Latest build of IE10 shows benchmark improvement, Windows 8 boot screen updated

One of the new features that will be shipping with Windows 8 is Internet Explorer 10. The new platform will bring several updates to the browser and one such feature will be its compatibility with HTML5.  

In a pre-Release Preview build of Windows 8, Canouna on Winunleaked posted up that the build of IE10 is up to 10.0.837X.0 (up from 8250.0 in the Consumer preview) and has a current score of 319 points on the Html5test.com. For comparison, IE9 gets a score of 138 and IE10 from the Consumer Preview received a score of 316. While not a major improvement from the Consumer Preview build, it is a step in the right direction.

There is another small change in the latest builds of Windows 8 and that comes in form of the splash screen. The image you see below is the boot screen (via Win8China) that replaces the beta fish from the Consumer Preview. Not a major change, but again, a small refinement for the Release Preview.

All of these small changes are occurring as Microsoft marches towards the release preview that will be available in early June. While we do not expect to see any major feature implementations, small refinements will be prevalent as Microsoft prepares the platform for general availability.

 

Wctaiwan contributed to this story

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Brookstone to sell fuel cell-based phone charger

Next Story

Serious Sam HD The Second Encounter to get DLC update

64 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

PyX said,
Safari 5.2 beta has 385 … IE still has a long way to go.

Compared to the speed at which Safari has gotten points IE11 should be safely ahead of them so don't worry!

On another note, html5 test is good as showing off yet it is so flawed since it doesn't check if browser supports the specifications correctly.

The IE10 about screen looks to have much more white space on the right side than on the left. Its blasphemy!

Such things bug the hell out of me for no reason at all!!!!

yet another bogus meaningless test. first was acid, then sunspider. it seems that as soon as IE takes the lead some other test pops up and all it does is test the difference of non IE vs IE and calls that difference 'THE STANDARD', so as to ensure IE gets lower on the scale... while the favorable IE difference is not included on the test as it would help IE...

Agree in more than 50%. Except that I don't care what MS considers themselves of. But what I do really care is that they keep pushing IE further and further and COMPLY with the standards. Do you know how tedious is to rewrite JavaScript scripts just because of IE? Same goes for CSS.

I like that they are showing this advancement. This means that less tedious code will need to be rewritten for cross-browser compatibility.

Jose_49 said,
Agree in more than 50%. Except that I don't care what MS considers themselves of. But what I do really care is that they keep pushing IE further and further and COMPLY with the standards. Do you know how tedious is to rewrite JavaScript scripts just because of IE? Same goes for CSS.

I like that they are showing this advancement. This means that less tedious code will need to be rewritten for cross-browser compatibility.


rewrite for IE? you do know at time of the release of IE6, it was the most standard compliance browser? But Mozilla, Sun etc. broke out allot of W3C standards.. which then broke IE6 with the 'standard' of the time. (and MS does not change their html standards within a released version of IE).
And i've been coding websites for years, and except for the min-width/height and rounded corners before IE9 i barely ever encounted CSS/JS issues that have to be IE specific.... learn how to code... geesh

Since IE7 sites look pretty much identical over most browsers (except for small minor issues like the rounded corners )

Remember when IE9 flew over that sunspider test, by skipping those useless while loops and foreach things and just went straight for the answer? they all flamed IE for doing so. Every time MS catches up to these so called tests (which are often designed for webkit or gecko and actually browser specific) they change it so it breaks for IE and it tumbles down the drain. same as that html5test, its so awfully biased, not even funny.

C'moooooooooon ? Are they gonna stick on changing the boot screen again and again and again and again and forget all about the pretty ugly things inside, like the store ??!
Plus if they're planning to just refine and refine and refine.. When are they going to add some major features ? in Windows 9 ??

Ahmed Nefzaoui said,
C'moooooooooon ? Are they gonna stick on changing the boot screen again and again and again and again and forget all about the pretty ugly things inside, like the store ??!
Plus if they're planning to just refine and refine and refine.. When are they going to add some major features ? in Windows 9 ??

We're past beta, there are no more major features that will be added, just refinements

I wouldn't mind knowing what the 3 extra points on html5test.com are for. Wonder what new html5 goodies we will get in IE10 final.

