6 ms·

Busting IE8’s Mythbusting

32 points by noodle 17y ago

snprbob86 17y ago
First: I use Chrome. IE is an awful browser. IE8 is bearable. I think that the advertising campaign that they are using for IE8 is disingenuous and despicable. As a Microsoftie, I'm not proud of it. I'm going to let it slide simply because I want as many people as possible to upgrade from IE 6 and 7. I do, however, believe there are more honest ways to go about it. I think people have found my defensive insight into Microsoft to be a valuable perspective. Let's keep the streak going... While the advertising teams have taken serious liberties, the engineering team has been honest. I can't find the source now, but I've heard that they were only aiming for CSS 2 support because CSS 3 is an unfinished draft: http://www.w3.org/Style/CSS/current-work http://www.w3.org/Style/CSS/current-work Many people complained about broken standards, so Microsoft decided not to ship a browser which map to unfinished standards. This would create future compatability issues. I think that's a reasonable call considering the critical mass of their browser which causes it to be a defacto standard. This looks to be in line with independent findings which show IE8 has fantastic CSS 2 support, but weak 3 support: http://www.quirksmode.org/css/contents.html http://www.quirksmode.org/css/contents.html Additionally, the IE team has made significant contributions to the W3C with CSS 2.1 test cases: http://blogs.msdn.com/ie/archive/2008/03/06/ie8-and-css-2-1-testing.aspx http://blogs.msdn.com/ie/archive/2008/03/06/ie8-and-css-2-1-...
- ZeroGravitas 17y ago
  Doesn't IE8 support some of HTML5? Doesn't that make it obvious that the "unfinished" line is total BS to justify strategic standards compliance manouvres? Note they use the exact same excuse for dodgy ODF in Office and surely no one is gullible enough to believe Microsoft has a sincere desire to deliver on that standard.
- rbanffy 17y ago
  I always found it weird the file extension is .xht instead of .xhtml at as in http://www.w3.org/Style/CSS/Test/CSS2.1/20061011/index.xht http://www.w3.org/Style/CSS/Test/CSS2.1/20061011/index.xht I would never have guessed why.
- dinkumthinkum 17y ago
  Well, let's get real here. We know where this is going. Microsoft really needs to either a) give up on the browser business or b) rewrite/scrap IE. The previous PM of IE (can't be bothered to remember/google his name, maybe Dean) basically had a breakdown and a "please don't be mean to me" serious of blog posts. It's silly that a company like MS cannot build a browser that lives up to standards set by a project like Firefox (maintaining compatibility with badly written corporate apps targeted at IE5/IE6 is a non starter -- very simple technical solution).
- cookiecaper 17y ago
  I wrote this on Reddit recently: "It's about control, which leads back up to money. "Windows is the default OS and IE the default browser. This is also why IE is broken. Microsoft doesn't want IE to render the same as its contemporaries because then you don't need to test on IE anymore, which means you don't need Windows anymore. "Microsoft controls things this way and it's been part of their corporate philosophy for a long time -- Embrace, Extend, Extinguish. They make something mostly compatible with the standard or competing product and then add proprietary extensions or quirks, and their marketshare alone forces people to take notice, and the hope is that eventually people will forget about the non-IE stuff and not bother to test on it anymore, meaning that now things don't work unless you have IE, meaning that you can't use the internet without Windows. That doesn't happen as often with the internet anymore, but as most of us know, it was quite successful for a pretty long time, and it's still successful for many non-web technologies (see DirectX v. OpenGL, etc.). "And while things are no longer panning out to complete MS dominance, IE still plays a major role in defining what techs get on the web and what doesn't. For instance, crappy HTML 5 support because HTML 5 harms Silverlight. This is all intentional, don't fool yourself." Not sure what you mean by "Microsoftie", but it'd be interesting to hear an MS advocate's or employee's position on this.
  - netsp 17y ago
    Microsoft doesn't want IE to render the same as its contemporaries because then you don't need to test on IE anymore, which means you don't need Windows anymore. Are you implying MS are purposely breaking IE in order to sell Windows licences to web developers? How many licenses exactly do you think are on the line here?
    - bengtan 17y ago
