5 ms·

Compared to the latest browsers from everyone else, yes. Unfortunately, Microsoft's style seems to be to release browsers that are obsolete before they're even

Compared to the latest browsers from everyone else, yes. Unfortunately, Microsoft's style seems to be to release browsers that are obsolete before they're even available. IE9 is a nice step ahead, but it leaves out a lot of nice technologies that could have moved the web forward. As Mozilla shifts to faster releases, and Chrome, Safari and webkit in general steam ahead, it's sad to think that we won't see IE 10 for another couple of years at the soonest. The way IE is developed is a relic of the desktop software era. Mozilla recognized that to keep up with Google, they needed to change how their browser is developed and released - I pray that something vital is changed to make that possible for MS and IE as well.

Meai 15y ago
There are already previews of ie10 floating around, and it was shown on mix'11. I think it's going to be released with Windows 8
- code_duck 15y ago
  Which will be released in... 18 to 24 months? Will the adoption rate of IE 9 even be 25% of IE users by then?
Silhouette 15y ago
> Unfortunately, Microsoft's style seems to be to release browsers that are obsolete before they're even available. I still don't understand why people think this crazy rush to get new browser versions out as rapidly as every couple of months is a good thing. Even if browsers support new features that fast, full-time professional web development agencies aren't going to keep up with the developments at the same break-neck pace, never mind anyone else. Even if they did, I doubt many of them would risk their reputation designing live sites for serious clients using unproven novelty technologies. While Microsoft's release cycle is perhaps longer than I would choose, at least they have some stability as a result. We may have hated IE6, but we did so only after several years of it being clearly the best browser in town, which people often forget. In any case, at least its quirks and foibles were well understood, and workarounds were widely documented and used basically successfully. Ditto for IE7, and anything from IE8 onwards is pretty decent as far as web standards go. For all the anti-IE criticism, the Web developed from a novelty to a routine part of daily life on Microsoft's watch, and about half the people in the world still use IE to get stuff done, despite all the possible alternatives available to them. Right now, with these absurdly rapid release cycles, it just feels like Google and Mozilla are having a big game of mine's bigger than yours is. I'd rather they stopped breaking actually useful stuff in releases they are pushing to the browsing public: Google have broken everything from rounded corners to HTML5 video, while Mozilla have fundamentally stuffed tried and tested tech like Java applets and basic typography by trying to be too clever with new technologies in recent versions. I'd rather the Chrome and Firefox teams caught up with basics that most people actually care about: Firefox 4 still doesn't do sensible tab isolation years after IE and Chrome did, while Chrome still doesn't seem to have an ad blocker worth anything, for example. Meanwhile, I really don't care that they can hide the URL bar now; I have a 1920x1200 screen and I like to know what site I'm really visiting. I don't care that Google support "open" video formats like VP8; the serious video publishing world uses the technically superior H.264, and Google just removed support for that in Chrome for purely political reasons. Please note that none of this means they can't issue security or performance updates as necessary. But Microsoft do that too, they just don't feel the need to slap a big "this is a shiny new version!" sticker on it every time. > The way IE is developed is a relic of the desktop software era. Contrary to trendy opinion among bazillionaire wannabes on Hacker News, the vast, vast majority of the world's IT infrastructure still lives in the desktop software era, and most web-based or mobile-based software sucks on technical, usability and basic functionality grounds. And I write that as someone who makes his living working with those technologies, just trying not to suck at it quite as badly.
- code_duck 15y ago
  Interesting perspectives. Let's see. >I still don't understand why people think this crazy rush to get new browser versions out as rapidly as every couple of months is a good thing. Because the alternative system involves way too much pain in upgrading for users, apparently. Three monolithic releases in an entire decade is a better plan, you think? The technologies involved with the web move too quickly to still be thinking about IE 6 and IE 7 in 2011. >While Microsoft's release cycle is perhaps longer than I would choose, at least they have some stability as a result. We may have hated IE6, but we did so only after several years of it being clearly the best browser in town, which people often forget. In any case, at least its quirks and foibles were well understood, and workarounds were widely documented and used basically successfully. Ditto for IE7, and anything from IE8 onwards is pretty decent as far as web standards go. All I can assume from that statement is that you're not a javascript or CSS developer. IE 6 was the best because Netscape had their 'air supply cut off' and was not really in the game in 2001. IE 6 and 7 continue to cause problems for me, personally, and if I was the only one, we would not be having this discussion. >For all the anti-IE criticism, the Web developed from a novelty to a routine part of daily life on Microsoft's watch, and about half the people in the world still use IE to get stuff done, despite all the possible alternatives available to them. Yes, after MS beat down the company who pioneered bringing browser technology to the masses, the web grew while IE was the most popular browser. Yes, about half of the world uses IE - mainly people who don't understand what a browser is, and click the big E on their desktop. Including software with other software that has monopoly level market saturation is successful, can you believe it? > I'd rather the Chrome and Firefox teams caught up with basics that most people actually care about: Firefox 4 still doesn't do sensible tab isolation years after IE and Chrome did, while Chrome still doesn't seem to have an ad blocker worth anything, for example. IE doesn't even have a spell check, much less an ad blocker. How about Web GL? If I recall from the Reddit threads from the IE team, Microsoft insists they can't put IE9 on XP mainly due to hardware acceleration. For 2D only? >Please note that none of this means they can't issue security or performance updates as necessary. But Microsoft do that too, they just don't feel the need to slap a big "this is a shiny new version!" sticker on it every time. How many significant updates to IE 8 have there been? How often was Chrome or Firefox improved during that time, noticeably? Waiting until MS releases a new version of Windows and everyone buys a new computer in order to run it has left web developers with a lot of problems. >the vast, vast majority of the world's IT infrastructure still lives in the desktop software era, and most web-based or mobile-based software sucks on technical, usability and basic functionality grounds. Some people are still using DOS, but that's not really the point. I expect at some point, the enterprises who haven't already figured it out will realize that developing or purchasing inflexible, monolithic software that is upgraded with great pain and expense every five years is not ideal. Hundreds of millions of people are using internet based software (and I'm not talking about Google Apps - I mean applications such as this site) each day, and they work. Meanwhile, I can't open an IT magazine without seeing the word 'cloud' 8,000 times, so... we'll see what happens to the world of desktop software, hmm? IE is a deplorable web browser in the opinion of the vast majority of web developers I've ever encountered. it's the only one that you have to fire up virtual machines to test on three or four different versions even when using Windows. The development models of webkit and Mozilla have resulted in far superior software, and that's really all one can say. It's time for MS to either get serious about releasing a top quality browser, or go away.
jabo 15y ago
Silhouette and 911-inside_job: You guys should really read this: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2575632 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2575632

