Microsoft's Internet Explorer head working on 'something new' inside company

The Microsoft executive in charge of Internet Explorer has announced he will be leading a new team working on "something new" inside Microsoft, though what exactly that entails remains a mystery.

Dean Hachamovitch, who has worked at Microsoft since 1990, announced his move in a post on the IEblog. The post contained no hints as to what he may be working on, beyond saying the executive expects he will "continue blogging in the near future at a different Microsoft address on a new topic." ZDNet's Mary Jo Foley says the move fits with Microsoft's recent reorganization, as the Internet Explorer team exists under Terry Myerson's operating systems division, and he's reportedly putting his own team in place.

While Hachamovitch's future role isn't known, the likely direction for Internet Explorer is one that heavily relies on a cloud infrastructure and cross-platform use.

Windows 8.1's Internet Explorer 11 includes the ability to sync tabs across devices running the operating system, and it's believed that same ability will come to Windows Phone with its next major update, expected to come early next year. Performance has similarly increased in the browser, which offers improved touch recognition as well. As Microsoft's operating system unit continues working closer together, it's likely the browser will include more improvements between the company's platforms.

Microsoft released Internet Explorer 11 for Windows 7 on Thursday, though it lacks the tab-syncing feature of its Windows 8.1 counterpart because the older operating system doesn't require users to have Microsoft Accounts.

Source: IEblog via ZDNet | Image via Microsoft

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Microsoft starts shipment of its Xbox One exclusive games

Next Story

Microsoft confirms SkyDrive is coming to the Xbox One

63 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

Every browser out there has issues.
Just having to cope with every single issue/extra code is sometimes aggrevating to say the least.

Oh... look... in IE, Chrome and FireFox it finally looks all the same. Phew...
But hey, what's going on in Opera..?? AAAAAAAAAaaargghhh!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Or alike ;-)

Only menu systems are a bitch now, especially on tablets. Dropdown menus etc. often don't work properly without some extra fiddling :-\

it would be nice if they released a consumer focused browser and leave IE for business. A new web engine and performance that will make bloated chrome blush.

No.. it's one browser over another. IE "used to be" the standard browser everyone used.

MS has some competition. I have IE11 but never use it because even my banks website doesn't work with IE11. Although the state that a MS browser is necessary IE10 has been out for how long? then came IE11... I'm not complaining, I just remember what some people tell me are in the know around here.

For an honest belief here.. It has to be standards. Chrome seems to be in the lead as some are less then happy with the firefox updates constantly. Chrome got the update correct by having it update in the background. It is a fight to the finish!

The sheer amount of pure ignorance displayed in this thread is overwhelming, its almost like people are really dumb and their opinions are stuck in the past or something?

I know what Microsoft is going to do.......whatever Google is going to do with Chrome.

Microsoft isn't hard to figure out. Whatever their competition (aka the "frontrunner) announces what they are going to do, Microsoft will announce the same thing also a few minutes later.

I'm really sick of all the IE-bashing... it's 2013... IE11 is a completely different browser than what IE6/7/8 were. It's faster than all other browsers, provides awesome integration into the OS, and HTML5 videos works amazing compared to the others. Give IE11 a try before bashing it.

Also, regarding sites that don't render good... it's because developers that are using non-standard code, browser-specific/engine-specific code, etc. Good developers design using standard code which render fine in all browsers (including IE). I switched from Chrome to IE11 and never looking back.

A lot of web devs grew up through the early 2000's when IE6 was exactly _that_ bad, Opera Free had banner ads, and Gecko's Netscape had crashed, burned, and was just finding its legs with Phoenix/Firebird.

The worst thing MS did was release two more versions to further convince people that it couldn't do any better. It was bad until version 9 - some people just don't develop new notions about software.

Not bashing Ms here as I usually do but, it is an interesting note that web developers have to redesign websites for IE11 to work? IE used to be the standard. But this isn't the case if entire websites have to be redesigned to work with IE11.

right?

chrisj1968 said,
Not bashing Ms here as I usually do but, it is an interesting note that web developers have to redesign websites for IE11 to work? IE used to be the standard. But this isn't the case if entire websites have to be redesigned to work with IE11.

right?