      There's one here. I'm an Ubuntu user, but I have a paid copy of XP that I use in VMWare so I can test IE6 & 7. EDIT: But I'm probably an outlier.
      - netsp 17y ago
        I'm not saying none exist. I have a windows machine that I use mostly for IE. But (a) I didn't buy it for that purpose, it already existed and (b) I would probably want to use sites I work on in IE even if it worked perfectly. It's the most popular browser. They don't have to break IE.
ralonso 17y ago
As a long-time and primarily Windows user and developer, even though knowing that they're false, I was interested in seeing these so-called "facts" Microsoft has been spreading around about IE8 being busted in a clear, concise and researched way. ...But as I opened the page, this came up: "Windows 7 is the best Windows yet (unlike Vista) and IE8 is the best IE yet (unlike IE6-7)." Can't they be even more biased? Despite Vista having a bad launch, it was far from being a bad OS and is, as of right now, extremely solid; IE6 and 7 were a significant improvement over their predecessors. I'm sorry to de-rail the topic.
- youngian 17y ago
  Here's how I read that statement: IE6 and IE7 were only the "best IE yet" at release due to how truly awful each previous incarnation was. IE7 is a lousy browser, so calling it the "best IE yet" at the time was like saying that chewing on tinfoil is more fun than chewing on rusty razor blades. It might be an accurate statement, but it doesn't mean you're enjoying that tinfoil. IE8, on the other hand, actually feels like a step (admittedly a smallish step) in the right direction. Similarly, Windows 7 is actually more _usable_ than previous Windows. Vista was shinier than XP, and had a couple nice features like integrated search, but there's a reason Dell had to start selling machines with XP licenses again. I think the author intended the statement to be something like this: that Windows 7 and IE8 actually _deserve_ the title of "best ___ yet."
darshan 17y ago
Complaint #1: its is a possessive; it's is a contraction for it is. (The author kept using its as if it meant it is.) Complaint #2: The author kept using the form: The Lie: <a summary of the author's opinion> The Truth: <an explanation of the author's opinion> That's messed up. The "lie" should be what he thinks Microsoft got wrong. Complaint #3: The whole thing is just his opinions. It would be nice to link to some actual benchmark results, for example, rather than just countering Microsoft's "IE8 is the fastest" with "No it's not!" Not worth reading.
- billybob 17y ago
  I agree that the article isn't very helpful. Here is a benchmark for you: http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/09/01/27/ie8s_javascript_performance_lags_well_behind_safari_chrome.html http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/09/01/27/ie8s_javascrip...
- billybob 17y ago
  Here's another test. Out of 10 browser versions tested, the only one that IE8 beat was IE7. http://service.futuremark.com/peacekeeper/browserStatistics.action http://service.futuremark.com/peacekeeper/browserStatistics....
  - rbanffy 17y ago
    That's unfair. It should be noted it also beats IE6.
    - rbanffy 17y ago
      But things may change as you do down the version ladder. I bet it is slower than IE 2 or 3.
enra 17y ago
I'm almost starting to think that this recent IE8 promotion and "facts" is actually a clever marketing strategy. Just releasing a poor or decent browser doesn't get that much mentions or headlines - but with outrageous claims or even lies you get tenfold mentions in blogosphere and media. It might not be a smart for Microsoft appear as liars but hey, at least people know that IE8 is out.
- zimbabwe 17y ago
  The media really doesn't care much for web browser competition. Blogs, do, but the blogs that care are the ones read by people who already know IE is bad. Microsoft isn't doing some clever targeting with this. It's pretty obvious that they're going after ignorant people with an ignorant tactic, and let's face it, they couldn't attract users any other way.
  - rbanffy 17y ago
    For them, the best way to attract users is to make OEMs bundle only Windows+IE with computers they sell. Most people don't reinstall the OS or even know what IE is. Targeting smart people is seldom a smart strategy - they are not as numerous.
    - zimbabwe 17y ago
      Point. But I was talking about outside of bundling, since I figured it was a given. I'm guessing Microsoft here is trying to retain that hold, at a time when many people download Firefox or Chrome or Safari first thing on bootup.
      - rbanffy 17y ago
