Dean Hachamovitch to show IE8 at MIX Keynote

Joshua Allen writes on the MIX blog that Dean Hachamovitch, the guy who runs the Internet Explorer team, is to showcase IE8 at the MIX08 conference. Dean is going to share more about Internet Explorer 8 including a sneak peek at some of the features his team have been hard at work on, such as IE8 finally passing the Acid2 test and further improvements on standards compliance.

Dean's keynote at MIX06 was one of the highlights of the inaugural MIX conference. Since then, IE shipped a new version with a new UI and dramatically improved standards support, and the browser industry has heated up with an emphasis on web standards and new entries in the browser market.

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Record Label Quits, Uploads Albums onto The Pirate Bay

Next Story

MacBook Air Battery Issues Frustrate Users

34 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

glad to see the continuation of competition in the browser market. When are the next version of solitaire and minesweeper going to be released ?

(Midnight Mick said @ #5.1)
I bet it won't!

I'll take that bet!

Because of all the grief with Vista, I think that until Windows 7 comes out, Microsoft will keep most everything it releases compatible with XP.

There are now thousands (if not millions) of companies and individuals who don't want anything to do with Vista and either refuse to upgrade or have downgraded back to XP from Vista [me, for example].

It would be relatively insane in these circumstances for Microsoft to release IE8 and not have it compatible with XP.

What exactly were those killer features that XP had over Win2k again? The true Windows ME in the NT product line is not really Vista, but rather XP (Win2k with a Candy Cane interface and a few select media applications).

(Octol said @ #5.5)

I'll take that bet!

Because of all the grief with Vista, I think that until Windows 7 comes out, Microsoft will keep most everything it releases compatible with XP.

There are now thousands (if not millions) of companies and individuals who don't want anything to do with Vista and either refuse to upgrade or have downgraded back to XP from Vista [me, for example].

It would be relatively insane in these circumstances for Microsoft to release IE8 and not have it compatible with XP.

Why? Are they going to somehow break IE7 so that everyone has to update? From where Im sitting IE7 does everything its asked and compared to the other IEs before it, its not even close, IE7 blows the doors off all that came before it The standard compliance thing is meaningless to almost everyone that uses a browser.. no one knows what that means and no one cares except people in the know and thats almost no one in the grand scheme. This news means nothing to almost everyone.

(bluarash said @ #5.6)
What exactly were those killer features that XP had over Win2k again? The true Windows ME in the NT product line is not really Vista, but rather XP (Win2k with a Candy Cane interface and a few select media applications).

You're probably trolling since that post is so dumb, especially comparing a business OS to a consumer OS. In case you actually believe that rubbish though, XP offered tons of improvements. System Restore, driver rollback, cleartype, fast user switching, improved power management, improved network security, application compatibility mode, and yes it looks a lot nicer even in classic mode because of things like alpha blended icons and support for high color icons in areas not supported in 2000 like the system tray. I'm sure I've left out tons of features but the point is while Windows 2000 was a great OS no one can say that XP wasn't a big improvement, especially in the area of gaming support since this was the first version of NT officially aimed at consumers. Anyone who claims XP is just 2000 with a new theme is an idiot.

Enough with your stupid threadjack though, back to IE8. I'm very much hoping they'll return to the standard layout or at least make it customizable. IE7 wasn't bad technology wise but the new layout was absolutely horrible in my opinion. The most important thing is better security and standards support though. I also believe there's no doubt it will be available for XP since that OS is still officially supported and will be for years to come.

(Skyfrog said @ #5.8)
You're probably trolling since that post is so dumb, but in case you actually believe that rubbish XP offered tons of improvements. (...) Anyone who claims XP is just 2000 with a new theme is an idiot.

Enough with your trolling threadjack, back to IE8. I'm very much hoping they'll return to the standard layout or at least make it customizable. IE7 wasn't bad technology wise but the new layout was absolutely horrible in my opinion. The most important thing is better security and standards support though.

Well said, bravo.

(Octol said @ #5.5)

I'll take that bet!

Because of all the grief with Vista, I think that until Windows 7 comes out, Microsoft will keep most everything it releases compatible with XP.

There are now thousands (if not millions) of companies and individuals who don't want anything to do with Vista and either refuse to upgrade or have downgraded back to XP from Vista [me, for example].

It would be relatively insane in these circumstances for Microsoft to release IE8 and not have it compatible with XP.

Whats funny is that if you watch that poll on the front page here, it has gone from more people using XP last time, to now more people using Vista. Also, what are you going to do in a year when XP is finally killed off by Microsoft?

XP was not just a consumer operating system, it had a professional edition. While Win2k was not a consumer system, it was used by many consumers and played a good share of games just fine. I own all three: Win2k, XP and Vista and I actually see Vista as a significant improvement over XP. The point was to compare the three of them and notices that there were a lot of changes. If you are going to call any version of the NT kernel ME it would be XP because it had the least improvements (unlike Windows NT 4, Windows 2000 and Vista).

