Internet Explorer team makes Valentine's Day HTML5 site

You may remember that in December, Microsoft launched a "Let it Snow" web site from the Internet Explorer team that showcased the power of HTML5-based web browser effects. Today is Valentine's Day and to celebrate, the IE team has created a new HTML5 site for the occasion, titled "Love is in the Air."

On the official IE developer's blog site, team member Rob Mauceri writes that the Love is in the Air page "brings together hardware-accelerated HTML5 canvas, SVG, CSS transforms & transitions, WOFF, audio, and more." The site shows a ton of hearts on the screen, along with an IE logo with a face, hair, arms and legs. The logo is dancing to a tune which you can listen to if you use Internet Explorer 9. You can adjust how many hearts show up on screen at once, up to a massive 4,000.

The site also has a special message that you can discover by moving your mouse cursor above the big heart. The message is different if you use Chrome, Firefox or some other HTML5 browser. The blog also states that if you have the Developers Preview edition of Windows 8, you can use the included Internet Explorer 10 web browser and your fingers to reveal the special Valentine's Day message.

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Motorola's first Android 4.0 Intel smartphone leaked?

Next Story

Windows 8 accessibility features detailed

37 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

No hearts at all for me in IE9. I didn't get any snow, either. It must be the corporate spyware they put on these machines here. That crap ruins a lot of stuff.

MidnightDevil said,
Hum, so, Chrome has absolute no 3D ?
What do you mean? Do you mean hardware acceleration? I believe it does has that now, or it is imminent. (Fast on my beta Chrome, anyway)

PotatoJ said,
Leave it to MS to make a website not compatible with other browsers. Classic.
Yes, it's compatible. How is it not? (Apart from the music thing, which is an outstanding issue among all browsers)

Wow you know you're surrounded by nerds (no offense) when a valentine's day comment stream ends with:

--------------------

the default 250hearts...

Firefox 10 = 51-53 FPS (does not seem to matter if it's full screen (1920x1080) or my usual smaller window)

IE9 = 60FPS+ (so it's pointless here as it's off the scale)

---------------------------------------------------------

2000 hearts (Full screen 1920x1080)....

IE9 (x64) = 35fps

Firefox 10 = 6fps

Obry said,
Wow you know you're surrounded by nerds (no offense) when a valentine's day comment stream ends with:
Cause it's a browser technology test? It's not even something you'd send to a non-techie loved one.

the default 250hearts...

Firefox 10 = 51-53 FPS (does not seem to matter if it's full screen (1920x1080) or my usual smaller window)

IE9 = 60FPS+ (so it's pointless here as it's off the scale)

---------------------------------------------------------

2000 hearts (Full screen 1920x1080)....

IE9 (x64) = 35fps

Firefox 10 = 6fps

so it's clear IE9 is king in terms of hardware acceleration as 35fps is decent where as 6fps is a straight up slide show. i always liked IE9 in terms of general quickness and it's clear it's king in hardware acceleration but for general use i still prefer Firefox over IE mostly because of the addons and configuration etc.

side note: my setup = AMD Athlon X2 (2.0ghz overclocked to 2.4ghz) with a Radeon 5670 512MB graphics card.

IE9 and IE10 preview definatly have some smooth hardware acceleration, Chrome's latest build for me lags like heck with a small number of hearts.... IE's at max is still fluid as it can be

_Heracles said,
IE team proving that Firefox HWA is a joke since IE9

Hmm? I'm getting slightly better FPS in FF12 than I am with IE9, with Chrome (on my hardware anyway) running a laggy third. No MP3 music though thanks to their not wanting to deal with licenses.

_Heracles said,
IE team proving that Firefox HWA is a joke since IE9

With 4k hearts, its at 27fps in IE9 and 33fps in Firefox 13 (nightly).

Max Norris said,

Hmm? I'm getting slightly better FPS in FF12 than I am with IE9, with Chrome (on my hardware anyway) running a laggy third. No MP3 music though thanks to their not wanting to deal with licenses.

