Microsoft begs Web devs not to make WebKit the new IE6

[Boz]

Sorry to be the spanner in the works but Chrome still has superior HTML5 support

Which is the end of the argument right here

Btw, mine is a bit less cause I'm not using nightly but using the latest public version of Chrome (like 90% of other Chrome users) since Chrome and Safari and Firefox update their browsers transparently to the latest version so fragmentation is minimal or non-existant.

So not only IE10 sucks ass in HTML5 render test, IE will always be fragmented because of Microsoft and how they approach updates and due to their proprietary nature.

Btw, Webkit browsers top HTML5 test charts

[Noir Angel]

448 is still great for the stable channel, it shows how superior Chrome's HTML5 support is.

[Seahorsepip Veteran]

IE10 is very good compared to it's predecessors :p

But Firefox is still the best if it's about css following W3C :D

I always have to make custom css stylesheets or css hacks for chrome and IE10 to work correctly as they should, as example chrome positions a absolute element ignoring the borders of its parent compared to firefox who follows those borders.

Also css3 animations are buggy on chrome compared to firefox, especially 3d ones :/

Worst about chrome is that they still add a outline on input elements, wtf?

On the other hand chrome is way better in rendering speed.

And Opera is horrible, css is always not functioning right, it doesn't accept ~ and + in all circumstances, labels and checkboxes can't be moved in seperate places in html files because they don't work in that case etc etc.

[Athernar]

But it doesn't matter guys, Google has a history of spying on their users, so in future versions Chrome might steal your bank details!!!!!111

I always have to make custom css stylesheets or css hacks for chrome and IE10 to work correctly as they should, as example chrome positions a absolute element ignoring the borders of its parent compared to firefox who follows those borders.

Also css3 animations are buggy on chrome compared to firefox, especially 3d ones :/

Worst about chrome is that they still add a outline on input elements, wtf?

I can concur here, in my personal experience as a webdev, Webkit has probably the buggiest implementation of various standards. Personally I put it down to a focus on tickboxing to win over the clueless non-developers, rather than having solid, compliant implementations.

[Mr. Gibs]

Btw, mine is a bit less cause I'm not using nightly but using the latest public version of Chrome (like 90% of other Chrome users) since Chrome and Safari and Firefox update their browsers transparently to the latest version so fragmentation is minimal or non-existant.

1. That site tests stuff that isn't part of the HTML5 standard. It may become part of it in the future but it isn't yet.

2. You know what I find funny Boz? In pretty much every single thread about HTML5 you claim how useless it is, what a waste of time it is, how Apple is idiotic for supporting it etc etc etc. And now since supporting HTML5 suits your argument (Google is the best) you're all for it. Amazing, such a remarkable turn around.

3. You claim that Microsoft is idiotic for supporting DirectX over WebGL because is proprietary crap. But then in every single other thread you promote flash and claim it's so much better than WebGL. Last I checked Flash was just as proprietary as DirectX is.

4. You claim that since Webkit has 90% marketshare in mobile and a majority in desktop (may be true who knows) it's a standard right? Well then 10 years ago Microsoft had close to 100% marketshare with IE. So according to your logic, IE6 should have been the standard and all other browsers should have just died out. Flawless, absolutely flawless logic there.

[Seahorsepip Veteran]

steal your bank details!!!!!111

I can concur here, in my personal experience as a webdev, Webkit has probably the buggiest implementation of various standards. Personally I put it down to a focus on tickboxing to win over the clueless non-developers, rather than having solid, compliant implementations.

Yeah it's really messy with css3, hopefully it improves one day :/

[Nashy]

So what's the deal with IE6? What was so special about it? I don't understand.

It was very, very old and wasn't up to date with HTML and CSS standards. Because it was so widely adopted for such a long time, you had to spend a lot of time, and create a lot more code to get a website to work on IE6 and function correctly.

I don't necessarily think it was a bad browser, it did it's job for it's time, it just should have been updated long before IE7, and adoption rates needed to be higher and faster than they were. Some companies STILL use it.

