Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Corporate IT Just Won't Let IE6 Die

CmdrTaco posted more than 4 years ago | from the your-arms-bloody-off dept.

Internet Explorer 479

alphadogg writes "Security experts, industry analysts, and even Microsoft recommend that IT departments upgrade Internet Explorer 6, yet new research shows that while there may have recently been a mock funeral for the aging browser, IE6 is still around and doing well, especially during standard business hours." The article says that they are seeing 6-13% peaking during business hours. Around here we see less than 1.5% IE6, but since we see only 10% IE in general, I imagine we're just lucky.

cancel ×

479 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

First non IE user. (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31998786)

FF FTW!

They will... (-1, Offtopic)

alfredos (1694270) | more than 4 years ago | (#31998788)

...If it becomes a priority. Yes, Simon Travaglia was right. That is the way.

Re:They will... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31999260)

...If it becomes a priority. Yes, Simon Travaglia was right. That is the way.

I wish they'd unleash him on the morons who continue to run IE 6. The BOFH would fix them.

Meanwhile, I wish we'd stop thinking of "nigger" as a racial slur and instead give it a meaning like "extremely fucking stupid, never to be emulated". Then we could freely say that companies relying on old pieces of shit like IE6 are niggers.

My plate is pretty full right now... (5, Informative)

stillpixel (1575443) | more than 4 years ago | (#31998812)

but I'm working on it! The only way to get Corporate/Management off of IE6 is to fix any web apps you have in your organization that won't work on anything but that.

Re:My plate is pretty full right now... (4, Insightful)

fieldstone (985598) | more than 4 years ago | (#31998868)

But... isn't using IE6 in a corporate environment the equivalent of saying, "Yes, please infect my computers with malware without warning!"? That's not even to touch matters of compatibility... Doesn't security mean anything? And wouldn't most IE6 web apps work in IE8 under its compatibility mode... or am I being overly optimistic about said compatibility mode?

Re:My plate is pretty full right now... (4, Informative)

Nadaka (224565) | more than 4 years ago | (#31999070)

You are being over optimistic about compatibility mode. It isn't identical to what it is supposed to emulate.

Re:My plate is pretty full right now... (4, Funny)

sgbett (739519) | more than 4 years ago | (#31999100)

We see over 80% IE6, most of our users are NHS, hospital staff, clinicians etc

Kind of appropriate in a way.

Re:My plate is pretty full right now... (5, Interesting)

fieldstone (985598) | more than 4 years ago | (#31999168)

It's because of familiarity, I'm pretty sure. I've had clients absolutely refuse to use anything else, even IE8, because it "felt" (in other words, looked) different from what they were used to. My solution to this is usually one of the Firefox themes that makes Firefox look like IE. The IE6 one is pretty flawless.

Re:My plate is pretty full right now... (4, Insightful)

causality (777677) | more than 4 years ago | (#31999294)

It's because of familiarity, I'm pretty sure. I've had clients absolutely refuse to use anything else, even IE8, because it "felt" (in other words, looked) different from what they were used to. My solution to this is usually one of the Firefox themes that makes Firefox look like IE. The IE6 one is pretty flawless.

If a client cares about that more than all of the problems with IE6, then they should not have a position in their company that allows them to make IT-related decisions.

Re:My plate is pretty full right now... (1)

Creepy (93888) | more than 4 years ago | (#31999390)

Our web product minimum version is IE6, so we have to have IE6 on some machines. I'd love to upgrade them to 7 or 8, but we can't until management gives us the go. If I work on one of those machines, I browse in IE6 because it is the only browser on those boxes (they're usually VMs).

The plus side is none of our Linux or UNIX hosts support IE anymore. Solaris and Mac IE was a nightmare to support.

Re:My plate is pretty full right now... (1)

IntlHarvester (11985) | more than 4 years ago | (#31999194)

The core issue is that there is no IE6 compatibility mode. There are modes for IE5 and IE7, but not the version that everyone used.

(It would probably be impossible to create a true "bug-compatible" mode for IE6, considering the vast number of bugs. But MS really screwed people here by giving them no upgrade path other than recoding everything.)

Re:My plate is pretty full right now... (5, Insightful)

amplt1337 (707922) | more than 4 years ago | (#31999254)

No, it's equivalent to saying "We need to run mission-critical software that won't run on higher versions of IE."

I've actually had to go around uninstalling IE 7 and 8 from user machines and re-installing IE 6 because the users have to run IE6-only software, or the vendor's IE7 installer doesn't work, or there are bugs in the IE 7 version, etc. etc. Sure, I'd love to get rid of the vendor -- you think that's easy?