        They never engage competition on a level playfield - for them, it's a waste of resources. Bundling makes a lot of sense because they can deal with ten, at most, clients and have a huge impact on just about every computer user on the planet. Groklaw has an interesting piece on the probable reasons why Asus pulled the plug on their ARM-based netbook and I guess this is their typical behaviour. Want to bet the net MSN Live Messenger (or, will they call it "Bing messenger"?) will make every search on the system default to Bing? Playing fair is so strange to their corporate DNA it would provoke a violent allergic reaction.
billybob 17y ago
The IE8 comparison is very misleading. They give IE checkmarks for "security," "privacy," and "ease of use," where Firefox and Chrome get none. What, so Firefox and Chrome have ZERO security and privacy? Wow, thanks for warning me, Microsoft! The truth is that all three browsers have security and privacy features, which are too complex to be reduced to a single checkmark. Firefox at least gives some quantified argument on its pages: "An independent study shows that, in 2006, IE users were vulnerable to online threats 78% of the time. Firefox users? Only 2%." It's interesting that this comparison doesn't concede a single category. In "performance," they say, "hey, let's call it a tie!" Actual timed measurements of Javascript performance show that IE8 is WAY slower than the competition. http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/09/01/27/ie8s_javascript_performance_lags_well_behind_safari_chrome.html http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/09/01/27/ie8s_javascrip... http://service.futuremark.com/peacekeeper/browserStatistics.action http://service.futuremark.com/peacekeeper/browserStatistics.... Microsoft's browser comparison truly is deceptive. I'm glad they're moving people away from IE6, but they're far from having the best browser our there.
- dinkumthinkum 17y ago
  You might be interested in this paper presented at SOSP on AjaxScope by some guys from Microsoft Research http://www.sosp2007.org/papers/sosp095-kiciman.pdf http://www.sosp2007.org/papers/sosp095-kiciman.pdf Check out page 2. Interesting table. IE7 is 3 orders of magnitude (i.e. 4870ms instead of 6ms, with Firefox 2.0 at 116) slower than Opera at String+ operations in Javascript. It's interesting. AjaxScope is pretty neat as well.
- bhrgunatha 17y ago
  In "performance," they say, "hey, let's call it a tie!" Actual timed measurements of Javascript performance show that IE8 is WAY slower than the competition. Plus neither of the links you posted tested Firefox 3.5 which has improved javascript performance which implies IE8 slips further behind.
makecheck 17y ago
What this says is that Microsoft is willing to be very deceptive about a free product. But you can't blame them at all, it's just a web page. Even if this deception actually has some demonstrated effect on browser market share, those market share changes will be based on the personal decisions of people to switch. It's not like Microsoft has gone and deleted everyone's IE7 and Firefox installations without permission. Remember that any source of information should not be implicitly trusted. [Trust me! ;) ] If an individual decides to believe Microsoft's statements without doing any further research, and downloads and permanently switches to IE8 based on lies, then it's that person's problem.
mtarnovan 17y ago
Microsoft marketing has gone from uninspired and mildly disingenuous to outright pathetic lies. This should come to no surprise to anyone, they feel the heat building up from multiple directions (the web slowly replacing the OS, apple gaining more and more marketshare, oss quality steadily increasing, drastic measures imposed on them by anti-monopoly organisations in the EU and many more). They face this heat, as noted by multiple commenter above, with their usual embrace/extend/extinguish tactic. Wonder if it will work on HTML5, the stakes are unusually high on that one.
oomkiller 17y ago
Lets be real here. MS's marketing lies does not make people want to use IE. There are a few major reasons why people still use IE, and all of them are marginally valid. Deployment tools for organizations That's what has always been used, why should I change? It's installed by default on Windows, and many users lack the knowledge that there IS something else, in addition to not knowing how to install that "something else." The only way we can get rid of IE is to ensure that it is NOT distributed with versions of Windows, providing deployment and security lock-down tools for organizations, and educating the public about all of the options.