Meai 15y ago

There are already previews of ie10 floating around, and it was shown on mix'11. I think it's going to be released with Windows 8

code_duck 15y ago
Which will be released in... 18 to 24 months? Will the adoption rate of IE 9 even be 25% of IE users by then?

Silhouette 15y ago

> Unfortunately, Microsoft's style seems to be to release browsers that are obsolete before they're even available. I still don't understand why people think this crazy rush to get new browser versions out as rapidly as every couple of months is a good thing. Even if browsers support new features that fast, full-time professional web development agencies aren't going to keep up with the developments at the same break-neck pace, never mind anyone else. Even if they did, I doubt many of them would risk their reputation designing live sites for serious clients using unproven novelty technologies. While Microsoft's release cycle is perhaps longer than I would choose, at least they have some stability as a result. We may have hated IE6, but we did so only after several years of it being clearly the best browser in town, which people often forget. In any case, at least its quirks and foibles were well understood, and workarounds were widely documented and used basically successfully. Ditto for IE7, and anything from IE8 onwards is pretty decent as far as web standards go. For all the anti-IE criticism, the Web developed from a novelty to a routine part of daily life on Microsoft's watch, and about half the people in the world still use IE to get stuff done, despite all the possible alternatives available to them. Right now, with these absurdly rapid release cycles, it just feels like Google and Mozilla are having a big game of mine's bigger than yours is. I'd rather they stopped breaking actually useful stuff in releases they are pushing to the browsing public: Google have broken everything from rounded corners to HTML5 video, while Mozilla have fundamentally stuffed tried and tested tech like Java applets and basic typography by trying to be too clever with new technologies in recent versions. I'd rather the Chrome and Firefox teams caught up with basics that most people actually care about: Firefox 4 still doesn't do sensible tab isolation years after IE and Chrome did, while Chrome still doesn't seem to have an ad blocker worth anything, for example. Meanwhile, I really don't care that they can hide the URL bar now; I have a 1920x1200 screen and I like to know what site I'm really visiting. I don't care that Google support "open" video formats like VP8; the serious video publishing world uses the technically superior H.264, and Google just removed support for that in Chrome for purely political reasons. Please note that none of this means they can't issue security or performance updates as necessary. But Microsoft do that too, they just don't feel the need to slap a big "this is a shiny new version!" sticker on it every time. > The way IE is developed is a relic of the desktop software era. Contrary to trendy opinion among bazillionaire wannabes on Hacker News, the vast, vast majority of the world's IT infrastructure still lives in the desktop software era, and most web-based or mobile-based software sucks on technical, usability and basic functionality grounds. And I write that as someone who makes his living working with those technologies, just trying not to suck at it quite as badly.

