Hacker News Reader

Comment by oomkiller | Hacker News Reader

This is a huge deal for enterprise app developers. We've been able to develop on a modern web platform, but have our customers use our app with IE 6, 7 and 8 (via ChromeFrame). Now we're going to have to add support for at the very least IE8, since XP (still over 50% market share in business) isn't going anywhere anytime soon, despite Microsoft EOLing it. Most IT admins I've dealt with refuse to install any other browsers on their systems, but don't have a problem with browser plugins for some reason.

View on HN

It seems like the enterprise grade solution would be to checkout the svn or git repo some time in the next 6 months and then rebrand it to "your company name here" frame.

http://src.chromium.org/viewvc/chrome/trunk/src/chrome_frame...

The viability of this strategy depends on whether the Chrome/Chromium bits will continue to integrated with the "Frame" bits. I'm not getting a good feel for the architecture from just a quick glance at their repo, but I'd definitely like to find out how viable, long-term, a fork might be.

> Now we're going to have to add support for at the very least IE8 ....

> Most IT admins I've dealt with refuse to install any other

> browsers on their systems, but don't have a problem

> with browser plugins for some reason

Why don't you just deploy Chrome itself? Google has made a version of Chrome that can install without admin rights.

I have a feeling this was Google's plan all along: 1) get everybody dependent on Chrome with Chrome Frame, 2) make version of Chrome that installs without admin 3) remove support for Chrome Frame 4) $$$ profit from massive switchover to Chrome inside the enterprise as developers make an end run around IT by using the non-admin install.

Another great opportunity to pressure IT to switch to Firefox as the standard.

This is the opposite, this is just showing the c levels they were right all along, build on microsoft, 'no one every got fired for buying microsoft', because they will support their shit forever. I think i can get a supported visual fox pro environment if i want.

You can still buy a horse and buggy too. Does that make it the ideal option for transportation on the interstate?

I think you just come from a different perspective than me, i work in the enterprise for fortune 500 companies. The mindset and the process is just different. If the horse and buggy works, and is cheap, and doesn't have high maintenance costs, in the enterprise will gladly let the horse and buggy technology go until paste the day when we are flying spaceships to and from work.

I enjoy the witty snaps, but realistically, it just shows your out of touch with the enterprise space.

I am not talking client facing apps, all of those are cross browser up to date to ensure maximum visibility, i am talking intranet enterprise apps so hideous no one who isnt paid to use them ever would... these are the backroads that only the farmhands use. the overseers are like you want to throw an automatic carriage back here, but we pushed for it, and just as it rolls out i gotta tell em the automatic carriage company stopped selling gasoline, and they just look at me laugh, and say horses run on hay...

thats all it is aint the end of the world, aint even a big deal, i will write an active x control and embed it in the page to do what i need... horse and buggy style

... and then these big enterprises are surprised when they get outmaneuvered by a startup using technology which less than 10 years old.

A cruise line is not going to get "outmaneuvered by a startup using technology which less than 10 year old.

Nor an insurance company.

Nor a bank.

Nor large agrobusiness.

The tech industry is not the only industry that exists in the world. There are many industries where software does not form the basis of competitive advantage. In those cases, IT is not the most efficient use of capital.

Who says the cruise line, insurance company, bank, agrobusiness and so on are going to get outmaneuvered by a startup? They're going to get outmaneuvered by another big company in their line of business with less-stupid IT policies.

Getting these sorts of issues (and bigger ones) right is something big companies call "IT strategy" and they'll often pay consultants real money for it. That's because, done well, IT can be the foundation of significant competitive advantages. Is using a more modern browser going to create an advantage all by itself? Almost certainly not. But the kind of IT organization that can't even handle something that simple is going to struggle mightily with the bigger fish.

Unlikely, as their competitive advantage does not come from IT.

For example, a bank competes on the basis of access to capital (i.e., deposits), which depends primarily on size, location, and interest rates. Given the choice between upgrading their computers and opening a new branch, it is much better to open a new branch.

Well... "enterprise" can sit still for as long as they want. I don't really care one way or another. Besides, eventually we'll be so far ahead that we won't even be able to hear them complain about the shrinking world they've built and refuse to leave. I've worked in government which traditionally is even worse than enterprise when it comes to things of this nature. But we had a pretty good IT department that didn't just dig in their heals and refuse to budge. Sure we weren't installing nightly builds or anything but we got fairly regular updates and stayed reasonably current. It is possible. Eventually it will catch up to you in terms of maintenance costs.

There is still a ridiculous amount of enterprise web apps that are built for IE.

Just saying "switch to Firefox" or "change products" is simply not an option.

So? Old, poorly-maintained systems have all sorts of issues. Not working with newer browsers is just one of them. Consider these possibilities:

- Maintenance and support costs are notably higher than they would be with a newer system. It is worth noting that, technically speaking, Microsoft hasn't stopped supporting Windows XP. They're just raising the price and requiring a bespoke service agreement for XP support.

- Not working with newer browsers means not working with smartphones and tablets. A company could be passing up opportunities to improve productivity with mobile devices.

- It may be difficult or (practically) impossible to scale an old, brittle system with the needs of the business, especially if the old system has issues with newer hardware.

- It may not interoperate well with newer systems in the organization, foreclosing opportunities to offer valuable products and/or services.

And so on. Letting parts of your IT infrastructure bitrot has long-term consequences and companies should realize that when they make IT decisions.

One of the biggest surprises has been the grudging increase in "open" support in web apps with execs and field support staff/salespeople adopting iPads.

It's easy enough to tell someone "you can't use Mac/Linux/IE9/FFox/etc. unless you can make a case for it," when they're not contributing to the top line. Kill arguments claiming that it will save money by asking if it will increase general support costs.

When the CFO wants to be able to access the intranet with her iPad, it's a different story.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com