32 points by noodle 17y ago

First: I use Chrome. IE is an awful browser. IE8 is bearable. I think that the advertising campaign that they are using for IE8 is disingenuous and despicable. As a Microsoftie, I'm not proud of it. I'm going to let it slide simply because I want as many people as possible to upgrade from IE 6 and 7. I do, however, believe there are more honest ways to go about it. I think people have found my defensive insight into Microsoft to be a valuable perspective. Let's keep the streak going... While the advertising teams have taken serious liberties, the engineering team has been honest. I can't find the source now, but I've heard that they were only aiming for CSS 2 support because CSS 3 is an unfinished draft: http://www.w3.org/Style/CSS/current-work http://www.w3.org/Style/CSS/current-work Many people complained about broken standards, so Microsoft decided not to ship a browser which map to unfinished standards. This would create future compatability issues. I think that's a reasonable call considering the critical mass of their browser which causes it to be a defacto standard. This looks to be in line with independent findings which show IE8 has fantastic CSS 2 support, but weak 3 support: http://www.quirksmode.org/css/contents.html http://www.quirksmode.org/css/contents.html Additionally, the IE team has made significant contributions to the W3C with CSS 2.1 test cases: http://blogs.msdn.com/ie/archive/2008/03/06/ie8-and-css-2-1-testing.aspx http://blogs.msdn.com/ie/archive/2008/03/06/ie8-and-css-2-1-...

ZeroGravitas 17y ago
Doesn't IE8 support some of HTML5? Doesn't that make it obvious that the "unfinished" line is total BS to justify strategic standards compliance manouvres? Note they use the exact same excuse for dodgy ODF in Office and surely no one is gullible enough to believe Microsoft has a sincere desire to deliver on that standard.
rbanffy 17y ago
I always found it weird the file extension is .xht instead of .xhtml at as in http://www.w3.org/Style/CSS/Test/CSS2.1/20061011/index.xht http://www.w3.org/Style/CSS/Test/CSS2.1/20061011/index.xht I would never have guessed why.
dinkumthinkum 17y ago
Well, let's get real here. We know where this is going. Microsoft really needs to either a) give up on the browser business or b) rewrite/scrap IE. The previous PM of IE (can't be bothered to remember/google his name, maybe Dean) basically had a breakdown and a "please don't be mean to me" serious of blog posts. It's silly that a company like MS cannot build a browser that lives up to standards set by a project like Firefox (maintaining compatibility with badly written corporate apps targeted at IE5/IE6 is a non starter -- very simple technical solution).
cookiecaper 17y ago
I wrote this on Reddit recently: "It's about control, which leads back up to money. "Windows is the default OS and IE the default browser. This is also why IE is broken. Microsoft doesn't want IE to render the same as its contemporaries because then you don't need to test on IE anymore, which means you don't need Windows anymore. "Microsoft controls things this way and it's been part of their corporate philosophy for a long time -- Embrace, Extend, Extinguish. They make something mostly compatible with the standard or competing product and then add proprietary extensions or quirks, and their marketshare alone forces people to take notice, and the hope is that eventually people will forget about the non-IE stuff and not bother to test on it anymore, meaning that now things don't work unless you have IE, meaning that you can't use the internet without Windows. That doesn't happen as often with the internet anymore, but as most of us know, it was quite successful for a pretty long time, and it's still successful for many non-web technologies (see DirectX v. OpenGL, etc.). "And while things are no longer panning out to complete MS dominance, IE still plays a major role in defining what techs get on the web and what doesn't. For instance, crappy HTML 5 support because HTML 5 harms Silverlight. This is all intentional, don't fool yourself." Not sure what you mean by "Microsoftie", but it'd be interesting to hear an MS advocate's or employee's position on this.
- netsp 17y ago
  Microsoft doesn't want IE to render the same as its contemporaries because then you don't need to test on IE anymore, which means you don't need Windows anymore. Are you implying MS are purposely breaking IE in order to sell Windows licences to web developers? How many licenses exactly do you think are on the line here?
  - bengtan 17y ago
    There's one here. I'm an Ubuntu user, but I have a paid copy of XP that I use in VMWare so I can test IE6 & 7. EDIT: But I'm probably an outlier.
    - netsp 17y ago
      I'm not saying none exist. I have a windows machine that I use mostly for IE. But (a) I didn't buy it for that purpose, it already existed and (b) I would probably want to use sites I work on in IE even if it worked perfectly. It's the most popular browser. They don't have to break IE.