If it makes you any happier, I am sure that there will be a XP release (though it will I'm sure lack features).

(bluarash said @ #5.6)
What exactly were those killer features that XP had over Win2k again? The true Windows ME in the NT product line is not really Vista, but rather XP (Win2k with a Candy Cane interface and a few select media applications).

Actually that's still my opinion of XP. I'll take Vista, which actually changed things for the better, anyday.

It has too, MS would be shooting themselves in the foot if they didn't :P considering XP is still the OS of choice for many poeple.

(solardog said @ #5.7)
(Octol said @ #5.5)

I'll take that bet!

Because of all the grief with Vista, I think that until Windows 7 comes out, Microsoft will keep most everything it releases compatible with XP.

There are now thousands (if not millions) of companies and individuals who don't want anything to do with Vista and either refuse to upgrade or have downgraded back to XP from Vista [me, for example].

It would be relatively insane in these circumstances for Microsoft to release IE8 and not have it compatible with XP.

Why? Are they going to somehow break IE7 so that everyone has to update? From where Im sitting IE7 does everything its asked and compared to the other IEs before it, its not even close, IE7 blows the doors off all that came before it The standard compliance thing is meaningless to almost everyone that uses a browser.. no one knows what that means and no one cares except people in the know and thats almost no one in the grand scheme. This news means nothing to almost everyone.

That is the most un-educated post I've seen in a while... IE7 is barely more standards complaint that IE6, and in some ways its worse. Do me a favor, don't speak about that which you do not know. Do you develop website for multi-national million dollar companies?? My guess it no if you think that web-standards mean nothing. That or you haven't been hit with a lawsuit yet for not complying.

Web standards are a crucial part of net-neutrality. Why should anyone be forced to used one browser over another... no one should be forced into anything, henceforth, standards exist to enable equality.

This week I was working on some back-end administration coding for a web-application for one of my clients. It works in IE6(with hacks for layout, since it incorrectly displays the box model), it works in Netscape, Firefox, and Opera. However, in IE7 I get this weird bug where when I roll over an image button, the whole <div> dissapears as if it's style attribute is being set to display:none, however it's not, and none of the other browsers experience this same anomoly... this is a definite no-no, and this is why standards are in place.

Lets say for example Microsoft, or even Mozilla for a change decided that they were going to make this new whiz-band browser that does a whole bunch of cool stuff, the only catch is, it's not standards compliant and you can only do the new whiz-bang stuff in their new browser. And then they push it to a whole bunch of new companies and convince them to develop strictly for their browser. Then there's the people less fortunate who can't afford a new PC, or disabled people with special PC's and screen-readers. This browser is useless to them and they cannot use it because either their PC doesn't support it, or their disability tools like screen-readers, etc, can't parse the text and tags on the page.

So for someone to say that web-standards aren't important really shows how ignorant you are.

I hope not, and I'm hoping they drop IE7 from it also, although they are supposedly going to try and force feed it to you on todays updates, I think. I sure as heck don't want either!

Maybe making the menu bar customizable would help, but with IE7 not remembering usernames that I like to save on websites, between startups, I'm not going to use it just for that reason.

(solardog said @ #5.7)
.... The standard compliance thing is meaningless to almost everyone that uses a browser.. no one knows what that means and no one cares except people in the know and thats almost no one in the grand scheme. This news means nothing to almost everyone.


WTF?!

You obviously don't code your own webpages, otherwise you wouldn't have said that...

Read: Standards-compliance IS EVERYTHING. That's the way it should be !!

I'm no professional web developer, but do some coding along the side... Now if all web browsers were 100 percent standards-compliant, I wouldn't have to waste my (precious) time to test and modify code just to suit a particular browser. I've coded webpages since the 90's, and even back then, web standards is something I never ignored for the sake of convenience.

(Chrono951 said @ #5.10)
What's funny is that if you watch that poll on the front page here, it has gone from more people using XP last time, to now more people using Vista. Also, what are you going to do in a year when XP is finally killed off by Microsoft?

Windows 7.

(cork1958 said @ #5.15)
...but with IE7 not remembering usernames that I like to save on websites, between startups, I'm not going to use it just for that reason.

Funny, IE7 remembers my usernames between startups. On most [non-secure] websites, whenever I type in a username and password, IE asks me if I want it to remember them. In most cases I say 'yes' and it remembers.

bring back the "old ui" some people like customize his toolbar, and really hate the position of stop and reload button

I like the IE7 UI with the menu bar hidden. But I understand if some like the older UI. All they'd have to do is allow you to move the buttons around in IE8 and everyone shuld be happy.

(GP007 said @ #3.1)
I like the IE7 UI with the menu bar hidden. But I understand if some like the older UI. All they'd have to do is allow you to move the buttons around in IE8 and everyone shuld be happy.

Exactly! I don't see why it's so hard for them to do that. Customization of the bar is what makes browsing easier, not getting used to crap being on this side or that. I browse between FF and IE many times (school) so it'd be nice to have.