Of course, I also encourage people to do any *ahem* personal browsing in Firefox anyway, but IE6 isn't going to go away until we don't need it. If the web-designer artistes out there want to complain about cross-browser compatibility, they can either bite me, or come down and do my users' jobs for them.

Re:My plate is pretty full right now... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31999466)

Where I work the architecture board is constantly issuing recommendations and guidelines for software that try to keep the company not so dependent on a particular vendor. It recognizes two corporate standard web browsers. But the business units continue to ignore or follow these guidelines. Poor office workers can't do anything without MS wizards that use ActiveX in their HTML work. Now when the company wants to migrate off IE6 there is a big problem. Gee, I wonder why. Short term gain for long term loss so typical.

Re:My plate is pretty full right now... (3, Informative)

DigitalSorceress (156609) | more than 4 years ago | (#31999324)

My company is still stuck on IE6 for users of our financial system because it appears to totally break if you try and use it with anything other than IE6.

I don't ever touch that system, so I upgraded mine to IE8 and then proceeded to set FireFox with NoScript as my primary browser. I only use IE when a site I actually need for work refuses to work in FireFox or requires flash/shockwave which I have NOT installed on my FireFox (for my own sanity).

If I want to do personal browsing while at work, I plug my MacBook into the visitor network to protect both my employer and myself from any Interwebz baddiez.

Re:My plate is pretty full right now... (2, Insightful)

Renegade Lisp (315687) | more than 4 years ago | (#31998896)

but I'm working on it! The only way to get Corporate/Management off of IE6 is to fix any web apps you have in your organization that won't work on anything but that.

At the same time, more and more important sites out there need to stop supporting IE6. Where I work now, we are forced to use IE6 because it is "company standard", but it is accepted, at the same time, that we need to look up stuff on external web sites all the time. If those sites no longer support our browser, that would be an increasingly urgent reason to upgrade.

Once that decision is taken, it would probably only take between 4 and 6 years to actually get the project implemented...

Re:My plate is pretty full right now... (4, Interesting)

Z00L00K (682162) | more than 4 years ago | (#31998980)

In any case - all those in the surveys must be very lucky to see such low numbers when it comes to IE6.

A system that I run still has more than 65% of the traffic from IE6, luckily the last clients have abandoned using IE 5.5.

Other figures are 21.1% for IE7, 12.7% for IE8 and 0.8% for the other browsers (Firefox, Safari.)

Re:My plate is pretty full right now... (1)

TheRaven64 (641858) | more than 4 years ago | (#31999310)

99.2% is absurdly high a market share for IE; most surveys put it somewhere in the 60-80% range, so I can only imagine that your site is highly Windows-specific. You don't run MSDN do you?

Re:My plate is pretty full right now... (1)

Phalnix (714052) | more than 4 years ago | (#31998944)

Unfortunately that would require bringing back VBScript to browsers :/ This stuff needs to be rewritten. Perhaps creating a place for businesses to go to get things migrated would ease the burden of hiring people to do it internally?

Re:My plate is pretty full right now... (1, Flamebait)

Lumpy (12016) | more than 4 years ago | (#31999144)

Yup they will get right on that right after they recode all the internal apps from VB6 to VB.net...

you have any idea how much VB6 crap is still rolling around inside corporations, even HUGE ones?

you think they will be replacing the horribly borked .asp webapps soon? They wont fix them until forced to do so.. In other words, Microsoft stops issuing any patches for IE6 and warns everyone against using it for any reason.

Re:My plate is pretty full right now... (1)

stillpixel (1575443) | more than 4 years ago | (#31999356)

Like I said in my first post, I'm working on it. I handle several websites and webapps on a daily basis, along with going back and reworking older webapps if I have spare time. Sometimes it can be really annoying and painful to do, but in the end I feel better personally and the closer I get to being able to recommend Firefox for everything the happier I really am.

not first post... (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31998822)

Not first post, but the first time Slashdot editors comment on browser share here?

Yeah, we're one of the ones stuck with it (1)

Pojut (1027544) | more than 4 years ago | (#31998836)

I'm not exactly sure at this point why we are still using IE6...for a while we were sticking with it because we were using some legacy software that required IE6 to function properly (it literally didn't work with any other version, apparently), but we no longer use that stuff, so...yeah...no idea why we are still stuck with IE6.

I can understand why we still use XP, but not IE6.

Re:Yeah, we're one of the ones stuck with it (3, Interesting)

courteaudotbiz (1191083) | more than 4 years ago | (#31999218)

I work as a consultant in a 5000 users company where the ONLY standard is IE6. The reason why we're stuck here is because mainly of poor development practices, using non W3C compliant standards to develop in house web applications that rely on IE6 proprietary features.

The only way to get rid of it is to put a LOT of resources (see money) on making our in house apps standards compliant. The problem is that the developpers do not have the budget necessary because the top company managers (non tech) say "Hey, we can browse the web with IE6? So no money until it does not work anymore!"