ralonso 17y ago

As a long-time and primarily Windows user and developer, even though knowing that they're false, I was interested in seeing these so-called "facts" Microsoft has been spreading around about IE8 being busted in a clear, concise and researched way. ...But as I opened the page, this came up: "Windows 7 is the best Windows yet (unlike Vista) and IE8 is the best IE yet (unlike IE6-7)." Can't they be even more biased? Despite Vista having a bad launch, it was far from being a bad OS and is, as of right now, extremely solid; IE6 and 7 were a significant improvement over their predecessors. I'm sorry to de-rail the topic.

youngian 17y ago
Here's how I read that statement: IE6 and IE7 were only the "best IE yet" at release due to how truly awful each previous incarnation was. IE7 is a lousy browser, so calling it the "best IE yet" at the time was like saying that chewing on tinfoil is more fun than chewing on rusty razor blades. It might be an accurate statement, but it doesn't mean you're enjoying that tinfoil. IE8, on the other hand, actually feels like a step (admittedly a smallish step) in the right direction. Similarly, Windows 7 is actually more _usable_ than previous Windows. Vista was shinier than XP, and had a couple nice features like integrated search, but there's a reason Dell had to start selling machines with XP licenses again. I think the author intended the statement to be something like this: that Windows 7 and IE8 actually _deserve_ the title of "best ___ yet."

darshan 17y ago

Complaint #1: its is a possessive; it's is a contraction for it is. (The author kept using its as if it meant it is.) Complaint #2: The author kept using the form: The Lie: <a summary of the author's opinion> The Truth: <an explanation of the author's opinion> That's messed up. The "lie" should be what he thinks Microsoft got wrong. Complaint #3: The whole thing is just his opinions. It would be nice to link to some actual benchmark results, for example, rather than just countering Microsoft's "IE8 is the fastest" with "No it's not!" Not worth reading.

billybob 17y ago
I agree that the article isn't very helpful. Here is a benchmark for you: http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/09/01/27/ie8s_javascript_performance_lags_well_behind_safari_chrome.html http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/09/01/27/ie8s_javascrip...
billybob 17y ago
Here's another test. Out of 10 browser versions tested, the only one that IE8 beat was IE7. http://service.futuremark.com/peacekeeper/browserStatistics.action http://service.futuremark.com/peacekeeper/browserStatistics....
- rbanffy 17y ago
  That's unfair. It should be noted it also beats IE6.
  - rbanffy 17y ago
    But things may change as you do down the version ladder. I bet it is slower than IE 2 or 3.

enra 17y ago

I'm almost starting to think that this recent IE8 promotion and "facts" is actually a clever marketing strategy. Just releasing a poor or decent browser doesn't get that much mentions or headlines - but with outrageous claims or even lies you get tenfold mentions in blogosphere and media. It might not be a smart for Microsoft appear as liars but hey, at least people know that IE8 is out.

zimbabwe 17y ago
The media really doesn't care much for web browser competition. Blogs, do, but the blogs that care are the ones read by people who already know IE is bad. Microsoft isn't doing some clever targeting with this. It's pretty obvious that they're going after ignorant people with an ignorant tactic, and let's face it, they couldn't attract users any other way.
- rbanffy 17y ago
  For them, the best way to attract users is to make OEMs bundle only Windows+IE with computers they sell. Most people don't reinstall the OS or even know what IE is. Targeting smart people is seldom a smart strategy - they are not as numerous.
  - zimbabwe 17y ago
    Point. But I was talking about outside of bundling, since I figured it was a given. I'm guessing Microsoft here is trying to retain that hold, at a time when many people download Firefox or Chrome or Safari first thing on bootup.
    - rbanffy 17y ago
      They never engage competition on a level playfield - for them, it's a waste of resources. Bundling makes a lot of sense because they can deal with ten, at most, clients and have a huge impact on just about every computer user on the planet. Groklaw has an interesting piece on the probable reasons why Asus pulled the plug on their ARM-based netbook and I guess this is their typical behaviour. Want to bet the net MSN Live Messenger (or, will they call it "Bing messenger"?) will make every search on the system default to Bing? Playing fair is so strange to their corporate DNA it would provoke a violent allergic reaction.

