PushUpTheWeb: Who Am I To Tell My Readers They Should Upgrade Their Browsers?
by
on July 29, 2008,
Dion Alamaer over at Ajaxian reports about a new service that is intended for any website owner to be able to detect the browser version of any visitor and suggest an upgrade if needed. PushUpTheWeb (that's the name of the service) is self-described by its creator as an "effort to push the web forward by helping users update their outdated browsers". The service is available for Internet Explorer, Firefox, Safari, and Opera.
Basically, when a user visits a site that has PushUpTheWeb script installed, he is prompted to upgrade to the latest version with a link that will take the user to the upgrade page for the respective browser (or the user can choose to be reminded later). As of this writing the service is used on 9 domains known to its creator (the site chose to report this right on the homepage) and invites other sites as well, obviously.
I do not see any business model behind the service now - this is the relatively rare case when a web 2.0 product can't even be monetized with ads (unless they choose to add advertising to the "subtle" link prompting for the upgrade - which sounds too bad to ever become reality). The only thing the company can rely on is donations from webmasters who choose to install it.
But I definitely see a number of problems for the service ever to be able to gain adoption on any significant number of websites. My concerns are about how our readers will feel about these reminders without any possibility to opt out. I am sure our readers will be hugely disappointed and this is probably true for many other publishers as well.
First of all, some people tend to stick to their older browser versions for a reason of their own - and here I don't even give them a chance to say: "Thank you, I am aware I am on an old browser but I actually want to keep it this way."
Another thing is that blog readers and users of a huge number of web applications are already often annoyed by the ads we push into their faces right when they enter (and no, I won't go again into the compensation for blog owners topic). So I can only imagine that using this browser upgrade reminder in addition to ads will annoy users even further - and may even raise serious privacy concerns from users.
And the final concern is about why would any webmaster or, say, blog owner want to install this script at all? The only niche audience I see are software manufacturers that may need to make their potential users upgrade their browser before they will be able to use the product itself. But this does not look like a huge audience to me. The rest of us are supposed to do it out of general good will to help more internet users migrate to a newer browser. But why should I care about what my visitors use to browse the web if they choose to stop by here? I am invariably thankful for them coming at first place and I don't care if they are on a new browser or an old one or if they access Profy from 5-years-old desktop PC or a fancy new MacBook Pro. I am happy they (you) stop by and by no means I am going to irritate them if I can avoid that.
If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to profy RSS feed!
major
raj
CopyrightLawSucks 
kwarren84 
Michael Fidler 
Jaime A. Restrepo 
Yolanda
I’m sorry, Svetlana, but I totally disagree. It’s a smart developer who forces the upgrade issue. Many users don’t upgrade simply because they don’t like change, and it becomes impossible to keep a web site backward compatible with every browser out there merely to keep a small portion of the audience happy. IE is probably the worst offender when it comes to changing how design renders, and adds a significant amount of time and development cost to an app when you have to test it in every possible version of the browser that users might have. From a business standpoint, does it really make sense to add that development time and cost on because of stubborn users?
The reason that Firefox is considered by many to be the most secure browser is because it constantly prods users to upgrade when fixes are made. It makes sense.
Cyndy, I don’t see any reason for you to be sorry about the disagreement - it is obvious that we may disagree on some subjects. I see your point perfectly well but I also see that the small developers who can not afford maintaining their sites to support every single browser version in existence already drive upgrades - simply by not supporting some browser versions. What I really don’t like about the service is that it does not offer any ability for a user to opt out and tell to the website owner clearly that you have no intention of upgrading (for whatever reason you may have and however it may restrain internet growth and development). Otherwise there may well be sites that will need the service to prompt their users to upgrade if they don’t support the versions these users are on - I just don’t think it should be this intrusive. I just think that no matter how stubborn a user is, he is entitled to use the browser that he is happy with - unless he actually wants to use a service that needs him to upgrade. And if the service is needed, he will most certainly upgrade.
And by the way, were not you the one recently damaged by one of Firefox security updates?
I like it - it’s one of those things where we spent an exorbitantly large amount of developer and designer time with Tatango just for getting the site looking perfect for the five users who’re still hanging around on IE5.5.
We could adopt Apple’s Me position of straight denying users, or even doing something similar to PushUpTheWeb ourselves - “Hey, looks like you’re using a really old browser, you should upgrade!”.
The problem there is that users would wonder why they should even use our site if we refuse to support them, but if it becomes a widespread thing, the chances of users upgrading become better.
I agree on the opt-out thing, and since it’s all handled centrally, it would be simple to opt out of it on one site, and never again see it on any of the other sites that might be using PUTW.
Svetlana.
It might be a good thing that there’s no “business model behind the service”. Perhaps PushUp are doing this for the dream of a better website World, for all of us to enjoy..?
Why does EVERYTHING need to have “monetisation” potential..? Sometimes people have a passion so real that money is worthless.
