I find it amazing that people seem to be more concerned about upgrading the browser than upgrading the OS. The delta between XP and Win7 is so much larger than IE8 and IE9 that having this discussion is almost embarrassing.
While I get that this may make the life of the HTML5 dev easier -- its just dwarfed by the importance of getting people off of a dangerous OS.
While in theory it would be nice to see MS support XP with IE9, I much prefer they use any means to get people off this OS. I'd even love to see them offer Ubuntu or Win7 as upgrade path. There's just no reason to be on XP. And everything we do to make their lives seemingly easier, really keeps this in this precarious situation.
Thing is: I don't care if you run XP or Win7 (or Mac OS X or Ubuntu for that matter) because my software does not run on top of the OS but on top of a modern browsers. So the IE8/9 difference matters to me, the OS difference does not. Don't forget that most (or at least a lot of) people here on HN develop or run web apps.
Within the scope of this discussion, that's somewhat facetious. The main reason cited for wanting people to move off IE6 is security concerns rather than HTML5 support, and for good reason - I don't care whether people can use the latest-greatest version of gmail, I care whether they're unduly liable to become part of a botnet that can bring down gmail for everyone.
That's not my reason, and I've never once mentioned it. I don't care a bit about other people's security. It's an important issue, but life is short, and I've got other stuff to worry about.
My applications have to run in people's browsers...if there are a significant number of people using crappy old browsers (of which IE8 is one), it affects my life and my use of time.
"Since when did Hacker News become about pandering to software development subfields?"
Since always.
But, that's not the point. This whole conversation is about Microsoft referring people to a site that will help them upgrade their browser...the majority of people seeing the message and following those steps, will be upgrading to a browser that just isn't up to snuff.
The page it links to does not show people how to upgrade their OS. You're the one taking this conversation in an entirely unrelated direction, and bringing OS security into the discussion. I'm complaining because the whole IE countdown thing is a nuisance rather than a help.
And, again, the OS people run is not my concern. The browser with which they use my applications, however, is my concern. Getting people to upgrade their OS is Microsoft's problem, not mine. But, by recommending an old browser for their users that haven't upgraded from XP, they're making their problem into my problem. I'm tired of dealing with Microsoft's problems, and I don't think it's fair that they use their market clout to keep putting their problems on my plate.
But, that's not the point. This whole conversation is about Microsoft referring people to a site that will help them upgrade their browser...the majority of people seeing the message and following those steps, will be upgrading to a browser that just isn't up to snuff.
Expecting Microsoft to advocate people moving to a non-Microsoft product is idiotic.
I'm tired of dealing with Microsoft's problems, and I don't think it's fair that they use their market clout to keep putting their problems on my plate.
Let me get this straight -- your main complaint is that it's not fair?!
Yeah, I like it when people I work with, directly or indirectly, play fair. When they don't, I feel I have every right to criticize them for it, which is what I've been doing.
I believe Microsoft is doing the web (and me, as a developer for the web) a disservice, and I'd like them to stop damaging the web (and me).
Not true. First of all, I wouldn't use Windows at all on a machine I depended on for security. The fact is my XP box has never had a bug on it. It's fully patched, services off, behind a nat, with firefox and noscript. Acl's can be improved but I've never bothered. I admit it takes a lot of upfront prep to get XP safe to use, but it can be done if one has the knowledge.
Who said I know anything about web development? Greybeard here that learned on the Vic-20.
Yes. A number of security augmentations in Windows 7 required significant modifications to the operating system kernel and user space environment (almost to the point of a rewrite in some cases). These modifications cannot happen in Windows XP without turning Windows XP into Windows 7.
ASLR is mostly enabled, especially in 64-bit binaries. W^X protection is always enabled on 64-bit binaries. Service hardening and privilege separation are enabled by default always.
They should make a free Windows 7 Basic basic (basically XP but newer ;p) upgrade. That way people would have a option but that IF they have a PC capable of running a basic version of Windows 7.
Actually, the need to upgrade anything and everything is a bit overdone. What, in particular, is your problem with XP?
The MS monopoly thrives on the need for a regular update, needed or not. Windows XP is a great OS IMHO - it's a shame MS found it convenient to ditch support for it.
OSes aren't new. We've been doing them a long time. MS may say there are things missing from XP but it satisfies a lot of needs - for example, it runs Firefox quite well.
Now browsers, in particular, are still in a state of flux. With browser, in particular, upgrading matters. That also might not continue forever but its true now.
The browser you use impact me because I care about what you see. The OS you use does NOT impact me because only you see it.
While I get that this may make the life of the HTML5 dev easier -- its just dwarfed by the importance of getting people off of a dangerous OS.
While in theory it would be nice to see MS support XP with IE9, I much prefer they use any means to get people off this OS. I'd even love to see them offer Ubuntu or Win7 as upgrade path. There's just no reason to be on XP. And everything we do to make their lives seemingly easier, really keeps this in this precarious situation.