4 ms·

Folks at MS are doing a pretty good job with IE recently. Even though IE9 is a bit behind "modern browsers" (text-shadow!) - it is a decent browser. And IE10 lo

Folks at MS are doing a pretty good job with IE recently. Even though IE9 is a bit behind "modern browsers" (text-shadow!) - it is a decent browser. And IE10 looks very promising, in fact it looks like it will have all it needs to be considered "modern". Could be even ahead in some areas (CSS Regions - http://www.adobe.com/devnet/html5/articles/css3-regions.html http://www.adobe.com/devnet/html5/articles/css3-regions.html - or hardware acceleration). My only fear is that with Microsoft's old-fashioned way of releasing updates (plus lack of support for older OSes) we still will have to support ~5 versions of IE for years.

dave1010uk 15y ago
The slow updates and lack of OS support is a big deal for me. I posted about this back in February before IE9 came out (http://www.basecreativeagency.com/2011/02/what-microsoft-need-to-do-to-fix-ie9/ http://www.basecreativeagency.com/2011/02/what-microsoft-nee...) and the situation hasn't changed with IE10. Whilst Google can get a really high percentage of users onto the latest version of Chrome within days, Microsoft cannot do the same with IE9 (and IE10 when it comes out).
LeafStorm 15y ago
If Microsoft supported older versions of Windows with the newer versions of IE, and pushed 8, 9, 10 etc. via Windows Update, this wouldn't be as much of an issue. However, I think that what they are trying to do is force people to either (a) take the upgrade path to Windows 7 or 8, or (b) leave behind the latest software like Office >2010 and IE >8. The problem is, upgrading Windows (any OS, really) is so fraught with complexity (and spending) that most people and IT organizations would rather stay on a nice, stable Windows (i.e. XP) and deal with the older software. (Especially nontechnical people who just have Win XP because that's what came on their computer.) Unfortunately, that means the developers have to pay for it.

dave1010uk 15y ago

The slow updates and lack of OS support is a big deal for me. I posted about this back in February before IE9 came out (http://www.basecreativeagency.com/2011/02/what-microsoft-need-to-do-to-fix-ie9/ http://www.basecreativeagency.com/2011/02/what-microsoft-nee...) and the situation hasn't changed with IE10. Whilst Google can get a really high percentage of users onto the latest version of Chrome within days, Microsoft cannot do the same with IE9 (and IE10 when it comes out).

LeafStorm 15y ago

If Microsoft supported older versions of Windows with the newer versions of IE, and pushed 8, 9, 10 etc. via Windows Update, this wouldn't be as much of an issue. However, I think that what they are trying to do is force people to either (a) take the upgrade path to Windows 7 or 8, or (b) leave behind the latest software like Office >2010 and IE >8. The problem is, upgrading Windows (any OS, really) is so fraught with complexity (and spending) that most people and IT organizations would rather stay on a nice, stable Windows (i.e. XP) and deal with the older software. (Especially nontechnical people who just have Win XP because that's what came on their computer.) Unfortunately, that means the developers have to pay for it.