Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Why are Websites Still Forcing People to Use IE?

Posted by Cliff on from the betcha-it's-active-x-controls dept.

DragonTHC asks: "I just visited Movielink's website for research. Their site has a nice message saying, 'Sorry, but in order to enjoy the Movielink service you must use Internet Explorer 5.0 (or higher) or Mozilla/Firefox with an IE Tab Extension (IE installation required).' While allowing the IETab Firefox extension is somewhat progressive, why do companies still force people to use Internet Explorer? Surely the site should work just fine in Firefox? With Firefox's steady gains in market share, you would think that webmasters would get the hint. If you are a webmaster, what are your reasons for forcing IE?"

10 of 899 comments (clear)

  1. Forcing people to use IE? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I think you mean forcing people to use other sites.

  2. Then don't go there by Jupix · · Score: 5, Insightful

    They have no power over you. Just go somewhere else for your research. That's what I do when I come across a stupid website like that.

    1. Re:Then don't go there by Zocalo · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Exactly. This is the strongest message you can send and it's actually your easiest option thanks to Internet search engines. Any decent web logfile analysis package is capable of showing stats on the number of visitors that only visited the home page and didn't follow any links. If the site in question is using one and that figure gets high enough then they might just correlate it with browser usage and the clue train will pull into the station. If not, well, it's their lost sales, advertising revenue, warm-fuzzies though high pages hits or whatever other factor they judge the success of the site by.

      --
      UNIX? They're not even circumcised! Savages!
  3. Re:"Allowing" IETab? by LighterShadeOfBlack · · Score: 5, Insightful

    What's (somewhat) progressive about MovieLink isn't that they're allowing IETab... but that they're recommending it. It's not all that progressive though is it? That just means the website isn't from a time where for most people there really was no known alternative to IE. They're obviously well aware of Firefox and yet they have chosen to jam a proverbial fork in the user's eye by suggesting they change their software to fit the website. If anything that's regression in my book. They're aware of other browsers, they explicitly just don't care.
    --
    Spelling mistakes, grammatical errors, and stupid comments are intentional.
  4. What could be worse? by Robber+Baron · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Never mind IE, the idiots I'd like to kick the shit out of are the ones who do a website entirely in Flash!

    --

    You're using her as bait, Master!

  5. Re:Obvious arrogance. by ergo98 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    How about IE has functionality that your sacred cow doesn't?

    Such as? What necessary piece of functionality does IE have that Mozilla (or Opera, or others) don't have?

    The GP is absolutely correct most of the time: In the vast majority of cases there is no justifiable reason, and the only explanation is a lazy and/or dumb development team that couldn't be bothered to support another browser. Many of these projects were developed or began back when such a lazy choice wouldn't impede them much, but nowadays it can be deadly (if I encounter an IE-only site, I presume the operators are just grossly incompetent and go elsewhere).
  6. The worst in people? by writermike · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Wow. So many of the comments here just assume the worst about people. The users are lazy or stupid, the developers are "n00bs" or the people that run the websites are arrogant. And, yeah, I'm sure that's the case for some.

    I propose a much simpler answer: Return-on-investment.

    Here's an example: When the site was created, it was around the time that building for IE was considered a must-have and getting a presence on the Internet meant untold riches coming your way. Companies hired designers based on those premises. The designers delivered. The companies sunk a chunk of money into it.

    A few years later, designing for _ALL_ browsers is a must-have, but... The company didn't make the untold riches they were promised (turns out people would rather buy tube bending by phone and email). They don't see the point in sinking money into a redesign for a website that doesn't amount to much in the company's overall income.

    Yeah, it annoys me when Firefox doesn't work on a site, but I have alternatives and, for the most part, some of those sites are indeed being retooled little by little. All of my bank sites support Firefox without question. Something not true a couple of years ago.

    Cheers,

    Mike...

    --
    If Nalgene water bottles are outlawed, only outlaws will have Nalgene water bottles.
  7. Re:Proprietary Stuff That's IE Exclusive by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    it's sort of cool to have an entire page pixelate/warp/dissolve/rotate/... in.


    no...no it's not
  8. Obvious denial by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I want the audience to read this thread because it proves my point. MS says "You have a problem? I have a solution". The OSS community starts you off with a "you don't have problem". The poster didn't even suggest OpenOffice or any other OSS software that might give the needed solution (assuming it can). That's why some sites code to IE, and if they're "stupid and lazy" for solving problems instead of denying them? Then so be it. IE will still be there to take up the OSS slack.

  9. Re:We only support IE because... by CrossChris · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Nobody here is dumb or lazy.

    Yes they are - the boss deciding this policy is fundamentally stupid. If he worked for me he'd have 1 month notice to realign his attitude or it's goodbye. Anyone stupid enough to reduce the availability of a commercial website by making it browser specific doesn't deserve a job in the IT industry (unless he's downgraded to Janitor!).

    As a maintainer of a Top 10 website (it's the only British one listed in the Netcraft Top 10), I can tell you that Internet Explorer accounts for less than 50% of our visits right now and has IE use has visibly declined in the last year. Indeed "other" Operating Systems now account for over 45% of our site visits. We will not be using proprietary codecs in future for our on-line programme services.

    Game Over, Microsoft!