13 ms·

I'd like to see some competition as well, but in my perspective, they're taking the wrong approach. This entire project seems to be about improving compatibili

I'd like to see some competition as well, but in my perspective, they're taking the wrong approach. This entire project seems to be about improving compatibility with older websites, by adding more algorithms and layers to the rendering process. I don't believe everyone is using Firefox and Chrome because they have better compatibility than IE. I think they should focus on cutting the fat, and making the lightest weight, fastest and standards compliant browser possible, with some popular third-party add-ons available, such as ad block. Or, leave IE11 as the default now for compatibility, and spin off a new browser called IE Lightning. If people start to switch over, then more sites will be developed to work in IE Lightning. In short, create a faster browser with a smaller memory footprint and ad block, get users, watch compatibility fix itself, then make this ship as the default browser in 5 years.

gcb0 12y ago
i think that is what they are going against...
pjbrunet 12y ago
"If people start to switch over, then more sites will be developed to work in IE Lightning." Based on this sentence, I get the feeling you don't appreciate the value of web standards? If Microsoft wants to be taken seriously ever again (they had 10+ years to make that effort with IE before they lost the browser war) all they need to do is render pages correctly, not in their own special way. That also means not inventing special-to-Microsoft codes. Microsoft has a long record of screwing the greater community for their own self-interest. For example, sabotaging Java.
- Chronic31 12y ago
  Your last sentence describes Google.
  - anonbanker 12y ago
    Absolutely correct. We should be trusting neither.
  - icantthinkofone 12y ago
    I thoroughly disagree. Net Neutrality, today, is case in point. Until Chrome came along, Firefox was going it alone against IE. Until Google Fiber came along, we all had less than 10Mb downloads for $80/month. There's much, much more. Pick better battles. Google is not your enemy.
    - girvo 12y ago
      A company can achieve good things, and still be an enemy. There are other examples of unsavoury things Google has done as well. That said, I think applying morality to a company is silly; despite what the law may say, I'll never consider a corporation a person. It's a collection of people, and people can do good and bad things.
    - BuckRogers 12y ago
      That's suggestive that Google is our friend, which it is not. It's a for-profit entity, thus just as much as our convenient friend as any other and in general an enemy whose sole purpose is to separate you from your money. Don't get it twisted any other way. If you're looking for friends, pick a non-profit.
    - indians_pro 12y ago
      lol people like you are going to be happy when in a decade, everyone is going to be wearing google glasses, browsing through google chrome, having a google fiber internet connection, and 'renting' self-driving google cars. Cameras everywhere, control of the source internet, control of the browser, and I bet through some magic prominent universities decide that Go is the perfect language to teach beginners, over Python/C++/others- and start issuing free chromebooks to students. Just look at how they've been fucking up google voice to drive users to Hangouts to get more control. Look at how sometimes, Hangouts randomly doesn't give you notifications of new messages, so that you're kept on your toes and keep checking your mobile frequently. Look at how google maps absolutely _degrades_ and the 'famed' UI starts to look retarded when you turn off 'Location sharing'. Haha, google is definitely going to have the last laugh. Edward Snowden must be crying somewhere right now. There's going to be a day, when your 3 months old search for 'google services open source alternatives' gets you flagged as disqualified to being hired in Google/(maybe) other companies. And it's not going to stop. Google is going to keep getting bigger and bigger, keep growing tentacles, and keep getting more and more in control, and omniscient. I wonder how the great hackers of ages past allowed the whole technology industry to come to this, to let the situation become so bad. There should have been dozens of rms', but everyone kept quiet and rolled over. Now, it's near impossible to be free of google's touch when browsing the internet. EDIT : Hmm, downvoted without a comment. Looks like the 'crawlers' picked this up. I'm scared now.
  - cm127 12y ago
    I wasn't aware of this. Source? Coincidentally, I'm not seeing results when I Google: google sabotage java.
    - giaour 12y ago
      Try googling "android"
- Throwaway90283 12y ago
