Mark Kent wrote:
Mark Kent <mark.kent@xxxxxxxxxxx> espoused:
Philip <none@xxxxxxxxxxx> espoused:
Roy Schestowitz wrote:
Firefox reaches 18 percent of corporate desktops
,----[ Quote ]
| This number will seem low to those who have seen higher numbers elsewhere
| (for example, as high as 30 percent in Europe). This simply reflects the bias
| of the report toward formal enterprise adoption, a route that Mozilla has
| explicitly not taken. Basically, Firefox is not an alternate universe into
| which you will be banished.
`----
http://www.news.com/8301-10784_3-9907299-7.html?part=rss&tag=feed&subj=NewsBlog
In my company, we are seeing Firefox as a bridging technology to help us
move from IE6 to IE7. Because of MS' stupid maneuver of embedding IE in
the OS, the roll back to IE6 is really bad. So Firefox is used to help
those that get stuck on IE7 until the internal apps fully support IE7.
Ah, so you're using Firefox to rescue you from a dumb design decision
some time ago, ie., to couple your "internal" apps to closely to IE6,
so that when Microsoft released IE7, it caused all kinds of problems
for your *users*, you know, the poor folk you push this stuff onto.
Not content with having made the mistake once, linking all your
applications to IE6, you're now *repeating the same mistake* by linking
them all to IE7. Frankly, I would have strong sympathy with your poor
users if they formed a lynch-mob as an education exercise for their
apparently terminally stupid admins and internal ICT support folk.
The *sensible* choice would be, *stay with Firefox*, where things
work *without* changing your apps. If you're very very lucky (and no
ICT department should be relying on /luck/ as a design choice), then
Firefox will be around to save your jobs again when IE8 comes along.
If you're not lucky, then maybe you should brush up your CV just in case.
That was meant to be you in the plural, not personal polite.
You intent is understood. Personally I agree with you, but I have to
work with these Luddites.
|
|