Who told you that? A friend of a friend of a friend who made a GeoCities site 15 years ago?

WTF are you even saying? IE11 is the most standards compliant version of IE to date, and it's much faster than the competitors.

The sites that don't render fine are the ones that DO use old IE-specific code. If developers use web standard code from the W3C (not using browser specific or engine specific codes such as WebKit), sites render flawlessly on all browsers.

Therefore, that's the developers fault not the browsers.

chrisj1968 said,
Not bashing Ms here as I usually do but, it is an interesting note that web developers have to redesign websites for IE11 to work? IE used to be the standard. But this isn't the case if entire websites have to be redesigned to work with IE11.

right?

Not calling you a stupid ignorant untalented web dev, but I am. Please check some of the bile you spew out in future, what you just said was absolute crap!

REALLY? that's interesting. No I'm NOT a DEV But I've been around here listening to those who are in the know to know enough.

It has already been told to me that IE11's big issue is that webpages need to be rewritten to work with IE11 and some are still rewriting for IE10 still.

As for spewing bile.. I take exception to that comment as I have vomitted bile due to multiple bowel surgeries and it is awful. I'll give you a pass on this one.

My use of language was purely because of how you worded yours, as in starting with "not bashing Ms......" and then proceeding to do exactly that.

Websites do not need to be coded again for IE11 (or 10), but they do need a tiny bit adding to say 'if IE10 or 11 then don't do anything different' - this is only if the sites themselves have any code that didn't work in older versions meaning that the web dev put a bit of code in that detects if the browser is IE and then delivers different code.

IE10 and 11 should work just fine with standards, so long as they code with standards then there is nothing special that is needed for IE.

Now, if the dev is using browser specific code (code that targets specific browsers) then its not using standard compliant code, its using code that the specific browser enabled before it was standardised. This is why webkit is having a detrimental effect due to its use of proprietary extensions made before the things were standardised.

So some websites have moz and webkit specific code that of cource wont work in IE, IE waits for the W3c to make it into a standard and implements the standard compliant version. If web devs are using browser specific code in the meantime then they should be well aware at the time that they are going to need to go back to this website at some point and make it standards compliant again - because simply by using none standard browser specific tags they are breaking standards themselves.

There are far more 'web devs' out there that no little about the damage they do, and just prefer to hate on IE.

but WHY aren't website developers coding their sites for IE in mind? there has to be a reason and you and I don't and canNOT speak for them.

If anyone who develops websites who is neither pro/con against MS could chime in.

MS bashing.. If I don't care for something I just say my peace

My top guess:

1. they are tweaking/rewriting trident to be faster a bit similar to what Google did to Blink?
2. They are rewriting IE entirely from the ground up to compete better with Chrome/FF?
3. A social network? (So.cl doesn't count.)

1. Blink isn't a rewrite, it's supposed to remove useless code that Google didn't want to use. The most funny thing about that is that the Webkit developers have started a similar project to remove all useless code... from Google. Anyway, might be a good possibility.
2. A doubt it, Trident is a major piece of software, if they are working on a rewrite, they should have started years ago. Of course, it's a possibility, and while I, like I said, doubt it, it would be nice.
3. Why doesn't So.cl count , it's an awesome social network, I love the pics! However, I don't think so.

1. I understand Blink is nothing new, Google just trimmed it up. I'm saying Microsoft could be trimming trident up.
2. Trident is also a pain in the arse for developers. At the very least they can be streamlining it.
3. Go up to anybody on the street and ask them if they have a So.cl account. They will probably say "What's that?". I bet you any amount of money more people know what Linux is than So.cl. MS needs to re brand it, integrate it with their services, and advertize it.

Anyway, I was just throwing out things that came to mind. There's really no validity in what I'm staying lol.

Trident was rewritten from IE8 to IE9 though. Don't see why not. Or even if its just for experimenting and backporting features as they do with other products.

I really hope IE disappears completely. This is coming from a web developer. Due to the lack of updates for old operating systems. We are obliged to provide compatibility for IE6 IE7 IE8 IE9 (yes IE9 is absolute).

The web is evolving and automatic and forced updates are a must. Imagine if we need to go through this trouble for ALL older versions of FF and Chrome? IE, please kill yourself. YES, you're improving a lot though out the years, but you are very inconsistent. Even Google dropped all support for all their products for IE8.

