Why I Block IE6 and Why You Should Consider Doing the Same

When Internet Explorer 6 came out in 2001, it was a huge step forward for the browsing world. Sadly, while the long-living browser still commands a strong contingent of users, it has outlived its welcome for at least 5 years. Nowadays, the nearly 8 year old browser still continues to be a thorn in side of web developers. When I redesigned my site this past January, I was unwilling to commit to the time it would take to make IE6 fully compatible with the design and unorthodox elements on the site. I had a choice of allowing visitors using IE6 to have a downgraded version of the site (which would take time in and of itself to implement) or to block them altogether. I chose the latter and I am writing why I think it is a reasonable decision.

Objects At Rest…

Many users on the internet have no problem browsing on IE6. Most sites work just the same on their outdated browsers as they do on its modern counterparts. This gives the general public no reason to move on. However, there is a reason why most sites still work on that browser — it is because web developers spend an extraordinarily unproportionate amount of their time making sure it does. As long as people’s favorite sites continue to work for them with their browser of choice, there is no reason for them to move on. This may be a foreign concept to many of us, but there are plenty of people that operate this way — explaining the 10%-20% of users (depending on the statistics you believe) that still use it. In a way, this noble pursuit from the standards movement to push for backwards compatibility has caused this this nasty side-effect.

Web developers feel like they must support IE6 because it still constitutes a large segment of the user population. IE6 still constitutes a large segment of the population because web developers still support IE6. It is a vicious cycle that really is not doing anyone in the equation any good. In my opinion, by not blocking IE6 or at least making it very clear that it is unsupported, it is essentially continuing the notion that IE6 is a relevant browser. A bit of education and an adequate nudge in the right direction would do both parties a lot of good. Instead of trying to make IE6 users have the least sub-par experience possible, why not help them actually have a good experience?

Time Well Spent?

The more complex sites become, the more code they need to contain in order to support legacy browsers. My question is if that is worthy of our attention. For some sites, it most certainly is. However, for others, it is taking valuable hours away from improving the experience of the site for the majority of users on modern browsers. Even the process of creating and testing downgraded versions of the site for older browsers takes significant time. It’s just another task to juggle and manage when adding new pages/features. Ultimately, it just does not seem to pan out to spend 30% of one’s time trying to put a square peg in a round hole for 10% of your audience. There are an increasing number of sites that have decided not to fully support IE6, but do not actively block it either. That is a reasonable decision, however I find some fault in it. No matter how good the messaging is, if users come to your site and it looks broken, it will reflect poorly on your site. Better to block it altogether and ensure all users that can view the site see it perfectly.

This is what you'll get on this site with IE6.

This is what you'll get on this site with IE6.

For my site in particular, I wanted to try out some new Flash/HTML interactions in addition to some relatively unique Javascript UI experiments. Whether it could run in IE6 seemed unimportant. Frankly, a large portion of the site is about those types of things — it’s my business. This site is not some strange exception of the rule, there are plenty of sites out there that are interested in offering unique experiences while still desiring to semantically correct and standards-friendly. Those sites should rather work on refining the experience on modern browsers while aiding in the migration to compatible browsers than keeping back the majority’s experience for legacy browsers. Sites that the public depends on for information, such as government sites, should by no means block anyone. However, sites that are attempting to push new UI paradigms and experiences should at least consider the idea. If a site is in the business of a next-gen experience, not only does browsers like IE6 not fit in the picture, viewing a such a site in such a browser could lessen the image/brand of the site.

A One-Time-Only Rule

There are some inherent problems with my train of thought. For one, this route makes information inaccessible to a segment of the population — which flies right in the face of what the internet should be all about. Secondly, not all people have control over their browsing experience. Lastly, this type of thinking can easily spin out of control by simply not supporting any browser that proves to pose compatibility issues. However, let me try to explain why I think IE6 is a unique case.

I would argue, however, that IE6 is different than other legacy browsers because it is lingering. It just refuses to go away unlike almost all of its predecessors. Secondly IE6 was basically the last major pre-standards browser and it had no significant updates that improved its standards support. Sure, IE7 has its issues, but it is nothing like its older brother. Basically, all browsers coming out at least have decent support for standards, with most doing a very good job of it. IE6 is the last browser still standing that falls outside of these parameters. The faster we can push it out the door and forget it ever happened, the better off we will all be. That being said, with the way browsers are designed, I do not foresee any reasonable justification to pull this trick back out once IE6 bites the dust.

Alternative Methods

Even though I see it as the most effective method, blocking IE6 is not the only way to go about solving this issue. Ultimately, I am aware that blocking any traffic to one’s site can be seen as wasteful. There are other ways to get the idea across while being less drastic. One way would be to block IE6 users once a week on a consistent day with a clear explanation of when and why. Another option is to simply disable as much CSS and Javascript as is possible without hampering core functionality. Such a move would most definitely get the attention of users while not keeping them from your content.

