| Forum Home | ||||
| Press F1 | ||||
| Thread ID: 103704 | 2009-10-03 19:36:00 | Site incompatible with IE6 | johcar (6283) | Press F1 |
| Post ID | Timestamp | Content | User | ||
| 816465 | 2009-10-03 19:36:00 | A mate had this site (http://www.freightmanagers.co.nz) developed for him by a crowd in Wellington. They were relatively cheap, but ignored all deadlines and were hard to contact. I have zapped their link on the site, because we didn't want to be advertising poor service. We have found that this site appears to have been developed for IE7 and later. Unfortunately the target customers for the site are generally corporates, many of whom still run IE6 (!!!). Can someone please advise how to make the site IE6 compatible? I assume there's a wee bit of code that needs to be entered on each page... Thanks. |
johcar (6283) | ||
| 816466 | 2009-10-03 20:30:00 | Looks OK on FF, sorry can't help though | gary67 (56) | ||
| 816467 | 2009-10-03 20:37:00 | Why not get the mate who presumably paid for the development to take the matter to the small claims in the event it can be proven. I am not planning to go back to IE6 to test the theory. |
Sweep (90) | ||
| 816468 | 2009-10-03 21:13:00 | Why not get the mate who presumably paid for the development to take the matter to the small claims in the event it can be proven. I am not planning to go back to IE6 to test the theory. Would take far too long and he doesn't want any more to do with the original developers. |
johcar (6283) | ||
| 816469 | 2009-10-03 23:10:00 | Would take far too long and he doesn't want any more to do with the original developers. In that case, cut your losses & start again. PJ |
Poppa John (284) | ||
| 816470 | 2009-10-03 23:23:00 | What doesnt it do with IE6? It looks fine in firefox and IE8 | hueybot3000 (3646) | ||
| 816471 | 2009-10-04 02:27:00 | Can you give us a print screen of it in IE? | Blam (54) | ||
| 816472 | 2009-10-04 02:52:00 | I think the sponsor message in the header of screenshot and the warning boxes in the body of the IE6 screenshot are artefacts of the Browsershots analysis. The IE7 screenshot is how it should look. So IE6 seems to lose the image in the top part of the screen, the menus and the logo bottom right, as well as the Java customer logon to the portal. In all other common browsers, the site works just fine. But unfortunately, many corporates don't use the 'good' browsers (or even a better version of IE!) Basically, if a customer has IE6 (idiots, but let's not go there), the page is unusable. "Cutting his losses" as suggested is not a viable option - he is a start-up, so cash is hard to come by. I am certain there is a simple fix, along the lines of a comment in the page code that is specific for IE6, that would resolve the issue quickly and easily. |
johcar (6283) | ||
| 816473 | 2009-10-04 02:57:00 | Well whoever the clowns were that built the site didnt validate (validator.w3.org F&charset=%28detect+automatically%29&doctype=Inline&group=0) it PM me if you want me to pull it apart and sort its issues |
hueybot3000 (3646) | ||
| 816474 | 2009-10-04 03:31:00 | Can someone please advise how to make the site IE6 compatible? I assume there's a wee bit of code that needs to be entered on each page... Ensuring IE6 compatibility is more than adding a wee bit of code. I designed a website for someone recently and they expressly told me that it had to be IE6 compatible because of the kind of visitors they were expecting. Even though I designed with that in mind, it still took significant extra time to actually get AJAX and CSS etc working properly with its ridiculous rendering engine. I almost pulled my hair out. Personally, for my own sites I don't even test with IE6 anymore. The only way to force people to upgrade is to stop wasting hours of development time and money on ensuring IE6 compatibility. If 15% of users don't see the site properly, that's their issue. In this case it sounds like you have a higher than average number of IE6 users though. Did the developer know this when the site was being designed? How much did he pay? Was browser compatibility discussed? What did the contract expressly require of the developer? These are all things that would need to be considered. |
maccrazy (6741) | ||
| 1 2 3 | |||||