BUILD 2013: A closer look at Internet Explorer 11

With today's launch of the Windows 8.1 Preview, Microsoft also delivered the first preview of the latest version of its web browser, Internet Explorer 11. In a media briefing at its BUILD developer conference in San Francisco, Microsoft explained why it believes that "the best experience of the web is on a Windows device with Internet Explorer 11". 

"Other browsers run everywhere, but not with excellence in one particular place," according to Microsoft's Dean Hachamovitch, corporate vice-president for Internet Explorer, "and that's an opportunity." He added that such browsers "don't have the performance or responsiveness that you want", particularly when it comes to touch. 

The limitations of other browsers, he said, are in stark contrast to IE11 on Windows 8.1. "IE11 is a lot like you - it's about more than one thing at a time", he said, noting that rival browsers on mobile devices limit users to viewing one page or tab at a time. He added that "IE11 is perfect for touch, delivering 'stick-to-your-finger' responsiveness" when navigating the web. 

With Internet Explorer 11, Microsoft is expanding on the ability to pin websites to the Start screen, with the launch of Live Tiles for sites. The company has even created its own site to help developers to take advantage of this opportunity at www.buildmypinnedsite.com, which offers a simple wizard to create code that allows sites to push notifications directly to a pinned tile on a user's Start screen.

This isn't the only enhancement in IE11. "Most of the web wasn't designed for touch, but users still expect it to just work,", said Hachamovitch. One example that was highlighted was web page navigation that relies on mouseovers, where hovering the cursor over a particular target causes a menu to open. The natural behaviour for users is to either tap the target or push and hold, which usually just activates a link which advances the user to a page that they didn't intend to navigate to, or opens a software menu bringing up browser options.

In IE11, Microsoft has integrated support for this kind of scenario, allowing users to touch a hover 'hotspot' so that the menu stays open to enable the user to click on the actual link that they're seeking. IE11 is also the first browser to fully support HTML5 drag-and-drop interaction with touch. Microsoft says that developers don't need to do anything special to make this happen on their sites; just adhere to HTML5 standards, and the browser does the rest. 

Microsoft also talked up its improved keyboard support in web page forms in its new browser; tap on a phone number field, and you'll get a number-centric keyboard; tap on a field requesting an email address, and you'll get a keyboard that includes shortcuts for URL suffixes, such as .com or co.uk. 

There's also much-improved tab support in IE11; you can now have up to 100 tabs open per window, and you can open multiple Internet Explorer windows concurrently. IE11 also manages tab resources more effectively; those tabs that haven't been active for a while will be de-prioritised, using fewer system resources than those that you're frequently jumping between. But if you then jump to a tab that's been less active for a while, it will 'instantly' come back to life with all requisite system resources available to display the page and its content as required, without affecting the user experience. 

On the user interface side of things, users can now keep the tab view permanently pinned open, rather than the slightly frustrating experience in Modern IE10 of seeing the tab thumbnail bar disappearing every time it's used.

Microsoft also says that it's dramatically improved its support for favorites on Internet Explorer 11, with a new Favorites Center, which synchronises your bookmarked sites across all of your devices through Microsoft Account integration. The favorites themselves are individually customisable too; you can choose a picture to represent the thumbnail tile for a page, rename the favorite itself, and group these bookmarks into a folder structure of your choice. 

Web account management is also offered, with the ability to save log-in details for the sites that you choose, and synchronise those details across your devices too. This is also fully customisable, allowing you to select specific sites to take advantage of this feature, or it can be deactivated entirely. 

Tabs can be synced across devices too, making it easier to maintain workflow when switching between devices.

Under the hood, Microsoft says that IE11 is the first browser to fully accelerate the entire JPEG image pipeline; the GPU decodes the image and readies it for instantaneous display. Text rendering is also dramatically improved, some thirty times faster than Internet Explorer 10, and thirty times faster than its rivals, with the whole process being delegated to the GPU, rather than exhausting the CPU with these tasks, which Microsoft says is a much more efficient and power-efficient way of processing and displaying pages. 