I like that there is an auto update checkbox, hope it is checked by default. Wonder how the updating actually works, hoping it is a silent background update that way less people will stay on older browsers.

Edited by torrentthief, May 9 2012, 6:09pm :

deadonthefloor said,

H.264 support.

Other browsers get WebM bonus points too. both are fail imo as neither are part of htm5 spec.


yep
most benchmarks are BS
Some test WebGL and claim that it is HTML5

_Heracles said,

yep
most benchmarks are BS
Some test WebGL and claim that it is HTML5

if you code sites as HTML doctype, they look pretty much identical over IE9/10, FF, Chrome/safari etc.
and performance, meh. it feels to me that IE9 outruns most others, FF is better at those heavy websites. as its slow to begin with and no matter what you seem to throw at it, the speed remains almost identical where IE9/Chrome slow down the heavier a website seems to be. altho i barely notice any lag or slowdowns on IE9 on a quadcore and up machine. Where Iron seems to bottle down even if there's plenty of resources available.
Gonna be fun with IE10 being hell of allot faster then IE9.

Can't wait for the metro fad to hit gameing, completely flat games with no depth at all.. minimal color.... remdinding us all of the Atari days..

neufuse said,
Can't wait for the metro fad to hit gameing, completely flat games with no depth at all.. minimal color.... remdinding us all of the Atari days..

Back when games were games and not short dashes from cut-scene to cut-scene and over in 6 hours? Sounds good to me.

GP007 said,

Back when games were games and not short dashes from cut-scene to cut-scene and over in 6 hours? Sounds good to me.

Back when the games industry crashed? Yeah, what an apt comparison for Windows 8!

Athernar said,

Back when the games industry crashed? Yeah, what an apt comparison for Windows 8!

Crashed in the US and shifted over to Japan you mean. Atari had no one else to blame but itself.

GP007 said,

Crashed in the US and shifted over to Japan you mean. Atari had no one else to blame but itself.

>Implying that Atari was the sole participant in the video games crash.
>Missing the point.

Ice_Blue said,
Nice. But they're back with the wide borders. NOT nice.

the wide borders never went away... been about the same width since vista... and was still pretty wide in windows xp / 2000 and back

Ice_Blue said,
Nice. But they're back with the wide borders. NOT nice.

they're wide so you have room to try to grab them, but translucent so the window itself doesn't look to "heavy" on the edges.

butilikethecookie said,
WINDOWS

How beautiful! They couldn't have made it any more bland!

Great. First they took away the Start Menu, then DVD playback, and *now*, they're taking away the 8! They should give the users the choice on whether to display "Windows 8" or "Windows"! Who the frak does Microsoft think they are, taking everything away from us!?

/s

butilikethecookie said,
WINDOWS

How beautiful! They couldn't have made it any more bland!


It's an unreleased internal beta, and obviously a placeholder. Just like the Betta splendens screen that it replaces.

Dot Matrix said,

Great. First they took away the Start Menu, then DVD playback, and *now*, they're taking away the 8! They should give the users the choice on whether to display "Windows 8" or "Windows"! Who the frak does Microsoft think they are, taking everything away from us!?

/s

doesn't really matter to me. i'm one of those weirdos who first boot always sets up Verbose messages. i don't even see the logo.

I understand it may be the Chinese version, but I'm not a big fan of all the Chinese writing and the diagonal text on the boot screen. Looks totally out of place.

/s

Enron said,
I understand it may be the Chinese version, but I'm not a big fan of all the Chinese writing and the diagonal text on the boot screen. Looks totally out of place.

/s

That looks like a watermark of win8china.com

Jose_49 said,
Aww. No Windows 8's logo on the boot screen. I believe a white one would look nice.

Yea I agree. It doesn't matter if most won't see it anyway. There should be a logo of some sort. Brand your logo screen, thats what its there for! And more than just a bland word.

Jose_49 said,
Aww. No Windows 8's logo on the boot screen. I believe a white one would look nice.

You mean the new flag? Or the number 8? If you mean the number the loading dots at the bottom move to form the number 8.

Dot Matrix said,
I'm loving the softer, flatter look of AERO. No more windows popping out at me!

Yep! There's something "lightweight" about that IE10 window that I don't get from the current version. I also like the right-angle corners.

I think I'm really going to like the desktop look of Windows 8.

