4 ms·
One more Internet Explorer to worry about
- dkasper 17y agobut it feels so incredibly late in the game to improve their font rendering to acceptable, never mind pushing the limits a little. Late in the game compared to what? The browser wars are really heating up again! Plus, it's not like the internet is going anywhere sometime soon, so it seems kind of odd to call it "late" in the game.
- sid0 17y agoI have no idea what he's talking about there. Firefox supports ligatures, but ultimately relies on the OS to do the font rendering, just like IE does. DirectWrite's support for Y-directional subpixel antialiasing and subpixel positioning is what IE9 will benefit from. (A DirectWrite backend is in the works for Firefox, too.) DirectWrite rendering is better than the next best Windows rendering, which has so far been the best rendering across OSes -- yes, this is a personal opinion, and no, I'm not interested in debating the relative merits of Windows and OS X rendering. Unless Firefox gets its DirectWrite backend first, IE9 will have the best rendering available on any desktop platform.
- nickpp 17y agoHe lost ANY credibility when he started bashing IE's font rendering. Not only that is the same OS rendering used by Firefox, but with Cleartype is one of the best font rendering out there. Some think of it as better than OS X's. As the parent comment said, the future is even better: DirectWrite.
- m_eiman 17y agoSo he's complaining about both a) IE is bad and b) Microsoft is trying to make it better. I suppose he'd like them to just discontinue the whole thing, then? Not the most likely, or even desirable, outcome.
- daeken 17y agoIs it just me, or was there absolutely no content here? Frankly, I'm glad to see MS stepping up to the plate and working towards a better browser. If you don't like IE9, don't use it, but more competition is never a bad thing.
- dazzawazza 17y agoMore competition is never a bad thing, true. But IE is so far behind it's genuinely slowing the development of the internet and it really looks like IE9.x will continue this trend. Forget the rendering differences (for which you can argue there are legacy issues that MS should care about) the pure speed of JS in the various IE's REALLY hurts the internet. Even a moderately complex Google maps mash up requires serious thought on IE as it's just SO slow.
- Tichy 17y agoJS has only recently picked up speed, with vastly improved implementations in recent browser versions. It is not surprising that the one or other vendor is lagging behind, but why shouldn't they be able to catch up? So what is bad about a new IE with faster JS?
- dazzawazza 17y agoMy worry is that the leading (most popular) browser is the slowest. On the web you need to work to the lowest common browser.
- Tichy 17y agoI only skimmed the article, but it looked as if IE9 is not that much slower than the others. I am sure they'll try to catch up before the final release. As for IE6, I suppose Microsoft would like to get rid of it, too. I don't know who still uses it anyway - it seems to require extra effort to stick to it. Must be all the Windows 98 users?
- JamieEi 17y ago
- motters 17y agoI stopped worrying about Internet Explorer in 2004.
- deleted 17y ago[deleted]
- natch 17y agoPerfect headline.
- rbanffy 17y agoThere is a simpler solution: not worrying about IE. Make your business model in such a way you don't need users who don't know better than not to use IE.