In another first, the company says that IE11 is currently the only browser to support the W3C resource priority stack, allowing web designers to identify which parts of the page must be loaded first and which elements - such as user comments, usually right down at the bottom of a web page - can be de-prioritised as the page loads. 

As for when we'll see Internet Explorer 11 make its way to other Microsoft platforms, the company is playing it coy for now. The company line is the usual "we have nothing to announce at this time", although Hachamovitch did add that "we work very closely with the Xbox and Windows Phone teams", hinting at future releases on those platforms - and frankly, this seems inevitable. 

And will Windows 7 ever see Internet Explorer 11? "We've made our commitment to Windows 7 very clear," he said, adding: "Wink, wink." We'll take that as a yes

Images via Microsoft

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Internet Explorer 11 will be coming to Windows 7

Next Story

Motorola gets a new logo

82 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

How do you turn it into that mode? I just have the older looking ie 10 version. it just looks like a normal explorer window.

Does anyone know how to remove a device from appearing for synced tabs?

I upgraded my Surface Pro to 8.1, then reformatted it and did a clean install, now I see my Surface Pro listed twice when I am one of my other 8.1 machines.

11 major version and still no rational extension model = epic fail. I'm sticking with chrome as i see no advantage of going back to IE

The mandatory upgrade of IE10 via Windows update already causes malfunction of several web sites with my business partners. I had to downgrade! No way to try IE11!

ray_bk said,
The mandatory upgrade of IE10 via Windows update already causes malfunction of several web sites with my business partners. I had to downgrade! No way to try IE11!

Force compatibility mode, and then notify your 'business partners' to STOP using separate code when their web site sees an IE client.

This is poor coding on the web site, not a problem with IE10. Often these type of sites are seeing IE and throwing very old IE6/7 tags at IE10 which it does not like, as it is trying to be 'only' standards compliant.

This rule goes for any weird website out there, if it doesn't look the same in IE10 as it does in other browsers, then they are coding for IE specific corrections that are NOT necessary and instead should be only looking at if the feature is supported by the client or not, not the browser itself.

I really like the new browser. Ever since IE9, I think it's the best one out there. Not only is it fast to load all kinds of different pages, it's also uncluttered. No add-ins or plug-ins to install everything just works right out of the box. Also, you can use different tracking lists like AdBlock. I'm very satisfied with my IE browser.

DarkNet said,
Why wouldn't they provide an updated browser to their currently number one operating system?

If the browser used new technologies not present in legacy OSes, then the browser can't be back-ported.

All new versions of Internet Explorer are built in the newest version of the OS - which right now, is Windows 8. There may be a platform preview or two for Windows 7, similar to the ones IE10 had, to allow those people to test the engine, but the full browser is built on the OS it was designed on first, and then backported after the browser is RTW, just like IE10 was. IE9 has been the only outlier here since IE 5.5 in that it was a new browser built on the same OS as IE8 (Win7).

DarkNet said,
Why wouldn't they provide an updated browser to their currently number one operating system?

IE10 is currently available for WIn7, and they said IE11 will too.

I am using IE11 now and to be honest, it feels really sluggish and slow. IE 10 had superior performance for me. But I'll use it for a week before reserving judgement and it is a beta so maybe some settings aren't entirely correct.

They've already released a few patches for the 8.1 Preview. I've noticed some areas of sluggishness around various parts of the OS. But, yes, it is beta as you have said. So I fully expect there to be many patches along the way. This may be related to the new kernel.

djpailo said,
I am using IE11 now and to be honest, it feels really sluggish and slow. IE 10 had superior performance for me. But I'll use it for a week before reserving judgement and it is a beta so maybe some settings aren't entirely correct.

This makes me curious to what the variation that you are seeing has been created. Video card, video drivers, etc.

Specifically do a few graphical tests at IETestDrive, and then flip your driver to Standard (generic SVGA), and see if performance goes up or down on the graphical tests and browsing in general. (This forces the OS to use the software DirectX rendering engine and should remove any GPU induced performance issues.)

