Old browsers increase the development cost of web stores because the code can't be streamlined, so the cost of merchandise must go up. This isn't fair to those who browse with modern browsers, so don't penalize them... instead...
Tax users of old browsers with a price markup.
A web store http://www.kogan.com/ just implemented this policy and is apparently the first to do so.
Interesting idea, but I doubt too many sites are going to embrace this idea for fear of losing business. It does make a lot of sense to charge for upkeep on shitty, outdated browser compatibility, though. Especially when it takes all of maybe 5 minutes to open Windows Update and upgrade, perhaps even less if you go find a good browser to download to replace the steaming pile of crap that is IE.
The Opponent
Title: Forum Battle WINNER
Joined: Feb 24 2010
Location: The Danger Zone
Posts: 3495
Posted:
Jun 15 2012 09:32 pm
I once went out of my way to ban AOL users from accessing my website. It felt great, but I had no way of knowing anyone from AOL actually tried.
I'm not a bad enough dude, but I am an edgy little shit. I'll do what I can.
UsaSatsui
Title: The White Rabbit
Joined: May 25 2008
Location: Hiding
Posts: 7565
Posted:
Jun 15 2012 11:27 pm
Insulting your customers over browser choice is a great way to lose them. I don't think this will catch on.
Wouldn't just replacing that with "Hey, you need to upgrade your browser to use this website" really be that much harder?
And yes, it is insulting them over browser choice, not just for not updating. I notice that updating the browser isn't a suggested option there.
I personally support this up to not recommending a later IE version alongside other browsers. IE6 is godawful, and IE7 is mostly the same godawful with a horrible tabbed UI, however IE8+9 are pretty good, especially 9, since it no longer has such a cluttered UI. Mostly everything else is still leaps and bounds ahead, but it's a good direction taken by IE. I still hate on the unnecacary intergration, but that is another story for another day.
Also, I think more websites should do stuff like this until almost the entire web for IE7 and below users is just a sea of "upgrade or change your browser" messages.
Also find it interesting that they didn't forget the Opera browser in the suggestions. Way too many people forget about Opera, which is what holds me back on using it (tried it when I got my school netbook, it didn't support iCloud.com, something I can't do without, so I went back to Firefox).
Satire, there are talks about Opera being acquired by Facebook.
As for the insult, yes, I agree it is insulting. If it were my own web store, I would never write things the way they did. However, I commend them for increasing the price for those who browse with old technology. This is the same deal as emissions checks being more expensive for older cars. It is easier to support new browsers, and if this encourages people to upgrade, it reduces support costs.
JoshWoodzy
Joined: May 22 2008
Location: Goshen, VA
Posts: 6544
Posted:
Jun 16 2012 08:53 pm
GPFontaine wrote:
This is the same deal as emissions checks being more expensive for older cars
Not even close
@om*d
Title: Dorakyura
Joined: Jul 10 2010
Location: Castlevania
Posts: 4224
Posted:
Jun 16 2012 10:58 pm
JoshWoodzy wrote:
GPFontaine wrote:
This is the same deal as emissions checks being more expensive for older cars
Not even close
I agree with Woodzy here.
Let's use the law in New York as an example here:
NY DMV wrote:
Some vehicles are exempt from emissions inspections: vehicles one model year old or newer, vehicles at least 26 model years old, vehicles with vintage or historic plates, electric vehicles, motorcycles, farm equipment, homemade or custom vehicles in the upstate area, and diesel vehicles weighing 8,500 pounds or less.
Try another example.
As far as my opinion on the matter, they might as well just not support it at all, and either state that on their site or just not state it at all. Maybe they should include links to browser updates or suggest using another computer to make the order instead of ripping their customers off. What they are doing is being unnecessary assholes about it, and frankly, lazy in not bothering to build their website to support it.
Mr. Satire
Title: No title necessary.
Joined: Jun 08 2010
Location: Termina Field
Posts: 1540
Posted:
Jun 17 2012 12:00 am
@om*d wrote:
What they are doing is being unnecessary assholes about it, and frankly, lazy in not bothering to build their website to support it.
I don't think they are being lazy. Getting a content-rich website to work in legacy browsers like IE7 and IE6 without just being lazy and making the whole page a Flash thingy is rather difficult, if not impossible. And I don't want websites to just have to use Flash, because Flash should be dead and largely replaced by HTML5 by now, but it isn't, thanks to legacy browsers.
What they are doing is being unnecessary assholes about it, and frankly, lazy in not bothering to build their website to support it.
I don't think they are being lazy. Getting a content-rich website to work in legacy browsers like IE7 and IE6 without just being lazy and making the whole page a Flash thingy is rather difficult, if not impossible. And I don't want websites to just have to use Flash, because Flash should be dead and largely replaced by HTML5 by now, but it isn't, thanks to legacy browsers.
"This page is not supported by your browser. Please update it or use another browser".
Simple, to the point, gets the job done, and doesn't piss your customers off.
Well, just noticed that this was done by an Australian retailer, who is also responsible for this ad:
After seeing that, no wonder they did the IE7 tax.
UNRELATED NOTE: Why can't I use YouTube's new embed code here? It's the only embed code that works with my everything (as I don't install Flash on my computers)
They provide a gate to hell, through which demons may escape.
Sounds plausible.
About as plausible as any reason that could be given for not installing Flash on your computer.
Because Flash is an old technology that should be abandoned.
Pretty much what Satsui said above me. Just because something should be abandoned doesn't mean it is yet possible to do so. I can't imagine how much fun it is to use the internet without Flash because at least 1/3 of the internet uses it in some form or another. Perhaps while you are at it you can quit playing old video games because they are old technology that have already been abandoned by the people who made them, or stop using the wheel because, shit, we have hovercraft technology making it obsolete or something.
Captain_Pollution
Title: Hugh
Joined: Sep 23 2007
Posts: 1591
Posted:
Jun 18 2012 03:42 pm
Well if you think something should be abandoned, and you're continuing to use it out of convenience, then you're part of the problem and supporting something you think is dumb. I think it's admirable to stop using something because you think that something should be abandoned, even if it's inconvenient to do so. At the same time, though, you should be /aware/ that you're actively deciding /not/ to take the path of least resistance, and so you shouldn't bitch about it when you run into that resistance, since it's something you specifically chose to go after.
<Drew_Linky> Well, I've eaten vegetables all of once in my life.
JoshWoodzy
Joined: May 22 2008
Location: Goshen, VA
Posts: 6544
Posted:
Jun 18 2012 11:10 pm
lol, bitching about flash because your shitty devices don't support it, Satty?
Even though I'm busting balls, he's still gonna come in and freak out about it.
Klimbatize
2010 NES Champ
Title: 2011 Picnic/Death Champ
Joined: Mar 15 2010
Location: Las Vegas, NV
Posts: 4975
Posted:
Jun 19 2012 11:25 am
Captain_Pollution's post is perfect. I hope Satire actually reads it closely. It really speaks to many of Satire's problems with technology.
It's admirable to not use a product for what you deem as a good reason, but you have to put up with the consequences of not using said product without bitching about it.
Automobiles are an old technology that should be abandoned. It's still pretty necessary to use one to survive in today's society.
That just doesn't make sense. Automobiles are an old technology, but is there a new and better alterative? No.
Flash is old technology, and it has a new and better alternative.
And Woodzy, if I were bitching about it for that fact, I would still use it on my desktops and laptops. Also, fucking Flash support shouldn't be the decider for if something like a tablet is shit. Flash for Android is on its way out the door, but I bet the same people who bash iStuff for not having Flash won't bitch about Flash no longer being available on the beloved yet shitty Android OS.