billybob 17y ago

The IE8 comparison is very misleading. They give IE checkmarks for "security," "privacy," and "ease of use," where Firefox and Chrome get none. What, so Firefox and Chrome have ZERO security and privacy? Wow, thanks for warning me, Microsoft! The truth is that all three browsers have security and privacy features, which are too complex to be reduced to a single checkmark. Firefox at least gives some quantified argument on its pages: "An independent study shows that, in 2006, IE users were vulnerable to online threats 78% of the time. Firefox users? Only 2%." It's interesting that this comparison doesn't concede a single category. In "performance," they say, "hey, let's call it a tie!" Actual timed measurements of Javascript performance show that IE8 is WAY slower than the competition. http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/09/01/27/ie8s_javascript_performance_lags_well_behind_safari_chrome.html http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/09/01/27/ie8s_javascrip... http://service.futuremark.com/peacekeeper/browserStatistics.action http://service.futuremark.com/peacekeeper/browserStatistics.... Microsoft's browser comparison truly is deceptive. I'm glad they're moving people away from IE6, but they're far from having the best browser our there.

dinkumthinkum 17y ago
You might be interested in this paper presented at SOSP on AjaxScope by some guys from Microsoft Research http://www.sosp2007.org/papers/sosp095-kiciman.pdf http://www.sosp2007.org/papers/sosp095-kiciman.pdf Check out page 2. Interesting table. IE7 is 3 orders of magnitude (i.e. 4870ms instead of 6ms, with Firefox 2.0 at 116) slower than Opera at String+ operations in Javascript. It's interesting. AjaxScope is pretty neat as well.
bhrgunatha 17y ago
In "performance," they say, "hey, let's call it a tie!" Actual timed measurements of Javascript performance show that IE8 is WAY slower than the competition. Plus neither of the links you posted tested Firefox 3.5 which has improved javascript performance which implies IE8 slips further behind.

makecheck 17y ago

What this says is that Microsoft is willing to be very deceptive about a free product. But you can't blame them at all, it's just a web page. Even if this deception actually has some demonstrated effect on browser market share, those market share changes will be based on the personal decisions of people to switch. It's not like Microsoft has gone and deleted everyone's IE7 and Firefox installations without permission. Remember that any source of information should not be implicitly trusted. [Trust me! ;) ] If an individual decides to believe Microsoft's statements without doing any further research, and downloads and permanently switches to IE8 based on lies, then it's that person's problem.

mtarnovan 17y ago

Microsoft marketing has gone from uninspired and mildly disingenuous to outright pathetic lies. This should come to no surprise to anyone, they feel the heat building up from multiple directions (the web slowly replacing the OS, apple gaining more and more marketshare, oss quality steadily increasing, drastic measures imposed on them by anti-monopoly organisations in the EU and many more). They face this heat, as noted by multiple commenter above, with their usual embrace/extend/extinguish tactic. Wonder if it will work on HTML5, the stakes are unusually high on that one.

oomkiller 17y ago

Lets be real here. MS's marketing lies does not make people want to use IE. There are a few major reasons why people still use IE, and all of them are marginally valid. Deployment tools for organizations That's what has always been used, why should I change? It's installed by default on Windows, and many users lack the knowledge that there IS something else, in addition to not knowing how to install that "something else." The only way we can get rid of IE is to ensure that it is NOT distributed with versions of Windows, providing deployment and security lock-down tools for organizations, and educating the public about all of the options.