Ultimately, this idea is obviously not for everyone. However, it was a huge relief for me to know that I had the freedom to try some new ideas on this site without having to figure out a way to make it work in legacy browsers. At this point in time, the majority of users are using browsers that more or less get it right. I think it is about time to cater directly to that majority.

The Discussion

27 Comments

  • Nice post, and agreed fully. IE6 should die a quick death. I also doubt that you, like other bloggers posting similar material to yours, have many IE6 visitors. I’d bet, similar to my visitors, most are on Firefox.

  • Actually Chris, you would be surprised – I get roughly 10% of my traffic from IE6 – just have a look at the stats. I think a better argument is the quality of the traffic from IE6. Most traffic from that browser hit my tags pages by random search queries. So,in terms of real traffic from that browser, you’re right – it’s next to nothing.

  • I think going out of your way and spending time and effort to actively ban users that don’t conform to your mindset is a bit childish and spiteful and not really what the web is about. Banning people is anti-social and anti-accessibility whichever way you look at it.

    I doubt many people still choose ie6 by choice, but many who use it are likely restricted by workplace IT policy. I prefer not to be judgemental and uninclusive about people I have never met, I’m not convinced an uncompromising and deliberately obstructive response to a visitor encourages anything constructive for them or yourself.

    Spread -love- not hate. If you must be a zealot, persuade why the alternatives are good, instead of focusing on negativity via an imposed restriction

  • I can definitely see your position Mike, although my decision to block them is not do to me judging them. For myself, it simply comes down to the fact that I cannot ensure a proper experience on this site of browsers like IE6 with the time and resources. I rather avoid circumstances where users get a subpar, half-working site on older browsers – because I feel, no matter how you spin it, it reflects poorly on the site.

    Ultimately, if you are ultimately educating the user while blocking them, I do not see the problem. Like I mentioned though, not all folks are going to be cool with this approach, which I completely understand.

  • Simple. You design a standards-compliant, valid sites. And don’t worry about IE6. Just charge clients extra for IE6 support.

  • My company recently stopped supporting IE6 by default. We charge clients extra if they “need” IE6 supported and it’s saving us and our clients money.

  • @cssProdigy – For many, that works just fine, I just wonder about the concern of allowing the site to appear broken on legacy browsers.

    @Shawn – I think that is a wise decision. There are plenty of sites that not only should, but need to support legacy browsers, however that extra work needs to be accounted for in terms of budgeting. I’m glad to see shops doing that.

  • I absolutely agree with the principle, but I wouldn’t have said blocking users from the site is a great way to do it. A warning throughout the site should be just as possible? Telling the less technically minded people how to check what version they are running and how to upgrade?

  • I absolutely agree. With my new redesign on my design service website, I do not intend on spending the time to make it compatible for IE6 viewers. It’s not the target audience, anyways.

  • Good post. I’ve been hateing on it for several years now. The big problem as I see it is that a lot of companies have invested deeply in IE6 compatbility for their intranet etc. So for them it’s a mattter money. As a above comment suggested you should just charge extra for the service of making things compatible with IE6, I usually charge a day or two extra for making the site look in it, that usually makes easy for customers to drop it!

  • I intend to go the route of charging for ie6 support as soon as ie8 comes out. I can’t wait for the day, ie6 is a thorn for sure.

  • I agree that charging for the extra time it takes makes sense. On a recent site I built ( http://www.shair.it/ ) I did the basics to make it look OK in IE6 and then I added on a bar along the top of the site which recommends users to upgrade. Nothing should be unusable but people can’t complain about the cosmetic issues because they have something tellng them exactly why they are happening…

  • p.s. at least no-one is worrying about IE5.5 any more! No more box model hacks!!

  • I have no problem with forcing IE6 users to update. It’s hard to argue with numbers- and if the majority of users going to your site are not using IE6- then sorry IE6 users- it’s time to upgrade. You’ve had plenty of time and here is an opportunity to get current. As you pointed out, have a half-assed experience reflects far worse. At least you are being courteous enough to enlighten them and point them in the right direction.

    Here’s an example to support your article- do you hear anyone developing for Flash 7? No, because the majority of users are now using 9. Why is the majority using 9- because of detection methods that are widely used to help users upgrade so that they can experience the site the way it was intended, with the correct plugin. By doing this, you give users the choice- and if they want the content- then they need to upgrade.

    What i would suggest is putting analytics on your upgrade button and see how many IE6 users enter- and then upgrade. Then maybe add a follow-up to let us all know if you are on the money.

  • IE6 is a fully functional browser with more capabilities than most.

    Its foibles and failings are all well known and documented AND TAKE NO SIGNIFICANT EFFORT TO OVERCOME.

