Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 14th Nov 2012 22:12 UTC
Internet Explorer "In Windows 8, we reimagined the browser with IE10. We designed and built IE10 to be the best way to experience the Web on Windows. With the IE10 Release Preview for Windows 7 consumers can now enjoy a fast and fluid Web with the updated IE10 engine on their Windows 7 devices. The release preview of IE10 on Windows 7 is available for download today."
Thread beginning with comment 542628
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
lucas_maximus
Member since:
2009-08-18

This is akin to saying that the current worst-of-the-bunch is a lot better than the previous worst-of-the-bunch. It holds for not only the JS engines, but also for the rest of the browser.


While you may scoff, we now have all major browsers with decent JS engines, that is a massive win for all web developers.

It isn't much to crow about, is it? With the first release of IE6, Microsoft had the best browser client of any. Microsoft had clearly lost that lead by October 2006 with the release of Firefox 2.


Who cares, that is now ancient history.

They have been a long way behind other leading browsers ever since.


Not anymore.

IE 9 is a pretty fast browsers and are a good default browser to the world's best selling desktop operating system, Windows 7.

Nobody really uses browsers because they do better in the Sunspider benchmark.

This is clearly reflected in the market share trends:
http://gs.statcounter.com/?PHPSESSID=j2juf5bil673j4vrso39eijui6#bro.....


http://news.softpedia.com/news/IE9-Usage-Share-Bigger-than-Those-of...

Err ... no.

IE10 doesn't appear to be the version of IE that can arrest this persistent slide, especially if it is the worst performed modern browser, it provides the least features, and it misses out on basic things like open codec support that could easily have been provided at next-to-zero cost.


There are reasons why Microsoft moves at a slower rate with IE as I have already pointed out in my previous comment.

TBH, open codec support is pretty minor, with the majority of the web still using Flash Video.

Major HTML 5 features and the fact that it can now do Strict mode for ECMAScript, is far more important.

Being a Web-developer, these are the features we want ... I have no interest in some idealistic fight over a video codec.

I have written my recommendations in my blog post here

http://luke-robbins.co.uk/video-on-the-web/

And nothing has changed.

If Web Developers want IE to have better standards support, they should use the platform previews and give feedback to Microsoft (via bug reports).

If you want to troll, actually try to do better than quoting hipster web developers ... which will hate on IE no matter what.

Edited 2012-11-15 11:20 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 3

lemur2 Member since:
2007-02-17

If Web Developers want IE to have better standards support, they should use the platform previews and give feedback to Microsoft (via bug reports).


Bug reports and other requests for standards support are ignored for years by IE developers. There have been incessant requests for support for SVG and PNG that were ignored by the IE team for over a decade, and bug reports which alluded to the lack of support for standards were simply marked as "will not fix" or "will not implement". Vorbis format was standardised in 2003 and in 2006 it was proposed as a web standard for audio, yet it is still not implemented in IE to this very day. IE is no less than six years behind the times.

Instead, Microsoft pushed proprietary methods such as WMV and WMA, ActiveX and Silverlight, in a transparent attempt to make it all-but-mandatory to use IE (and hence Windows) as the only way to access the "full, rich-content" web. "Rich content" is Microsoft's own term, BTW. Such attempts should rightly be vehemently opposed by all fair-minded people.

The very saddest thing in all this is that you apparently think I am trolling in this. Let me assure you I am not. Microsoft's attempts to make the web a walled garden for access only by using Microsoft products as clients is amongst the very worst of their monopolistic anti-trust behaviour, and it has been so for decades. Even a simple-minded fool knows this to be so.

Edited 2012-11-15 11:59 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2

lucas_maximus Member since:
2009-08-18

Bug reports and other requests for standards support are ignored for years by IE developers. There have been incessant requests for support for SVG and PNG that were ignored by the IE team for over a decade, and bug reports which alluded to the lack of support for standards were simply marked as "will not fix" or "will not implement".


Maybe a decade ago, but if you actually watched the video I have linked, they are actually trying to get developers to contribute.

Also they have good reasons for not implementing some standards. Unlike other browsers development teams (cough cough Chrome) they don't implement features when badly for the sake of it after IE6 (IE6 worked with the draft standard at the time, and was changed signicantly afterwards).

Vorbis format was standardised in 2003 and in 2006 it was proposed as a web standard for audio, yet it is still not implemented in IE to this very day. IE is no less than six years behind the times.


No it isn't, I could probably point to a lot of other features that have just turned up in browsers in the last few years (font-face has been present since IE 4.0 I believe).

Picking one possible web standard and saying IE is behind is ridiculous.

Also IE8 was the first browser to implement CSS 2.1 and XHTML 1.1 correctly.

Instead, Microsoft pushed proprietary methods such as WMV and WMA, ActiveX and Silverlight, in a transparent attempt to make it all-but-mandatory to use IE (and hence Windows) as the only way to access the "full, rich-content" web. "Rich content" is Microsoft's own term, BTW. Such attempts should rightly be vehemently opposed by all fair-minded people.


In the past they have yes, pushed stuff like this. I agree it is shitty. However that is simply not the case anymore.

If you actually watch the video they are actually listening to developers and know they simply cannot do that anymore.

There is a massive push in the .NET community to support web-standards as well, coming from Microsoft.

Since I actually work in this industry and use Microsoft Products to make web applications that are conform to standards (I actually really care about web standards). Before and .NET 3.0 it was very difficult to do things that would conform to standards ... now it is easy.

The very saddest thing in all this is that you apparently think I am trolling in this.


It doesn't matter what I say on the subject, you will doggedly keep the same opinion no matter what.

So you are either trolling, or you are delibrately being ignorant. I don't care which.

Let me assure you I am not. Microsoft's attempts to make the web a walled garden for access only by using Microsoft products as clients is amongst the very worst of their monopolistic anti-trust behaviour, and it has been so for decades. Even a simple-minded fool knows this to be so.


I actually work in this industry. I have seen a massive change in the way Microsoft has been pushing its ASP.NET web stack since 2008. A lot of it is inspired by the Ruby and Python communities.

Lets not forget they made the whole MVC stack Open Source and they even now have a package manager that makes it easy to use Open Source projects in your web application.

All you are doing is simply repeating criticisms that are almost a decade are and simply aren't true anymore.

Edited 2012-11-15 12:53 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[5]: IE10 still disappointing
by telns on Thu 15th Nov 2012 21:27 in reply to "RE[4]: IE10 still disappointing"
telns Member since:
2009-06-18

"Bug reports and other requests for standards support are ignored for years by IE developers."


Anyone that works in software gets used to this, and it isn't MS-specific. There just aren't enough hours or brainwaves in the day to fix everything. You triage, and sometimes you ignore. Sad but true.

Several years ago I encountered a rendering bug in FF, that when I reported it was stunned to find it was already almost ten years old (probably better than 15 years now), persisting from early Netscape days. It had been actively reported and updated the whole time. Some helpful users had even submitted patches. I bet it is still there.

Edited 2012-11-15 21:28 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2