Should the API even show Internet Explorer as an option to visitors that are using Windows XP with features that require IE9+?
I suppose we could do that, also for Firefox 3.6 on Mac users who use Tiger or below? I am not sure where to draw the line tho :/
Perhaps we should take a second look at the support/recommendation matrix we're assuming and flesh that out a little.
For IE/XP, I agree that it doesn't really make sense to show IE9+ if it requires a complete OS-upgrade, or perhaps we do show it but add a note/icon related to the OS needed.
I guess this also relates back to whether or not we should consider #47 (Chrome Frame) for oldIE (which is relevant if IE9 isn't being shown).
There is no realistic chance Windows XP users will ever see IE9 because Microsoft made a deliberate decision to use Direct2D APIs which are not available in that legacy operating system.
Microsoft Windows XP Internet Explorer users are in a unique position that requires a financial commitment on their part to update their web browser.
I'm unsure if it would be bias of us to tell IE users to switch browsers rather than follow the upgrade path Microsoft has requested of them. Or, is it in the users best interest to provide for them the shortest path to success?
I would say it would be in their best interests to suggest the shortest path to success, but..others may disagree :)
+1 for shortest path.