  I should clarify, I think they should be strictly following web standards, and by doing so, they help to force those sites not following standards to update their code, or die. I don't want my browser using extra resources, and having extra features and menus to improve compatibility with someone's sloppy, hacked together website from the 90s. I'd rather that site appear broken because it's not following standards, and by doing so, it's encouraged to update, or be replaced by someone else. I believe this would allow for a smaller browser footprint, and we'd see better coded websites in the long run, instead of carrying them through. For example, we get a new IE browser, that follows standards to the T. If your site doesn't work in IE, it's not because "it's IE, use a real browser", it's because you didn't code your site properly. In the video they talk about how they would previously look at the top 10k websites and ensure compatibility, and now they're looking at millions and billions. They shouldn't look at anything. If Reddit doesn't work in the new version of IE, because they're not following standards, then so be it. Don't look at methods of relaxing those standards and bending the rules to get Reddit working. Leave it broken, and let the users apply pressure to Reddit because the site isn't working in IE. As I said above, they can't laugh off IE anymore, because it's not some dumb, outdated browser. Instead, it's following standards, so Reddit is broken, not IE. It would be the gold standard... in standards. You check to make sure your site works in IE, because if it does, then you coded it right. If your site displays fine in Firefox and Chrome, you don't really know if it's coded properly, or if they just held your hand to make it display correctly.
Encosia 12y ago
Have you used IE in the past few years? IE is (by far) already the fastest browser on my two Windows 10 machines right now. That was also the case when they were running Windows 8 and 8.1 in the past. The latest versions of IE make Chrome feel like Netscape Communicator 4, and they're noticeably faster than Firefox too. If it had a nice LastPass extension, Ghostery, Buffer, and a few others, I'd probably be using IE as my default browser right now.
- blacksmith_tb 12y ago
  Sadly, judging from FF and Chrome both, extensions lead to unavoidable slowdowns. Which makes them a "can't live with them, can't live without them" proposition. Every time I create a new profile, I am shocked by how fast it is. Then the avalanche of ads and tracking pixels forces me to install ABE or uBlock, and the downward spiral begins.
  - Encosia 12y ago
    Definitely, that's probably one of the biggest dangers of opening IE up to more extensions. On Windows at least, the divide between Chrome/FF and IE is more fundamental though. Last month, I spent a week really seriously trying to evaluate switching to Firefox or IE, using equivalent extensions (essentially just LastPass, IIRC). Chrome was still awfully clunky compared to Win10's IE TP, especially around touch scroll/zoom/swipe inputs.
  - rhengles 12y ago
    I think MS already has a solution for this. http://blogs.msdn.com/b/ie/archive/2010/09/17/add-ons-staying-in-control-of-your-browsing-experience.aspx http://blogs.msdn.com/b/ie/archive/2010/09/17/add-ons-stayin...
- icantthinkofone 12y ago
  Speed is not the mark of a good browser. If you are using speed as your mark, then you have never coded for the web and have never gone through the trials and tribulations of IE. If speed was the target, then Lynx would be the best of browsers. http://html5test.com/ http://html5test.com/ http://css3test.com/ http://css3test.com/
gtjrossi 12y ago
Actually, our approach is effectively yielding the results you're looking for. Removal of old IE legacy cruft is slimming Spartan's disk and memory footprint when compared with IE. Advances in the Chakra engine are pushing performance ahead. We're rearchitecting our DOM, which is yielding perf and security wins too. We're planning an extension platform also, with top add-ons like ad block being a clear target. There's a bit of a catch 22 with "get users" and "watch compatibility fix itself" as broken compatibility is often cited as a top reason for users to switch browsers. It's hard to grow users without investing in compatibility. So what we're doing is defining our "blend" of investments. Right now we have a heavy amount of interop investments in our blend as we think that's important for users. Over time (months, not years) the major interop gaps will disappear and I expect we'll see a shift in that blend to increase investments in other areas. (Jacob Rossi, Spartan platform engineering team)
- tkubacki 12y ago
  hope you are going to support Shadow DOM/Web components soon - otherwise we will face new generation of "works only on Firefox and Chrome" apps
- jsprogrammer 12y ago
  Will there be an open source Linux build? Edit: Really? Downmods for a legitimate question?
  - scrollaway 12y ago
    I think you got downvoted for asking a foolish question. If there were linux builds in the plans, they would have announced it. If open sourcing the whole thing was planned... well, you get the idea.
    - jsprogrammer 12y ago
      I don't see what is foolish about the question (and was taught [and believe] that there are no foolish questions). MS has opened up their flagship development platform (.NET) and even has it building on Linux. MS will also rent you Linux virtual machines. The post also talks about interoperability and running across many kinds of devices, including "try out RemoteIE which will stream our latest browser from the Azure cloud to Windows, iOS or Android devices."
Ajedi32 12y ago
>This entire project seems to be about improving compatibility with older websites, by adding more algorithms and layers to the rendering process. Uh... isn't that exactly the opposite of what they're actually doing here? Did you read the article? They're creating a new rendering engine that has all the backwards compatibility crap stripped out, so that they don't accidentally break compatibility while making changes to the layout engine they're using for legacy sites. (I.E. They're removing layers from the rendering process, not adding them.) > Or, leave IE11 as the default now for compatibility, and spin off a new browser called IE Lightning. Uh... they kind of did. It's called Spartan.

