• subscribe
January 31, 2012 10:22 AM

IE 6 and the Dark Side of Success

Windows IT Pro
InstantDoc ID #142111
As with many behind-the-scenes Hollywood dramas, tech industry success stories often come with a dark side. In the late 1990s, for example, Microsoft worked to improve the overall quality of its Windows NT family of products, hoping to move beyond the workgroup computing realm and into the more lucrative enterprise market. But in succeeding beyond its wildest dreams, Microsoft also encountered a curious counter to this success: Enterprises expect the software solutions they purchase to last and last and last, and as a result, the software giant has had to extend support for its aging systems far beyond the original expiration dates.

Windows XP is, of course, the most obvious and extreme example of this issue. Released at the height of Microsoft's market power -- and the nadir of its US antitrust troubles -- XP is now a decade old. It came laden with a number of issues, although most, such as the UPnP bug that tarnished the product's launch, were fixed long ago and are mostly forgotten. What's stuck around, like the smell of overly pungent cheese, however, are some key XP technologies that, like the OS itself, simply won't die.

It's a serious problem. Microsoft has recently claimed that there are over 1.3 billion active users of Windows worldwide, making this the most widespread and successful technology platform on earth. Between 350 million and 400 million new PCs are sold every year, and roughly 90 percent of those come with a Windows license of some kind. And although most of those PCs, of course, ship with Windows 7, Microsoft's enterprise customers retain downgrade rights. And some, believe it or not, are still installing XP.

In fact, from a usage share perspective, XP is still roughly neck-and-neck with Windows 7, depending on which market researchers you choose. (Some even place XP decidedly ahead.) This is problematic from a number of perspectives. From Microsoft's perspective, it hampers the company's ability to push more modern platforms and technologies, and this is surely a concern for the next OS release, Windows 8, which is as forward-leaning as anything the software giant's ever created. For users, this means that app and web developers must target the least-common denominator, with the result being that most applications and websites aren't as technologically advanced as they could be.

Enterprises stick with XP for a few reasons, but one the big ones a decade in is compatibility. And although Microsoft has made huge strides in application compatibility in both Windows 7 and Windows Vista, it's done little in the way of web app/site compatibility, choosing instead to direct customers to expensive and complex virtualization solutions to meet this need. And it's been pushing an initiative to kill off both XP and Internet Explorer (IE) 6, the browser that ships with XP, because it's insecure, out of date, and doesn't adhere to modern web standards.

In fact, Microsoft's Stephen Rose just blogged about the pending expiration of XP support -- it crossed the 800-day milestone over the past weekend -- and Microsoft recently claimed that overall IE 6 usage in the US fell below 1 percent. This is good news. But the truth is, millions of people, almost all in enterprises and other businesses, are still saddled with this dated, insecure browser. By Microsoft's own estimates, almost two thirds of enterprises still use XP in some capacity. That's close to 500 million PCs worldwide, according to some estimates.

Last year, I wrote about a third-party effort to close the web app compatibility gap in "Solving IE 6 Site Compatibility Issues When Microsoft Won't." That solution, called Browsium, offers an elegant way to simultaneously use multiple versions of of the IE rendering engine, Flash, and Java, all at the same time, in the same browser. But the original Browsium version came with what turned out to be an easily overcome downside: It required users to download various IE components from Microsoft's website and it raised the specter of a possible Microsoft backlash against a solution that, frankly, ran counter to the  message Microsoft wanted customers to hear.

This week, Browsium announced a follow-up to its original product that overcomes the possible issues of its predecessor. And if web app/site compatibility issues are still preventing a migration to more modern Windows technologies, you should take a look. Called Browsium Ion, this new version builds on a year of learnings about how browsers work and can become compatible with older web technologies. And the surprising find is that Browsium doesn't really need the IE 6 rendering engine. Instead, it can deliver even better compatibility results using the native IE 7, 8, or 9 versions and an adapted version of the "Quirks" profile Microsoft itself uses for backward compatibility.

