I’ve no doubt mentioned before that I have an 1½ hour commute on the train. This gives me plenty of time for reading web logs via AvantGo on my Palm.
Most folks don’t create a mobile version of their blog, but that’s fine as the AvantGo browser does a decent job of making web sites readable and navigable. Most, if not all, of the blogs I read are coded with well structured (X)HTML, using CSS to provide layout and presentation. This makes AvantGo’s job even easier, despite the fact it only supports HTML 3.2 and has no support for CSS.
With these facts in mind, I am increasingly irritated by having to scroll past messages like this on What do I know (an otherwise top notch blog):
NOTE: Because you are using an outdated browser, you may only view the raw textual content of this site. In order to view, use, and enjoy this site to the fullest, we strongly recommend upgrading your browser to one that supports web standards.
Oi! I am using an up to date browser that supports Web standards (just not the latest ones). Splorp is a little more friendly and accurate:
Please note: The Splorp site has been redesigned using cascading style sheets and will look much better in a browser that supports web standards. However, the content on this site is completely accessible by any browser or internet access device – including a Newton.
Here’s a few more popular sites that run similar upgrade warnings:
There’s lots of other sites that run this message too. Here’s some popular sites that don’t:
So should we be including this message or not? Within the context of all browsing scenarios (not just mobile), here’s some pros and cons as I see it:
The first pro is an important one for commercial sites with strong visual identities, such as Wired: regular readers deserve to have an explanation as to why their favourite site now looks pants. However the message could be removed later – or moved to a sidebar – once the majority of readers have been informed of the change. I wonder if that’s what Douglas had in mind?
The second pro is certainly laudable: there needs to be an education of users & admins that buggy browsers need replacing. But again, the message could be moved to a sidebar or some other area of lower importance. (I appreciate that a sidebar is not likely to be displayed as such, but if it’s marked up suitably the relative importance will be apparent.)
As for the cons. Well the first one is obviously important as no-one wants a search engine description of their site to be "Please upgrade your browser". The scrolling and reading issue could be partially worked around by placing a skip navigation link before the message, but does not solve the problem if one needs to use the navigation.
The repetition and subsequent emotional reaction is difficult to measure, but in my case was enough to spark me into writing this diatribe. User style sheets could have a good go at hiding the message by adding an ahem class with display:none, but that’s no guarantee.
So for personal sites, I say ditch the upgrade message. It’s only there for vanity – folks can still read and navigate your stuff right? All they can’t do is see your nice design.
For corporate sites, I say major thumbs up for switching over your build philosophy (you’ll appreciate it in the long run) but keep the message there for a while; loyal readers need to be told where the visual identity has gone to. However, do provide a way to skip the message and after a while (when the feedback trickles out) move the message to a less prominent area and be done with it.
What do you think?
Web standards · Browsers · Accessibility
Johan Svensson wrote:
My pet peeve: stupid banks who don’t allow anything but The Beast (that would be IE) and Netscape 4.*, and then have the guts to tell me to “upgrade to a better browser.” Isn’t that why I’m using Mozilla?
Opera is out, Mozilla is a no-no. Well, both Opera and Mozilla work just fine if I tell them to identify as The Beast…
Rich wrote:
Yeah. It’s at least understandable, if not exusable, when users are restricted to IE because the web application uses ActiveX exclusively.
But when the site works fine on other browsers, it’s just plain ignorance on the part of the developers.
Jeremy wrote:
I decided fairly early on not to have the browser upgrade message on my personal site: http://adactio.com
However, there are subtle hints and jibes in the style-switching form for any non-CSS capable browsers ;-)
On another site of mine, I’ve included the browser upgrade message but I’ve moved it to the bottom of the page:
http://www.thesession.org/
I did this mostly for the reason you mentioned: the inconvenience of having the same message appear at the top of every single page would be just too annoying.
Micah wrote:
You bring up an original and very valid point. My opinion (as an occasional lynx user) is that a simple display-none’d link to, say, webstandards.org is enough to remind people and takes up little screen space.
Adrian wrote:
Great article. I opted to skip the “Your browser sucks” message on my site for the same reasons you cite.
As for sites that display the message on each page, the least they could do is check the page’s referrer and not display the message if the referring page is from the same site.
Doug wrote:
Interesting points here Rich, and a very valid topic to write about and discuss. One that generated quite a bit of flack while I was still at Wired. But I believe that it’s due to the wording of the message. Right before I left, I proposed altering the message on Wired News to take in multiple scenarios, but the change never got made. Rather than take up space here to spout off on Wired-specific details, today’s post on stopdesign is directly related.
Kris wrote:
On my latest creation [1], I used some sort of upgrade message too, but not so explicit. It is in Dutch, my apologies. It comes down to “Are you experiencing any problems viewing this site? Read more about solving it easily…”.
After reading this entry, and having experienced the rather annoying message first hand, i decided to only show it one time. That means, I retrieved the HTTP_REFERER and if it did not contain the site’s the domain name (thus coming from outside) I display the message.
By the way, I used an image with an empty ALT attribute for the image.
[1] http://www.cinnamon.nl/
(Sorry that it is completely in Dutch language)
taestell wrote:
Nice post. A lot of good points.
But you said, “A text-based speech browser will read out the message out each time.”
Well, this is only true if the speech browser does not support CSS itself. All user agents should support CSS, including speech, braille, mobile phone, PDA, TV, and traditional screen browsers.
Mark wrote:
Has anyone got a script which can check the reffering page using js and HTTP_REFERER ?
If so, might you be kind enough to post it here?