[Mathiasdm]

It looks like this is not really about WebKit causing problems. It's developers making the mistake of only putting a WebKit prefix in.

Like others have said before in this thread, this can be handled using several cross-browser libraries.

An example tool: http://leaverou.github.com/prefixfree/

Additionally, the use of these prefixes is in fact not bad (as long as you have a decent fallback). Here are some actual arguments: http://www.alistapart.com/articles/prefix-or-posthack/

[jakem1]

If you stopped defending Microsoft for a second you'd see how ridiculous your argument is. Not seeing, how ironic and hypocritical it is for a company that took the internet a decade back with it's crap browser and it's proprietary practices while abusing monopoly (that's why other browsers couldn't penetrate their dominance), trying to present themselves as champions of "standards" and warning how open source browser engine is somehow bad, while at the same time trying to lock down Windows as much as possible, is hilarious at best. And yes, they are such huge supporters of what's good for everyone while they deliberately refuse to support WebGL (when everyone else has) instead of peddling their own proprietary DirectX. Not to mention that saying that if it wasn't for Microsoft we wouldn't have hardware accelerated browsers is just plain nonsense. Webkit was actually the first browser engine who introduced hardware accelerated support when Apple released the very first iPhone. They need to shut the hell up and let IE die because Microsoft has proven how good they are for the web and while IE10 might be solid now, knowing what Microsoft is like this won't last long and they will continue trying to abuse anything they can to push their own proprietary approach.

I'm not defending MS, just common sense. The past is the past and Microsoft have clearly embraced web standards so it's pointless dredging up old mistakes (especially since you seem to be happy to see webkit and web developers repeat them).

As for webgl, I'd rather have secure computers than an unnecessary, buggy, non-standard attack vector for hackers. Besides, using your argument, surely DirectX is a standard given the fact that it's on 95% of the worlds PCs and is supported by most graphics chips so why doesn't Chrome support it ;)

Frankly, your argument is pathetic and it's sad to see you defend the interests of corporations like Google over web users.

[Lord Method Man]

WebGL is such a gaping security hole that I'm glad to be running a browser that doesn't support it. Any browser that allows web code to directly access my hardware with no managed API isn't coming anywhere near my system.

[jakem1]

An even greater majority of people are using non Trident based browsers. Around 62% of all users now use non Trident based browsers,(so Microsoft's argument that the web should be tailored to suit their browser is still silly). a higher percentage than those not using Webkit based browsers. Isn't it great when we skew stats to fit our agenda?

What's Trident got to do with anything? Microsoft's request is to follow standards which will benefit Firefox, Opera and ultimately webkit-based and any other browser users as well.

Why do you hate web standards so much?

[Mr. Gibs]

An even greater majority of people are using non Trident based browsers. Around 62% of all users now use non Trident based browsers,(so Microsoft's argument that the web should be tailored to suit their browser is still silly). a higher percentage than those not using Webkit based browsers. Isn't it great when we skew stats to fit our agenda?

Except Microsoft isn't saying code your websites to only work on IE, they're saying don't code your websites using webkit only prefixes. Instead code them to follow standards.

By using webkit (or gecko / opera) only prefixes all you're doing is repeating what MS did with IE6. So I thought people would be happy about hearing this since it promotes web standards, but nope Microsoft can never do anything right.

[Stoffel]

MS is against standards, BOOOO MS

MS is for standards, BOOO, die MS

Doesn't matter what they do, haters will be haters

[Argi]

Competition is a good a thing. As mentioned, I don't think anyone wants to return to the days of IE6 as the "standard."

[ViperAFK]

Webkit is the standard. For both desktop and mobile. End of.

And btw, if Microsoft wants what's best for developers it should, as I said, dump their IE engine completely, join Webkit movement and create IE based on webkit and then contribute to the webkit based along with Apple, Google to improve it, so we can have finally one HTML rendering engine standard. Mozilla, btw, should do the same.