I just HOPE that in the future, development teams will fucking stick to standards!

Re:Yeah, we're one of the ones stuck with it (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31999452)

I don't understand why you just don't treat IE6 as a specialized internal apps platform and use something else, like Firefox, as a web browser.

Developers could then code new apps to modern standards and those apps could use Firefox as the apps platform.

Re:Yeah, we're one of the ones stuck with it (1)

Attila Dimedici (1036002) | more than 4 years ago | (#31999396)

We have it here, there are several webapps we use that are built for IE6. They have rolled out IE8 to select users to see if compatibility mode works for those apps. It appears to, so now they are scheduling a roll out of IE8 for later this year or early next. There is a more business critical roll out going on right now and they don't want to make such a change until the higher priority system has had all the bugs worked out.

Well... (4, Insightful)

drolli (522659) | more than 4 years ago | (#31998838)

Once the crappy internal web applications for managing some forms have been duct-taped together by a student worker, nodody dares to touch a single thing. You can only get burned.

Re:Well... (1)

LordLimecat (1103839) | more than 4 years ago | (#31999142)

Call in a consulting team, get a quote for reworking it. Doesnt that neatly solve the problem?

Re:Well... (3, Funny)

AnonymousClown (1788472) | more than 4 years ago | (#31999214)

Call in a consulting team, get a quote for reworking it. Doesnt that neatly solve the problem?

Pfft. Post the job on Rent A Coder. You'll get the job done cheap and good by some really hungry laid off IT guy that needs the money.

Re:Well... (1)

drolli (522659) | more than 4 years ago | (#31999306)

Not if the consulting team messes up. If you are the one who called for them and something is fucked up in the eye of the upper morons (who may have hired the student doing the crap back then), it does not matter if the consulting team did their job right.

Re:Well... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31999474)

From what I see here at my work. They are reworking the webapps to work nicely with IE8 but only IE8. Basically setting us up for a similar ordeal in 10 years time.

Re:Well... (1)

Sique (173459) | more than 4 years ago | (#31999446)

Are you ready to do this for out of production PSTN systems, which are still installed at the customer's sites in numbers?

I am looking at you, Siemens Hicom 300V3. Out of production since 15 years. Still in use and managed by an outdated version of HiPath Manager V1.0 installed on a Windows 2000 somewhere.

Re:Well... (1)

hweimer (709734) | more than 4 years ago | (#31999464)

Once the crappy internal web applications for managing some forms have been duct-taped together by a student worker, nodody dares to touch a single thing. You can only get burned.

It's not only student workers, but also companies who have been led to believe that there was real security support for IE6 until 2014 [microsoft.com] .

My Company's Clients Only Use IE6 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31998842)

Even though IE 6 users account for a just a small minority of users, they are often the majority of my paying customers.

You can't even install IE 6 on a new computer without jumping through millions of hoops. I'm sure some crusty old piece of lousy web app is to blame somewhere... But seriously, these IT department need to get their act together and join us in 2010.

Re:My Company's Clients Only Use IE6 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31999238)

I can attest that some of our customers, as recently as six months ago, were still requesting specifically that we prep our product to work on IE6 so that it would be compatible with their network. So, not only are they clinging to legacy apps, but they are actively installing apps that are optimized for IE6. When will the madness end?

Posting AC, duh.

How to kill IE6... (1)

Mad Merlin (837387) | more than 4 years ago | (#31998844)

IE6 won't die until it's more painful to stay with IE6 than to upgrade away from it. So if you want to kill IE6, that means dropping support for IE6, or if you have paying customers, charge them more if they're using IE6, and tell them that. Game! [wittyrpg.com] did the former ages ago.

Why? Just standardization? (1)

BadAnalogyGuy (945258) | more than 4 years ago | (#31998850)

An analysis of the reasons corporate users were still using IE6 would have been really nice.

Is it a matter of hard-assed sysadmins locking down the system so that users can't upgrade?
Is it misguided policy?
Is it reasonable policy?

I'm sitting here typing this on Chrome and wouldn't even consider going back to IE. Why aren't these corporate users upgrading (if not to FF or Chrome, at least IE7 or 8)?

Re:Why? Just standardization? (3, Informative)

LWATCDR (28044) | more than 4 years ago | (#31999054)

Simple it is Microsoft's fault.
Actually this time it really is.
Microsoft decided to and all sorts of stuff to IE and to ignore web standards. They produced web authoring tools that generated code that only worked with IE. And they encouraged other companies to do the say. Their Partners.
They did this because they wanted people to be locked into the Microsoft Ecosystem. You can not move off of Windows because some of your software will stop working! Microsoft feared and fears web apps to this day because of that idea.
Web and software developers bought into this because "everybody used IE" and since you had to make your stuff work for IE anyway why spend time making it work for Netscape, then Mozilla? I mean why worry for say 2% of the population and most of those people had IE anyway so they could always just use IE instead!

