Hacker News Reader

Comment by taspeotis | Hacker News Reader

> We are offering to buy a new computer with a modern browser for any of our customers who are stuck with IE7

Great PR, since practically no-one is going to take them up on the offer. If you're on IE7 you're probably on it because MegaCorp's Intranet Application '02 Enterprise Edition doesn't work on anything else. Meaning the new computer will break their LOB application.

It's also possible it won't cost them any money in the long run, if their definition of "customer" is limited to the people posting jobs [1].

[1] http://www.nursingjobs.us/employers/pricing/

View on HN

The other option is they are elderly or just don't care. They have that E-Machines Pentium 3 future proof 256MB of RAM Windows98 computer and they'll use it until they die, because shouldn't everything that costs over $1,000 dollars last for 20-30 years?

Yes, just like your car will last you 20 years. If you drive a car from 1994 you don't expect to be able to drive 90 mph or offroad without running into major issues. Should cities keep their infrastructure backwards compatible for people with old cars?

It's apples and oranges. In 1994 people went over 80mph all the time, and they still do. If you maintain a car well, it will continue to be able to do that. By contrast, though... a PC perfectly maintained from 1994 until now would be hopeless in today's infrastructure.

Yes, it's more like buying $1000 worth of apples and oranges.

> a PC perfectly maintained from 1994 until now would be hopeless in today's infrastructure.

Not if they upgraded both their hardware and software along the way. Even without upgrades, their computer might function just fine, but they should not expect to browse websites created with technologies that were not yet dreamed of when their computer was born.

People expect to make phone calls on their 5 year old phones, but it would be unreasonable for them to complain that they cannot download the latest version of snapchat on it. People with old browsers and hardware can expect old websites and software to work for them. It is unreasonable for developers to be required to create new websites that work for outdated and insecure browsers.

> Not if they upgraded both their hardware and software along the way.

The "upgrades" necessary would be a new computer in all but case, so unless your name is Theseus, you've got a new computer.

> Theseus

Or Trigger...

http://www.frequency.com/video/only-fools-horses-truth-behin...

I do that with a car from 1972.

The comparison doesn't hold though.

You likely have been upgrading and maintaining your car. Users with IE7 who expect the world to freeze with their hardware are like car owners who do not change their oil yet would be amiss when their car stops functioning after 10 years.

Strained car analogies are the 1999 Slashdot PT Cruiser of internet arguments.

I nearly spit water out of my nose. And probably the corner of my eyes.

Could be worse, as I've just found out; it could be hot coffee.

I don't think anyone running IE 7 honestly believes that. But the promise of the Web was you got to avoid minimum hardware requirements and things worked everywhere. HTML and CSS were supposed to be backwards-compatible by degrading gracefully. This point has been lost. There's really very little point in having an open standard if the only way to run anything is to update your browser every 6 weeks.

In the case of elderly users I don't think that many of them could even identify the browser that they use without prompting from others.

Sure they can. The usually use Google as a browser.

When I recently asked my grandfather about his browser preference, he said Yahoo. I came to realize that he believes Yahoo IS the web; it's his start page on IE.

No, IE is what he uses for the internet. His browser is Yahoo.

"If you're on IE7 you're probably on it because MegaCorp's Intranet Application '02 Enterprise Edition doesn't work on anything else."

This is what virtual machines are for...

Try teaching the HR officer who is afraid of the maximize button to use a VM. Even Windows 7 XP mode is scary - the chrome is different.

That's like a carpenter saying he's afraid to pick up a hammer. How can you be an employee and at the same time be afraid of doing your job?

It might be hard to believe, but there are plenty of people in the world whos job has nothing to do with being tech-savvy.

In this specific case the persons job is to manage HR process, not to keep their IT infrastructure up to date. The computer and browser are just tools.

I'm not saying they have to be tech-savvy, where did I say that? And keeping the IT-infrastructure up to date? What has that got to do with anything? Did you reply to the wrong comment?

If part of your work depends on using a computer (to manage HR or whatever), you can't be afraid of doing basic tasks like maximizing a window, turning it on, etc.

Just like a carpenter can't be afraid of picking up a hammer.

I hope it's more clear to you now.

The above comment still holds. If your job is to use the tool all day, every day, one would expect that you would learn how it works.

I see the same issues as well where I work in education. Teachers, whose job is literally all about learning, are terrified to learn about technology tools for their classroom.

You would think, but there are plenty of barely competent tradesmen around. Why should it be any different here?

There use to be a phrase referring to wood workers [edit, my mistake - boat caulkers], 'His mallet rings.' Meant as a complement. When you've got the skill to do it, the beats of your mallet create a particular pattern of sound. It's a different mindset to just picking up a hammer ... or a nail gun as the case may be ... and smashing something in. It's, pride in your effectiveness, a dedication to get better at a task.

It's pretty rare to find someone these days whose hammer rings.

I've seen 80 year olds being retrained.

If it's "learn to use a VM or lose your job", coupled with a good computer basics course, I'm pretty sure he/she will be properly motivated.

I work at a megacorp that recently switched the local branch to terminal servers + virtual machines, not one has had any difficulty with the retraining, and the previous megacorp I worked for had a 70 year old using a pretty complex environment.

My grandmother went from being afraid of clicking a button to being a decent internet user, using both IE and Firefox (since her hospital's website didn't work in IE).

It's worth noting that Microsoft put a lot of effort into making that experience less painful with seamless VM integration:

http://technet.microsoft.com/en-US/video/Ff945178

There are two reasons why most places don't use this: they've been skimping on RAM or their IT people don't want to learn something new. Neither reflect well on their IT management.

IE8 has compatibility mode that will work just fine will all those "designed for IE6" pages. Same for IE9. In IE10 and 11 I found the compatibility mode to be less accurate in mimicking oldIE.

I wonder if there'll be a rush for IE10 compliancy when Windows XP support comes to an end like COBOL systems needed Y2K compliancy leading up to 2000?

I assumed the whole point of the offer was that they'd be able to run both computers. The old works-with-our-"enterprise"-software computer is kept alongside the new web-browsing computer.

Thats not really how enterprise computing policies work :) If its not centrally administrated, its probably not allowed. At least in the type of environment where people are still on IE7.

I think you missed a hyphen. I was referring to the horrible limited software that many companies use that always seems to have "enterprise" in the name.

If you're stuck in the sort of toxic environment where a new free machine is not allowed because "policy" then nothing can help you.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com