jQuery 3.0 Stops Supporting Internet Explorer Workarounds (softpedia.com) 80
An anonymous reader writes: Thursday's release of jQuery 3.0 is "the first version that features absolutely no workarounds for old Internet Explorer browsers," reports Softpedia. "If customers are still asking you to work with IE6, IE7, and IE8, then you should stick with jQuery 1.0 for the foreseeable future." The jQuery blog explains that over 18 months of development, "We set out to create a slimmer, faster version of jQuery (with backwards compatibility in mind)... It is a continuation of the 2.x branch, but with a few breaking changes that we felt were long overdue." Besides jQuery's free, open source JavaScript library, they also released a "slim" version that excludes ajax and effects modules (as well as deprecated code), and a new version of the jQuery Migrate plugin.
Great decision (Score:5, Funny)
Now they need the guts to stop supporting JavaScript.
Re: (Score:1)
The inability to understand this kind of humor is actually a sign of brain damage. You might want to have some tests done...
The alternative is native apps (Score:2)
Without JavaScript, HTML documents would have to be static, and apps would have to be native. Would you prefer having to download a separate native app for each Internet service you access through your PC? Would you further prefer having to buy another operating system license or possibly even another computer* if the app happens to be exclusive to an operating system other than the one your PC runs?
* OS X is exclusive** to Mac computers, which start at $499.
** Legally.
Re: (Score:3)
The people who block execution of JavaScript as an intrusion on the privacy and security of their computers will block execution of WebAssembly for the same reason.
Re: (Score:2)
If it becomes commonplace for end users to block JavaScript and WebAssembly, then developers will have to choose a technology other than JavaScript or WebAssembly for applications deployed to the public.
Re: (Score:2)
90%+ of the web is pure information delivery
Even some cases of "pure information delivery" require executing code. Though the CSS3 checkbox hack allows expanding and collapsing subtrees in a limited fashion, a site like Slashdot would still need to execute code to retrieve the text of "hidden comments" that aren't sent when the page first loads. And when said "pure information" has video as its medium, the viewer needs controls to navigate the video. Browser-provided controls are not always sufficient, especially for a long video that has chapter sto
So it's useless in the real world. (Score:1)
So jQuery 3 is useless in the real world, then, since we need to support at least some of those browsers. Over 15% of my sites' users are using IE 8. I can't tell them to "fuck off" by using jQuery 3! Hell, I still get more IE 8 users than I get Firefox users.
jQuery 1 will be the only option for a very long time.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
So? You made the decision to use Microsoft technologies. Full stop.
That's like whining about gas mileage standards when you own a Hummer. The rest of the world shouldn't bow to your special snowflake existence.
Sorry that's harsh...but it's also how reality works.
Captcha: incensed
Re:So it's useless in the real world. (Score:5, Insightful)
No, it really IS useless.
If you only target modern browsers, between querySelectorAll, XHR2 or fetch (ok, that will need polyfilling), and all the newer stuff that's available in 95% of browsers, jquery is very nearly useless.
The only reason to use it is to deal with older browser quirks. Once you don't need to support that, you don't need jquery.
Re: (Score:2)
What I was trying to say is that you need it for backward compatibility, and they're getting rid of that, making it useless... Woosh.
Re: So it's useless in the real world. (Score:3)
Dude this 2016. Not 2006. Corporate sites no longer support IE 8 starting last year. Shit ADP processing is one huge corporate site for credit cards. Myaline won't even support IE 8.
Today corporations use Firefox and Chrome and MBA and PHB see sites like MSN miss render. They won't blame web developers.
In 2006 everyone used IE 6 and Firefox was a secret geek thing. It had 0 presence on corporation desktops! All the sites the PHB worked fine in IE 6. So it must be an incompetent web developer then etc. Those
Re: (Score:3)
I don't really need to. I already work on a lot of large scale web apps and sites targeting IE10 and up without using jQuery, and they work fine... ::shrugs::
Re: (Score:3)
I encourage you to check out the source to either JQuery or Sizzle. You'd be surprised how many workarounds are needed even for items like querySelectorAll and xhr2.
I encourage you to check out You Might Not Need jQuery [youmightno...jquery.com]. You'd be surprised how many workarounds aren't needed. This is especially true if you set the slider to exclude IE versions that have known unpatched security vulnerabilities (that is, everything before IE 9).
What exactly is he supposed to do? (Score:2)
So? You made the decision to use Microsoft technologies. Full stop.
15% of the *customers* are using IE8.
What exactly is he supposed to do?
Use an IE8 exploit to do a drive-by download of Chrome and force it to be the default browser?