Now that Microsoft has to move to following standards and now frankly that the standards have gotten much better. W3C your too freaking slow! Microsoft is breaking a lot of it's old stuff.
So people are sticking with IE6 because many of them are trapped by their large investment in old apps.

 

That's the way it happened where I work. (1)

khasim (1285) | more than 4 years ago | (#31999336)

And it is CONTINUING because IE6 is on all the desktops.

The old apps require IE6 ...
The new apps need to be written to the "standard" ...
That "standard" is ... IE6.

So guess what is going to be around for a LONG time.

Re:Why? Just standardization? (1)

IntlHarvester (11985) | more than 4 years ago | (#31999478)

Microsoft decided to and all sorts of stuff to IE and to ignore web standards

As someone who worked on many "IE only" applications* back in the browser war days, actual proprietary IE features were never used as widely as Slashdot assumes they were. (And many of these features are still supported in IE8.)

The most common issues seem to be cosmetic issues arising from buggy markup, minor javascript issues, and IE6's half-assed support for CSS2. Meaning, a good portion of these "IE6 only" sites could be compatible with modern browsers with just a little elbow grease. (However if you're talking about part of a multi-million enterprise app, that's easier said than done.)

* recall that Netscape had a completely proprietary DOM and even worse HTML/CSS support than IE. So it wasn't really a question of coding to "standards" but avoiding the extensive dev/qa time required to support Netscape.

Re:Why? Just standardization? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31999078)

A friend of mine works in a corporation where the workstation installations come bundled with Netscape 6.2, and that's the only browser they can use to access their intranet. I don't know what it is; some odd proxy thingie or the site that doesn't work with other browsers, but that's what they're stuck with. Most employees seem to use it for ordinary web browsing too.

So I'd say that it's mostly about legacy applications that won't work if you upgrade.

Re:Why? Just standardization? (1)

Kentaree (1078787) | more than 4 years ago | (#31999444)

During the early 00s nobody cared about anything else than IE because there was no decent alternative (Netscape was hell at the time), so, anything written/acquired back then only really supported IE. Rather than spend money on making it work with newer browsers, the companies decided that they'd just set IE6 as a requirement and force companies to either pay for costly migrations to more modern software, or keep IE6 installed.

What We Need ... (1)

WrongSizeGlass (838941) | more than 4 years ago | (#31998852)

... is another Google-like IE 6 attack. I'm not saying this should happen to Google again, just another large public company. That type of press coverage is the only way to get the attention of top brass.

Re:What We Need ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31999010)

Ssshhhh! I'm already working on it, don't tell anyone, but the large public company is Apple.

Legacy apps (3, Interesting)

GoJays (1793832) | more than 4 years ago | (#31998862)

Many apps that run on IE 6 will not run correctly on IE 7 (not even thinking about IE8 yet). It can cost a company millions of dollars to upgrade or redevelop their proprietary applications and for what? Tabs? A fully patched IE 6 is just as secure as IE7, so why upgrade? I think many companies will skip over IE 7 and go straight to IE 8 when they upgrade machines from XP to Win7.

Re:Legacy apps (3, Interesting)

Em Emalb (452530) | more than 4 years ago | (#31998958)

Many apps that run on IE 6 will not run correctly on IE 7 (not even thinking about IE8 yet). It can cost a company millions of dollars to upgrade or redevelop their proprietary applications and for what? Tabs? A fully patched IE 6 is just as secure as IE7, so why upgrade? I think many companies will skip over IE 7 and go straight to IE 8 when they upgrade machines from XP to Win7.

Pretty much this, but I would like to expand this to state that at my company, we'd LOVE to upgrade and get the hell off of IE6 for some of our users, but we simply can't without spending literally millions of dollars. For a small firm, this isn't an option. (Finance industry) There's a ton of vendor lock-in, and several of our biggest applications have us stuck. Are we taking steps to move off their proprietary locked in software? Of course. But it is a ridiculously slow process, and some of the managers involved simply don't give it the time necessary, as they have "bigger and better things to do". (Not my call, I'm not in those meetings and actually don't do helpdesk stuff unless the world is exploding.)

