2400+ major sites that IE 8 can't render correctly

As Microsoft moves forward with IE 8 it is hoping to introduce new features that will help stop the bleeding of consumers switching to other browsers. While many hope that IE 8 will also help to ease webmasters pain of making every site work on every browser, that dream may not come true.

Mary-Jo Foley of ZDnet is reporting that IE 8's incompatibility list is at "2400 major sites and counting". These are sites that do not render correctly natively in IE 8 and require an IE 7 layer to be running to display to web page correctly. The irony is that IE 8 is more web standard compliant yet coding for its previous product is causing havoc in the new engine. The problems can range from the entire page being rendered incorrectly or only portions of the page that break due to IE 8 standards.

Below are some of the larger sites from the list, the entire list can be found here:

  • msn.com.cn
  • microsoft.com
  • yahoo.com
  • ebay.com
  • facebook.com
  • apple.com
  • flickr.com
  • dell.com

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Sins of a Solar Empire: Entrenchment - New Trailer

Next Story

Facebook: please don't delete your account

83 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

I'm a professional web developer and I tend to develop and test in a browser that follows standards better first then go back and tweak it to make sure it looks and functions the same in IE6/7/8. Yes, it's sad that I have to test it in each version of IE but that's what I'm paid to do so I can't really complain. I for one am looking forward to IE8 if it indeed is a step forward in following standards; that means less tweaking for me... hopefully =)

I still think this idea is stupid! If your site is "broke" and now works because of this list then most of them will never ever get fixed! Why fix something if it ant broke! ;)

My point is that this does not help things at all. I'd rather have had Microsoft "break the web" once now so we can finally move on. Instead, this allows lazy developers, companies and users to procrastinate for many more years to come.

The front page image is a joke: "2400+ major sites not ready for IE8"... XD
Surely the websites should comply to the W3 Web Standards, and IE8 should try to render those correctly.
IE has always been terrible, it comes as no surprise that version 8 will continue this tradition.

Wait a minute, I don't understand this at all!

Microsoft.com, Apple.com, Ebay.com, flickr.com, msn.com, yahoo.com, neowin.com, dell.com, intel.com, facebook.com and most of google sans gmail.....

All these sites render for me exactly the same with Opera, IE8 Beta from win7 beta1 and Firefox... what am I missing here? anyone actually having rendering issues with IE8 on these sites?

As far as I can tell, every properly done site renders well in IE8

If you are a professional web developer you must:

a) Been fired from most companies that have hired you

or

b) Never gotten paid for a single project because chances are, 99% of your customers use IE to look at the product they are paying you for.

This is a very dumb attitude to have. Yes, IE is not a good browser (still) but it is what most people use so if you are serious about your work (which seems like you aren't) then you will be making sure your site runs fine in IE first and THEN Firefox and finally Opera/Safari/Chrome (which are the three browsers (two rendering engines) you could get away with possibly)...

the problem lately with Web coding is that you should not have to code your site to work on IE it should just work Code is Code if it works on one it should work on all of them. When i write a Website it test it in Every Browser Except for IE because i know that something is going to break and i do not think that i should have to code for IE i should code to make the website not make it IE complaint.

littleneutrino said,
When i write a Website it test it in Every Browser Except for IE because i know that something is going to break and i do not think that i should have to code for IE i should code to make the website not make it IE complaint.

That is just a horrible programming attitude. I hope you don't get paid for your work. IE is the dominate browser and should be supported.

littleneutrino said,
When i write a Website it test it in Every Browser Except for IE because i know that something is going to break and i do not think that i should have to code for IE i should code to make the website not make it IE complaint.

So to visit your web site people should have to download the browser of your choice? That is not going to happen, no matter how good your web site is. Website should be IE+FF+Safari compatible if you want any visitors.

I agree with JonathanMarston totally. The simple fact is some websites need to update their pages to IE8 web standards. It's like saying it's an operating systems fault if a program built for earlier builds only doesn't work on a later builds. Dumb idiots who blame a web browser for issues caused by the website itself really annoy me with their moaning and lack of common sense and intelligence.

