Online Retailer Imposes First Ever Web Browser Tax

[Iron Criterion]

hope this catches on, maybe if all websites become like this it will force my college to upgrade their fucking browsers once in a while i think they are still using the same version that came with the damn os and while they are at it they could install flash

There's only one thing for it - break in and update their antiquated software.

 

[Buizel91]

Loving how people are rushing to the conclusion of "durr hurr, this r good idear becuz IE lolol".

Question: How many of you still run an outdated copy of Firefox? Or Chrome? Or, hell, an outdated Windows/Mac OS? Perhaps a slightly out of date antiviral program? Would you still think this is a great idea if they were penalizing you for running those?

Chrome updates automatically for me, i think it does for everyone.

I think it's because IE7 is ancient and is hard to make websites for now, older versions of Firefox aren't a problem i think. They can't be unless they would have used the Tax thing for them as well.

 

[Iron Criterion]

Loving how people are rushing to the conclusion of "durr hurr, this r good idear becuz IE lolol".

Question: How many of you still run an outdated copy of Firefox? Or Chrome? Or, hell, an outdated Windows/Mac OS? Perhaps a slightly out of date antiviral program? Would you still think this is a great idea if they were penalizing you for running those?

It's a terrible idea. It'd be far easier for them to just stop supporting IE7. They did this for the publicity, and to try to make some free coin off of people who are likely unaware of how to upgrade their network software or have the inclination to do so. I know plenty of places that use older systems for a variety of reasons, and while it's true that such systems are less secure, they're also more familiar to older users. Not everyone is young and tech-savvy and able to keep up with the rapid curve of software upgrades compared to normal products they purchase.

Bottom line: this is a dick move and I hope it ends up hurting their wallets in the long run. And it's a damn shame that people are so quick to proclaim any sort of additional tax that gets between a consumer and a product as a "good idea", as if people don't get screwed by companies enough.

Do you know what type of retailer kogan is? It is a technology retailer. So I'd like to think that the majority of people browsing a technology website are savvy enough to install a new fucking browser.

And as technology progresses older technology will be left behind - it's hard to make websites work for IE7 so it has had its day. I don't see this as 'punishing the customer', more speeding up the long overdue death of IE7.

 

[MASTACHIEFPWN]

I never thought I'd see people actually embrace the idea of a company telling you what software you should/should not use. The hypocrisy, it is delicious.

Agreed to the highest possible extent.
The only reason people are supporting this is because of the stupid browser elitist war.
For fuck's sake it's pointless.

But people should put it into perspective, The number probably isn't high for users of IE 7 on that website, but say you went to a website and were taxed for using your primary browser. That's what I'm getting out of this.
Great way to usher in a Monopoly.

 

[Flatfrog]

ak93]Maybe they will finally get a good version of IE... that's my hope at least...

Is there really such a thing?

My gut anti-IE instinct has been struggling against IE9 which seems so far to be excellent. Just as good standards compliance as Chrome or Firefox, better development tools, clean and easy to use. Obviously they've nicked the best ideas from their competitors as always, but they've done a good job on the whole. I've gone off Chrome quite a bit - it crashes a lot, especially with Java, and it has a terrible habit of running about a hundred simultaneous processes on my machine.

 

[Dark Togashi]

Let's hear Fox News spin this!

Since you asked so nicely, here you go:

"Online retailer imposes 6.8% surcharge on people using outdated software in an effort to cut costs of maintaining support for legacy systems"

You're welcome.

More along the of:

"Obama imposes 6.8% surcharge on people using outdated software because he hates America and kicks puppies for fun"

 

[SenseOfTumour]

I'd suggest it's better than just not supporting it, because tech-illiterate customers who came to the site would just get an error and either assume the computer was broken or the site had gone away.

Also, it's not even anti IE, they're just saying get a browser from this century, because it costs us money to support IE7, and we'd like to not have to.

It also gets them publicity, which is rarely a bad thing.

 

[Ashannon Blackthorn]

This is a terrible idea. Now companies are going to see this, see that people are actually willing to pay the tax, and say "Well, if they'll pay it then, we can carry out our own on-line tax! And we can tax ALL the browsers!"

Death of internet shopping, here we come.

Hi Mr.Slippery Slope Arguement, I'd like you to meet Bertinian, Bertinain, Mr. Slippery Slope.

 

[AWAR]

I'm actually curious as to how many people can still use such a crap browser. Considering there are a lot of infinitely better options at the low low cost of "free".

Easy: Technologically inept people.

 

[Dryk]

Why not just drop all support for IE7? It accomplishes the same goal of forcing people to upgrade or to go elsewhere, so why not?

And the only correct answer is: because this way allows them to make more money. That makes it a dick move, no matter how you try to explain it away as mere "progress".

That's the beauty of it though, rather than outright forcing people to upgrade or go elsewhere they still have the choice of using their outdated browser, they just have to chip in for the ridiculous development costs.

The slippery slope argument works for outright lack of support too, and yet most people aren't blocking people from their sites because they don't have a browser they like.