Re:Legacy apps (5, Insightful)

DrgnDancer (137700) | more than 4 years ago | (#31999342)

I realize this probably wasn't your fault in the first place, but it *is* your company's own fault. Eventually, Microsoft *will* stop supporting IE6 (XP is supposed to go out of support in a few years, and there's no IE6 for Vista or 7). Those millions of dollars *will* have to be spent. Why not start working on it now and spread the pain out. All of this "but it will cost us million of dollars to make our stuff work like it should have in the first place!" whinging by various corporate managers kind of ridiculous. You (not you personally, but generically "you IT managers") know they won't support this stuff forever, you could fix this over time and spend very little quarter by quarter, but you'd rather cry about the million of dollars it will cost all at once when you eventually HAVE to deal with it.

Re:Legacy apps (1)

DarkKnightRadick (268025) | more than 4 years ago | (#31998960)

That's just it. MS is not supporting IE6 anymore. To me that sounds like no more patches.

Re:Legacy apps (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31998970)

Oh, the millions of dollars excuse again. You can keep IE6 for accessing internal applications, just deploy a modern browser for using the web and b2b web applications. It can't cost more to support than the cost of cleaning up a malware'd network. If it costs millions of company dollars to install and maintain a web browser, that is incompetence.

Re:Legacy apps (1)

commodore64_love (1445365) | more than 4 years ago | (#31999170)

Can you install both IE6 and IE7 at the same time? When I upgraded my PC, 7 overwrote 6.

Re:Legacy apps (1)

dingen (958134) | more than 4 years ago | (#31999230)

No, but you can install Firefox, Safari, Chrome, Opera or something else next to IE6.

Re:Legacy apps (1)

dingen (958134) | more than 4 years ago | (#31999042)

How exactly will it cost millions to make an IE6 webapp compatible with IE7 or 8? IE has changed little to nothing between those versions and all the crap like ActiveX is still supported, so what's the problem?

Re:Legacy apps (1)

ShadowRangerRIT (1301549) | more than 4 years ago | (#31999228)

Well, if they're using implementation quirks of IE6 which were not 100% faithfully replicated in IE7/IE8's compatibility mode (possibly due to security concerns), that would be one reason. And ActiveX, while still supported, is much more restricted in IE7/IE8; they may be assuming that the failure to work with a default configuration in IE7/IE8 means it isn't supported, rather than restricted by default but configurable.

Re:Legacy apps (1)

dingen (958134) | more than 4 years ago | (#31999328)

So the worst case scenario is the case of an exceptionally terrible webapplication which depends on weird IE6 quirks which aren't available in any other application. Isn't the solution as simple as getting some kid as an intern in the summer to fix the stuff that doesn't work? How will that cost you millions?

We still see 22% (4, Informative)

ducomputergeek (595742) | more than 4 years ago | (#31998866)

22% of all hits to our site are from IE6, but IE 6 users still account for something like 40% of all orders (i.e. revenue) for the site. And anytime we break anything with IE6 we hear about it quickly. This is down from about 45% of all browser hits and nearly 60% of all orders last year.

Re:We still see 22% (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31999286)

22% of all hits to our site are from IE6, but IE 6 users still account for something like 40% of all orders (i.e. revenue) for the site.

Does that mean dumb people are twice as likely to buy your product? ;)

Re:We still see 22% (1)

AnonymousClown (1788472) | more than 4 years ago | (#31999304)

IE 6 users still account for something like 40% of all orders (i.e. revenue)

So there's a financial incentive to keep IE6 around - for you guys.

Idiot Software Vendors (1)

neowolf (173735) | more than 4 years ago | (#31998870)

One really big reason is there are some business software companies out there that wrote specialized applications using M$ tools that ONLY WORK in IE6. We have a huge problem with a CRM system at my company, and the vendor is very-very slow to change it. We've managed to get it to work in "Compatibility Mode" with some tweaking in IE8, but I can see why some larger companies don't want to invest the time and money in it right now. It really is ridiculous- IE6 is a pox on the Internet and NEEDS to die.

IE6 should die now (1)

Skatox (1109939) | more than 4 years ago | (#31998872)

As a webdeveloper, it really sucks create sites with ie6 compatibility

Re:IE6 should die now (1)

DarkKnightRadick (268025) | more than 4 years ago | (#31998986)

I just don't do it. Seriously, I refuse to support IE6 in any way, shape or form. If that means I miss a section of a potential market, so be it. Let them catch up to the 21st century.

Re:IE6 should die now (1)

Skatox (1109939) | more than 4 years ago | (#31999040)

That's true. On my private projects/work i don't support it, but in my main job i must do it :(

Re:IE6 should die now (1)

DarkKnightRadick (268025) | more than 4 years ago | (#31999180)

I'm glad I don't work for a company where it's a must (I'm an indy web developer, though only part time right now). I make it very clear that IE6 support is out of the question. If they want/need IE6 support, I'll hand them well commented code (not that I don't anyway) and recommend them to someone good that will give them that support.