I dunno, all of those sites look and behave similar to me from initial testing... Tried with IE8 RC1 and FF 3.1 b2 on Vista SP1.

I see a lot of comments from people who has never touch the codes before but trying to debate on this. People! Your statements are not fooling the web developers. Leave some common sense.

This article is poorly written and totally misleading. The title should be "2400+ major sites that still haven't been updated for the pending IE8 release". The issue isn't IE8 "can't render" them correctly. The issue is they have been written for IE7 and when viewed with IE8's standards mode they break. Luckily, MS created the compatibility mode list (you know, the one with 2400+ major sites in it) that allows IE8 to render them correctly.

Sorry but the unprofessional FUD you're spreading doesn't look any better here than anywhere else...

That's exactly what I was thinking. Seems a lot of people are just going to misread it as IE8's standard compliance doesn't work. It's just that nobody has updated the code yet.

Oh, and the IE team doesn't control the Microsoft websites - it's up to each team to update their site.

That's the problem with articles like this. Just sensationalism at its best...

Those sites need to stat updating their tags so IE8 can render them properly while in standards mode. Not the other way around, but i think some sites will hesitate to do that, at least not for a while.

@JonathanMarston, Quikboy and ajua -

Thank you for pointing out your issues with this article, however, in future we have a 'Report a problem' feature on the Neowin news articles where you can inform us of these things. The news team see those faster than comments and they tend to not interrupt the flow of discussion. Please see this screenshot for a quick reminder or for more information, please visit http://www.neowin.net/forum/index.php?showtopic=734026&st=0.

There is a chance that the news reporters and editors will not see your suggestions here, but they definitely will if you use the feature mentioned above.

As we would like to keep the news discussion clean and relevant, comments like this will be deleted in future and suggestions forwarded to the news reporters and editors.

Thank you.
CalumJR.

That's funny, if you look at the source code for Microsoft.com, they have added the meta tag that forces IE8 to render in IE7 compatibility mode... That is pretty pathetic...

Yeah, I'm not really impressed with IE8 at all - I had much higher hopes for it but even sites that I have coded (not perfect, ok, but working fine in Chrome and Firefox and IE7 using the exact same code) look like crap in IE8. I personally think they have problems with their rendering engine still. I am not a psycho XHTML 1.1 Strict maniac but still... I don't think all the problems are only from IE8's standards compliance but maybe that's just me...

Obry said,
That's funny, if you look at the source code for Microsoft.com, they have added the meta tag that forces IE8 to render in IE7 compatibility mode... That is pretty pathetic...

I don't think that is pathetic at all.

Microsoft are obviously using their resources for more important things than re-writing a whole website, at the moment.

Eventually, they will re-write the website when they have time/resources, but why bother at the moment when they can bypass it whilst they have more important things to focus on?

CalumJR said,
I don't think that is pathetic at all.

Microsoft are obviously using their resources for more important things than re-writing a whole website, at the moment.

Eventually, they will re-write the website when they have time/resources, but why bother at the moment when they can bypass it whilst they have more important things to focus on?

"More important things to focus on?" - This is often a question or point that people make that never makes sense. Surely a company as big and wealthy as Microsoft would have resources for every single part of their business. You don't think every single person is working on Windows 7, do you?

michael.dobrofsky
Surely a company as big and wealthy as Microsoft would have resources for every single part of their business

No company is big enough that they should be expected to waste money and resources on anything - they have a responsibility to their shareholders not to be wasteful.

Seriously, what would Microsoft gain by updating microsoft.com for IE8's standards mode when they can simply add the meta tag to put IE8 into compatibility mode and be done with it?

I am not a psycho XHTML 1.1 Strict maniac but still...