gcb0 12y ago

i think that is what they are going against...

pjbrunet 12y ago

"If people start to switch over, then more sites will be developed to work in IE Lightning." Based on this sentence, I get the feeling you don't appreciate the value of web standards? If Microsoft wants to be taken seriously ever again (they had 10+ years to make that effort with IE before they lost the browser war) all they need to do is render pages correctly, not in their own special way. That also means not inventing special-to-Microsoft codes. Microsoft has a long record of screwing the greater community for their own self-interest. For example, sabotaging Java.

Chronic31 12y ago
Your last sentence describes Google.
- anonbanker 12y ago
  Absolutely correct. We should be trusting neither.
- icantthinkofone 12y ago
  I thoroughly disagree. Net Neutrality, today, is case in point. Until Chrome came along, Firefox was going it alone against IE. Until Google Fiber came along, we all had less than 10Mb downloads for $80/month. There's much, much more. Pick better battles. Google is not your enemy.
  - girvo 12y ago
    A company can achieve good things, and still be an enemy. There are other examples of unsavoury things Google has done as well. That said, I think applying morality to a company is silly; despite what the law may say, I'll never consider a corporation a person. It's a collection of people, and people can do good and bad things.
  - BuckRogers 12y ago
    That's suggestive that Google is our friend, which it is not. It's a for-profit entity, thus just as much as our convenient friend as any other and in general an enemy whose sole purpose is to separate you from your money. Don't get it twisted any other way. If you're looking for friends, pick a non-profit.
  - indians_pro 12y ago
    lol people like you are going to be happy when in a decade, everyone is going to be wearing google glasses, browsing through google chrome, having a google fiber internet connection, and 'renting' self-driving google cars. Cameras everywhere, control of the source internet, control of the browser, and I bet through some magic prominent universities decide that Go is the perfect language to teach beginners, over Python/C++/others- and start issuing free chromebooks to students. Just look at how they've been fucking up google voice to drive users to Hangouts to get more control. Look at how sometimes, Hangouts randomly doesn't give you notifications of new messages, so that you're kept on your toes and keep checking your mobile frequently. Look at how google maps absolutely _degrades_ and the 'famed' UI starts to look retarded when you turn off 'Location sharing'. Haha, google is definitely going to have the last laugh. Edward Snowden must be crying somewhere right now. There's going to be a day, when your 3 months old search for 'google services open source alternatives' gets you flagged as disqualified to being hired in Google/(maybe) other companies. And it's not going to stop. Google is going to keep getting bigger and bigger, keep growing tentacles, and keep getting more and more in control, and omniscient. I wonder how the great hackers of ages past allowed the whole technology industry to come to this, to let the situation become so bad. There should have been dozens of rms', but everyone kept quiet and rolled over. Now, it's near impossible to be free of google's touch when browsing the internet. EDIT : Hmm, downvoted without a comment. Looks like the 'crawlers' picked this up. I'm scared now.
- cm127 12y ago
  I wasn't aware of this. Source? Coincidentally, I'm not seeing results when I Google: google sabotage java.
  - giaour 12y ago
    Try googling "android"
Throwaway90283 12y ago
I should clarify, I think they should be strictly following web standards, and by doing so, they help to force those sites not following standards to update their code, or die. I don't want my browser using extra resources, and having extra features and menus to improve compatibility with someone's sloppy, hacked together website from the 90s. I'd rather that site appear broken because it's not following standards, and by doing so, it's encouraged to update, or be replaced by someone else. I believe this would allow for a smaller browser footprint, and we'd see better coded websites in the long run, instead of carrying them through. For example, we get a new IE browser, that follows standards to the T. If your site doesn't work in IE, it's not because "it's IE, use a real browser", it's because you didn't code your site properly. In the video they talk about how they would previously look at the top 10k websites and ensure compatibility, and now they're looking at millions and billions. They shouldn't look at anything. If Reddit doesn't work in the new version of IE, because they're not following standards, then so be it. Don't look at methods of relaxing those standards and bending the rules to get Reddit working. Leave it broken, and let the users apply pressure to Reddit because the site isn't working in IE. As I said above, they can't laugh off IE anymore, because it's not some dumb, outdated browser. Instead, it's following standards, so Reddit is broken, not IE. It would be the gold standard... in standards. You check to make sure your site works in IE, because if it does, then you coded it right. If your site displays fine in Firefox and Chrome, you don't really know if it's coded properly, or if they just held your hand to make it display correctly.