The reason I am curious is that on virtually all of our systems here that we have test 8.1, the IE11 performance is something our engineers are the most impressed with, from load/render times to even a usability noticeable level above IE10 that is just smoother.

Good luck and hopefully as RTM gets closer your issues will be resolved.

I'll mention WebGL.

I just ran the conformance tests at https://www.khronos.org/regist...ebgl-conformance-tests.html and got:

Results: (14673 of 20485 passed, 12 timed out)

So it looks like they've a way to go yet. The IE release notes do state that it's an early preview of the feature so that should score better as time goes on.

Lots of WebGL demos on the web don't work for a variety of reasons. Precious few seem to perform feature detection rather than "LOL IE? No."

Ambroos said,
Nobody is going to mention support for WebGL and SPDY?

WebGL is the surprising one that took a lot of security coding to ensure unfettered code isn't able to run on the GPU like it can currently do in Chrome and Firefox. (Yes there are ways to fry a video card by visiting a WebGL site with Chrome or Firefox and get executable code running on OS X and Linux.)

Microsoft pushed back hard to get some level of protection with the WebGL team and what didn't get implemented, Microsoft includes in IE11 to ensure WebGL doesn't turn into the potential nightmare security people have been warning about.

The W3C has a safer specification as well, but it seems that Google and Mozilla are completely ignoring them when it comes to 3D and shader processing. (Ironically, Microsoft was the last holdout, fighting for the 'actual' standards based version, and they can no longer leave IE users behind as sites and content are coming online for WebGL.)

Mobius Enigma said,

(Yes there are ways to fry a video card by visiting a WebGL site with Chrome or Firefox and get executable code running on OS X and Linux.)

What? That is absolute rubbish, please link me any source that confirms this.

Ambroos said,

What? That is absolute rubbish, please link me any source that confirms this.

I just noticed your reply. I can't believe that you think this is impossible?

Knowing of any architectural flaw in a GPU would allow someone to target it with exploitive code that could permanently damage it. People once thought it was impossible for malware to cause hardware damage, but a simple virus that would strobe an older CRT monitor til it failed was an easy proof of concept.

As for references on this, start here:


"Running WebGL on top of the latest DirectX technology provides additional security. On other devices and operating systems it's possible to overwhelm the GPU and get all sorts of bad things happening. On the DirectX architecture there is time-out detection and recovery. If you overwhelm the GPU, instead of taking down the whole system, it will just reset the GPU. So we feel we have defense in depth and, with the changes in the standard, that makes it safe to implement."

...from:
http://www.neowin.net/news/so-...t-add-webgl-support-in-ie11

Going back several years there are specific WebGL projects that Microsoft referenced when they first worked to get security mechanisms added to WebGL.

As for executing code, all it takes is a web site with malicious WebGl code to attach itself or creating a psuedo GP-GPU operation to execute.

looking forward to seeing some of the testes people are going to put it through in the preview to either prove microsoft wrong about how "great" it is or to prove them right about finally making a good browser, but I know IE10 is a nightmare, Especially for our business as we now have a dedicated programmer just to recode all of our web apps to function properly as the IE10 block is not working well.

littleneutrino said,
looking forward to seeing some of the testes people are going to put it through in the preview to either prove microsoft wrong about how "great" it is or to prove them right about finally making a good browser, but I know IE10 is a nightmare, Especially for our business as we now have a dedicated programmer just to recode all of our web apps to function properly as the IE10 block is not working well.
Then IE10 isn't a nightmare, but your websites are. IE10 is a great browser, IE11 is even better and has better performance on benchmarks like Kraken (Mozilla) and V8 (Google) than Firefox and Chrome. That proves a point.

Studio384 said,
Then IE10 isn't a nightmare, but your websites are.

^This.
Try removing IE specific CSS and JScript, then tell me how much re-coding there is to do.