Just as well, as no site in XHTML1.1 renders in any version of IE unless the content type is incorrectly set to "text/xml" instead of "application/xhtml+xml" This is what Distler's Blog does, mainly because it is less hassle than running XHTML through XSLT to convert it into something IE won't present a download dialog for.

michael.dobrofsky said,
You don't think every single person is working on Windows 7, do you?

No, they are working on the many software products they develop (Windows 7, Windows Vista updates, Visual Studio, Office, Internet Explorer, etc) as well as their online MSN and Windows Live services.

In their eyes this would be a very minor issue, because instead of changing the whole code of a website, they can just add a conditional comment, or something, to the code. :)


@JonathanMarston -

I agree completely.

smooth_criminal1990 said,
big wow. As a regular firefox user, I find plenty of sites that it doesn't render correctly

Really? Can't tell you when the last time I saw a site not rendering properly in firefox.

Hi,

- Know what ? I just checked "microsoft.com" on IE8 Beta2, and it renders perfect. Same thing for "yahoo.com". So let's just assume that IETeam are actually intelligent people and won't release a browser that doesn't render half the web. How about waiting for the product to be actually finalized and publicly available before killing it ?

That's the point of beta software, to find the flaws. Why wait until they release the gold 1.0? at that point is pretty useless and will need more patching.

I think some people are missing the point of the Compatibility List. The whole aim is so that sites which are providing IE specific code which breaks when rendered in standards mode can be rendered in IE7 mode, thus displaying correctly to the user. This means major sites display 'correctly' (as they did in IE7) in IE8. If webmasters update their site to hand IE8 the same code as Firefox then they will display correctly in standards mode. All they then need to do is ask Microsoft to remove them from the Compatibility List. I think this is a great step forward, providing web standards and compatibility for sites which don't hand IE8 good code.

IE fails, for ever.
Sites working fine in Firefox, Opera and Safari, yet it fails in IE - web developers have to resort to hacks and stuff to get it render properly in IE.

Maybe because those sits think it's still IE6 or IE7 and don't try to render/use IE8's standards mode?

In which case it's the sites fault and not IEs.

Yeah if it actually updated the page as you type it'd be a lot more useful rather than having to click the stupid edit button over and over.

Funny how Microsoft.com is in the list. You would think that site would be 100% IE8 compatible. Tisk tisk...another reason why I wont use IE8.

Do you even visit Microsoft.com often? You're not using IE8 because of that? It does render in "compatibility" mode if a site doesn't work by default in IE8 you know. Oh, but you wouldn't because you haven't even tried it yet.

it's the most important move to keep IE in the game. I'll be more happy to hear that IE8 breaks webpages while standard-compliance.

But that's to be expected from Microsoft.

To quote my earlier post from another news article today (aimed at a different Apple fanatic):

Oh look, you have an Apple logo in your profile, what a surprise :rolleyes:. Bashing everything MS is getting boring now.

@James123:

It's best not to reply to comments like this any more as we are cracking down with the moderation in the news articles ;)

Comments like this and their replies really does ruin the flow of appropriate discussion.

If the user agent were changed to mimic Firefox, would the pages render correctly. If IE8 is more standards compliant, it probably just needs a more standards compatible page.

You could try that out I guess? I think IEPro lets you change that? Or something else out there probably does.

I think most of the problems with IE8 standards mode is that sites think it's IE7 or 6 and just send that out which breaks things until you switch IE8 into compatibility view.

No kidding, that is pretty pathetic. I'd understand maybe if it was sites no one's really heard of, but these are all major sites...

Not only embarassing, it's just sad.

Well I think their focus is to make sure that IE8 is indeed web-standard compliance. Everything will move from that point on once MS get the standard correctly implemented in IE8. I'm happy to see how many sites render incorrectly, cuz that means how many sites still spitting the old IE7 codes.

IE8 crashes on several sites.
It also crashes on curse.com even 1000 times after i click recover.
I tought it is cause i disabled flash, but all other sites don't make it crash...