Sean "XariusX" Maddison wrote:
Nice and well formed argument against the Browser Upgrade initiative. I couldn’t agree more that it is not necessary on personal sites. I have removed it from my site after considering the points you put forward
I understand that many people use small-screen devices, WAP-enabled phones and textual browsers (Like Lynx). I am considering dedicating a little tiny link at the top of the page (with display: none style into it) that leads to a page explaining the pants design.
Oooh! Just spotted a tiny mistake on your site. Under the “make a comment” box the sentence
“HTML will displayed, not rendered.”
is missing the word “be” I think…
Anyway thanks for the enlightenment :D
Kris wrote:
This retrieves the HTTP Referer – if there is one – through PHP.
<?php
$u = $_SERVER[‘HTTP_REFERER’];
echo $u;
?>
Mark wrote:
Thanks Kris for the HTTP Referer code in PHP. Is it possible to do this in Javascript?
Rich wrote:
Mark – Can I suggest you pursue your referrers conversation directly with Kris. Contact me directly and I’ll put you in touch.
My contact form: http://www.clagnut.com/about/
Cris wrote:
This discussion has made me realize that I’ve been putting the Upgrade message on my pages not for the user’s benefit, but for the client’s. Speaking only for myself, it’s been a somewhat cowardly attempt to forestall the criticism that I expect from the boss and the customer when they try to view my sites in NS4.
Thank you for reminding me who we’re really designing for: the end user.
Ricardo Lamego wrote:
I hope this still has some relevance one month later =)
Richard, your question raised important doubts and you have consistently proved you’re points but I must disagree with you in only one thing: for personal sites, I say don’t ditch the upgrade message!
When browser campaign started as all other standards initiatives, it was through personal and independent sites that the message was spread. It were those same sites that first adopted those practices and behaviours. And it still are those sites that influence the community to make the move like Wired did and make the statistical number thick enough for people start noticing.
I don’t know about you but at work it took me 2 years (2000–2001) to get permission to use CSS (for style only and ditch most font tags) and to evangelize some standard using policies among my colleagues.
I could have not proven my views and participate in the standards “movement” if i didn’t have some projects of my own where I made the rules.
So please, if there is another solution in alternative to ditch the message, let’s use it. There’s still a lot of work to be done!
Minh Nguyễn wrote:
For a while now, I’ve been placing a fairly detailed “display: none” message on the top of all my pages, telling people to upgrade. I did this because the WaSP said to, and because many of my readers weren’t at the time very computer-literate, so they just used Netscape Navigator 4.
If I could use HTTP_REFERRER, I would. But I use one of those free servers (namely, Netfirms.com), so I don’t have control over things like that.
I’ve considered putting a hidden link on every page, right before the message, saying “Cut to the chase!” When a reader who can see the message clicks on the link, it sends them to the good stuff. Would that be a good idea, in your opinion? Or would the hidden messages still be too annoying?
– Minh Nguyen (http://mxn.netfirms.com/index.html )Ben Hollis wrote:
I’ve started adding a little ASP.NET user control to my new XHTML+CSS sites that gently advertises better browsers only if down-level versions of netscape and opera, or internet explorer, are detected. That means only people who actually have outdated browsers get the message.
H wrote:
Bad habits certainly don’t die easily.
Working with standards is supposed to remedy the old tendency to discriminate browsers. While definitely not as radical as dead-end “please come back later with a decent browser” pages, I feel that hidden upgrade messages still miss a important point of standards-compliant design, browser independance. Low-tech edition (eventually with a link to a more elaborate explanation) is more to my liking. It’s not browser-centric, it expresses in a positive way the care taken by the designers to welcome less common or aging user agents, and, being much shorter, it’s much less annoying and can even gracefully (and logically) integrate with partially-degraded layouts.
Lorelle wrote:
I would love to see a listing of sites or information on CSS (style sheets) elements for PDAs, handheld, and cell phones. Even W3C is skimpy on details. I know they should be text oriented, but these are growing in their ability to handle graphics and multimedia.
Any recommendations on style sheets for the little browsers?
Thanks,
Lorelle
candybozan wrote:
I want more speed with the same amount of time i have now
wttmndvd wrote:
Update to MSN 9
James wrote:
I guess this comment is kinda late but I only just came across this article… :P
Why not display a message like that the first time a user visits a page on a site (by all means detect the user agent and omit the message on newer browsers), set a cookie and if the subsequent pages detect the cookie also omit the message.
That way visitors get informed but only need to put up with the message once!
Rolando Herrera wrote:
I need to upgrade of msn
samdra pimento wrote:
i can’t seems to send my picture to my contact and i don’t know why
picklock wrote:
the locksmith
Jacqui Baker wrote:
finding it really hard to access my hotmail
catarina wrote:
Access to Hotmail via Outlook and Outlook Express now requires a subscription. Please sign up at http://upgrade.msn.com
aid moi svp
merci
mimo ms wrote:
port:0,secure{ssl}:no,error number:0×80004005
EDWIN wrote:
I’M TRYING TO SEND EMAIL AND IT WON’T GO THROUGH.
Click Cargo wrote:
No tengo acceso a hotmail desde el Outlook Express
Mohammed wrote:
God problem using outlook
antonio gento wrote:
No puedo enviar ni recibir mensajes,desde outlook
el numero de error es 0×80004005
nadiaraafat wrote:
port0,secure{ssl}:no,errornumber:0×0004005
Mina Iskander wrote:
thank you
mandy wrote:
how do i sign up for incredimail?
patrik wrote:
Boo
igor dorfman wrote:
problem with receiving email
tmmy wrote:
i cant find my mail
Igor dorfman wrote:
can’t receive email
Mansour Abbasi wrote:
for activ my email