If something doesn't work in IE10, click the Compatibility Mode button. Worked just fine for me when trying to open Outlook Web Access 2003 (yeah, our IT department sucks). IE10 has the ability to render every page properly. But building your web apps specifically for older versions of IE will certainly cause headaches. IE10 conforms to all HTML5, CSS3, and modern JavaScript standards. Outdated code is your problem.

littleneutrino said,
looking forward to seeing some of the testes people are going to put it through in the preview to either prove microsoft wrong about how "great" it is or to prove them right about finally making a good browser, but I know IE10 is a nightmare, Especially for our business as we now have a dedicated programmer just to recode all of our web apps to function properly as the IE10 block is not working well.

You must really be coding like ****.

I haven't had a website look funny in IE after developing in Chrome/FF since like IE 8. I'm talking canvas, JS, JQuery, box2d and everything here.

As others have said, IE10 is very good at parsing and displaying standards-compliant pages. One of the major issues I have with web developers in my day-to-day is that they do browser detection, and not *feature* detection as a primary means of developing content. Note that Mozilla, Microsoft, and Google recommend this approach.

Why web devs still rely on CSS and javascript to detect browsers (and enough do it badly that it makes me sad) when the browser makers themselves don't recommend it is a little disconcerting. This will only get worse as IE11 releases and supports things like WebGL and SPDY - I have come across a few sites already to test the former and the sites basically balk because it's IE. Even though IE11 supports it (it's a beta, so performance isn't great, but it's there), the sites are using browser, and not feature, detection.

In passing, why is it that IE needs an entirely separate flavour of Adobe Flash from every other browser?
Flash is annoying and the fact that it has to be updated twice is doubly annoying.
I've never understood why IE has to be different in this way - who is doing it wrong, IE or everybody else?

IE uses a different plugin architecture (ActiveX) instead of NAPI (everyone else). In Windows 8 though, Flash is like Flash in Chrome. It's built in, so you don't have to update it for IE manually.

There are three plugin models currently in use:
- NPAPI (Netscape Plugin API), supported by Firefox/Chrome/Safari/Opera
- PPAPI (Pepper Plugin API), supported by Chrome
- ActiveX, supported by IE

PPAPI is a fork of NPAPI that supposedly allows for easier sandboxing. They all do the same thing - execute native code in the browser when prompted to. Nobody is "doing it wrong".

The only thing "wrong" about the way MS is doing it, is that they're different from everyone else. Why not settle on using what everyone else uses and move ahead. If they did, it would allow IE to have access to the giant plugin library that already exists for the other browsers.

Chrome does it differently too, and they actually changed from the norm. Until all convert to PPAPI, Microsoft isn't doing anything wrong.

According to wikipedia, ActiveX support in IE goes back to 1996 (August) with v3. In fact, IE up to 5.5 supported (some) NPAPI plugins, but dropped it for IE6 due to security reasons, according to Microsoft. Of note, Netscape Navigator 2.0 was the version that first shipped with NPAPI support, also in 1996 (March).

Given Netscape and IE were busy fighting each other at the time for marketshare (with Netscape dominating), it's probably not surprising they decided to do things differently at the plugin level, and not just markup differences.

Further, it was Netscape (pre-Mozilla) that forced IE to no use the same (proprietary) plug-in standard that Navigator did; in case you forgot, IE 3.0 originally used Netscape's standard for plug-ins (specifically, the one Netscape itself did NOT use with Navigator 3.x - the original 2.x standard).

ahinson said,
The only thing "wrong" about the way MS is doing it, is that they're different from everyone else. Why not settle on using what everyone else uses and move ahead. If they did, it would allow IE to have access to the giant plugin library that already exists for the other browsers.

They are all different from everyone else.

One reason they are different is because of how security is handled, from running a sandbox and needing an active broker to allow the plugin/addon to run.

Chrome is a bit closer to IE because of its sandbox model that is based on Vista/IE7 and the later brokering technique Microsoft helped them.

They area also different because of how the browsers are designed, and IE uses a very different model than Chrome or Firefox. This includes how 3rd extensions are handled for security and how they interface into the pipeline of execution and rendering IE uses. Everything in IE is GPU co-processed and GPU rendered and has to integrate at the correct point to maintain the acceleration.