IE8 RC1 on Windows 7 7022 doesn't crash. It's rendering in IE7 mode though by default. It doesn't even show the compatibility icon to click meaning the site told IE what mode to use (or Microsoft's list picked it up)

SHoTTa35 said,
IE8 RC1 on Windows 7 7022 doesn't crash. It's rendering in IE7 mode though by default. It doesn't even show the compatibility icon to click meaning the site told IE what mode to use (or Microsoft's list picked it up)

IE8 rc1 here on vista, no crash!

A fair few I've never heard of, so whether they are major or not I'm not sure. However it's a bit unfair to count each site's portal separately e.g. google.com, google.pl... to come up with 2400. In know the list is from Microsoft but it's been extracted from an XML file.

When you factor in those region specific domain there is quite a lot of repition as you said. But big numbers make a better headline I guess.

Also, each address would probably have different code as well.

I remember validating both www.yahoo.com and www.yahoo.co.uk recently, just out of curiosity and www.yahoo.co.uk had significantly less errors.

I think that means counting each address makes sense, even if it belongs to the same company.

Can't even use IE8 - it doesn't render Gmail correctly, so no go at all. How can this thing be ready if there are so many problems. Not to mention it freezes after waking the PC from sleep.

Glendi said,
It's not final... it's RC1 yet.

RC1 is final product with bugs that have to be fixed. You would think it would be rendering correctly by RC1.

^Exactly. They are on the verge of releasing this thing. Seems they entire staff as MS is focused on 7 and Live services. Everything else is progressing the same. Not sure who to blame..the websites or the browser?

"RC1 is final product with bugs that have to be fixed"----No

RC1 is actually a version that is thought to be ready until more bugs that, have yet to be found, are found. Thats why its called a release candidate not a beta

But I agree that RC1 should not be having this "known" problem

You're complaining about the RC1 build? I'm stucked with the build in Win7 build 7000 and it freezes for like 5 secs for going into every single site!

In short, a release candidate is a version that could just as well be the RTM from Microsoft's point of view, in this case. Hence the "candidate" tag. It's basically a final version that is seeing some last minute testing before making it RTM. So this is also why sometimes e.g. a RC2 or whatever could end up being equal to the RTM. And yes, that IE 8 RC1 has glaring issues on this scale (Gmail is not an uncommon site), it's a bit troubling. But we'll see who's right when this thing is soon released.

you mean like Acid3 ? What does IE8 get in that again?
Most sites that don't render correctly in other browsers, don't render correctly because the site was specifically made with IE in mind and not web standards.

What's the difference? The sites that don't render properly in IE8 are also due to the same reason, that the site thinks it's IE7.

@Faisal Islam -

Firefox seems to be okay for me with every Windows Live service I've tried.

May you provide some examples please? I'm interested in this.

Tikitiki said,
If IE8 is truly web-standardized then it's not IE8's fault, it is the websites fault.



problem was that IE 7 was so popular that people coded to IE 7 standards rather than web standards

That ties into sites thinking IE8 is IE7 or IE6 and spitting out IE7 code when IE8 is running in standards mode.

I think if more sites just check the version number and see that it's IE8 and not 7, standards mode would work. Unless it's something IE8 still doesn't support yet.

GP007 said,
That ties into sites thinking IE8 is IE7 or IE6 and spitting out IE7 code when IE8 is running in standards mode.

I think if more sites just check the version number and see that it's IE8 and not 7, standards mode would work. Unless it's something IE8 still doesn't support yet.


it is IEs foult to NOT use Open Web Standards

Firefox, chrome, opera, safari all use web standards

thats why nobody should use IE

Its just got massive rendering problems. I've got a site that works perfectly fine in FireFox, Safari, Chrome, and IE7. But when I view it with IE8 there's all sorts of funky redraw issues. If I maximize/restore the window, it redraws correctly. Its just got some odd issues that need to be resolved before the final is released.

+rm20010 said,
Some other "major" sites include torrent indexing engines and a Japanese adult site.

Yet another very good reason not to use IE8 :D

Besides that, pitiful to see that not even their own site works with IE8 :lol: