DEV Community

Discussion on: How does your web dev team decide on browser support?

Collapse
 
isaacdlyman profile image
Isaac Lyman

I feel like there are two sides to this one. There are a lot of questions that technical management asks themselves, but only one question that they should be asking.

Questions they ask:

  • Who are our users? (To be fair, a lot of B2B companies are forced to support old versions of Internet Explorer because they have enterprise customers who give their employees super locked-down computers and won't invest the money to update them.)
  • What does our competition do?
  • What kind of development resources do we have? (If you're a big company that moves slowly anyway, legacy browser support may seem like an easy win because it doesn't require a lot of creativity or debate.)
  • What will our egos allow?
  • Do we need a monopoly? (If you're Google Search or Facebook, you have to support IE5 because your ability to sell ads at a premium is extremely dependent on your dominance in the market. But you're probably not Google or Facebook.)
  • How complex is our front end? (If you're willing to be Craigslist, then heck, you can support Netscape Navigator. On the other hand, if you want a shiny, cutting-edge single-page app with cool animations and complex interactions, it's hard to support non-evergreen browsers. You either have to pick one or spend a lot of money.)

What they should be asking:

  • What's the marginal cost of supporting another browser, versus the marginal benefit of gaining people who use that browser as prospective customers?

If you're doing analytics, you can see exactly what browsers your users and prospects are using, and if you know what each user is worth, you can determine if it's worth the cost of supporting their legacy browsers. It comes down to a subtraction problem.

In many cases, Chrome + Firefox will net you 75% or more of your potential market in one fell swoop. So that's something to think about.