A Remedy for Agency Browser Statements

24 July 04

Better browser statements to benefit everybody!

I recently perused my online financial accounts and noticed that every one of these Web sites had some kind of statement indicating their site was best viewed using Netscape or Internet Explorer browsers, versions 4.x or later. I’ve even noticed this with countless numbers of city, state, and federal Web sites as well, with little variation. For example, here is one from a particular credit card company:

“You may need to update your browser. We suggest Netscape version 4.08 or higher or Internet Explorer version 4.0 or higher. For Macintosh users, we suggest Internet Explorer version 4.5 or higher.”

Sometimes these statement ramble-on further about the importance of 128-bit encryption and try and/or provide additional information about why a user might be having trouble interacting with the site.

I could perhaps understand if we were several years back in time before many of the newer browsers were big on the scene, and most likely these statements were in fact written that long ago, but to see these same statements today is discouraging.

First, one has to wonder why those earlier versions of NN and IE are even mentioned at all; they have practically zero relevance to the online world anymore, and the shear mention of them does nothing to help encourage users to upgrade. “_Oh, so-and-so [bank, credit lender, government agency, etc] says I should be using NN4 or up. Heck, I have NN4, I guess I don’t have to do anything._�

When you think about how many people in just the U.S. alone use the Web sites of financial institutions and state/federal agencies, then the potential for “seeding� a better notion about browser version is tremendous.

Another problem with these statements is they do not mention any of the other better browsers available. The real issue here is often the need to use a browser that accommodates 128-bit encryption, but there’s more browsers out there that can do that than just NN or IE. Sure the average user may not even know about such great browsers as Firefox or Opera, or even use an Apple computer where the wonderful Safari browser can be had, but these statement are not doing anything to help enlighten users otherwise.

Here’s an alternative statement that could be used instead, while still allowing for all the backwards compatibility issues that agency sites are so afraid of:

“If you’re having trouble viewing this site, or you’re system seems to be reacting slowly, you may need to update your browser. We suggest any of the following compliant browsers which are FREE to download: Firefox, Opera, Netscape, Internet Explorer,…[etc.]… For Macintosh users, we suggest…[the relevant, new browsers].”

Now let’s look at this modified statement and consider why this is better.

First, it’s not going into great length trying to troubleshoot problems for users, it’s simply saying if your browser is slow or the page looks funny, we suggest you get one of these better browsers that are free. When a Web site tries to cover all the possible reasons for a user why their Web site is not working, they just open themselves up for a barrage of e-mails and phone calls about why their troubleshooting techniques don’t work (or about why the instructions don’t make sense). It’s much better to keep the solution simple–update, upgrade, etc.!

Also, the use of the word “compliant� is for a reason; it’s not only correct to use it, and with good intention, but it’s also a strong, enforcing word, which might encourage a user to act.

Next, note that for all of the browsers mentioned (and any others that could be), there’s no reference to a particular version—there’s no need to! Simply pointing users to a browser’s Web site will expose them to the latest version of any given browser, which likely eliminates confusion about what version they need.

Also, note the word “free,� which is always a powerful influence. And even more, note the order the browsers are listed in the statement, this too has an encouraging effect on a user about what to upgrade to; put the most compliant browser names first.

So here is what it comes down to, if you are a content author/editor for a Web site having such a dated statement, consider these points for change: Keep your statement simple and direct; avoid talk of “128-bit encryption” and browser version numbers, stick with browser names only. Also, make mention of other compliant browsers available, the world doesn’t revolve around two browsers anymore. Finally, use words that have an impact (encourage user action), such as “compliant,” “upgrade,” and “free.”

With a little more help from our financial and government kin, who interface with thousands of users daily, maybe we could facilitate the leveraging of more compliant browsers into mainstream use. That would be good for everybody...agencies, users, and designers alike.