code_duck 15y ago
Interesting perspectives. Let's see. >I still don't understand why people think this crazy rush to get new browser versions out as rapidly as every couple of months is a good thing. Because the alternative system involves way too much pain in upgrading for users, apparently. Three monolithic releases in an entire decade is a better plan, you think? The technologies involved with the web move too quickly to still be thinking about IE 6 and IE 7 in 2011. >While Microsoft's release cycle is perhaps longer than I would choose, at least they have some stability as a result. We may have hated IE6, but we did so only after several years of it being clearly the best browser in town, which people often forget. In any case, at least its quirks and foibles were well understood, and workarounds were widely documented and used basically successfully. Ditto for IE7, and anything from IE8 onwards is pretty decent as far as web standards go. All I can assume from that statement is that you're not a javascript or CSS developer. IE 6 was the best because Netscape had their 'air supply cut off' and was not really in the game in 2001. IE 6 and 7 continue to cause problems for me, personally, and if I was the only one, we would not be having this discussion. >For all the anti-IE criticism, the Web developed from a novelty to a routine part of daily life on Microsoft's watch, and about half the people in the world still use IE to get stuff done, despite all the possible alternatives available to them. Yes, after MS beat down the company who pioneered bringing browser technology to the masses, the web grew while IE was the most popular browser. Yes, about half of the world uses IE - mainly people who don't understand what a browser is, and click the big E on their desktop. Including software with other software that has monopoly level market saturation is successful, can you believe it? > I'd rather the Chrome and Firefox teams caught up with basics that most people actually care about: Firefox 4 still doesn't do sensible tab isolation years after IE and Chrome did, while Chrome still doesn't seem to have an ad blocker worth anything, for example. IE doesn't even have a spell check, much less an ad blocker. How about Web GL? If I recall from the Reddit threads from the IE team, Microsoft insists they can't put IE9 on XP mainly due to hardware acceleration. For 2D only? >Please note that none of this means they can't issue security or performance updates as necessary. But Microsoft do that too, they just don't feel the need to slap a big "this is a shiny new version!" sticker on it every time. How many significant updates to IE 8 have there been? How often was Chrome or Firefox improved during that time, noticeably? Waiting until MS releases a new version of Windows and everyone buys a new computer in order to run it has left web developers with a lot of problems. >the vast, vast majority of the world's IT infrastructure still lives in the desktop software era, and most web-based or mobile-based software sucks on technical, usability and basic functionality grounds. Some people are still using DOS, but that's not really the point. I expect at some point, the enterprises who haven't already figured it out will realize that developing or purchasing inflexible, monolithic software that is upgraded with great pain and expense every five years is not ideal. Hundreds of millions of people are using internet based software (and I'm not talking about Google Apps - I mean applications such as this site) each day, and they work. Meanwhile, I can't open an IT magazine without seeing the word 'cloud' 8,000 times, so... we'll see what happens to the world of desktop software, hmm? IE is a deplorable web browser in the opinion of the vast majority of web developers I've ever encountered. it's the only one that you have to fire up virtual machines to test on three or four different versions even when using Windows. The development models of webkit and Mozilla have resulted in far superior software, and that's really all one can say. It's time for MS to either get serious about releasing a top quality browser, or go away.

jabo 15y ago

Silhouette and 911-inside_job: You guys should really read this: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2575632 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2575632