Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 24th Sep 2009 19:17 UTC
Internet Explorer Earlier this week, Google launched Chrome Frame, a plugin for Internet Explorer 6/7/8 which replaces the Trident rendering engine with Chrome's rendering and JavaScript engine for better performance and superior standards compliance. Microsoft has responded to this release, claiming it makes Internet Explorer less secure. Note: What database category do I put this in? Internet Explorer? Google? Choices, choices!
Thread beginning with comment 386110
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: Comment by Kroc
by Ford Prefect on Thu 24th Sep 2009 23:32 UTC in reply to "RE: Comment by Kroc"
Ford Prefect
Member since:

The problem is that IE8 is also lagging behind! Its the same crap with MSIE as always. All browsers support feature X but IE. All browsers support feature Y but IE. Same old story, again and again and again.

And if there would bei IE20, and if they even would force it down everybody's ass, you could bet again on the fact that it would be missing standard features, has its own opinion on CSS, etc. and so on.

Reply Parent Score: 6

RE[3]: Comment by Kroc
by nt_jerkface on Fri 25th Sep 2009 00:19 in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by Kroc"
nt_jerkface Member since:

What are you saying? That people would be better off with IE6+Chrome plugin than IE8? That's a terrible idea from a security standpoint.

The real problem is that there is a large contingent of people that don't want anyone to use IE8 simply because it is made by Microsoft. They're ideologically driven and have no desire to judge software based upon technical merit.

It doesn't seem to matter that IE8 follows strict standards by default since there are just as many negative posts about IE8 as there were about IE6. If IE20 ever comes out we'll probably have to endure a thousand posts about how it doesn't follow standards because it hasn't adopted a 3 month old Skynet proposal.

Browser evangelism has really gotten old, especially on tech sites which are already visted by people that are more likely to use an alternative browser. It's preaching to the choir and I have to deal with enough religion/politics in real life.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[4]: Comment by Kroc
by Ford Prefect on Fri 25th Sep 2009 08:50 in reply to "RE[3]: Comment by Kroc"
Ford Prefect Member since:

No, I'm not saying that at all. People should use IE8 if they want to. They will use an inferior product given current competition, but then at least it is not a terrible product anymore like its predecessors.

Note that the Chrome plugin is also available for IE8 and for a reason. The only thing I state is that it is true that IE8 is still missing important features that other browsers already have, and it is valid to call the Chrome plugin a fix for that. It is also true that if you look at the history of IE, Microsoft is very reluctant to participate in the evolution of browsers. As a matter of fact, IE7 and 8 are only there as they finally lost their monopoly on the market. Now they are playing catch up, but always only up to the point where they would start to bleed. And they try to avoid the endorsement of any standard which does not benefit them, probably just out of caution, just not to loose anything on the market...

Microsoft's strategy unfortunately does not benefit the customers, as it stalls the state of the web. The features missing in IE8, btw, are all listed in the original Chrome Frame article...

Edited 2009-09-25 08:54 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 4