• http://www.irwebreport.com/ Dominic Jones

    Jonathan, thanks for link. It’s a forthright viewpoint and more users of other browsers would be nice.
    It is indeed ironic that the move hurts good developers more than others, but you can argue that good developers are more likely to be able to cope with the fallout.

    Of course, it’s an IE world and we have to work with that reality, and look for the opportunities the improved dominant browser gives website owners.

    We serve a separate stylesheet to IE6 users on IR Daily. It is a bit more bother, but it’s a quick solution for us.

  • http://www.irwebreport.com/ Jonathan Godsell

    A developer friend of mine has written a good article that details how Microsoft, with the launch of IE7, have actually taken a step backwards, and managed to increase the workflow of every website designer and developer:

    http://www.charcoaldesign.co.uk/weblog/6

    It concludes that we should not adopt IE7 but reject it in favour of truly standards compliant browsers like Firefox. Realistically though, we can guarantee this will become the default browser within a year or so. If you haven’t tested yet, time to get cracking!

  • Pingback: IR Daily » 10 Signs You Need a New IR Website

  • Just another developer

    Working for a large vendor, I was amused by your article. Funny too, this was forwarded to me by a panicked client.

    I found it to be sensationalist and sophmoric. Things like “because no one has the knowledge or guts to tell you” that we “won’t read anywhere else” are just laughable.

    Your article holds some truth, in that there are companies who were complicit in Microsoft’s screwing up of the web with their half-baked implementations of browsers. You are correct too, that it is their own fault for designing to a broken platform. I’m willing to bet these same companies sites look terrible in far better browsers like Firefox or Opera.

    Anyway, please refrain from hand-waving, braod-stroking articles in the future. You do a disservice to those of us who’ve suffered long under Internet Explorer’s crapulous reign, who’ve had to waste countless dollars of a client’s money by writing parallel code in script and/or CSS to support the litany of broken browsers Microsoft has produced. Blaming everyone for the fact that Microsoft would rather spend time introducing incompatible, Windows-only features instead of rewriting the nearly 10 year-old Trident engine( to be fair, a marvel in its day ) for something modern.

    Finally, you also seem to lack an understanding of how business really works. Often times, there is no budget allowed to properly code, test, tweak, and polish a site for the 10 or so browsers in popular use and developers are pressured to shove it out the door as fast and as cheap as possible. That usually means making it work in IE 6( remember, it’s been the “standard” for almost 6 years ) and damn the rest.

  • Chris

    Websites and applications that don’t render out in IE7 cannot be blamed solely on the developers. Your proposed solution how developers should be testing their sites and apps in beta releases is a significant waste of time and resources. Beta releases are development builds, and by no means a production or stable release. Beta releases typically change drastically between beta release, and would require developers to rebuild their site every time a new release is sent out.

  • http://www.irwebreport.com/daily/ Dominic Jones

    > Developer
    This article is about investor relations website vendors. That’s clearly not your business, because then you wouldn’t be so quick to jump to conclusions about whether I am being sensationalist or just plain honest. If you can find a single investor relations source that has written anything vaguely similar to what I wrote before I wrote it, I’ll retract the entire story. Unfortunately, I’m a lone voice here. I understand the problem perfectly, and I understand that Microsoft still owns the browser market and companies have budgets. That doesn’t excuse investor relations departments, or their vendors, from neglecting their most important communication channel with investors, something that directly impacts their credibility with the market and their cost of capital.

    > Chris. Agreed. I didn’t say what you’re suggesting I said.

    As a general point, I wonder why both of you are so defensive about this topic. Good developers don’t worry about this stuff.

  • Chris

    Dominic,

    By way of curiosity, I’d like to ask you if you’ve ever done any kind of software development. The arguments against your opinion have nothing to do with developer skills or knowledge. The reason why this can potentially cause controversy is because you’re making a blind statement about developers not doing their jobs when beta releases are released. In fact, this is more than just a software developer problem, it’s a risk management problem and business analysis problem. Developers often times do not make critical decisions that impact the business.

    Your article implies that developers are the single focal point to place blame on. If my deduction about your article is incorrect, please clarify what your point really is.

  • http://www.irwebreport.com Dominic Jones

    Chris,

    This has nothing to do with software development and nothing to do with testing with beta software. It has to do with software that has already shipped. IE 7 shipped and people didn’t test their websites in the browser. Some still haven’t. That’s plain negligence.

    Why do you want to excuse this? It’s unacceptable, period.

    This is not about whether IE7 is a good or bad browser. It’s about website developers, managers etc. being asleep at the switch. And it’s not just about making sure their site’s don’t break in IE7, but also about taking advantage of new features in IE7 that can help organizations make more of the Web.

  • Pingback: IR Web Report Blog » Cookie-Cutter IR Websites Bad, Says Ex-Insider

  • Pingback: Investor Relations Blog » IR website vendors are failing IROs