With Windows 8 and Microsoft 'baking' in Flash support, this pretty much removes any consistency or security problems for Flash, even with 'holes' in Flash security, it still would have to violate the IE broker it runs under to cause harm, which is much harder that at level of integration.

Hopefully Flash will go away and die someday as HTML5 replaces the need; however, until then the most secure and fastest Flash experience is in IE10/11.

Deihmos said,
Without support for extensions like chrome I cannot see myself using IE if I don't have to.

Consider what extensions you 'think' you need, and then compare them to the features IE10/11 provides that removes the needs for an extension. (Protection lists/Adblocking/etc are included.)

Also consider the security risk the extensions you are using might be creating for you.

Then go look for the remaining 'must have' extensions at the IE add-on site, you should be able to find any extension you need is available. (IE had addons/extensions before Chrome existed, and it was Microsoft that showed Google how to implement the extension brokering, as Chrome originally didn't offer extension support because they needed a brokering system to get them to work in the sandbox model, which also came from Microsoft.)

Sorry but I will stick to Firefox as my default browser, which I prefer as it has features that I don't find in IE:
- Remembers my open tabs and automatically reopens them all after shutdown/restart
- Numerous add-ons easily available for customisation, and in particular
- Mouse gestures, including drag link to open in new tab
- Noscript for selective allow/block of trusted domains
- Multi-row tabs
IE may be good at what it does, but it doesn't do nearly enough.

IE10 and 11 have those already. Have you even used them?
Remember open tabs - This is an opton.
Addons -Desktop only (They don't use the same addons ase Firefox, You'd have to go look for equivalents.)
Drag link to open in new tab - Desktop, yep. Metro, right-click.
Noscript - that's an addon. Tracking protection lists do the same thing.
Multi-row tabs - if you mean stacking them I have no idea honestly, but the Metro IE has been creating extra preview rows for tabs since before Win 8 was released.

So basically, IE is good at what it does period.

Having looked again I'll concede remember-open-tabs, but not the rest:
-Add-ons generally : firefox provides many more, and a central way to search and manage them.
- Mouse gestures - IE appears not to have drag-to-open? And no gestures like rightbutton-dragleft to go back, righbutton-down-then-left to close tab, etc.
-Noscript is far more versatile than tracking protection. Eg can allow a domain temporarily.
-Multi-row tabs - not available.

So despite your comments, I'm staying with Firefox (and you should try it! - Go to Tools|Addons, then load up Noscript, Firegestures, Quickdrag, TabKit).
IE is too far behind on usability, playing too safe with lowest-common-denominator basic features.

Edited by gb8080, Jun 27 2013, 1:27pm :

Agreed. I use Firefox and IE is definitely lagging behind in terms of add-ons.
You're never going sell someone on add-ons though. I've tried, and the IE kids just say they don't need them rather than seeing the power in them. Denial is a powerful thing.

Also, when someone says IE has add-ons, I laugh. MS's add-on API requires add-ons to be compiled in C++, which takes significantly more effort to create and manage. While Firefox and Chrome use a simple scripting language, and both have a more extensive and open API, allowing the add-ons access to many things that MS simply doesn't expose. Which is why you see thousands of add-ons for Firefox and Chrome and a few hundred for IE, and most of the one you do see for IE have very limited functionality.

Edited by ahinson, Jun 27 2013, 4:59pm :

gb8080 said,
- Mouse gestures - IE appears not to have drag-to-open? And no gestures like rightbutton-dragleft to go back, righbutton-down-then-left to close tab, etc.

Really? That's awfully backwards to me. Middle clicking has opened a link in a new tab for yonks, and it's much easier than dragging links. If you're on a laptop, then Control+Click does the same thing. Yeah, it's not "dragging the mouse" all over the joint, but it achieves the same result and is much more efficient IMO.

Back buttons on a mouse is also better, or Alt+Left arrow. So so difficult...

Personally I don't give a rats if you use Firefox, but don't carry on as though crap like that is somehow something that you must have. I tried it, and it's really not as good as you think it is. At least the keyboard+mouse combos I use work in other programs without special plugins.