I'm getting IE running at a high FPS rate, and FF and Chrome lagging like wild with their latest builds

neufuse said,
I'm getting IE running at a high FPS rate, and FF and Chrome lagging like wild with their latest builds
Which latest builds? Nightly? Aurora? Beta? Release? (Sorry, it's just unclear)

Seems fast for me too, in Fx Aurora.

laserfloyd said,
Chrome was by far the worst. Clocked 3 FPS... FF was better but IE9 smoked them all.

Got the acceleration enabled? (I forget if it is by default) Mine wasn't great (maybe 25FPS where I was getting near 40 in FF12, ~36 in IE9 at 4000 hearts) but it wasn't that bad.

xn--bya said,

With 4k hearts, its at 27fps in IE9 and 33fps in Firefox 13 (nightly).

With 4K hearts, it's at 45fps in Chrome 19 (Fullscreen) ;-)

I have on 4k hearts
ie9 - 34 FPS
chrome 19 - 32fps
FF latest special intel + avx nightly build(unofficial) - 60fps and on auto 4.4k hearts 55 fps

Max Norris said,

Hmm? I'm getting slightly better FPS in FF12 than I am with IE9, with Chrome (on my hardware anyway) running a laggy third. No MP3 music though thanks to their not wanting to deal with licenses.

IE9 is the clear winner as 3rd party browsers refuse to support standard audio and video formats (a manufactured issue/conflict which completely ignores free OS resources).

Also Firefox should be more CPU dependent. The slower your CPU is, the faster IE9 will be based on my test.

_Heracles said,
IE9 is the clear winner as 3rd party browsers refuse to support standard audio and video formats (a manufactured issue/conflict which completely ignores free OS resources).
If only it was that simple. It's not, and you know it. (Without wishing to go into it too much, non-Windows/OSX users should not be penalised on web technology, it's completely against the spirit of the web).

_Heracles said,
Also Firefox should be more CPU dependent. The slower your CPU is, the faster IE9 will be based on my test.
Why 'should' be? Do you mean Firefox *is* more CPU dependent? (Might be true, just want to clarify).

_Heracles said,
IE team proving that Firefox HWA is a joke since IE9

First thing first, check FF actually is using HWA. Older driver and multiple graphics systems will not work (Intel/Nvidia mix). In these cases you can either upgrade your drivers or force FF to use the hardware rendering by editing the config settings.

Also this test uses different renderings in each browser. For example in FF it actually gets the figure to rotate and animate through movements. On IE it just moves it between two positions. To test between the browsers is really poor because it has been purposely made to do less work on some browsers to inflate results.

The Beta Channel FF does outperform IE9 with 4000 hearts. And this is while doing full animations and not the cut down versions displayed in IE9.

For FF to check if you are using HWA type in your address bar: about:support

Then scroll down to graphics and check that Direct2D is enabled, DirectWrite is enabled and GPU Accelerated Windows is valid.

Why is this post so long? Some of you must realize that it is indeed made by Microsoft. IE must be the fastest of all.

MS could be using private HTML5 features that are only included in Internet Explorer 9+, and that are incomplete with the other browsers.

Kirkburn said,
If only it was that simple. It's not, and you know it. (Without wishing to go into it too much, non-Windows/OSX users should not be penalised on web technology, it's completely against the spirit of the web).

Why 'should' be? Do you mean Firefox *is* more CPU dependent? (Might be true, just want to clarify).


h264 is royalty free and is a non issue (unless one wants to sell h264 videos, but that goes against free Internet and all...). I have no idea whats up with MP3 support, but I am confident most Linux users play MP3s on their free Operating Systems. Essentially All commercial devices / OS are geared toward entertainment (such as iPads) so they support h264/MP3. Thus there is no issues about support. It is simply an issue of getting the most Google money, but pretending that the issue is preservation of communist roots of the Internet.

I own a netbook - so I tested it out.
The rest is just wishful thinking:
Also please note that Microsoft needs to create a browser which runs on anything Windows 7 runs on thus it must be fast and use as little resources as possible. IE10 will follow in the same direction - note that Windows 8 / IE10 will be tablet centric and tables are weak - Windows 8 actually promises to outdo Windows 7 in many areas.