Unless you are developing for a Chinees market (or Japan), what is the point of supporting IE6 these days? IE7 isn't used anymore (1% is nothing). And IE8, well... you might have a point there. MIGHT. And IE9: okay, that's nonsense if your website doesn't work in IE9, you're a bad coder, or should stop using languages that aren't standards (yet).

Anyway, if IE was gone, what should replace it? Chrome? I'm prety sure that you would be complaining about Chrome in 10 years because they are killing the web. About that: automatic and forced updates are a must, it's weird that you say that, because when sentens ago, you said you where supposed to give support for IE6 and IE7, while those browsers aren't used anymore, the only reason that might be legitem is that you're working for a company. Then why don't you update the browsers? Automatic and forced updates aren't a solution for any company, not even with brand new software made for IE11, Firefox 26 or Chrome ... (no seriously, what's the most recent version of that browser?). Because everything needs to be TESTED. Those companier relly on this software, one bug, and it's over untill it is fixed. There is a reason Firefox has ESR versions.

-- A webdeveloper

Edited by Studio384, Nov 11 2013, 7:50pm :

Indeed! No reason to support IE6 and 7... and libs like jQuery and Angular dropped IE8 support with version 2, so if the big guys agree on that, so should the devs (unless IE8 is demanded by spec).

We need at least three different rendering engines to keep the competition going. It's healthy for the web. IE/MS guys are standardizing with W3C, and have been for some time. Adobe is heavily in on it aswell, despite not having a browser. They have dreamweaver though.

WebKit is the engine that throwing in all kinds of unstandardized features. WebKit is the new IE6. Devs keep forgetting that IE6 was the best browser in the world when it came out, but firefox changed that a couple of years later. WebKit is perceived at the best engine in the world now, and they are ****ing things up. Lucky for us that Google forked Webkit to Blink so they wont get any new non-standard stuff Apple throws in.

IE11 has a great engine, and no other engine can compare when it comes to accelerated gfx. Try having 20 transparent divs with rounded corners, shadow and gradients moving around and resizing simultaneously. Background should be a picture. Others browsers will fail miserably.

I wonder why all the hate? Standards used in IE are different from the rest of the world. Microsoft had the mentality of implementing what they think is right; when a browser fails to follow standards and/or fails to implement the latest technologies (ECMA5/HTML5/CSS3) will increase development time.

No browser is perfect, but at least they can be updated with few clicks away and not going through "Windows Update". Without seemless updates we will always stuck with this version dilemma.

Fawzi Breidi said,
I wonder why all the hate? Standards used in IE are different from the rest of the world. Microsoft had the mentality of implementing what they think is right; when a browser fails to follow standards and/or fails to implement the latest technologies (ECMA5/HTML5/CSS3) will increase development time.

No browser is perfect, but at least they can be updated with few clicks away and not going through "Windows Update". Without seemless updates we will always stuck with this version dilemma.


I guess you're not aware of the fancy new check box "Install new versions automatically"?

Get with the times dude. You're not one of those minimum wage "developers" from India, are you?

Fawzi Breidi said,
I wonder why all the hate? Standards used in IE are different from the rest of the world. Microsoft had the mentality of implementing what they think is right; when a browser fails to follow standards and/or fails to implement the latest technologies (ECMA5/HTML5/CSS3) will increase development time.

No browser is perfect, but at least they can be updated with few clicks away and not going through "Windows Update". Without seemless updates we will always stuck with this version dilemma.

Because IE 9, 10, and 11 all support the latest technologies in the exact same manner that WebKit browsers do, but without the stupid browser-specific extension tags that WebKit requires. Windows Vista supports IE 9 and Windows 7 supports IE 11 now. Windows XP support is FINALLY going to end, so users have no reason not to upgrade to one of the latest versions of Internet Explorer. Besides, nothing is stopping you from putting a browser check on your website that tells users to download the latest versions of Internet Explorer, Chrome, or Firefox. And, since modern versions of Internet Explorer automatically upgrade themselves with Windows Update, it's not difficult to upgrade, as you say it is. Yes, it's unfortunate that we still have to wait for IE 9 to die with Vista, but it's not as terrible as you make it out to be.

