Microsoft begs Web devs not to make WebKit the new IE6


Recommended Posts

html5.jpg

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.

mOFs

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

GG9

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.

  • Like 2

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.

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.

steal your bank details!!!!!111

omg.jpg

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 :/

  • Like 2

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.

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/

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.

  • Like 2

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.

  • Like 3

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?

  • Like 2
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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

GG9

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.

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

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.

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.jpg

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, 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!

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • As I've been usually saying lately - we all can thank "AI" for this.
    • Friday Windows 11 preview builds are here. Insiders in the Experimental (formerly Dev) and Beta Channel can download builds 26300.8697 and 26220.8690. My Windows11 device on the Preview Channel just got 26220.8728. My guess is this build is a nightly update from 26220.8690.
    • Traffic has a surprisingly unexpected impact on your surroundings by Sayan Sen Image by Radik 2707 via Pexels A collaborative study by researchers from several Israeli institutions found that everyday pollution from traffic and industrial activity measurably changed the atmospheric electric field over the Tel Aviv metropolitan area, providing new evidence of how human activity can influence the lower atmosphere. The research was led by Dr. Roy Yaniv of the Hebrew University of Jerusalem and the Gertner Institute at Sheba Medical Center, Dr. Assaf Hochman of the Fredy & Nadine Herrmann Institute of Earth Sciences at the Hebrew University, and Prof. Yoav Yair of Reichman University. The study also involved Itay Froomer, a student from Hadera High School and the Israeli Museum of Medicine and Science (Technoda), who carried out the work as part of the Ministry of Education's 5-unit physics research track. The researchers focused on the atmospheric electric field under fair-weather conditions. Even in the absence of storms, a weak electric field naturally exists between Earth's surface and the atmosphere. One of the main ways scientists measure this field is through the Potential Gradient (PG), which is the inverse of the vertical component of the electric field. PG is a key part of the global electric circuit, a planet-wide system of electrical currents maintained by thunderstorms and electrified clouds around the world. Scientists have long known that the atmospheric electric field can be influenced by factors ranging from large-scale atmospheric processes to local weather conditions such as dust, fog and clouds. Human-made pollution is also known to play a role, but understanding exactly how urban emissions affect the electric field close to the ground has remained an area of ongoing research. To investigate this relationship, the team analyzed measurements from a newly installed electric field mill, an instrument used to continuously monitor the strength of the atmospheric electric field. The instrument was installed at the Center for Technological Education (Roter House) in Holon and became operational in August 2024. It was funded by Israel's Ministry of Education and the Holon municipality. The electric field mill forms part of a broader monitoring network that includes nearby meteorological stations and air-quality monitoring sites. This allowed researchers to compare electric field measurements with detailed weather data and pollution records to better understand what was driving changes in the Potential Gradient. The study focused on two major urban pollutants: fine particulate matter (PM2.5) and nitrogen oxides (NOx), both commonly produced by vehicle traffic and industrial activity. PM2.5 refers to microscopic airborne particles small enough to remain suspended in the atmosphere for extended periods, while NOx is a group of gases released during fuel combustion. Researchers examined daily, weekly and seasonal patterns in the atmospheric electric field and compared them with changes in pollutant concentrations. Their analysis revealed a clear relationship between NOx levels and changes in the Potential Gradient, particularly during morning and evening rush hours when traffic emissions were at their highest. “What we observe is a direct physical link between emission peaks and electrical variability,” explained Dr. Roy Yaniv. “NOx reduces atmospheric conductivity very quickly, so the electric field responds almost instantaneously during traffic rush hours.” Atmospheric conductivity describes how easily electrical charges move through the air. According to the researchers, nitrogen oxides rapidly alter this conductivity, causing a near-immediate response in the electric field. PM2.5, however, was associated with a delayed response. The researchers attributed this difference to the particles' longer atmospheric residence time, meaning they remain in the atmosphere for longer periods, as well as their different microphysical interactions with surrounding air and atmospheric components. The study also identified a pronounced "weekend effect." In Israel, traffic volumes and some industrial activity decline significantly on Fridays and Saturdays. During these periods, concentrations of both NOx and PM2.5 dropped, and corresponding changes were observed in the atmospheric electric field. “The weekend signal demonstrates just how sensitive the electric field is to changes in human activity,” the researchers noted. “When emissions decline, the electrical environment adjusts at once, providing a high-resolution indicator of urban atmospheric conditions.” The findings showed that pollution levels can influence not only the chemical composition of the atmosphere but also its electrical properties. Researchers said the results strengthened the case for using atmospheric electricity as an additional tool for environmental monitoring, particularly in densely populated urban areas where anthropogenic, or human-caused, influences are most pronounced. The study also pointed to potential public health applications. By combining air-quality measurements with observations of atmospheric electricity, researchers said they could gain a more complete picture of how urban atmospheric conditions change over time. “Integrating air-quality data with electric-field measurements gives us a clearer picture of how the lower atmosphere evolves moment by moment,” the researchers added. “It’s a framework that can support both scientific insight and practical environmental decision-making.” Beyond the scientific findings, the project highlighted a collaboration between universities, public institutions and secondary education. Researchers said the work demonstrated how students could take part in real-world environmental research while contributing to studies of air quality, atmospheric processes and their potential effects on society. Source: Hebrew University, ScienceDirect This article was generated with some help from AI and reviewed by an editor. Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, this material is used for the purpose of news reporting. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing
    • We aren't even at the all-star game and Microsoft is talking about an update that will most likely be released during the World Series if not after. A lot can happen in the world between now and the 2026 World Series, including the 2026 FIFA Cup. Tell me about it again after the FIFA Cup is concluded. That should allow plenty of time to prepare for it.
    • Great, tell me when I have a "Bad Pool Caller" elsewhere not in Windoze.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Week One Done
      AMV earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Month Later
      AMV earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Collaborator
      ryansurfer98 went up a rank
      Collaborator
    • One Month Later
      Eurosoft10 earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      Eurosoft10 earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      542
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      186
    3. 3
      Michael Scrip
      77
    4. 4
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      77
    5. 5
      Steven P.
      71
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!