Internet Explorer 8 Beta to begin later this year

[Bryan000]

i want:

* better support for web standards. pass acid 2, full css 2.1 support, html 5/xhtml 2

* UI changed? maybe use the 'ribbon' concept from office 2007 in ie8?

* tagging in bookmarks? firefox3 will have it, looks like it could be a huge hit

* improved rendering speed all-around. cause right now virtually every other browser on the market whoops the tar out of it

[argonite]

i want:

* better support for web standards. pass acid 2, full css 2.1 support, html 5/xhtml 2

* UI changed? maybe use the 'ribbon' concept from office 2007 in ie8?

* tagging in bookmarks? firefox3 will have it, looks like it could be a huge hit

* improved rendering speed all-around. cause right now virtually every other browser on the market whoops the tar out of it

I'm not sure if Acid 2 is on their roadmap. Acid 2 covers a lot of obscure features. Even if IE8 did implement these, it would be no guarantee as to it's compatibility with CSS 2.1 pages. Although CSS 2.1 is on the roadmap, I don't think HTML 5 or XHTML 2 are (XHTML might be supported as a result of advancement though, just like it is currently supported but not properly recognized). Tagging in Bookmarks is definitely something they'll be looking at, but more so tagging within pages. I honestly don't know why everyone's so hot about the ribbon, I say leave it up to MS, or make it customizable enough. Rendering speed is something they do need to work on.

[NightmarE D]

It would also mean Vista only. I'm wondering if Microsoft has the grounds to do that. It would mean a bit of work if they're going to provde it to XP, if this article is correct.

WPF is on XP as well so it wouldn't take a lot of work.

[The_Decryptor Veteran]

http://www.webstandards.org/action/acid2/guide/

They need to be working to get proper support for web standards, they are moving there slowly, but they need to really devote themselves to it (and bring the browser above the "crap" level)

IE used to be really good, but not so much any more.

[+jamesyfx Subscriber²]

I bet the visuals will just be a minor update from IE7. it must be. IE7s interface has already alienated lots of IE6 users.

[Ambroos]

Acid 2 isn't a reference. Most sites are still rendered best by IE, even if it doesn't pass Acid..

[mad_onion]

new design features for ie8 - no buttons or menu bars at all! even fewer ways to do what you need to do!

well if you don't need a menu bar then why have it. imo the menu bar is pointless in a browser because it doesn't really have that many options that it cant be better organized with a row of buttons. the way it's done in IE is best because it takes up less space.

thats also the reason i don't think the ribbon is appropriate, there aren't enough options to require it and it takes up loads of space. the way IE looks now is fine.

[jwjw1]

:wacko:

[cork1958]

well if you don't need a menu bar then why have it. imo the menu bar is pointless in a browser because it doesn't really have that many options that it cant be better organized with a row of buttons. the way it's done in IE is best because it takes up less space.

thats also the reason i don't think the ribbon is appropriate, there aren't enough options to require it and it takes up loads of space. the way IE looks now is fine.

Edit:

Oops! Mis-read the reply.

[M118LR]

I bet the visuals will just be a minor update from IE7. it must be. IE7s interface has already alienated lots of IE6 users.

I don't recall what IE6 even looks like as I have been using IE7 since Aug. 2005.

[Kushan]

Acid 2 isn't a reference. Most sites are still rendered best by IE, even if it doesn't pass Acid..

That's only because most sites are designed to work IN IE, for the sole reason that it has 90%+ of the market. It doesn't mean IE is standards compliant at all, it means web designers are forced to make their sites work in it or alienate 90% of their visitors. If IE passed the ACID test, it would make life easier for a lot of people.

[FloatingFatMan]

However, the fact that most websites work with how IE does things, means that the IE was has BECOME the de-facto standard; so maybe passing the acid test isn't so important anymore?

If IE changes to pass the acid test standards; there are a few billion webpages that aren't going to work properly anymore...

[Kushan]

Ummm....No.

You're basically say that we don't need standards because Microsoft's way of doing things is ok.

Well that's just silly, there's a reason we have standards, a reason why they're laid out in crystal clear for all to see.

I mean, right now, go find me a big list, from Microsoft, of the standards THEY use so that I can create my own browser that emulates IE's standards perfectly. Oh wait, it doesn't exist.

This means if I want to create a web browser, I have to spend (probably) years deciphering IE's standards and practices, as opposed to just going to W3C's site and downloading them.

What's more, if I want to MAKE a website, then who do I go to for the exact specifications of HTML/CSS that I should use?

Unless you're a web developer, you'll not know the hell it is just trying to make your website cross-browser compatible.

[FloatingFatMan]

Actually, I do know the hell it is. I also know that most websites tend to go for IE compatability for the simple reason they are the market standard. All the document standards in the world don't amount to diddly when people aren't following them to support the most popular choice.

I didn't say I like it, in fact I damn well HATE it; but facts are facts. IE is the market leader in browsers; people have to make their sites work with it which means ignoring official standards and going for what works in IE. Therefore IE has become the de-facto standard.

[red.]

Unless you're a web developer, you'll not know the hell it is just trying to make your website cross-browser compatible.

i can just imagine getting things to work in IE8 and then finding that IE7 and IE6 will display things differently and coding for yet another browser.

hopefully, IE8 will support the standards better and we won't have to do much messsing around of pages that work in FF/Opera.