Re:What exactly is he supposed to do? (Score:5, Funny)
Use IE8 exploit the kickoff to upgrade to Windows 10. Which won't include IE8.
Why write malware when you can use someone else's?
Re: (Score:2)
That'll learn 'em.
If you weren't AC, I'd mod you up, but I'm not sure if it's Funny or Insightful.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: So it's useless in the real world. (Score:2)
10k isn't much. Try 15k as our part in 60k.
We had to remain on IE8. So 2.5 years ago Chrome became the standard. About 1 year ago IE10 roll out. Now, no more compatibility view.
Lots of growing pains but as of last year, those few remaining apps and units were asking for it.
Re: (Score:2)
What measures has this "very large financial institution" taken against vulnerabilities in IE 8 for which Microsoft will never publish a patch?
Re: (Score:2)
I work for a Fortune 50 company. A huge portion of our user base is in China where IE 7(!) and 8 are still VERY common. Unfortunately many of our users are on dedicated hardware that absolutely cannot upgrade to a newer browser. The only way for them to upgrade is to get new hardware. The makes leaving jQuery behind very difficult.
Give them Firefox (Score:2)
A huge portion of our user base is in China where IE 7(!) and 8 are still VERY common. Unfortunately many of our users are on dedicated hardware that absolutely cannot upgrade to a newer browser.
Among this Chinese user base, what prevents Red Flag Linux or some other free operating system from booting? Heck, what keeps Firefox from running on their PCs that run IE 8? At least Firefox is less likely to expose your site's viewers to publicly known exploitable vulnerabilities.
It's possible to install two browsers on one PC (Score:2)
Then have them use IE 8 for ActiveX sites and Firefox for all other sites.
Re: (Score:2)
Then run Windows XP in a virtual machine on Red Flag Linux or whatever has replaced it.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not absolutely sure, but from what I've been told these machines cannot be updated in any way, shape, or form. But I don't know the specifics.
Re:So it's useless in the real world. (Score:4, Informative)
Well, judging from any quick search of release notes for just about every service I look into, they are unlikely to be able to online bank, use Google services, use quite a lot of modern websites, Google and Bing will be whinging at them constantly, and most websites will look like shit or just not work at all.
Sure, it's nice to retain compatibility, but there's also a time to move on. Do you still push out Windows 3.1 apps? Do you test on Windows 95? Still using plugins from the 90's?
If you haven't noticed, without an HTML5 browser (all the plugins are dead now by the way - Java, ActiveX, etc. - only Flash really "works" at all and that's going) almost all the websites you visit are just broken.
So if you ask your users to move on to a modern browser, you won't be the first to ask them that, by a long shot, and that's warning enough itself.
As someone who works in education, where they never throw anything away if it can still be used in lessons, where I'm often asked to install CDs that have been lying around for 20 years or more (Shockwave anyone?), with teachers complaining they can't teach what they used to 20 years ago because they don't have that software (yeah, I know, don't go there), almost everything is now HTML5 - from both paid and free resources. Even the CDs have gone and everything's now web-based, even testing, assessment, etc. tools.
And this year, pretty much every supplier announced HTML5 versions because NOTHING ELSE works on an iPad - Flash, etc. Our banks enforce IE 10 minimum but recommend Firefox or Chrome.
These 15%? Yeah, they're not your main source of income if they haven't bought a PC or upgraded their browser in 10 years.
Re: So it's useless in the real world. (Score:2)
They are Chinese. Unless your site needs Mandarin it is safe to ignore
Re: (Score:1)
Our banks enforce IE 10 minimum but recommend Firefox or Chrome.
These 15%? Yeah, they're not your main source of income if they haven't bought a PC or upgraded their browser in 10 years.
IE8 is 7 years old. I haven't supported IE 8 in 3 years. We ran tests via a QA person only to note that if the website broke, we'd add IE8 to the automatic pop up "Your browser is not supported, not all aspects of the site may work. Please upgrade to a supported browser: blah blah blah". It failed on a page about 2 years ago, we added the popup, and amazingly IE8 usage dropped significantly. :) No, we didn't lose those IE8 folks, they migrated to a supported browser. Since they were paying for services, the
Re: So it's useless in the real world. (Score:3)
At work we have Chrome everywhere now. Reason being is IE 8 in the past year has stopped working for a large number of websites!
Shit even ADP credit card processing for customers or to print out our paystubs just stopped working.
IE 8 users see the writing on the wall for the past year now and won't blame you if everyone else including IE's own default MSN page doesn't support it!
