great work, better CSS3 support too
I don’t believe Microsoft will turn to a new rendering engine
IMHO they do not need to. I created a maze 5 and a half years ago that would only worked in IE. Then everone was moaning that they were creating propriety code. I have just recently got the mazes working in all recent and up-to-date browsers (Finally). Each use their own propriety methods.
IE Renders it best, even when opacity has been set to less than 100%. Google does match it, Opera renders it almost as fast but slow at moving the cube. Firefox on WindowsXP is the worst. Really slow at rendering the page, and incredibly slow at moving the cube.
I prefer Microsoft. They have stuck to their business modal from day 1. Google on the other hand made themselves out to be company for the people. I don’t think they are. To me they want to own the internet.
How am I singing it’s phrases, I simply noted that it’s popular.
Sorry if you didn’t realise it but Android is now approaching Apple’s iPhone in respect to market dominance.
Wasn’t everyone earlier this thread lamenting about a piece of software where 50% or more weren’t on the latest version, and that it’s not possible for many to upgrade to the latest version because of draconian network operators?
I think Android’s cool and all but I don’t think it’s fair to sing its praises if you’re complaining about IE’s fragmentation since the situations and numbers are very similar.
As for IE9, great improvements but ultimately I see IE going by the wayside over the next few years, much like “personal computers” (PC and Mac) in general.
This is a good news. I would like to see IE9 beating other browsers.
That’s good news, I’m certainly glad the browser wars have started up again.
Kudos to the IE team, they’re heading in the right direction
Great, so that’s 4 IE versions I’ll have to worry about ( considering my sites’ specific demographic for IE6 is still nowhere near lower than 25% hence still supporting it for the next 3 years ). IE6 should’ve been IE7, IE7 should’ve been IE8 and IE8 should have been IE9. By the time IE9 comes around it will support what IE8 should have supported but again, will be behind the other browsers’ rendering engines. They should just seriously stop developing, save all that time and use Webkit.
Not impressed at all.
It is good news BUT I wish they use WebKit…
Let’s face it, whatever works in IE8 will work in IE9, so it’s no big deal. I can’t believe there are actually complaints that MS are updating their browser at more or less the same pace as Mozilla, Opera, etc. It’s a fantastic opportunity for actually using the CSS3 stuff that so far everyone but IE has been supporting, for progressively enhancing things (not for layout or important things like that).
I don’t think that the complaint is that Microsoft is developing a new version… but that it took them too long to develope IE7 and IE8 and therefore we are still having to deal with IE6.
It seems that Microsoft is again at work. Windows 7 released, now IE9… I’m glad that they’re adding CSS3 support too.
Each version of IE has specific DOM/CSS bugs ( and as we all know usually IE browsers have dozens of times more bugs than the other browser vendors ), I’m complaining because IE9 would introduce yet another whole slew of them even if they fixed the ones they were supposed to have fixed years ago. If they stopped it here we’d only have to worry about 3 IE versions and if they transitioned to using Webkit we’d spend hundreds of less hours of future time potentially running into future bugs and discrepancies between 4 IE versions. Ugh. While the IE team is busy making IE9 support features from a year ago, Opera/Mozilla/Safari devs will implement newer features in the next 2 years which the IE team won’t know about or even have time to implement, so we’ll be back to square one at them not keeping up with the rapid pace of web development in this day and age.
I’m pleased to see the IE team working on this.
It would be great if they could market their new browser in the media though. I’m often suprised with how little people know about browsers.
Which version of IE do you use at…?
Office 2007 is the newest version so that’s pretty up-to-date, IE will be either version 6,7 or 8.
Hmm, don’t know.
I guess the problem is that IE is three seperate browsers (soon to be 4), whereas e.g. Firefox is seen as one, not ff1 ff1.5 ff2 ff3. Perhaps it’s just me, but I don’t test every version of webkit or ff, I do have to test every version of IE though.
I’m not surprised. I’m sure the next Win is in the works as well. If they didn’t always have a new version of their products in the works what would be the point?
I guess the problem is that IE is three seperate browsers (soon to be 4), whereas e.g. Firefox is seen as one, not ff1 ff1.5 ff2 ff3. Perhaps it’s just me, but I don’t test every version of webkit or ff
That’s potentially just as wrong. For example, Firefox didn’t support :last-child or display:inline-block until pretty recently. If you go back to FF2, there are further gaps in support that people might take for granted nowadays and which could seriously break a web page. But yeah, of course the proportion of FF2 users is near-negligible, whereas the proportion of IE6 users (a far inferior browser) is not, so the urgency behind testing and supporting FF2 is not as high.
I’d go as far as to say it’s only important to support the latest versions of the other browsers. IE is the anomaly where users haven’t chosen to use it.
@hash, that’s generally because Firefox has built-in updating mechanism’s, and has a more technically minded user base than IE. IE is also relied upon in many organisations, so upgrading IE in such an organisation would require that all internal web applications, not only work in a more recent version of IE, but have vendor support for that particular version.
While I agree, it would be very nice if IE9 used webkit, I imagine there would be conflicting licensing issues. It’s just another thing to consider.
When I interviewed Chris Wilson ahead of IE7’s release, this is what he had to say about adopting WebKit or Gecko in Internet Explorer:
As for building on WebKit or Gecko or any of the other engines, part of that I’m sure probably is that we would have to leap through some licensing challenges there. But, the biggest reason for me is that there’s a real responsibility when we ship code, particularly to half a billion people, and we would be taking on that responsibility for a set of code that we don’t own, we didn’t come up with it, we’re not experts in it, and there’s a lot of code there. But we’re blamed if something goes wrong; even further than that, we’re responsible for it if something goes wrong. So, you know, if there’s a security exploit, we have to go fix it, we have to go deliver the fix immediately, or it’s-- we’re on the line for that. And that makes it a bit challenging.
Updated to IE8 users still do not have much, IE9 out again
Since then more of the CSS code is not compatible
Or want to continuously improve on the original IE
Least secure? How is it least secure? Is there any provable information that shows that the other browsers have no security issues? Out of all the browser in the wild none of them have as much built in protection as IE. So tell me, how does that make it the least secure? Because everyone attacks it? Well then we should all move to Firefox or another browser. But when that happens guess what? The attackers will follow.
Complaining because Microsoft it developing there own browser is just… Do you want another IE6 plateau? We are stuck with IE 6 because Microsoft stop developing IE for several several years. And now they have started again and you are complaining? Seriously…?