First I'm not an indian and thankfully my wage is good enough to support 3 families (where I live at least). Secondly, indians are humans and you will find you can learn a lot from them; take this idea out of your head and be respectful for everyone. The battle of words is not my thing here. Suddenly you all are web developers with amazing career; kudos for you!

Fawzi Breidi said,
I wonder why all the hate? Standards used in IE are different from the rest of the world. Microsoft had the mentality of implementing what they think is right; when a browser fails to follow standards and/or fails to implement the latest technologies (ECMA5/HTML5/CSS3) will increase development time.

No browser is perfect, but at least they can be updated with few clicks away and not going through "Windows Update". Without seemless updates we will always stuck with this version dilemma.

Hello, Windows Update is automatic and seamless too.

Fawzi Breidi said,
I wonder why all the hate? Standards used in IE are different from the rest of the world. Microsoft had the mentality of implementing what they think is right; when a browser fails to follow standards and/or fails to implement the latest technologies (ECMA5/HTML5/CSS3) will increase development time.

No browser is perfect, but at least they can be updated with few clicks away and not going through "Windows Update". Without seemless updates we will always stuck with this version dilemma.

Actually Microsoft implements only approved standards, and not incomplete drafts and proposals like you will often see in WebKit for instance. Both Apple and Google are guilty of this leading to the mess that WebKit actually is under the covers. Technically speaking, the guys who implement features too early have a tendency to cause more harm because drafts of standards are often incomplete (hence the term draft which a lot of people conveniently ommit) so they leave small (or large) portions up to the vendor to decide how to implement, essentially creating inconsistencies and fragmentation. Just look at the mess that is vendor prefixes in CSS, essentially forcing developers to write 5 lines for a single rule (-webkit-opacity, -moz-opacity, -o-opacity, -ms-opacity, opacity). Repeat that 50-100 times in a larger app and you have yourself a nice little mess to maintain. To make matters worse, some "developers" assume everyone uses Chrome and Firefox so they start implementing premature "standards" essentially re-creating the mess from the 90's with sites optimized only for certain browsers. Remember "Optimized for Netscape? *shrug*

All this leads to is more confusion to where people don't even know what is an approved standard and what is just a draft or proposal and then start making statements that browser X or vendor Y is so lagging behind. I am not saying that is the case with all standards but it happens *a lot* more often than not.

As a full-time developer, I really hope it's an IE with a webkit or gecko backend. IE is the bane of everything web.

spacer said,
As a full-time developer, I really hope it's an IE with a webkit or gecko backend. IE is the bane of everything web.

sorry but why? IE11 is really nice and compares well with the competition.

IE9/10/11 are fine. And having a new back-end wouldn't magically update the old IE versions, the ones that cause problems. Frankly, what do you think is wrong with IE 11?

Also, we're moving more and more towards WebKit, which is dangerous; there's a risk of an "optimized for WebKit" web just like what happened a dozen years ago when IE had >90% market share.

spacer said,
As a full-time developer, I really hope it's an IE with a webkit or gecko backend. IE is the bane of everything web.
Havens no, I don't want IE to be ruined.

It's already happened. We have a few "off-by-1" alignment issues on Firefox and my manager said not to worry about them. It's not an issue in Webkit or Trident, and it's not exactly important that this line be aligned that extra 1 pixel vs the engineering time to put the Gecko hack in, but it has started. My project is officially "Best viewed in Chrome or Safari".

spacer said,
As a full-time developer, I really hope it's an IE with a webkit or gecko backend. IE is the bane of everything web.

lol, not happening

greenwizard88 said,
My project is officially "Best viewed in Chrome or Safari".
That mentality is exactly what made sh*t happen last time.

Aethec said,
IE9/10/11 are fine. And having a new back-end wouldn't magically update the old IE versions, the ones that cause problems. Frankly, what do you think is wrong with IE 11?