Hey Taco (4, Interesting)

epiphani (254981) | more than 4 years ago | (#31998876)

Just out of curiosity, what is the browser breakdown here?

Re:Hey Taco (1)

DarkKnightRadick (268025) | more than 4 years ago | (#31999016)

FF 3.6/Chrome/IE8 (in order of most used to least used, with the last two having never been used in the past 6 months).

Re:Hey Taco (1)

sznupi (719324) | more than 4 years ago | (#31999048)

OS breakdown here would be interesting, too.

Re:Hey Taco (3, Funny)

Thanshin (1188877) | more than 4 years ago | (#31999366)

OS breakdown here would be interesting, too.

27/04/2010: The day slashdotters discovered they were all connecting with windows using IE6 and lying about just about everything. The page was closed and replaced with a porn site, for ever and ever.

Re:Hey Taco (1)

Steauengeglase (512315) | more than 4 years ago | (#31999058)

We run a javabased VNC through IE on an NT box that connects to to a Win7 box running Feisty Fawn on VirtualBox running Ice Weasel for Gopher sessions.

Re:Hey Taco (1)

chill (34294) | more than 4 years ago | (#31999256)

What, no WAIS [faqs.org] or TN3270? How do you expect people to get work done?!

Re:Hey Taco (1)

L4t3r4lu5 (1216702) | more than 4 years ago | (#31999448)

You've not lived until you've used GotoMyPC on Lynx.

As a general rule (4, Funny)

Palestrina (715471) | more than 4 years ago | (#31998878)

If you are still using I.E. 6 then you do not have "Corporate IT". Someone should go into the server room and poke the guy with a stick, and see if he moves. If not, call 911 on your rotary phone.

Re:As a general rule (1)

WiglyWorm (1139035) | more than 4 years ago | (#31999000)

I was about to tell you you were wrong. I was about to tell you that some places are stuck with web apps that don't support anything but IE6.

...then I remembered that the last of our web apps finally implemented IE7 support several months ago, but no one has bothered to implement the simple pilot test it would take to confirm IE7 support for all applications and then migrate to IE7. I guess I better get the stick out and start poking.

Re:As a general rule (5, Insightful)

nosfucious (157958) | more than 4 years ago | (#31999208)

Go poke the CIO instead. That's where the buck stops.

An IT department can make all the technical cases it want to. However, until the equation of $$$StandStill is less than $$$Moveforward, $$$StandStill is where you'll be.

And no, the CIO is almost never a technical weenie. It's just another seat on the board, with fat shareholder priviledges.

Re: Luxury (1)

francium de neobie (590783) | more than 4 years ago | (#31999280)

Rotary phone! You're lucky to have a rotary phone! In our office, all we use for communication are large, heavy, stone tablets. When our CEO goes overseas for meetings, we have a team carrying the Ark of Covenant containing all the contracts carved in stone. THAT, and IE6, is what a company with a long and glorious history should be using. You little startups need to get off our lawn.

My company makes IE6 the default (1)

commodore64_love (1445365) | more than 4 years ago | (#31998898)

I have the option to visit the company website to get IE 7 installed, but like most users I never bothered. I suspect that inertia is true all across the business world - people just use whatever was given to them.

(Meanwhile back at home my ISP forces me to use IE. For some dumb reason it's the only browser that works with their web/image compression software.)

Re:My company makes IE6 the default (1)

DarkKnightRadick (268025) | more than 4 years ago | (#31999038)

Web/image compression software? Do they make you connect through a proxy?

I'd find a new ISP if you can. Sounds like you've got a real winner there.

Re:My company makes IE6 the default (2)

gsgleason (1241794) | more than 4 years ago | (#31999092)

What if you just didn't use their crappy software?

Re:My company makes IE6 the default (1)

commodore64_love (1445365) | more than 4 years ago | (#31999226)

Nothing. For example I'm using Firefox now to read slashdot, but of course without the image compression, pages take longer to load. The speed-up I get via IE (and the ISP software) is a nice bonus.

Re:My company makes IE6 the default (1)

DrgnDancer (137700) | more than 4 years ago | (#31999392)

Eh... What? Are you connecting through a proxy or some weird thing like that? Get a new ISP. Seriously.

Embedded Computing (3, Interesting)

maxrate (886773) | more than 4 years ago | (#31998902)

A lot of embedded devices (example, ThinClients) won't allow you to upgrade to a later version of IE. That could be a small part of the reason.

Re:Embedded Computing (1)

WiglyWorm (1139035) | more than 4 years ago | (#31999024)

Embedded devices? The kind without a file system, right?

TRWTF is that this is slashdot, not TDWTF...

