What is the best approach for supporting older browser versions

[Jason]

We are in the beginning phase of a rewrite of our Extranet from
Java/BEA/Orace to .NET/SQL Server.

Unfortunately, one of our customers has standardized on Netscape 4.77.
Because they have 20,000 users of our system, we are forced to support this
version of the browser. However, we prefer to NOT be constrained by this
severe limitation for the vast majority of customers who are not
standardized on such an old version.

So, my question concerns the best way to handle situations such as this?
IOW, are there best practices that will allow us to gracefully downgrade
without having to double the coding effort? For example, design patterns
such as MVC, etc.

 

[Murray]

I think the best method is to serve two stylesheets, one for NN4x, and the
other for all other browsers. You can do this any number of ways, but a
common one is to link to the NN4x stylesheet, and then import the all other
browser one. NN4x will not do the import.

Make the NN4x stylesheet bypass most of the positioning so that the site is
functional, and usable, but it does not (necessarily) look the same as the
other browsers will see.

Of course, this assumes that you are using a CSS based layout approach. If
you are not, then the problem is MUCH more challenging. You might even
consider hiring a consultant who is experienced in such things....

 

[Jason]

Is CSS a better approach to doing layouts than tables? (Sorry for the naive
question, but my experience is with backend systems and WinForms)

 

[Murray]

Yes. But it's definitely a learning curve.

On the other hand, depending on your layout methods already in place, you
may have zero problems with NN4x. Can you point me at a representative
page?

 

[Ronx]

Design the site for modern browsers, but ensure it looks reasonable and is
functional in NN4.
www.rxs-enterprises.com/ is an example of this. It uses a mixture of table
layout and absolute positioning.

I have a similar problem to yours, one section of this site is aimed at a
group using NN4.01 on Win95. Isn't corporate policy wonderful?

Be glad your problem group do not use Opera 4. That is a real challenge.

Ron

 

[Jason]

Isn't corporate policy wonderful?

Tell me about it.

 

[clintonG]

IMO, although pertinent, CSS compatability should be the last issue
of consideration as it is only relevant to presentation and useability.

I would be more concerned with the issues related to security and
the management of state when processing forms and database access.
The client-side JavaScript required to respond to the 4.x browsers
is considerable and significantly impacts initial and ongoing costs.

Visual Studio.NET can be configured to enable some support for
older 4.x browsers but doing so produces 'all or nothing' resuls
which is by no means to be considered as a panacea as there are
many issues that make responding to the several layers of client-side
abstraction of the DOM (Document Object Model) a costly and
risky venture when compelled to support 4.x browsers.

So, the question regarding the 'best way to respond' may be for
executive management to use a 'carrot and stick' methodology.

The carrot is used to provide a significant incentive for the customer
to do what is neccessary to upgrade to IE 6 so business can be
conducted efficiently and securely.

The stick is used to beat the hell out of anybody that thinks my business
should operate at a loss and assume the risk of being taken out by
hackers who know how insecure Netscape 4.x is -- a problem that
can not even be resolved -- no matter how much money is thrown at
client-side scripting -- because there are no patches or service packs
that will ever be made available for Netscape 4.x browsers as it has
been abandoned as a product.

--
<%= Clinton Gallagher, "Twice the Results -- Half the Cost"
Architectural & e-Business Consulting -- Software Development
NET (e-mail address removed)
URL http://www.metromilwaukee.com/clintongallagher/

 

[Jason]

The stick is used to beat the hell out of anybody that thinks my business
should operate at a loss and assume the risk of being taken out by
hackers who know how insecure Netscape 4.x is -- a problem that
can not even be resolved -- no matter how much money is thrown at
client-side scripting -- because there are no patches or service packs
that will ever be made available for Netscape 4.x browsers as it has
been abandoned as a product.

I'm not sure if I'm following you here. Are you saying the risk is to me or
to the customer using the 4.x browser?