"Most of the web wasn't designed for touch, but users still expect it to just work,"

Have to love that line in the article. Most of the web WASN'T designed for touch, but yet MS builds an entirely new OS that IS designed for touch. Then they have to wonder why next to no one likes their new OS?! Duh!!

Really what does the web have to do with the OS? People by nature do not like change so yes people have their panties in a bunch over Windows 8.

Breaking news Apple develops iOS (a touch operating system) and Google develops Andriod (another touch operating system).

Oh please, 'next to no one likes it'? That is just fluff and some rather offhand exaggeration.

They are pushing evolution in the way people see and do things... ffs, apple tried this a multitude of times and people lauded them, other companies do it and they are gods in their field... MS, naw, they suck.

Knock it off. It's a company, not the bully that picked on you at school... let it go.

cork1958 said,
"Most of the web wasn't designed for touch, but users still expect it to just work,"

Have to love that line in the article. Most of the web WASN'T designed for touch, but yet MS builds an entirely new OS that IS designed for touch. Then they have to wonder why next to no one likes their new OS?! Duh!!


So the desktop UI, even though it hasn't changed, was magically revamped just to support tablets? You can boot to desktop and you've got your start button back. MS can't make you people happy.

cork1958 said,
"Most of the web wasn't designed for touch, but users still expect it to just work,"

Have to love that line in the article. Most of the web WASN'T designed for touch, but yet MS builds an entirely new OS that IS designed for touch. Then they have to wonder why next to no one likes their new OS?! Duh!!

What does that even mean? Read your own comment again.

I'll say this though: most websites since 2010 have been built for touch.

cork1958 said,
"Most of the web wasn't designed for touch, but users still expect it to just work,"

Have to love that line in the article. Most of the web WASN'T designed for touch, but yet MS builds an entirely new OS that IS designed for touch. Then they have to wonder why next to no one likes their new OS?! Duh!!

Your argument can equally be applied to iOS and Android. Using this course of reasoning, then everyone hates all modern OSes, and I don't find that to be true.

I also don't find many people outside of forums like this that actually dislike Windows 8 either.

Of all browsers, I would love to see Chrome die, especialy as a developer who wants to keep his CSS nice and clean. Google sucks at it.

coderchi said,
You must be stuck in the past and even in the past when IE6 came out it was the best thing to come out at the time.

True, but there's also the fact that MS was playing catch-up with IE7, IE8 and IE9 which was the first one to not suck.
They are doing a great job nowadays, still sometimes pushing their shady agenda (non-standard meta tagging for shortcuts, live tiles, and whatnot), but they definitely realized that they need to play the "good guy Microsoft" card once in a while to dissipate all the hate on them.

Have you ever tried IE 10? Its super fast, solid, perfect for touch and the safest web browser according to NSS Labs. They are making IE better and better year by year and they respect the privacy of the user unlike chrome! So if I were you, I'd give it a try!

gonchuki said,

They are doing a great job nowadays, still sometimes pushing their shady agenda (non-standard meta tagging for shortcuts, live tiles, and whatnot)

God forbid they should try to integrate the Internet better into Windows so that it doesn't appear as something disconnected from the user's computer experience. I see your point though, boring static icons with the site's Favicon are far better than something that can be customised to look nice.

Besides, that's not breaking anyone's standards, meta tags are for that sort of thing. No other browser is going to spew at some metadata added to the page, but browsers or systems that do can benefit by the increased functionality that the interpreting system can provide (In this specific case, nice looking Live Tiles on the Windows start screen, rather than boring and crappy favourites, as you seem to think is all we're entitled to).

gonchuki said,

True, but there's also the fact that MS was playing catch-up with IE7, IE8 and IE9 which was the first one to not suck.
They are doing a great job nowadays, still sometimes pushing their shady agenda (non-standard meta tagging for shortcuts, live tiles, and whatnot), but they definitely realized that they need to play the "good guy Microsoft" card once in a while to dissipate all the hate on them.

Your perspective of what happened with IE6-9 and Microsoft's intent do not reflect what actually happened or why.