MyHR (1)

Sporkinum (655143) | more than 4 years ago | (#31998906)

We have a crappy 3rd party system that replaced our printed paystubs. It's called MyHR. Only works with IE6, and only works with "real" Adobe PDF viewer. The only way employees can check their pay information is to use a computer at work, through a VPN Citrix session, or to have the old crap programs on their home PC.

Comes as default on the corporate IT Build (1)

klashn (1323433) | more than 4 years ago | (#31998916)

Since it comes as default on the corporate IT build at a lot of companies, which happen to also be sticking to Windows XP. Employees, not wanting the wrath of the BOFH (IT people) stick with what's given to them.

I'm sure if IE8 / IE9 were in the corporate IT build, or IT forced the upgrades more people would be using it as a default browser, unless the person has a preference to any of the other browsers.

Some of the older websites on the company's intranet require that you use Internet Explorer. Stick with what works but have SOLID network security, that should help most of the time, except when you download bad Mcafee DAT files...

like IT has a choice (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31998918)

Most IT departments have their hands tied for a majority of their projects. Be it, homegrown app compatibility, budget, balancing higher priority projects, upper management or what have you. I'm not surprised by this at all. Just because a piece of software is "retired" doesn't mean everything that relies on it is. IE6 is not going away completely for a LONG time.

IE6? (1)

MasseKid (1294554) | more than 4 years ago | (#31998948)

I'm still forced on IE5 you insenstive clod!

That's a switch (1)

grasshoppa (657393) | more than 4 years ago | (#31999060)

Usually it's IE forcing crappy standards on websites. In this case, it's crappy web design ( slashdot ) forcing itself on the browser.

Love slashdot, miss the old design that made what I'm interested in one click away.

Why not put pressure on the vendors? (2, Interesting)

gsgleason (1241794) | more than 4 years ago | (#31999062)

We are in the same state because our IT hires the cheapest vendors for any given task, and historically, they provide IE6-only web apps, like our expense management system and our Siebel ticketing system. If I even try 50% of internal web apps with a standards compliant browser, I only get a partial page or a blank page. Why not publicly humiliate the vendors who write only for IE?

Start of Wall of Shame (1)

AnonymousClown (1788472) | more than 4 years ago | (#31999338)

like our expense management system and our Siebel ticketing system

OK #1 Siebel.

Who does your expense mgt system?

So, guys, when there's supposed to be input for IT purchases, Siebel systems are off the table for being security and liability risks for the enterprise.

Let's get this going and kill IE6.

Enough with the bloody excuses! (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31999074)

The browser is no longer supported - it's dead - there will be no more security patches. This last point alone should make any "IT dept" with any common sense at all push to get a new browser in place ASAP. In fact, it should have been planned for and implemented years ago. If your management is too stupid and obstructive to allow this, get a new job - you're working for morons.

If you have some piece of garbage intranet app running, for christ's sake install a second browser for use outside of the company network. It's not hard, and there's plenty out there.

Stop being lazy hand-wringers. Do your job.

stopped using IE6 last week! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31999158)

The large international company where I'm working took the step to migrate just a few weeks ago... from win2000 & IE6 to winXP & IE7... woho... NOT. Our own huge tool generated html files now are at least one order of magnitude slower, but good thing since we now run XP and developers at my company have teh seemingly rare privilege of being entrusted with Administrator rights? Chrome was able to save the day(could not install it previously as it doesn't support win2k, OK I admit I ran it still via vmware and an ubuntu image, and even with the virtual machine overhead it was faster, ha!)

We scare our customers who run IE 6 & 7 (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31999188)

We're using the security hole in IE 6 and 7 where you can execute code with IE's image parser.

Our customer comes to our office for a meeting where he demands IE 6 & 7 support. We tell him to open his laptop and go to google.com. When downloading the google logo image we have configured our router to redirect to our infected image file.
Then we tell our customer to reboot. After the reboot we tell him to check his mail inbox in outlook and then tell us what the new mail he has says.

He gets really suprised when he sees his login password in clear text. And from that moment IE8 is a minimum requirement.

This works on every customer we have tried it on, they take it seriously when they see the security threat in action. Most people think anti-virus and firewalls protects them. Our job is to tell them that updated software also protects them, and we've failed bigtime when it comes to that.

Re:We scare our customers who run IE 6 & 7 (1)

greebowarrior (961561) | more than 4 years ago | (#31999348)

Your ideas intrigue me, and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter

Yep. We gots the IE6. (1)

MrTripps (1306469) | more than 4 years ago | (#31999320)

We have several instances of a third party document management system that only runs on IE6. Apparently the new version has a Fire Fox plug-in, but getting everyone to upgrade to the new version is like pulling teeth. For the short term I would be happy if I could convince our users to use IE6 just for that application and Fire Fox with Ad-Block for everything else.