They can still make their own JS engine (like Google does with V8 and Apple does with Nitro) if they want to to compete on speed or add unique features to their IE browsers (actual browser features not how it renders content) and we can finally build developer tools and all kinds of design support and fancy effects when we have all major browsers on a single, universal rendering engine.

This would truly move the web forward in ways unseen before. Actually it would give us a terrific web platform that would be similar to Flash (and I mean from the compatibility standpoint) and we could finally build stuff that's creative and pushing the envelope instead of polluting our code with 15 different hacks just to render content properly on IE browsers.

Yeah and before ie6 was "the standard", and look at the horrible mess that resulted in. the proper web standards should be followed, we don't need to go down this road again.

[Boz]

What's Trident got to do with anything? Microsoft's request is to follow standards which will benefit Firefox, Opera and ultimately webkit-based and any other browser users as well.

Why do you hate web standards so much?

Again, Microsoft doesn't follow standards that well at all. Let's stop yelling and pretending they are. They have proprietary extensions and Webkit is actually miles ahead of IE10 in HTML5 capabilities and support . so let's stop with this MS is web standards preacher. They are not, they are just trying to sound like that so their whole Windows 8/Metro platform doesn't crash and burn since they use their own proprietary extensions for building apps for Windows 8/Metro and if people continue using webkit powered browsers more and more MS is screwed. They don't want webkit to become defacto open source rendering engine for the web because MS loses a lot.. that's what it is all about.. not about standards (especially ironic considering that Webkit powered browsers absolutely destroy IE10 in pretty much everything standards including the full support for WebGL)..

And webkit WILL dominate the web and eventually everyone will join in because it's open source, everyone can contribute and browsers get updated instantaneously to support the very latest webkit builds unlike what Microsoft has been doing in the past and trying to control everything including browsers through their monopoly.

[HawkMan]

Apparently Chrome and Webkit doesn't follow webstandards that well either. Btu hey it's google, they can do as they please :rolleyes:

[jakem1]

Again, Microsoft doesn't follow standards that well at all.

This is disingenuous because you know what Microsoft's approach to implementing standards is. Just because they don't rush in an implement every little thing that someone thinks should be a standard doesn't mean they don't support standards well. They're considered approach to implementing standards may be slower than other browser vendors but at least it's stable and you know that the standards they do support have or will be ratified by W3C. The same can't be said for webkit.

Of course, none of this changes the fact that you're supporting the use of proprietary extensions rather than standards. You don't care about the progress of the internet or making web development easier. All you want to do is bash Microsoft and turn Chrome into the next IE6.

You can keep banging on about WebGL all you like but it's not a standard and it's not ready for prime time. It's only implemented in Chrome because Google don't care about user security.

[Boz]

Apparently Chrome and Webkit doesn't follow webstandards that well either. Btu hey it's google, they can do as they please :rolleyes:

based on what? From what I see, and numbers say it all, they are following the standards the closest (btw Maxthon is webkit as well). IE10 is dead last.

And stop with this Google is doing this sh**.. Webkit is NOT Google.. Webkit is everyone. IE is Microsoft only.. this alone should make it obvious to you that MS is full of crap.

[HawkMan]

Except those tests have f all to do with HTML5 standard, the majority of the tests are not part of the standard yet, many of them aren't even html5 and won't be.

and as has been pointed out, everything MS supports is ACTUALLY part of the standard or is guaranteed to be, whereas Chrome keeps slapping in experimental stuff that isn't finished yet and noone knows what the final version will be, and the point of this thread, they ignore certain things that IS in the standard and make their own different version.

In fact those who score highest on the html tests are rarely those that follow the standards best, but those that code specifically to score high on the tests, something MS has repeatedly said they won't do, they won't add in code and workarounds simply to score higher on a test.

[Max Norris]

based on what? From what I see, and numbers say it all, they are following the standards the closest (btw Maxthon is webkit as well). IE10 is dead last.