[MrCobra]

They could indeed port it. However ribbon interfaces aren't the 'be all holy grail'. An example would be PowerArchiver 2007.

A program like IE8, I feel, is better done in strips, because items like the Address bar and Search Box are more elongated and not very tall and would not fill the vertical space left with their addition, or it would get pushed to another line, leaving very few buttons left in IE8. Also IE8 doesn't have that many features that would be immediately relevant in many situations, like as in a Word Processor, and thus would do better to hide advanced stuff in a dialog box somewhere. However, I am in not the team designing the interface, so I honestly don't know what they know (usage statistics and everything).

Also, just because the Office UI team is working on Windows, doesn't mean Windows will look like Office 2007. The Office team designed that UI because they felt it would fit Office, they may design a new one that they feel would fit Windows. In either case, you will probably get a very good shell (because the Office UI designers are SMART people).

The ribbon interface in O2K7 is nice. It would not be nice on an app like IE. The 3rd paragraph is some of the major quirks and flaws with Windows and it's inbuilt apps. Those UI people do more than the UI. People over there have complained about having to networking and other various coding jobs when they don't code much. In the same respect you have programmers helping design the UI. Read the minime blog site and have a look into the working lives of MS employees.

As for IE, they shouldn't be doing an update. That browser should be rewritten and done properly. The days of trying to crush Netscape are gone and there's no more reason to break standards to kill competition.

[Kushan]

Actually, I do know the hell it is. I also know that most websites tend to go for IE compatability for the simple reason they are the market standard. All the document standards in the world don't amount to diddly when people aren't following them to support the most popular choice.

I didn't say I like it, in fact I damn well HATE it; but facts are facts. IE is the market leader in browsers; people have to make their sites work with it which means ignoring official standards and going for what works in IE. Therefore IE has become the de-facto standard.

No it hasn't, it's never been the "de-facto" standard and it never will be unless Microsoft actually MAKES it compliant with the official standards.

Just because it's the market leader is absolutely no excuse to **** all over the standards, it doesn't do anything for anyone and just makes life difficult. Because of their lacklustre support for standards compliance, their CSS support is abysmal in comparison to the competition, what more proof do you need?

If Microsoft owned the standard, it'd be a different case all together (for example, they own the MSN Messenger protocol, thus they can do what they like with it and if MirandaIM or something breaks, tough titty), but web standards are open to all and it should stay that way. Otherwise it'll be up to Microsoft to advance them further and if you look at their history of IE and how much they developed that, then you can clearly see why it's a bad idea.

If Web developers didn't take a stand and make their sites cross-browser compatible, none of the modern browsers, like Firefox and Opera, would have stood a chance and IE7 would have been a tweak of IE6, which looked like IE5, etc. etc.

So once again, standards are important and just because Microsoft penetrated 90% of the market is still no excuse to ignore them.

i can just imagine getting things to work in IE8 and then finding that IE7 and IE6 will display things differently and coding for yet another browser.

hopefully, IE8 will support the standards better and we won't have to do much messsing around of pages that work in FF/Opera.

I agree with this, it'll be an absolute pain in the ass for the short term, but if Microsoft DO make it more compliant, then in the long term it'll be better for everyone.

[thugilex]

another game from microsoft :)

[neufuse Veteran]

They said they were aiming more for customization. Ribbons aren't that customizable. It would also be quite a shock to have the interface change a SECOND time.

ribbions are EXTREAMLY customizable... they just use XML to build them and there is tons of examples on MSDN on how to do it... you could add buttons that do what ever pretty easily.. but as for it in IE8... how much could ribbons be used? i mean there isnt that much to put on a ribbion bar in a browser...

[zeroday]

Unless you're a web developer, you'll not know the hell it is just trying to make your website cross-browser compatible.

True that, I gave up trying to get my site working with IE6. It looks ok in IE7, but still doesnt look perfect like in FF or Opera.

[Rappy Veteran]

I would be interested to see how it runs when its released...

[Mathiasdm]

True that, I gave up trying to get my site working with IE6. It looks ok in IE7, but still doesnt look perfect like in FF or Opera.

Easiest way (in my experience) seems to be:

1. Make it work according to the standard (so Firefox, Opera, Safari and others are fine)

2. Add a tiny amount of conditional, so it works fine in IE7.

3. Start working on IE6.

4. Commit suicide.

5. ???

6. Profit!

[PL_ Veteran]

I would be interested to see how it runs when its released...

Same, IE7 is really heavy.

[Rappy Veteran]

Same, IE7 is really heavy.

Yeah to be honest I don't use ie7 only ie6 if I have to...I really don't like it...

[The_Decryptor Veteran]

...

Otherwise it'll be up to Microsoft to advance them further and if you look at their history of IE and how much they developed that, then you can clearly see why it's a bad idea.

If Web developers didn't take a stand and make their sites cross-browser compatible, none of the modern browsers, like Firefox and Opera, would have stood a chance and IE7 would have been a tweak of IE6, which looked like IE5, etc. etc.

...

Yeah, if there's competition, MS cares, IE7 only exists because Firefox exists (we would have been left with a slightly upgraded version of IE6 for Vista, eg.g. IE6.5).