    Similarly, I make the majority of my flash be Flash v7 because that has the widest support and costs me nothing.

    This basically a troll post, because it’s inflammatory and is geared to illicit responses (and comments) – get over it.
    IE is just one of many frigging annoying browsers, at least IT’S failings are clear and well known. Why isnt everyone bitching about IE7 (full of misc crap-behaviour) or do you feel all is well because IE7 now supports transparency?? (PNGs)

  • I’ll mention blocking IE6 (or just making it look nasty) to my CEO next time I see him. I’m sure the $50m we’ll lose in revenue from IE6 users a year won’t be an issue.

    Yes, great from a ‘theoretical’ point of view if you’ve got a blog, though as mentioned people hobbled by workplace installations of IE6 don’t have a choice to upgrade.

    In the real world when every dollar counts then this is a childish and naive view.

    And as a developer I’m happy that there are minimal tweaks or fixes required for IE6 to work for a normal website. Yes, bleeding edge may not work.

    Thankfully IE5.5 is not used as much these days….

  • @matt shaw – I think you’re right with needing to be explicit as possible in the upgrade process. At this point, many of those running IE6 are the least technically-minded of the bunch.

    @Adelore Lessard – Agreed. For some, IE6 may still be a target audience, but for many, like myself, it just is not.

    @Martin and Shawn Makinson – Charging extra seems more than reasonable considering how much work it can take to get modern interfaces to work in that browser.

    @Kelvin Luck – I think in a perfect world, that’s the way to go.

    @Sean B – For all the knocking people do to Flash, it has some amazing things going for it. The adoption rate for new versions is absolutely silly. Flash Player 10 hit 55% by December 2008. That’s just crazy.

    @mark – I think your arguments are a bit subjective. For basic sites, you’re absolutely right, it is not too hard to get it to work in IE6. However, for more complex UI designs and interactive models, it can be tremendously difficult, if not impossible to get something to work in IE6 without significantly compromising the original design.

    @Scooby – Like I said, not all sites should adopt such an issue. I don’t expect Google or Yahoo to block IE6 tomorrow. But there are plenty of sites, like mine, that don’t depend on IE6 users for money or a large portion of ‘quality traffic’. It just depends on each site.

  • About time alot of people start blocking IE6 nothing more to say.

  • Oh, damnable IE6 (and 7 and 8 for that matter, sigh) On my own recent site redesign, I had to resort to a number of tricks to get it to work in these browsers. In order of difficulty, Safari and FF were relatively easy (although believe it or not I needed some specific code for FF on PC vs Mac), followed by a bunch of special css and hacks for the IE (dysfunctional) family. Why in this day and age can’t MS make a standards compliant browser?

  • It is a shame that people are still using IE6. I know that only a small percentage of world computer users are literate on upgrading their systems, considering the ease of use of system update tools, but for people like us, web developers, is a pain to have to consider rewriting perfectly usable code, just to have to fulfill the duty of being available to every single platform and browser.

  • There is nothing “easy” about fixing a site to work with IE6 like was mentioned above. My last site required 3 js files to make my dropdown menu work and still look correct(kinda). I think the people who say it is “easy” make very simple sites with no more interaction than a link to the next page.

  • I really hate to create multiple css files for all the ie versions, and usually just css will not be enough as zak mentioned.. morover, IE has this trend of not rendering things the way it should..

    I can use doctypes to avoid much trouble in IE 7, but I wish IE6 would just disappear..i think web developers should get together and build a super IE6 specific virus that can exploit IE 6′s many loopholes and push users to stop using it ..

  • By and large it seems to be only lazy webmasters who can’t be bothered to make a reasonable effort to keep their sites backward compatible with respect to popular older browsers; and why is it that there is so much angst simply because IE6 doesn’t play well with some of their new toys? Besides; IE7 [A popup blocker! Whoopie!] looks like they tried to clone Firefox; what with the Google toolbar and similar forward & back buttons.]

    Exhibit A: 38 Errors, 15 warning(s)

    http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http%3A//somerandomdude.com/articles/opinion/why-i-block-ie6/&ss=&outline=

    Long Live IE6!

  • I charge $500 for ANY IE6 fix. This is a major discouragement to my clients but once they understand the reasoning behind the cost, they most often can’t justify the expense.

    I have turned away business simply because the client wanted their site to work in IE5.5 and 6. They wanted pixel perfection but were not willing to pay my premium.

    I say it’s time for change. Let’s help bring the web into the future.

  • I am blocking IE6 and hoping to make a few dollars while doing it. There are choices in life.

    http://www.explorerdestroyer.com

  • Youtube have now phased out support for IE6 – good for them :D

  • Being that it has been almost three years since this article was published, what was the deciding factor in enabling IE6 users to view your website.? I just happened to be on a ie6 test VM when I came across your post.

Leave Your Own Comment