To me, supporting IE (and IE6 specifically) is comparable to selling a product in China (assuming you live in the USA). The market is huge and enticing, but it can be more costly when all is said and done.
Some people say that you absolutely must support IE because an overwhelming number of people still use it. It is true that close to 85% of all US websurfers use one version of IE. The important questions though, how many people have ACCESS TO FIREFOX OR A MAC, what is the likelihood or expense of getting them to convert (to FIREFOX or another browser or a MAC) and what is the expense associated with artificially supporting an inferior browser.
1. Access to IE.
Everyone has access to FIREFOX other than people whose computer comes loaded with IE are not allowed to download anything because of a system admin. Basically, people on company computers, that are not MACS, and are not allowed to download ANYTHING.
2. Converting
Downloading FIREFOX takes about 2 minutes and is free. There is Chrome and Safari too. All free. All easy. Enough said.
3. Cost...
What is the cost of supporting an inferior browser like IE6 and IE in general. Is it really worth it at the end of the day-
The cost of supporting IE can be higher than you might think. There are direct costs involved with bug checking, testing pages etc. There are costs associated with the fact that the site just looks better in other browsers. Then the costs are increased considering FF will pay you (as of last year, not sure if they do anymore) to convert users.
So while conventional wisdom says that it is a no brainer to spend the extra money to get your product in the hands of a huge market, it might not be as black and white as it seems. Just like with any subsidy, webmasters who pay for the development of IE6 compatible sites are adding costs and removing efficiency from a market. Does Microsoft really need to be subsidized?
For the reasons listed above we support the project "iE6 no more" and, frankly, wish we had initiated it ourselves:)
