.

 

[Adam Howard]

Nonsense.

The system requirements for IE9 is Vista or W7, most companies on IE8 are using it because they are on XP.

They'll be forced to upgrade or convert sooner, rather than later.

 

[Forsaken]

They'll be forced to upgrade or convert sooner, rather than later.

And still the accounting department will try to get out of doing so.

 

[captainslater]

Spoken like someone who has never worked in an enterprise environment with legacy applications that only work with older versions of IE.

As you could read some posts before I'm working in such a company.

 

[SneakyDave]

I work in a company that still has 10,000 PC's and laptops stuck on IE8 and Windows XP. Some of these machines don't support Windows 7 requirements, and probably half of the users aren't that tech savvy to just pick up Windows 7's usability and functional changes. There are hardware upgrades, software upgrades, and training that all need to be organized, as well as testing of the existing hundreds of web apps to make sure they work in IE9.

Those who say some network engineer can just push a patch out obviously don't live in the "real world".

I'd like to be able to be a guinea pig and upgrade everybody on my team as we've been waiting for years to get an upgrade, but it doesn't work that way. Some companies are wondering if it's wise to wait until Windows 8 is out. Why fix XP if it still works.

Forcing people to upgrade from Windows XP just to be able to use IE 9 is a bad idea, in my opinion.

 

[ManagerJosh]

Some companies are wondering if it's wise to wait until Windows 8 is out. Why fix XP if it still works.

We unfortunately are having to make a footnote to clients during Penetration Tests involving Windows XP worktations that XP is starting to reach end of life, therefore no more security updates would be available and it poses a risk to an organization

 

[Adam Howard]

A LOT of you would save time and money in the long run (not at first) if you all switched to Debian Linux or Ubuntu Linux.

Completely remove yourself from Microsoft Windows and accept the open source of Linux. But also there are computers that are older than Windows XP, which can run Debian 6 or Ubuntu 12, just as fast and sometimes faster than the current Windows XP computers you're using now.

 

[ManagerJosh]

A LOT of you would save time and money in the long run (not at first) if you all switched to Debian Linux or Ubuntu Linux.

Completely remove yourself from Microsoft Windows and accept the open source of Linux. But also there are computers that are older than Windows XP, which can run Debian 6 or Ubuntu 12, just as fast and sometimes faster than the current Windows XP computers you're using now.

Not when you have legacy enterprise grade applications that are completely tied to Internet Explorer and Windows and there is no replacement for them. Again, many of us have beef with Internet Explorer and Windows XP. The problem isn't that we don't want to upgrade, it's that we can't upgrade.

 

[Adam Howard]

Not when you have legacy enterprise grade applications that are completely tied to Internet Explorer and Windows and there is no replacement for them. Again, many of us have beef with Internet Explorer and Windows XP. The problem isn't that we don't want to upgrade, it's that we can't upgrade.

Your company needs to step outside the box or be left back in history. While these choices may not be up to the system admins and more up to management and accounting... The result regardless is true.

 

[ManagerJosh]

Your company needs to step outside the box or be left back in history. While these choices may not be up to the system admins and more up to management and accounting... The result regardless is true.

Talk is cheap Adam until you've done at least one major enterprise grade migration. In some cases, older applications corporations bought have no replacement or alternatives. Heck, I've seen old mainframes with legacy applications still being utilized to this day.

Others, well we are talking custom multi billion dollar applications here. This is not your Microsoft Office. This is not something you can get off the shelf off Amazon.com

You literally are starting from scratch. Corporations have to:

• Conduct feasibility studies and put together proposals
• Have Business Systems Analysts to Perform JAD Sessions to gather requirements
• Get upper management to approve the investment
• Investigate Rules, and Compliance and integrate those requirements into the application
• Code/Program the Application
• QA The Application for Bugs and Security Lapses
• Fix bugs and QA as appropriate
• Train Employees on How to use the application
• Develop Translation Applications to interact with the legacy databases OR create importers to import the data into the new application
• QA that translation application or importer
• Setup test environments to test the translation application/importer on copies of production data
• Do multiple dry runs in a test environment to determine and isolate any issues when doing the actual implementation.
• Design and setup business continuity/disaster recovery plans.
• Implement BCDR plans.
• Perform BCDR Drills.
• Perform the implementation
• Support the application answering questions for employees on how to perform certain actions.

Each of these above steps is roughly anywhere between 3-18 months in time. Assuming the above 17 items I listed took 6 months, that's about 8.5 years roughly of work there. And if you have not noticed, the economy is in pits and companies are not exactly lining up around the corner to spend money on new application development.

 

[Adam Howard]

Talk is cheap Adam until you've done at least one major enterprise grade migration. In some cases, older applications corporations bought have no replacement or alternatives. Heck, I've seen old mainframes with legacy applications still being utilized to this day.