That IS the problem with IE11. IE10 and below are buggy and bloody useless, so anyone not using the latest version of windows and using IE will be screwed (the average joe that isn't going to bother with firefox or chrome or whatever). So developers still have to waste time coding for broken browsers and testing on them.

n_K said,

That IS the problem with IE11. IE10 and below are buggy and bloody useless, so anyone not using the latest version of windows and using IE will be screwed (the average joe that isn't going to bother with firefox or chrome or whatever). So developers still have to waste time coding for broken browsers and testing on them.

What specifically do you consider broken? What I find whatever people do their main development with is the "right one" and when they have to test on others those are the broken ones. It's completely relative.

spacer said,
As a full-time developer, I really hope it's an IE with a webkit or gecko backend. IE is the bane of everything web.

As a developer i hate the fact that WebKit is becoming the next IE. Keep the web open, keep choice, get rid of Webkit only prefixes that are the new bane of the web.

n_K said,

That IS the problem with IE11. IE10 and below are buggy and bloody useless, so anyone not using the latest version of windows and using IE will be screwed (the average joe that isn't going to bother with firefox or chrome or whatever). So developers still have to waste time coding for broken browsers and testing on them.

They're not useless at all! 9 was on par with the competition WHEN it came out. Same with 10, and same with 11 now. I think it's great they changed the ident so that old libs can't detect that it's IE. Now suddenly everything written for gecko/webkit just works without any stupid hacks.

spacer said,
As a full-time developer, I really hope it's an IE with a webkit or gecko backend. IE is the bane of everything web.

The backend is the server. You probably mean rendering engine Trident is healthy competition, and is better in quality on many features than gecko/webkit/blink/presto. The IE demos shows just that.

Studio384 said,
Havens no, I don't want IE to be ruined.

How does WebKit ruin a web browser? I can see it from a competition perspective, but not because WebKit is bad.

Also as a full time developer who just wrote an enormous website with full screen background images and video, can I just say you're talking ****? I don't support 6 and 7 anymore because even MS doesn't, but IE8 support required an additional 15 lines of CSS and using a video library that provides Flash fallback (mediaelement, many others are available). IE9 and above worked perfectly with the same code as Chrome and Firefox. In fact, I have WAY more issues with Firefox than I do IE these days, a site I built a few months back worked perfectly in everything back to IE8 with no changes, but in the latest Firefox release it rendered the same as IE7 - ****ing terribly. Consequently I had to build IE7 support, but for Firefox, not IE.

Might I suggest you need to learn to write better code if you're seeing such serious issues in IE9+?

spacer said,
As a full-time developer, I really hope it's an IE with a webkit or gecko backend. IE is the bane of everything web.

As a full-time developer I hope that never happens. IE9/10/11 have been just fine. Last thing we need is for competition to practically disappear and browsers to become nothing more than fancy shells around WebKit which isn't the holy grail of rendering engines. Yeah it would be nice to code for fewer (or even single) rendering engine but I rather have healthy competition and innovation any day than stale-ness that inevitably comes without competition. If it weren't for innovations from all major players, HTML5, JavaScript and CSS wouldn't be what they are today and we wouldn't be able to write cross-platform apps that work on any HTML5-capable device. Microsoft actually has been contributing some really great stuff (even to WebKit, ex: MS Touch Events) so I'm not sure why all the hate...

spacer said,
As a full-time developer, I really hope it's an IE with a webkit or gecko backend. IE is the bane of everything web.

I always like to point out to trolls..... here's one.

And if you really are a Web Developer you are one of those many lazy ones.

Melfster said,

No they don't I almost never use IE anymore. They need webkit.

I used to use chrome all the time and now I never use chrome because of how bad it crash when I had several tabs open. Since Ie9 I have no reason to.

Aethec said,
IE9/10/11 are fine. And having a new back-end wouldn't magically update the old IE versions, the ones that cause problems. Frankly, what do you think is wrong with IE 11?

Also, we're moving more and more towards WebKit, which is dangerous; there's a risk of an "optimized for WebKit" web just like what happened a dozen years ago when IE had >90% market share.

It isn't a dangerous risk because Webkit is open source and doesn't use proprietary technologies such as ActiveX so the comparison isn't even close to what would happen in reality. I do agree that simply putting a webkit backend won't fix up the problems with Internet Explorer because I have a feeling that most of the problems come back to bureaucratic bungling rather than the lack of ability to actually fix the problems.