A340600 said,

Yep! There's something "lightweight" about that IE10 window that I don't get from the current version. I also like the right-angle corners.

I think I'm really going to like the desktop look of Windows 8.

See this screenshot then (Win8 RP Escrow build) : http://i.imgur.com/dlYnB.png

what I'm most interested in is the performance. the HTML5 test only shows features nothing about performance. I'm sure this is a step in the right direction though. looking forward to the RC release.

ctrl_alt_delete said,
what I'm most interested in is the performance. the HTML5 test only shows features nothing about performance. I'm sure this is a step in the right direction though. looking forward to the RC release.

We'd have to wait for him to run sunspider etc but at this point I think the difference between browsers in JS is so small you can't really notice it using these types of benchmarks.

ctrl_alt_delete said,
what I'm most interested in is the performance. the HTML5 test only shows features nothing about performance. I'm sure this is a step in the right direction though. looking forward to the RC release.

And to be fair, considering how Microsoft are aiming for the majority of Metro apps to be writen in JS & HTML, for once people should actually care about IE's performance given it's the engine a lot of Metro apps will be running on.

Edited by ~Johnny, May 9 2012, 5:09pm :

ctrl_alt_delete said,
what I'm most interested in is the performance. the HTML5 test only shows features nothing about performance. I'm sure this is a step in the right direction though. looking forward to the RC release.

It *IS* a lot faster than IE9.

GP007 said,

We'd have to wait for him to run sunspider etc but at this point I think the difference between browsers in JS is so small you can't really notice it using these types of benchmarks.

i'm not talking about JS speeds, because right now IE10 has the fastest sunspider score. I'm talking about fluidity, jitter free....html5 performance, not just html5 features.

ctrl_alt_delete said,

i'm not talking about JS speeds, because right now IE10 has the fastest sunspider score. I'm talking about fluidity, jitter free....html5 performance, not just html5 features.

That's not something you can test with a benchmark and give out a score. Fluidity and jitter is something you'll have to test yourself visiting the sites you normally do day after day. Someone might visit a site that's a bit slow due to some crappy coding on the devs part but on the flip side others probably never have or will visit it. So in the end it's up to users and what they do. You can't really stick a number to something like that and give it a score.

whoa! Is the boot screen just going say "Windows" now? I think that..........................would actually be pretty cool.

FalseAgent said,
whoa! Is the boot screen just going say "Windows" now? I think that..........................would actually be pretty cool.

Maybe the thinking is that cuz it's going to be so short (unless you're on an older system) you wouldn't see much of it anyways.

GP007 said,

Maybe the thinking is that cuz it's going to be so short (unless you're on an older system) you wouldn't see much of it anyways.

That was the thinking for the simplistic boot screen in Windows Vista, and we all remember show stupid that was.

foodan said,
Nice to see a unified branding with "Windows", no "Windows 8", etc... much cleaner.

Its exactly what Microsoft has to do.

foodan said,
Nice to see a unified branding with "Windows", no "Windows 8", etc... much cleaner.

I think the "8" is done by the loading dots at the bottom maybe? Guess we'll wait and see, it could just have them going in a circle and not forming an 8 at all.

GP007 said,

I think the "8" is done by the loading dots at the bottom maybe? Guess we'll wait and see, it could just have them going in a circle and not forming an 8 at all.

It did form an 8 in the CP and i'm sure it still will. It's great that Microsoft is at last daring to be creative. Maybe the reckoned it is a must these days.

thartist said,

It did form an 8 in the CP and i'm sure it still will. It's great that Microsoft is at last daring to be creative. Maybe the reckoned it is a must these days.


No they didn't. The 8 was in the background of the picture that was above the dots.

Zlip792 said,
Great move forward to drive whole world to new HTML5 era.

just as long as that stuff stays the hell in my browser, I'm fine with it. Every time Microsoft starts trumpeting HTML 5 in apps, I just want to smack the p!ss out of them.

deadonthefloor said,

Lawl
I bet you'd have a hard time distinguishing good HTML5 Metro apps from C# apps from C++ apps.

Or have a hard time disguising HTML5 front end (presentation) from the C/C++/C# processing (backend). Heck, a fair amount of Windows right now is written using XAML for the front end end such as the new Task Manager in Windows 8.

