Does this mean we are going to have to write even MORE hack-ish code for future projects??
[New Microsoft Browser][1]
[1]: http://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/personal/2014/12/29/microsoft-browser/21001729/
The IE name is tarnished. They just want a fresh start. I’m open for it. Wondered how they were going to work around the tarnished IE name.
This might work, but ONLY if they bring it up to the same level of DOM-compliance as Chrome and FF.
Think Microsoft (who is so used to trying to force the world into its image) can pull that off?
V/r,
They lost that battle so I do believe they’ll bring it up to parr. I honestly want to believe they won’t try and f*** us over this time. Mainly due to the fact that they don’t have market control. They can’t call the shots. They are finally our b****.
To be completely honest, I wasn’t too upset at IE11 support (CSS side of things.)
I’m not a JS guy so I don’t know how things were on that world.
2 Likes
Och… the difference as far as JS goes is really two things:
- The fact that from the very beginning, IE had to be SO-O-O-O unique and different.
- Starting around IE7, Micro$oft would only GRADUALLY increase IE’s DOM-compliance (ie, IE6 was x% DOM-compliant, IE7 became x+10%, IE8 x + 20%, IE9 x + 30%, etc.), so hack-ish code would be written one way for IE6 and earlier, with minor differences for IE7, slightly better for IE8, slightly better than that for IE9, etc.
And don’t even get me started on issues that resulted from “Compatibility View”. GAH!
A huge issue on CSS side as well. Debugging peoples code here often was caused due to compatibility mode.
1 Like
Perhaps they will make this product Open Source; a trend that seems to be emerging from Microsoft lately.
1 Like
[quote=“ParkinT, post:7, topic:108541, full:true”]
Perhaps they will make this product Open Source; a trend that seems to be emerging from Microsoft lately.
[/quote]Not sure if I think that’s a nice thought, or a potential nightmare. Esp if this new browser will be as integrated into the OS as IE is.
I would think that if anything at all is going to change that it would be to make it independent of the browser - there are too many other platforms out there that don’t run windows now for Microsoft to limit their browser to one operating system.
1 Like
Ugh. Not sure if I’d be thrilled with that. Microsoft’s browser running on my Linux system. Sounds dirty to me… 
2 Likes
No one has said that anyone will ever use the new browser - basically Microsoft is in the same position now with regard to introducing a new browser as IBM were in the late 1990s. How many people ever used IBM’s browser?
1 Like
I didn’t even know IBM made a browser. But, then again, in the 90’s, I was connecting to the internet via phone dial-up and using the *nix shell for everything.
That’s a good point.
I didn’t even know IBM made a browser.
IBM pretty much makes a crappy version of everything, then sells it to a bunch of kool-aid drinkers for $5,000 a license.
source: I work in an IBM shop.
Seriously, it’s kinda sad. I moved off linux desktop because I got tired of crappy FOSS, most of IBM’s software is just like crappy FOSS, except worse, and costs more than anyone but a business with too much money and not enough sense can afford.
Thankfully, my team aren’t too much of IBM kool-aid drinkers outside of AIX and DB2.
1 Like
I used to be a PC tech and offsite network admin in the late 90’s. I hated, hated, HATED working on IBM computers, HP computers, and Compaq “home” computers. They were all a huge PITA to work on, no matter how modular they tried to make 'em. So I guess I’m not surprised that IBM’s browser was yet another crappy version.
2 Likes
There is still a current version of that browser - isn’t there?
There may well be. I have not kept up-to-date.
My first experience was when I worked for Stratus Computers (in the early 90s) with HP-UX. I also worked with Solaris and it was the ONLY browser there too (IIRC).
Wow. Released on Valentine’s Day 
of this year !!!
Lynx for Windows? That seems to be an oxymoron.
2 Likes