 

[Murray]

The client-side JavaScript required to respond to the 4.x browsers

is considerable and significantly impacts initial and ongoing costs.

In what way, Clinton. I can't think of how it would even differ at all, but
I am not familiar with the Oracle side of things. Nevertheless, none of
that is done client-side anyhow, so - 'splain, please.


--
Murray

IMO, although pertinent, CSS compatability should be the last issue
of consideration as it is only relevant to presentation and useability.

I would be more concerned with the issues related to security and
the management of state when processing forms and database access.
The client-side JavaScript required to respond to the 4.x browsers
is considerable and significantly impacts initial and ongoing costs.

Visual Studio.NET can be configured to enable some support for
older 4.x browsers but doing so produces 'all or nothing' resuls
which is by no means to be considered as a panacea as there are
many issues that make responding to the several layers of client-side
abstraction of the DOM (Document Object Model) a costly and
risky venture when compelled to support 4.x browsers.

So, the question regarding the 'best way to respond' may be for
executive management to use a 'carrot and stick' methodology.

The carrot is used to provide a significant incentive for the customer
to do what is neccessary to upgrade to IE 6 so business can be
conducted efficiently and securely.

The stick is used to beat the hell out of anybody that thinks my business
should operate at a loss and assume the risk of being taken out by
hackers who know how insecure Netscape 4.x is -- a problem that
can not even be resolved -- no matter how much money is thrown at
client-side scripting -- because there are no patches or service packs
that will ever be made available for Netscape 4.x browsers as it has
been abandoned as a product.

--
<%= Clinton Gallagher, "Twice the Results -- Half the Cost"
Architectural & e-Business Consulting -- Software Development
NET (e-mail address removed)
URL http://www.metromilwaukee.com/clintongallagher/

 

[Steve Easton]

A little lost on that comment myself??


--
Steve Easton
Microsoft MVP FrontPage
95isalive
This site is best viewed............
........................with a computer

 

[clintonG]

The risk is to you.

<%= Clinton Gallagher

I'm not sure if I'm following you here. Are you saying the risk is to me or
to the customer using the 4.x browser?

 

[clintonG]

I was referring to having to write JavaScript to manage all of the little
quirks one may want to resolve in the user interface when using CSS
with NS4.x browsers.

I also had in mind (and have no specific issue to cite) the recollection
that the NS4.x browsers were also replete with vulnerabilities that
can not be resolved as nobody is updating them anymore.

<%= Clinton

 

[Murray]

Clinton:

I am not aware of any js one needs to write to manage NN4x quirks (other
than the "layer reflow" problem). And it may surprise you to know that
Netscape has continued to update NN4x (at least up to v 4.8 a year or so
ago).

Supporting NN4x is not so hard as you seem to think....

 

[Murray]

How?

--
Murray

The risk is to you.

<%= Clinton Gallagher

 

[clintonG]

What do you mean how?

<%= Clinton Gallagher

How?

 

[clintonG]

Yes, I was surprised to learn that.

<%= Clinton Gallagher

 

[Murray]

How is there a risk to me (or to whomever is supporting NN4x)?

 

[clintonG]

Google: "netscape" + "I am an instigating moron"

--
<%= Clinton Gallagher, "Twice the Results -- Half the Cost"
Architectural & e-Business Consulting -- Software Development
NET (e-mail address removed)
URL http://www.metromilwaukee.com/clintongallagher/

 

[Murray]

It was uninformative -

Your search - "netscape" "I am an instigating moron" - did not match any
documents
Your search - "netscape" + "I am an instigating moron" - did not match any
documents

 

[clintonG]

Correction:
It was not correct to say that nobody is updating Netscape anymore.


--
<%= Clinton Gallagher, "Twice the Results -- Half the Cost"
Architectural & e-Business Consulting -- Software Development
NET (e-mail address removed)
URL http://www.metromilwaukee.com/clintongallagher/