Not that I care to get in this stupid argument, but off of that test site's own page, it specifically says it includes scores for things that are not part of the standard. Good test to see what the capabilities are, but for full standards compliance, since it's including bits that aren't an official part of the spec, not so much.

Apart from the main HTML5 specification and other specifications created the W3C HTML Working Group, this test also awards points for supporting related drafts and specifications.

WebGL is also part of this test despite not being developed by the W3C, because it extends the HTML5 canvas element with a 3d context.

There's a bunch of other blurbs about experimental and unofficial bits as well.

http://html5test.com/about.html

[jakem1]

From what I see...

Boz, the problem is that you only see what you want to see.

[Noir Angel]

I'm not defending MS, just common sense. The past is the past and Microsoft have clearly embraced web standards so it's pointless dredging up old mistakes (especially since you seem to be happy to see webkit and web developers repeat them).

As for webgl, I'd rather have secure computers than an unnecessary, buggy, non-standard attack vector for hackers. Besides, using your argument, surely DirectX is a standard given the fact that it's on 95% of the worlds PCs and is supported by most graphics chips so why doesn't Chrome support it ;)

Frankly, your argument is pathetic and it's sad to see you defend the interests of corporations like Google over web users.

Only a problem if your browser isn't properly sandboxed. WebGL is no more dangerous than any of the other 2D or 3D acceleration APIs built into modern web browsers. And DirectX is a "standard" because Microsoft give incentives to game studios to leverage it. Google don't support it because Chrome is a cross platform browser, and it's easier to port code from one platform to another if you use the same API on each. Given that Chrome is faster than any other browser on Windows their approach seems to be working, obviously lack of D3D support isn't holding them back. Besides, the web relies on open source technologies, and Microsoft's 3D and 2D api's aren't open source, making them useless to web developers.

Why do you hate web standards so much?

I don't. I'm just tired of hearing Microsoft shills blathering on as if every company and person on the web has some obligation to design everything around their products.

[ArialBlue]

I think the problem is many of you (Javik) never tried to figure out how to do a CSS gradient.

You need like FIVE or more CSS properties to ensure that a gradient renders itself.

This is A PAIN IN THE ASS.

Why the **** support any company which wants to make a web developer's life hard?

Sorry to be the spanner in the works but Chrome still has superior HTML5 support

HTML5 test is not a valid benchmark. It tests things which are out of spec.

AFAIK, it doesn't even test anything but just queries if the browser supports it.

That's an odd assertion because Chrome still burns through benchmarks like Peacekeeper with a score twice as high as that as IE attains, it still starts up faster, and the installation package is still nearly the same size for me (between 2010 and 2012 the download size increased by about 10 MB and that can be pretty much wholly accounted for by the inclusion of Flash and the HTML5 video decoder plugins), the binary and DLL's are pretty much the same size as ever before. The installation file for IE10 however was something like 48 MB, about 12 MB more than the Chrome installer.

Peacekeeper is not a valid benchmark. It tests things which are out of spec.

[Boz]

Boz, the problem is that you only see what you want to see.

Rich coming from someone who is defending a company who killed web progress for a decade with their crap browser and is now criticizing open source webkit that has even better standards support than IE10 as being "proprietary".

I guess you have to be special type of blind to miss the irony and hypocrisy in this.. The whole world is laughing at Microsoft.

I think the problem is many of you (Javik) never tried to figure out how to do a CSS gradient.

You need like FIVE or more CSS properties to ensure that a gradient renders itself.

This is A PAIN IN THE ASS.

Why the **** support any company which wants to make a web developer's life hard?

HTML5 test is not a valid benchmark. It tests things which are out of spec.

AFAIK, it doesn't even test anything but just queries if the browser supports it.

Peacekeeper is not a valid benchmark. It tests things which are out of spec.

Riiight.. the ONLY proper test is the one sponsored by Microsoft that shows IE10 doing well with HTML5.. GOT IT!