Go back to IE4 and Microsoft's proposals to the W3C from that timeframe through the IE6 timeframe. Note that a lot of features supported in IE4,5,6 were on the pending list until after Microsoft released the browsers, and through petition from Sun and IBM and Netscape were removed for political reasons.

Many of the features and tags were subsequently 'made fun of' by the web community, like the 'font' tag, as being BAD for HTML. However, like it, almost everything Microsoft proposed in that timeframe eventually made it back into the W3C standards after several years and a few tag revisions.

A lot of what HTML5/CSS3 is today is based on Microsoft's vision of HTML and proposals going all the way back to 1997. Sadly the anti-trust and politics of other companies stopped these from becoming standards until about 10 years later.

Microsoft is behind some of the most important things from start of XML, XHTML and AJAX to even pushing for standards to be clearly defined for visual consistency.

In 1999 the beta version of Office 2000 packaged everything in XML and seamlessly rendered in HTML on Netscape and IE. Sun argued that this would pollute the web and people would just start using Microsoft Word to design web sites.

Ironically it was then Sun that started their own group 3-4 years later to create the same technology that the world now knows as OpenDocument, which was a bit hypocritical. However, it got stranger when they later petitioned against OfficeXML, claiming Microsoft's XML based document technology should not be trusted because it was not as 'mature' as Sun's. (Wild uh?)


So the 'agenda' you think is some subversive mission by Microsoft, is what they have done all along. Add new ideas and functionality to the Web.


The IE9 got traction was because it was a rewrite of the engine, and moving from the document rendering model, that sadly Firefox and Chrome still use, to a parsing and JIT compiling model that even takes CSS and translates interactions into code running, instead of document concepts being displayed. This difference is why IE9-11 can still best other browsers in more complex rendering and with sites that require handling a lot of content and dynamic updates.

This last part is where the world and web needs people like you to step up and demand Google and Mozilla move to a the same newer model that IE9-11 uses for their browsers instead of dragging along the document display model that is slowing the adoption of HTML5 because of the variance in performance on different levels of hardware.

Seriously go back and research some of the things I mentioned. At the very least you will get the chance to see what transpired and the motives not evident to the consumer from a different perspective, even if you choose to still disagree.

I find it funny that you had all that to vent from a one-liner and an addendum sentence, assuming I don't know anything about what you just posted.

But even funnier is that you take things out of context. What happened in 1997 and its reactions from different players in the field was in that certain context, with a set of leaders on each company, and a set of engineers writing the specs and software.

What was or not approptiate to do 16 years ago isn't the same as today, or even 5 or 10 years ago. Think about it next time you try to use your OpenDocument vs OpenXML quote, or trying to reivindicate the font and marquee tags.

And it would do you some good to research why the first implementations of OpenXML were not appropriate as a *standard* and Microsoft had to go back to the drawing board.

wingliston said,
Yawn! Hating on IE is so 2001. You are stuck in the past. Have you tried the new versions? IE 11 scores 335 in html5 test.

You know that is the lowest of the modern browsers?

gonchuki said,
I find it funny that you had all that to vent from a one-liner and an addendum sentence, assuming I don't know anything about what you just posted.

But even funnier is that you take things out of context. What happened in 1997 and its reactions from different players in the field was in that certain context, with a set of leaders on each company, and a set of engineers writing the specs and software.

What was or not approptiate to do 16 years ago isn't the same as today, or even 5 or 10 years ago. Think about it next time you try to use your OpenDocument vs OpenXML quote, or trying to reivindicate the font and marquee tags.

And it would do you some good to research why the first implementations of OpenXML were not appropriate as a *standard* and Microsoft had to go back to the drawing board.

I apologize for trying to provide context and share information that is not common knowledge.

Having been at the first OpenDocument meeting and seeing the representative from Microsoft be treated reprehensibly and watch them leave the conference was something that gave me a wake up call that it was NOT about building a new or better technology; it was pure politics.