As a result, Browsium Ion is easier for customers to use because there's no upfront need to find, download, and deploy older IE rendering engines. It doesn't run afoul of Microsoft, ending any potential threats. But it works largely as before, allowing businesses to mix and match multiple IE rendering styles, Java versions, and ActiveX versions, on a site-by-site basis. So users can utilize the advanced features of modern browsers on most of the web, but fall back when needed, behind the scenes, to technologies that are compatible with intranet sites, line-of-business apps, and other web solutions that will never be updated. It all happens on the fly and with no end-user interaction, and it's controlled through standard Group Policy settings and a nice, MMC-like management interface.

In the meantime, I'll pay attention to the calendar, the monthly web browser usage statistics, and Microsoft's various blog posts and announcements around these issues. It's interesting to me that XP in general and IE 6 specifically are like house guests who've overstayed their welcome: Although we were happy enough with them at first, we're exasperated to be dealing with them after so much time has elapsed. How rude!


ARTICLE TOOLS

Comments
  • anonymuos
    3 months ago
    Feb 01, 2012

    Part of the issue that fanboys like Paul don't get is Microsoft continually changes the UI and removes features from its "upgrades" - two things it should never do. They can't come up with a new product that features the same UI with minimal changes but solid feature additions and supporting existing features which worked well along with new ones. MS doesn't get it. Its fanboy don't get it. Buying a new OS is very much like buying a new car from a different company. You get some benefits but you lose some features. Like http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_features_removed_in_Windows_Vista and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_features_removed_in_Windows_7 . MS still hasn't fixed any of them. There are wonderful apps like Classic Shell created to address hundreds of these issues but they still fall short of what MS can directly fix. They don't care, so we won't upgrade. XP SP3 till 2014, maybe XP x64 till 2015 (Server 2003 is supported till 2015 July, does Paul know that?) After that, Red Hat Enterprise Linux. We have HAD IT with MS changing the interface all over again and breaking and removing existing features. Windows in the 90s was designed with the enterprise first in mind - minimal UI changes, full feature compatibility and solid app compatibility across versions. Now it's developed to bring in more revenue from consumers who jump to the latest flashy toy they find because they are bored of the old one.

  • dilkie
    3 months ago
    Feb 01, 2012

    Microsoft could have avoided this issue completely if it had only addressed UI changes as well as application compatibility. Companies don't want to re-train all their employees every two years because MS decided to re-layout the windows desktop. It is expensive, time consuming and has no business benefit. Put in a "XP mode" or "win 2000 mode" so the user experience doesn't change and there would have been far less resistance. Win8 is going to re-do the user experience all over again. While that's fine for kids and home folks who want to play, it is totally NOT fine for enterprises that simply use a computer to get a job done. The computer is a tool, not the end product and MS needs to remember that.

  • R
    3 months ago
    Feb 01, 2012

    @Wibble & Ed B,

    I think you both make some excellent & practical points. I mean no insult to Paul, and other I/T columnists, but they just don't get it. Companies will move when the cost vs benefit ratio is on their side, not a vendor's. It's up to each individual business to weigh the pros & cons of upgrading.

  • The Bro
    3 months ago
    Feb 01, 2012

    Some companies are still installing XP, you say? Heck, to some, XP IS an upgrade -- I had the opportunity to tour a manufacturing facility recently and was taken aback to see Windows 2000 screensavers bouncing around the screens.
    Gee, talk about prying it from their cold, dead hands!

  • Wibble
    3 months ago
    Feb 01, 2012

    At the end of the day, business exists for its own ends, not as a Microsoft piggy bank. XP's fine, works, where's the business case for upgrading given the considerable cost?

    Interesting that (some) HP printer drivers are still not available for Vista & Windows 7 -- available for XP though.

You must log on before posting a comment.

Are you a new visitor? Register Here