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
Yet another very good reason not to use IE8
Besides that, pitiful to see that not even their own site works with IE8 :lol:
problem was that IE 7 was so popular that people coded to IE 7 standards rather than web standards
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.
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
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.
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.
RC1 is final product with bugs that have to be fixed. You would think it would be rendering correctly by RC1.
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
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.
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 here on vista, no crash!
The main page isn't crashing ie...
http://wow.curse.com/downloads/wow-addons/...s/kauction.aspx
If only Microsoft were still working on IE8 before it's official release!!!
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.
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.
At Neowin, we do not tolerate trolling in the news articles. Thank you.
Last edited by CalumJR on 19 Feb 2009 - 21:18
To quote my earlier post from another news article today (aimed at a different Apple fanatic):
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.
There was more to DanielZ's comment that what James123 quoted.
Last edited by CalumJR on 20 Feb 2009 - 00:03
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.
In which case it's the sites fault and not IEs.
- 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 ?
Really? Can't tell you when the last time I saw a site not rendering properly in firefox.
Then*
must have been
Talking about fail...
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...
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?
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?
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?
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.
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.
Sorry but the unprofessional FUD you're spreading doesn't look any better here than anywhere else...
Oh, and the IE team doesn't control the Microsoft websites - it's up to each team to update their site.
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.
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.
Last edited by CalumJR on 21 Feb 2009 - 04:54
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.
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.
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)...
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
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.
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.
Commenting has either been disabled on this article or you are not logged in. Click here to login or register, its free!
Note: Anonymous commenting is disabled in order to keep the quality of responses to a high standard.