Re:So it's useless in the real world. (Score:5, Informative)
<!--[if lte IE8]> <script src="https://ajax.googleapis.com/ajax/libs/jquery/1.12.4/jquery.min.js"></script> <![endif]-->
<!--[if !lte IE8]> <!--> <script src="https://ajax.googleapis.com/ajax/libs/jquery/3.0.whatever/jquery.min.js"></script> <!-- <![endif]-->
If I typed that correctly then it should give users on IE8 and below jQuery 1, while everyone else gets jQuery 3 even if their browsers don't support conditional comments. Just be sure not to use any functionality that's not in the jQuery 1 version that you use, but that should be easy.
Re: (Score:3)
Just be sure not to use any functionality that's not in the jQuery 1 version that you use, but that should be easy.
Someone should put together some sort of high level library to make this seamless and cover the edge cases for compatibility. It could even include some fancy wrappers for common stuff. JQScript?
Useless if you're an abberation (Score:2)
http://caniuse.com/usage-table [caniuse.com]
15% on IE 8 just isn't typical. I believe most IE 8 usage is in China. But they are supporting jQuery 1.0 for you. But you are still mad because they made something for everyone else?
IE 8 is unsupported and vulnerable to MitB (Score:2)
Over 15% of my sites' users are using IE 8.
On which operating system is Internet Explorer 8 still receiving security fixes? Windows XP and Windows Server 2013 are no longer supported. Nor are IE pre-9 on Windows Vista and IE pre-11 on Windows 7. And unlike other applications that require operating system versions that no longer receive security fixes, an application with "Internet" in its name can't reasonably be air-gapped from the Internet. Continuing to cater to IE 8 enables users' continued use of vulnerable software that puts their information
Re: (Score:2)
Why do we cave to people who want to use ancient unsupported stuff? Microsoft does not even support this stuff any more, and it's only used in places like banks where some idiot is in charge of IT and insists on 'standardizing' on something that is unsupported and a security nightmare. I support a VERY large application that is designed for Fortune 500 companies, and we simply tell them old IE is unsupported because it is not HTML5 compliant. Use Chrome, Firefox, or Edge. We get one second of pushback u
The pain (Score:1)
If customers are still asking you to work with IE6, IE7, and IE8, then you should stick them with a fork. They're done for.
And nothing of value was lost (Score:3)
Now, if Flash would finally go away...
How to migrate vector animations from Flash? (Score:2)
What migration path do sites such as Weebl's Stuff, Homestar Runner, and Animutation Portal have to migrate their vector-based SWF animations off of Flash, other than by rendering them to MP4 or WebM? Rendering an SWF to MP4 or WebM bloats its size in bytes by a factor of ten in my tests.
Windows XP and Vista (Score:5, Informative)
jQuery does still support both IE10 and IE11, so it's not like they're dropping all IE workarounds as stated in the title.
Re: Windows XP and Vista (Score:2)
You thought wrong
XP or Vista to 10 upgrade is behind paywall (Score:2)
I thought fully updated both XP and Vista run Edge.
Only with paywalled upgrades. I think CritterNYC was referring to upgrades available without charge beyond the cost of Internet data transfer. The offer to upgrade to Edge without charge, which expires sometime next month, is available only to users of Windows 7 and Windows 8.1.
Supporting quirks is what it's FOR (Score:1)
The only reason I use jQuery is to smooth over browser oddities. If it doesn't do that then it has no other value. I totally don't understand this decision.
Yes, MSIE is very low marketshare. Yes, MSIE sucks, so fuck that. jQuery was the [partial] answer. Apparently newer versions are no longer that.
Maybe another way to look at it, would be this: if you use jQuery 3, what do you use it for? Why bother at all? It doesn't get you anything, or at least, it won't get me anything.
Re: (Score:2)
Syntactic sugar, avoiding yet another learning cycle for just a little longer, maintaining existing codebases.
Re: (Score:3)
CSS selectors are MUCH easier than using document.getElementsByTagName, document.getElementsByClassName, document.getElementById. Those are all a mouthful when I can just type $(".className") and be done with it and have terser code that is easier to read (if you know jQuery).
jQuery's chaining also makes it a lot easier and nicer looking to manipulate DOM elements, unless you really hate chaining I guess. var x = document.createElement("input"); x.type = "checkbox"; x.checked = false; x.click = //etc; OR $(
Re: (Score:2)
Not contesting the other arguments, but for the first one...
document.querySelectorAll does just that. If it's too much to type, just alias it. Even to the $ sign!
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Then what the hell is the point?! (Score:1)
Jquery syntax is also muuuuuuuuuuuuuuuch easier to work with than standard dom calls, so there is that
Benchmarks? (Score:2)
I'd like to see benchmarks for the areas of jQuery where they claim performance increased, but I can't find any..
Content-Security-Policy (Score:2)