_Heracles said,
IE team proving that Firefox HWA is a joke since IE9

do you even realize that both internet explorer and windows are by microsoft and firefox is not, what this means, let me say it as simple as possible, so you can understand:

this means that the ie development team has access to the source code of windows and can integrate it perfectly, thats why you get better results with internet explorer

firefox developers dont have access to the windows source code, thats why it will always be behind in that matter..

but the irony is that in every other aspect firefox is superior, and you are stupid

_Heracles said,
I am confident most Linux users play MP3s on their free Operating Systems. Essentially All commercial devices / OS are geared toward entertainment (such as iPads) so they support h264/MP3. Thus there is no issues about support. It is simply an issue of getting the most Google money, but pretending that the issue is preservation of communist roots of the Internet.

Yay, communism. But seriously, MP3 is not a core web technology - so it makes no sense as a comparison. The GIF debacle is a better comparison, since that actually did affect the web.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G..._and_LZW_patent_enforcement

_Heracles said,
I own a netbook - so I tested it out.
The rest is just wishful thinking:
Also please note that Microsoft needs to create a browser which runs on anything Windows 7 runs on thus it must be fast and use as little resources as possible. IE10 will follow in the same direction - note that Windows 8 / IE10 will be tablet centric and tables are weak - Windows 8 actually promises to outdo Windows 7 in many areas.

A netbook that likely doesn't have a particularly good gfx card? I wouldn't be surprised if IE is a little more lax in when it allows HWA. As for the other bit ... Firefox has to create a browser than runs on WinXP to 8, OSX and Linux. What's your point?

Kirkburn said,

Yay, communism. But seriously, MP3 is not a core web technology - so it makes no sense as a comparison. The GIF debacle is a better comparison, since that actually did affect the web.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G..._and_LZW_patent_enforcement


A netbook that likely doesn't have a particularly good gfx card? I wouldn't be surprised if IE is a little more lax in when it allows HWA. As for the other bit ... Firefox has to create a browser than runs on WinXP to 8, OSX and Linux. What's your point?


The point is almost all OS support MP3 (integrated or opt-in).
Web Browsers should use those integrated codecs (to avoid bloat & legal issues).
Unlike h264 for video, MP3 for audio is not a good idea.
OGG, FLAC, and AAC are better choices.

IE9 can use HWA to speed up rendering in more cases than Firefox (Since Firefox unto Firefox 11/12/13 it seems?).
Thanks for proving my point - IE9 appeals to a lower-end hardware than Firefox.
Anyway, no my GPU is not blocked with up to date drivers.

I am not sure what will happen with Firefox once Windows 8 will be out.
IE10 will be faster and better than IE9 and will discourage plugins (large push for h264 there).
Firefox probably won't support METRO when Windows 8 comes out - hell it still can be installed on Windows 2000!!

_Heracles said,
Thanks for proving my point - IE9 appeals to a lower-end hardware than Firefox.
I was just providing an explanation, but yeah, it's unfortunate.

_Heracles said,
I am not sure what will happen with Firefox once Windows 8 will be out.
IE10 will be faster and better than IE9 and will discourage plugins (large push for h264 there).
I'd suggest it's a large push for the <video> element, not specifically h.264 - since the effect of less Flash would be felt across all browsers.

_Heracles said,
Firefox probably won't support METRO when Windows 8 comes out - hell it still can be installed on Windows 2000!!
And again, what's your point? Inability to run on Win2000 seems like a downside to IE, rather than anything else.

Kirkburn said,
I was just providing an explanation, but yeah, it's unfortunate.

I'd suggest it's a large push for the <video> element, not specifically h.264 - since the effect of less Flash would be felt across all browsers.

And again, what's your point? Inability to run on Win2000 seems like a downside to IE, rather than anything else.


Windows 8 will flourish more with tablets - so more of an h264 push - as tablets will run h264 via DXVA providing better performance than XVID/DIVX/REAL/WEBM/etc crowd. For maximizing user experience, Microsoft and Apple must push the h264 as standard. Don't disappoint me W8!

The fact that Firefox runs on many systems, even old ones which should be VERY discouraged, simply spreads out the effort. The fact that IE9 dropped XP is excellent - the developer team did not have to waste their time keeping compatible with XP. If Firefox was Windows 7 and up only browser, imagine how much faster it would be now.