Ask HN: Go HTML5 only for a new product?
17 comments
With options like http://www.modernizr.com/ and a handful of other fallback solutions for IE, i think it is ok to go ahead with HTML5/CSS3. The part to focus is not to ignore those who use IE. It is fine if the appearance is not as classy as it is in modern browsers but compromising on the basic functionality is definitely not a wise option.
Are you willing to ignore ~50% of the potential (mass) market?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usage_share_of_web_browsers
And do you guys really think it's gonna change that much in 1 year?
http://gs.statcounter.com/
In the end it's about what your clients will use. If you're building something for developers, sure, ignore IE. If you're building something to be used by dumb (computer) terminals at big corporations or the public at large, then it'd be a risky move.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usage_share_of_web_browsers
And do you guys really think it's gonna change that much in 1 year?
http://gs.statcounter.com/
In the end it's about what your clients will use. If you're building something for developers, sure, ignore IE. If you're building something to be used by dumb (computer) terminals at big corporations or the public at large, then it'd be a risky move.
First of all, the HTML5 and CSS3 standards are not finished yet. It means semantic values of tags, attributes, and even tag names, as well as their functionalities, can change at any time, and other can appear. Thus, it seems difficult to build an HTML5-only website for the general public.
Moreover, if this website is designed for a large company, there are chances that its user base is still using IE (even IE6 maybe). In this case, HTML5 and CSS3 are not welcome, even for IE8.
I would recommend to wait for IE9 release and the standards to be finished. Maybe you can add extra content for people using modern web browsers, like the <video> tag, but I think IE's user base is too large to be ignored.
Moreover, if this website is designed for a large company, there are chances that its user base is still using IE (even IE6 maybe). In this case, HTML5 and CSS3 are not welcome, even for IE8.
I would recommend to wait for IE9 release and the standards to be finished. Maybe you can add extra content for people using modern web browsers, like the <video> tag, but I think IE's user base is too large to be ignored.
My advice would be similar: if your app needs the new features of HTML5, use it. If not, just go with XHTML for now. It's easier to convert forward than backward I'd say.
Yes it is ok I think, if it really gives you an advantage in doing stuff faster and better (ie. if your app needs it).
You can aim at early adopters the first two years, and by then, this stuff will be mainstream. 37sigs took pretty much the same approach.
You can aim at early adopters the first two years, and by then, this stuff will be mainstream. 37sigs took pretty much the same approach.
The HTML5 Shiv (http://code.google.com/p/html5shiv/) will convince IE >=6 to handle HTML5 elements just fine.
I would say develop for IE7 & Firefox, making sure stuff doesn't break (is visible and somehow workable) in IE6 and Safari. That will cover 99.99 of your future customers.
I guess you are in danger of having more headaches in the future with bleeding-edge raw, not well supported things...
I guess you are in danger of having more headaches in the future with bleeding-edge raw, not well supported things...
Definitely, it's very fine to use HTML5/CSS3. However, I think that it is still a good idea to make it fall back nicely. Stuff like rounded corners aren't too tragic to lose when viewing something from IE6-8, but I think it's in your best interest to make sure that IE7 and 8 don't look dreadful. Reward people for using better browsers, but don't punish them for using bad ones either.
Completely ignore IE6, don't even worry about how it looks. Most startups nowadays buy a computer and at least IE7 is on it. 2011 should be a big year for HTML5, so aim towards the "future".
Don't worry about IE<9 too much, but certainly make sure it falls back gracefully is what I'm saying. It's okay if it's not as pretty, as long as the basics work.
Completely ignore IE6, don't even worry about how it looks. Most startups nowadays buy a computer and at least IE7 is on it. 2011 should be a big year for HTML5, so aim towards the "future".
Don't worry about IE<9 too much, but certainly make sure it falls back gracefully is what I'm saying. It's okay if it's not as pretty, as long as the basics work.
Thanks for the reply. I was planning on using some of the features like localStorage and notifications etc and not just css3 features for making things look better. Nevertheless, I think its a good idea to have graceful degradation.