IE 8 and iGoogle (1)

Prosthetic_Lips (971097) | more than 4 years ago | (#31999354)

Google is being very forward-thinking now. My dad got a new laptop, with IE 8 pre-installed. The homepage is iGoogle, which shows news articles -- that don't work when you click on them! He brought it over for me to "fix."

Suggestions? Yes, you in the back? (mumble mumble) Oh, good idea.

Yes, I installed Firefox, replaced his pinned icon (Windows 7) and told him to use that instead. Problem solved, one less IE user, so when IE 8 is the black sheep (8-10 years from now?), we'll have one less user to migrate.

lock ie6 from accessing the wider internet (1)

circletimessquare (444983) | more than 4 years ago | (#31999384)

let ie6 only access the intranet and the applications inside the company it is needed for

you don't even have to inspect packets for HTTP_USER_AGENT, no such filtering or gatekeeping nonsense at a network level: since you control the employee's desktop, just lock ie6 out programmatically. lock it down by subnet filter and make the property read only so savvier employees can't change it. employees get used to using two browsers: one for outside access, one for legacy apps

thus you decouple the legacy app argument from the security argument. win win. now you can keep ie6 inhouse for years if you have to. just don't let it peek outside

Windows 7 will finally kill IE6 (4, Interesting)

Entropy_ajb (227170) | more than 4 years ago | (#31999400)

The company I work for is begrudgingly moving to IE8 starting a couple weeks from now. The only reason they are moving to it is because they are also starting to role out Windows 7, and IE6 isn't available for Windows 7.

Therefore they have had no choice but to go through all of the internal sites and fix the numerous ones that only support IE6. Which was the only thing holding them back from pushing IE7/8 onto the XP machines. The good side effect of this is that for the most part all of the internal sites that have been upgraded to support IE8 also support Firefox now.

I suspect that an increasing percentage of those (1)

Peet42 (904274) | more than 4 years ago | (#31999418)

...will be browsers like Firefox and Opera that have been set to report themselves as being IE6 just so corporate websites will let them on.

Corallary: Sticking with XP too? (1)

ocularsinister (774024) | more than 4 years ago | (#31999422)

Isn't the corollary of this that businesses are sticking with XP too?

The problem is that managers are flat out scared.. (1)

HerculesMO (693085) | more than 4 years ago | (#31999430)

Until a company gives you sign-off for using IE7/8 with their application, they basically say "No, don't upgrade". The problem is when you have a set of users who can do 90% of their work without IE6 but still need that 10%, how can you convert them over? You can't.

Managers don't push so hard about IE6 because they simply don't care. If it works, they don't want to bother with it. I have managed to upgrade about 50% of our users but now I'm stuck because the rest of our users have issues with IE7/8. Hell, I upgraded our users to IE7 because some vendors won't even sign off on THAT.

The simple fact is that management pushes applications that are cheap and crappy (this is rather universal) and then IT is stuck with the job of supporting them and ensuring they work. They start to build business processes around these horrible applications, and then find later down the road that the cost of conversion to a better, more useful piece of software (that probably is better coded and works in IE8 because it's more standards-aware) will cost many times over what the initial cost of the system implementation was. But do they care? No -- they bill it back to the business side, while they collect bonuses year to year about how great a job they did that ONE year. It's not about ROI, it's about one year results that you can pin a medal to.

This is the inherent problem with corporate IT as a whole. Read this article and you'll see what I mean: http://infoworld.com/print/108477 [infoworld.com]

Not pushing updates (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31999436)

I've been working in an environment where a WSUS server is supposed to be pushing updates down. Users complained about SP3 taking too long, so they delayed it and forgot. Now were getting attacked by viruses left and right because of old vulnerabilities. The users ignored the update and now theyre falling further and further behind, and the WSUS wont push them any other updates.

Im assuming the remaining IE6 users just dont know any better or aren't being forced to update.

Have no choice... (1)

rAiNsT0rm (877553) | more than 4 years ago | (#31999440)

I love how this is always said like it is a sign of a failed IT dept. We still run IE6, we have to for more than one essential business apps that will not run in any other browser. Because of buyouts upgrades are not possible and we aren't given any funds for anything but keeping things barely running. Sure, it sucks, in a perfect world, we'd have been long off of it. Eliminating positions (mine included) and the current state of the economy on many businesses make this a pretty minor issue as far as those in power are concerned. That's the reality of IT for many. Sad but true.

It's just a matter of time... (1)

inimicus (194187) | more than 4 years ago | (#31999458)

It's just a matter of time until some trojan, virus, or whatever appears in the wild that can get through (or specifically targets) IE6 after it's no longer supported my MS, yes? At what point is it more cost-effective to upgrade to something newer? Before or after something like this happens and guts out your intranet, folks? Really...

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>