Where is support for classList, server-sent DOM events, web notifications, WebGL and the audio and video elements? No, H.264 is NOT an acceptable codec since the MPEG-LA has made it clear once everyone is suckered in to supporting the codec they will charge everyone at every chance they get and NO requiring a user to MANUALLY install a codec is NOT native support. Both Apple and Microsoft are part of the MPEG-LA patent troll group which also includes members of the MPAA (e.g. Warner Bros).

While the standards have improved Microsoft is still being anti-competitive and so long as that continues to happen there is no reason to use the Trident rendering engine. The GUI? Forget it, completely not customizable, even Safari, (a Mac product!) is more customizable than IE! Microsoft products WERE known for their customizability...now not only are they even more static than Apple products but the interfaces suck even more! Who puts the home icon on the right side of a 1080p screen?

Edited by JAB Creations, May 10 2012, 11:22am :

JAB Creations said,
Where is support for classList, server-sent DOM events, web notifications, WebGL and the audio and video elements? No, H.264 is NOT an acceptable codec since the MPEG-LA has made it clear once everyone is suckered in to supporting the codec they will charge everyone at every chance they get and NO requiring a user to MANUALLY install a codec is NOT native support. Both Apple and Microsoft are part of the MPEG-LA patent troll group which also includes members of the MPAA (e.g. Warner Bros).

While the standards have improved Microsoft is still being anti-competitive and so long as that continues to happen there is no reason to use the Trident rendering engine. The GUI? Forget it, completely not customizable, even Safari, (a Mac product!) is more customizable than IE! Microsoft products WERE known for their customizability...now not only are they even more static than Apple products but the interfaces suck even more! Who puts the home icon on the right side of a 1080p screen?

Then no CHEERS for you

JAB Creations said,
Where is support for classList, server-sent DOM events, web notifications, WebGL and the audio and video elements? No, H.264 is NOT an acceptable codec since the MPEG-LA has made it clear once everyone is suckered in to supporting the codec they will charge everyone at every chance they get and NO requiring a user to MANUALLY install a codec is NOT native support. Both Apple and Microsoft are part of the MPEG-LA patent troll group which also includes members of the MPAA (e.g. Warner Bros).

While the standards have improved Microsoft is still being anti-competitive and so long as that continues to happen there is no reason to use the Trident rendering engine. The GUI? Forget it, completely not customizable, even Safari, (a Mac product!) is more customizable than IE! Microsoft products WERE known for their customizability...now not only are they even more static than Apple products but the interfaces suck even more! Who puts the home icon on the right side of a 1080p screen?

Before you rant, fact check what you 'think' are standards and what are standards.

WebGL for example is NOT a standard, and is discouraged by every security company in the world along with the W3C, as it is a MASSIVE security risk because it exposes GPU shaders unfettered to any web site that wants to shove OpenGL code through your GPU or GP-GPU shader code. (From gaining access, to installing malware, to even using GPU flaws or death loops can FRY your video card.)


W3C has their own 'safe' shader and alternative features they are promoting.


WebGL is completely the opposite of standards and what the technologies around HTML5 are trying to create. The purpose of HTML5 is to create RIA and graphical web sites WITHOUT NEEDING direct OPENGL access and instead providing this in HTML5 technologies and STANDARDS.

WebGL bypasses all the standards, is just basically rendering OpenGL in a box, and exposes video cards to malware.

Hypothetical...
What do you think people would say if Microsoft came out and told everyone just to write DirectX code for websites and ignore HTML5 for graphical rendering?

Pitchforks?

This is EXACTLY what Google is doing though, except it is OpenGL instead of DirectX.

(The reason why Google is abandoning HTML5 standards in support of WebGL, is that they can't graphical 'rendering' content in Chrome as fast as IE9 or IE10, which is a major problem for them right now, and until they can catch up, they are bypassing Chrome's rendering capabilities and just using OpenGL like a freaking video game, and spitting on HTML5 while they do it.)
*Go look up Google's IEFish response to IE9 doing a true graphical HTML5 based FishTank demo. Google couldn't match IE9's speed, so they wrote their 'version' in WebGL. (And called it HTML5 cause it painted to an HTML5 canvas, but wasn't HTML5 content or rendering whatsoever.

Holy CRAZY leaking from a bag of mess...