Use wrapper methods/classes for each of those HTML5 specific features. Initially, probably for most of the early adopter phase you can get away with using/expecting the HTML5 feature to be present. When you do need to support browsers that don't support or brokenly support those features, you can add in support at the wrapper level without having to do any serious refactoring.
Also, keep a careful eye on the HTML5 draft recommendations, just in case features change their implementations. It's unlikely for a feature supported in two independent modern browsers to change unless there's a fundamental problem, or patent workaround needed.
Also, keep a careful eye on the HTML5 draft recommendations, just in case features change their implementations. It's unlikely for a feature supported in two independent modern browsers to change unless there's a fundamental problem, or patent workaround needed.
Ah yes, those are good ones to use. I say screw it and use stuff like that. Just make sure that on your marketing page you explicitly say which browsers are supported so that you don't get a bunch of angry customers :)
I think lots of enterprises still have IE only policy and we certainly see that with Visual Website Optimizer (whose complex visual designer works even on IE 7). I would certainly not risk discounting IE 6-8.
Thanks for the reply Paras. Can you share what percentage of your traffic is IE? (and also the breakdown between IE6 - 9)
IE is actually 5% with 90% out of it IE8 and 10% IE7.
But if you have specific companies as target customers, check what their IE policy is. I know my previous employer is still on IE6 due to a bug tracking system that only works on IE6. And I know other companies are in similar situations.
Otherwise, I would suggest supporting IE7-9.
Otherwise, I would suggest supporting IE7-9.
Last place I worked for someone else (an investment bank) had both:
* web apps that only work on IE6
* web apps that did not work on IE6
simultaneously.
There was no official workaround, so everyone ran copies of Firefox on their local desktop, with the help of IT, and ignored the architecture astronauts setting the policy.
* web apps that only work on IE6
* web apps that did not work on IE6
simultaneously.
There was no official workaround, so everyone ran copies of Firefox on their local desktop, with the help of IT, and ignored the architecture astronauts setting the policy.
I wouldn't ignore IE when targeting fortune 5 million. Check out html5boilerplate.com and css3pie.com to help achieve cross browser and backwards compatibility. Good luck with your app!
My opinion, being in a similar situation: Build for the future. My SAAS product prototype currently works only in Safari/WebKit, since it's the only browser that supports CSS3 Animations and CSS3 3d Transforms. I have not yet launched anything so this is purely speculation, but I'm willing to wait a year or two, since what I'm building will take some time for a single developer (me!).
May not work for you, but it's my current philosophy.
May not work for you, but it's my current philosophy.
If the features are significant enough to convince a CIO to change browser than yes.
If the product is not ready for mainstream release for the next 12 or 24 months then yes.
If it's only slightly better than IE compatible alternatives and you want people to use it today then no.
Personally I believe now is the time to start taking a risk with HTML5 only - when it does go mainstream you'll be ahead of the pack.
If the product is not ready for mainstream release for the next 12 or 24 months then yes.
If it's only slightly better than IE compatible alternatives and you want people to use it today then no.
Personally I believe now is the time to start taking a risk with HTML5 only - when it does go mainstream you'll be ahead of the pack.
You can have both, to an extent.
http://html5boilerplate.com/
http://html5boilerplate.com/
This is my plan! Just finding programmers that are on board is the problem for me.
Money of IE users doesn't differ from the money of people using modern browsers.
Why would you even ask this question? Either you are willing to size your actual market or you are not. Nothing HN can do for you can possibly overcome your predilection one way or another.
I asked the question to get a sense of what percentage of typical B2B SAAS customers use IE. Also if its shrinking significantly over time.
You can do this research yourself. Or else, you don't really care.
[deleted]
I was wondering if its ok to go HTML5/CSS3 only and not worry about internet explorer too much (IE6-8). This basically allows me to code better features more easily, ultimately resulting in a more usable product.
Would appreciate any feedback from HNers who are catering to the same market and have any stats to share. How widely is internet explorer used in fortune 5 million companies. Is it worth the extra development time and all the headaches anymore?
Thanks!