The base functionality of the web has not changed. There were many players at the time that wanted people to believe the newer HTML proposals from Microsoft (and others) were NOT needed, and they did a brilliant job of misleading web developers and the W3C.

Facts are facts, and the world was cheated out of a lot of technology during that timeframe and the progression of the entire web was stifled for several years.

Sun (and others) didn't want more advanced HTML technologies, as they wanted developers to use JAVA instead of being able to recreate the same content in XML/HTML.

Just the continued existence of JAVA and Flash type technologies for RIA in use today is evidence that keeping HTML/XML technologies "LIMITED" was in the best interest of companies like Sun.

If JUST Microsoft's proposals and XML work in the late 90s had been accepted at the time, the web would have looked more like it does today over 10 years ago.

To get Microsoft's technologies in use on the web, they were FORCED to create Silverlight, as a runtime container for things that HTML5 natively supports today.

With the HTML5 progression we finally are seeing bring us into the next generation of RIA content and web development. If you step back and notice, Microsoft is 'natively' running HTML5 on WP8 and Windows 8, and IE9's design model is built around compiling the declarative XML nature of HTML5 that outside of the web Microsoft calls "XAML" which is very similar what they were proposing back in 1999.

If the web was 'not ready' for more advanced HTML back in 1999, then why was it ready for Flash and JAVA to fill that void?

PC EliTiST said,
What sounds good? All I'd like to know... Did IE11 improved the speed of downloading other browsers?

Yes you can get malware faster now... Download Chrome, install, enjoy your malware.

In 2012, Chrome and Firefox were 2 of the top 5 pieces of software that allowed malware to be installed on end user systems. FYI.

I have to tell you guys that I tried IE 11 and was very, very, very impressed.
I haven't used IE in probably 7 years or more and I am very impressed. I just started to use IE 10 because of it. I can't wait until IE 11 comes out for Windows 7.

o My web pages loaded faster than any browser I have tested easily (Chrome, Firefox)
o You can now save the tabs for when you start up
o IE now has a spell checker built right in and fixes typos right away inline for you
o With WebGL now built in I am thinking of switching to IE fulltime.

I have been really unhappy with FireFox for a while, so I switched to Chrome a while ago, but I still use both (different browsers for different subjects that I am researching).

Firefox crashes on me easily when I was just loading my email and the flash plugin which was updated was horrible, it started stuttering and then I would load other browsers and the same video would not stutter. Now this is all with the latest version of "Flash", which I confirmed in the control panel. It seems like Flash isn't as high quality compared to the Chrome version or the IE version. Firefox and IE having the exact same flash version. Chrome has a different type of flash plugin than the other two so it's a different version and it's also bundled with the updates.

Chrome makes my mouse stick when I use Google maps on satellite mode and not in full screen. I thought it was my mouse at first, but I used a different mouse and it still did it, so I searched on Google and sure enough, people were complaining about this bug and it's a huge bug. Lots of people complaining about this and no fix, however you do go into full screen on the street view it will fix this problem.

Then there is the fact that the version of Flash that Chrome is bundled with, will not remember my settings. I have a 6 megabit connection and I want to see things at 1080p because my computer can handle it (it's an Ivy Bridge 3777k at 3.5 Ghz with 16 gigs of memory and it should handle it fine) and nope it always goes to the lowest setting no matter what I do. That is beyond annoying as I want my videos on youtube to always be displaying at 1080p where available. Someone even offered a plugin to fix this nonsense. I tried it and google said there could be a security risk for the newer version of this, so I uninstalled it.

Chrome and Firefox can't render the text as well as IE11 can. It's not even a contest. Not only is IE11 faster than displaying pages on Firefox and Chrome, it can display them better as well. The text is crisper and clearer and I don't have to zoom now to see things.

I also don't care about plugins. They just normally act like toolbars in my opinion and slow down your browser, can cause browser crashes and also act as a security risk.

Edited by Yogurtmaster, Jul 26 2013, 12:44am :

They fixed menu hover issues! Now Best Buy and ESPN work! And two IE windows open side by side is awesome on a widescreen tablet. Try doing that on an iPad.