Is it a crime now to spend your own time & money promoting your beliefs..? I think the crime should be turned towards those using outdated, inferior and vulnerable browsers (where there is no legitimate reason to do so).
In many cases of casual Internet browsing, users are unaware that new browser updates are available. So the “invasion of privacy” argument can certainly be weighed against the “free security advice” that PushUp’s service provides.
And let’s remember, this service is a free “option” available to people who are passionate about modern browser standards. No-one is forcing webmasters to use it. So if a webmaster or a blogger believes enough to use it, that’s their choice.
So good on yous PushUp..! I think it’s an awesome “option”, made available free-of-charge, for anyone who CHOOSES to promote browser standards.
I agree with Svetlana in regards to the “opt out” option. But hey, if PushUp develop and improve their offering it comes at their own time and expense (since it’s not “monetised”). So I won’t hold that against them.
PS - I truly hope there’s no shifty, dodgey, monetisation or maliscious issues with PushUp, cause I want to believe that they just believe in a better web World.
I also disagree, Svetlana. we need apps like this to force people to be standards complaint. Cyndy et al are correct here, IMO
@Adrian: I understand your concerns about the users who may be hesitant of using your service since you refuse to support them or rather make them upgrade. But why would you expect services like PushUpTheWeb to become a widespread practice if even you are not willing to install it while you sure need to push your users up? I think the only way it can grow at all (and by the way, the grew by 51 domain since me writing this post) is by installations of those software manufacturers and developers of web apps that really need it themselves.
And glad you see that the opt out is badly needed – and it’s a good idea that it should be centralized so that a user could never be reminded of it if he is sure he does not want to upgrade for a reason.
@dawnprofies: You know, monetization model was not my biggest concerns – it is just usual when we review various services for the first time to mention if they have any revenue potential or not, nothing more. My biggest concerns are in intrusive nature of the service and in lack of the ability to opt out. I don’t think this is a huge product that takes lots of money to support – it is definitely simple enough and could really be developed to help build a better online world, no worries about that. If that is the case and if they are ready to develop the service further to take the concerns stated here into account, I’m all for it. I just stated my thoughts as a blogger while I admit there are plenty of cases when admins may very much need such services (see the example described by Adrian above – even though he does not seem to be all that willing to use it himself).
@Leslie: I’m not sure that compliance to standards should be achieved by web admins. Instead I think that such actions should be taken by the developers of the browsers themselves. Look at Cyndy’s example with Firefox – they simply push new stable versions to you when they are ready. And if standards matter and security is important, why don’t the rest of the group follow the same pattern? Why do they expect everyone else to push their products to higher versions instead of doing it themselves?
You could add the opt-out option since this is open-source, seems like a couple lines of extra code. I guess that will make it in eventualy through user contribution since not everyone wants to push it that far.
@wastedyouth: Thank you for the advice, since I’m not a developer myself I did not think it was that easy to add opt-out functionality to this service. But I believe that if we are thinking about a general opt-out feature on all the sites that use PushUp, I believe it should be done centrally as well by the PushUp developer.
and I also disagree. how else can you introduce a better browsing experience, if not by making better websites + educating the users that they are missing out on something. the website creators are the most responsible for the web, because THEY MAKE IT
@N.R. We make the internet? Really? I actually think that we participate in making the internet for Google to use to earn their huge revenue. Maybe that’s paranoya, though.
But I can imagine Google plastering all of their websites with “you need to upgrade your current browser to Chrome because it is better, faster and more reliable” - it will be incredibly funny, sure.
I agree that you shouldn’t try to tell users what browser to use. Just because the user is using an old version doesn’t mean that they can upgrade. Opera and Firefox had more platform support in previous versions (Firefox 1.5 supported the most platforms through ports AFAIK). On older platforms, Internet Explorer 4 and 5 are the most modern web browsers available. A lot of IE6 users are at businesses or other places where they simply cannot upgrade their browser. It is the administrator’s job. And many businesses have local Intranet software that depends on IE6, meaning that software can’t be easily upgraded.
Instead, a page needs to gracefully degrade in browsers. I sometimes use simple browsers, such as Links2 -g or Dillo when I am connected to a slow wifi network for instance. Even though I have access to more modern web browsers, I do not want to have to wait for another browser. Other users may still be on slower computers that only support these web browsers, or even on a mobile device.
–Posted with Kazehakase 0.5.2 (Gecko based) with Links2 -g a virtual desktop away–
@Jake: Thank you for the comment, you seem to be the first one to support me about this. And the arguments you mention are absolutely reasonable and should definitely be taken into consideration - people may fail to upgrade for a whole range of reasons, not just because they are too stubborn to use something newer.
I think this is a very handy tool. It’s hardly intrusive so if you don’t want to upgrade you can just ignore the message - it goes away after a few seconds!! If you are that concerned you can block cookies and the message won’t disply. I’m using it on my site and have had good feedback from it.