Encosia 12y ago

Have you used IE in the past few years? IE is (by far) already the fastest browser on my two Windows 10 machines right now. That was also the case when they were running Windows 8 and 8.1 in the past. The latest versions of IE make Chrome feel like Netscape Communicator 4, and they're noticeably faster than Firefox too. If it had a nice LastPass extension, Ghostery, Buffer, and a few others, I'd probably be using IE as my default browser right now.

blacksmith_tb 12y ago
Sadly, judging from FF and Chrome both, extensions lead to unavoidable slowdowns. Which makes them a "can't live with them, can't live without them" proposition. Every time I create a new profile, I am shocked by how fast it is. Then the avalanche of ads and tracking pixels forces me to install ABE or uBlock, and the downward spiral begins.
- Encosia 12y ago
  Definitely, that's probably one of the biggest dangers of opening IE up to more extensions. On Windows at least, the divide between Chrome/FF and IE is more fundamental though. Last month, I spent a week really seriously trying to evaluate switching to Firefox or IE, using equivalent extensions (essentially just LastPass, IIRC). Chrome was still awfully clunky compared to Win10's IE TP, especially around touch scroll/zoom/swipe inputs.
- rhengles 12y ago
  I think MS already has a solution for this. http://blogs.msdn.com/b/ie/archive/2010/09/17/add-ons-staying-in-control-of-your-browsing-experience.aspx http://blogs.msdn.com/b/ie/archive/2010/09/17/add-ons-stayin...
icantthinkofone 12y ago
Speed is not the mark of a good browser. If you are using speed as your mark, then you have never coded for the web and have never gone through the trials and tribulations of IE. If speed was the target, then Lynx would be the best of browsers. http://html5test.com/ http://html5test.com/ http://css3test.com/ http://css3test.com/

gtjrossi 12y ago

Actually, our approach is effectively yielding the results you're looking for. Removal of old IE legacy cruft is slimming Spartan's disk and memory footprint when compared with IE. Advances in the Chakra engine are pushing performance ahead. We're rearchitecting our DOM, which is yielding perf and security wins too. We're planning an extension platform also, with top add-ons like ad block being a clear target. There's a bit of a catch 22 with "get users" and "watch compatibility fix itself" as broken compatibility is often cited as a top reason for users to switch browsers. It's hard to grow users without investing in compatibility. So what we're doing is defining our "blend" of investments. Right now we have a heavy amount of interop investments in our blend as we think that's important for users. Over time (months, not years) the major interop gaps will disappear and I expect we'll see a shift in that blend to increase investments in other areas. (Jacob Rossi, Spartan platform engineering team)

tkubacki 12y ago
hope you are going to support Shadow DOM/Web components soon - otherwise we will face new generation of "works only on Firefox and Chrome" apps
jsprogrammer 12y ago
Will there be an open source Linux build? Edit: Really? Downmods for a legitimate question?
- scrollaway 12y ago
  I think you got downvoted for asking a foolish question. If there were linux builds in the plans, they would have announced it. If open sourcing the whole thing was planned... well, you get the idea.
  - jsprogrammer 12y ago
    I don't see what is foolish about the question (and was taught [and believe] that there are no foolish questions). MS has opened up their flagship development platform (.NET) and even has it building on Linux. MS will also rent you Linux virtual machines. The post also talks about interoperability and running across many kinds of devices, including "try out RemoteIE which will stream our latest browser from the Azure cloud to Windows, iOS or Android devices."

Ajedi32 12y ago

>This entire project seems to be about improving compatibility with older websites, by adding more algorithms and layers to the rendering process. Uh... isn't that exactly the opposite of what they're actually doing here? Did you read the article? They're creating a new rendering engine that has all the backwards compatibility crap stripped out, so that they don't accidentally break compatibility while making changes to the layout engine they're using for legacy sites. (I.E. They're removing layers from the rendering process, not adding them.) > Or, leave IE11 as the default now for compatibility, and spin off a new browser called IE Lightning. Uh... they kind of did. It's called Spartan.