Others, well we are talking custom multi billion dollar applications here. This is not your Microsoft Office. This is not something you can get off the shelf off Amazon.com

You literally are starting from scratch. Corporations have to:

• Conduct feasibility studies and put together proposals
• Have Business Systems Analysts to Perform JAD Sessions to gather requirements
• Get upper management to approve the investment
• Investigate Rules, and Compliance and integrate those requirements into the application
• Code/Program the Application
• QA The Application for Bugs and Security Lapses
• Fix bugs and QA as appropriate
• Train Employees on How to use the application
• Develop Translation Applications to interact with the legacy databases OR create importers to import the data into the new application
• QA that translation application or importer
• Setup test environments to test the translation application/importer on copies of production data
• Do multiple dry runs in a test environment to determine and isolate any issues when doing the actual implementation.
• Design and setup business continuity/disaster recovery plans.
• Implement BCDR plans.
• Perform BCDR Drills.
• Perform the implementation
• Support the application answering questions for employees on how to perform certain actions.

Each of these above steps is roughly anywhere between 3-18 months in time. Assuming the above 17 items I listed took 6 months, that's about 8.5 years roughly of work there. And if you have not noticed, the economy is in pits and companies are not exactly lining up around the corner to spend money on new application development.

And that is why a lot of companies will not make it. The rest of the world is moving forward and those who can't or will not, will be left behind.

It's not a personal attack or cheap talk, it's just the facts of business. When the rest of the world is using X and Y company is still using Z, but Z is not compatible, workable, or migrate-able to X .... Y company still using Z stops growing and continues to fall back.

Technology is binary. You're either a 1 or a 0. Alive or dead.

 

[SneakyDave]

In 20 years, there will be a lot more Fortune 1000 companies "alive" than "stay at home" part time Linux purists. That's just the nature of business.

Business is business, not all of them are IT shops. Most large ones don't even support their own employee's machines. They contract that work out. Businesses will do whatever it is they think they can do to save money and server their customers well.

We still use IBM z/OS mainframes. They actually interface better with Linux platforms than Windows machines because they have a unix partition. But for whatever reason, it's been about 10 years of trying to convert Solaris and HP-UX machines to Red Hat Enterprise. Why is that? Because it's just like Windows. As soon as everything was converted to dedicated RHEL machines, somebody created something better (virtualization), so now those servers with mission critial applications on them had to move to VMWare guests. I suspect it'll happen again when something better comes along.

Big business just can't upgrade an operating system on a box for mission critical apps, even for VMWare. We're told that an operating system upgrade from RHEL 5 to RHEL 6 will take a minimum of 48 hours over a weekend. That's unacceptable to shops that are considered to be "24x7". People can talk about running in the cloud all they want, but most non-IT businesses are trying to find ways to make their applications run smarter, and not follow the sunshine and lollipops of cloud computing.

 

[ManagerJosh]

In 20 years, there will be a lot more Fortune 1000 companies "alive" than "stay at home" part time Linux purists. That's just the nature of business.

Business is business, not all of them are IT shops. Most large ones don't even support their own employee's machines. They contract that work out. Businesses will do whatever it is they think they can do to save money and server their customers well.

We still use IBM z/OS mainframes. They actually interface better with Linux platforms than Windows machines because they have a unix partition. But for whatever reason, it's been about 10 years of trying to convert Solaris and HP-UX machines to Red Hat Enterprise. Why is that? Because it's just like Windows. As soon as everything was converted to dedicated RHEL machines, somebody created something better (virtualization), so now those servers with mission critial applications on them had to move to VMWare guests. I suspect it'll happen again when something better comes along.

Big business just can't upgrade an operating system on a box for mission critical apps, even for VMWare. We're told that an operating system upgrade from RHEL 5 to RHEL 6 will take a minimum of 48 hours over a weekend. That's unacceptable to shops that are considered to be "24x7". People can talk about running in the cloud all they want, but most non-IT businesses are trying to find ways to make their applications run smarter, and not follow the sunshine and lollipops of cloud computing.

You're exactly right Dave. It's all about maintaining the data confidentiality, data integrity, and data availability.

 

[Shelley]

jQuery doesn't kill IE. IE kills IE in turn Kills us. Allegedly << learned the word from the lawyers handbook for dummies so all credit for that word goes to the Dummy series handbooks.

 

[BlackJacket]

If a company doesn't want to invest in its own infrastructure and keep it maintained, how do they ever expect to stay above water?

 

[Adam Howard]

If a company doesn't want to invest in its own infrastructure and keep it maintained, how do they ever expect to stay above water?

Bingo !

And respectfully, this is one of the many reasons (not the only reason obviously) business in America is sinking.

I keep hearing about how these large multi-million dollar companies have written their own software (or hardware) and is completely dependent on X resource.

But walk into a multi-billion dollar company that isn't based in The USA and you'll find less things are dependent on any individual resource. I would say a vast, majority of it is commercial software (not custom in-house) and much of it (not all) can update on the fly.

And before anyone quote me and says, "well they have the funds and resources".... I would quote you back and say, that is why they have the funds and resources.

As for the stuff that is in-house and customized .... It either gets updated, replaced, or phased out. There is less resistance on doing what is needed to stay competitive, productive, and current (up to date).

If you can't imagine how a large intentional company could do this... Now you understand part of the problem is not understanding.

 

[ManagerJosh]

I know a defense contractor who still uses punch cards for aircraft that are still in commission. Everything is on punch cards. Parts, Blueprints, schematics, notes on the aircraft.

Does this mean they are do not invest in new infrastructure and technology? Hardly.