|
The sooner a new browser comes the better  .We want Spartan 
|
|
|
|
|
If the new browser will be fully compatible with either Chrome or Firefox. In other words: everything that works in the mentioned browsers must work in the new MS browser.
|
|
|
|
|
Chrome and FireFox are not 100% compatible. The goal is to be 100% HTML5 compliant. Chrome and FireFox will move towards the standard.
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, lose the baggage.
But the issue I have, coming from Desktop development is that the HTML is fine for basics.
What I would prefer is to have the web driven by a DIFFERENT metaphor.
As opposed to everything inside of HTML. I envision a container request for the application.
Then recursively, each containers content is brought down in a similar fashion, as a separate
resource/object. More like laying out a "form"... Not requiring everything to come down inside of a giant HTML that has to update itself on refresh.
HTML5 and JavaScript/Ajax is getting closer to this. And Tons of Javascript technologies are trying to do this by dynamically updating/replacing chunks of HTML (hello jQuery, knockout.js, etc).
The structure should not be updated often, but the individual pieces could be requesting live data, etc.
Marking things up into HTML is the equivalent of hiring a professional assistant and then communicating only with Pictures so she can type what you want!
|
|
|
|
|
|
No, Microsoft should get out of the browser business because there's several alternatives that will always be better.
Marc
|
|
|
|
|
|
For a programmer there is always too many alternative. In some places I have seen people see "Internet explorer" as internet and other software as software.
I had to deal with people to encourage software other then ie. They followed my advice. When they had to run the application I have developed for them, they will run other software. For everything else they will use ie. The reason is ie is internet.
If microsoft get out of browser business they will be out of business. Be cause, programmers are not their targeted user.
I do not fear of failure. I fear of giving up out of frustration.
|
|
|
|
|
No.You're wrong.All the good things will come only when there is a competition. That is the universal truth.So MS must do Browser business.
|
|
|
|
|
Although I only use it when forced to do so, I have to consider the recent historical record of MustySnuff.
The progress from XP through to Win8 is a horrific decay in usability. With that same skilled staff at work, imagine how they'd "improve" IE.
Or, as the saying should go: things can always get worse.
Perhaps they should just distribute Mozilla with Windows?
| "The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein | | "As far as we know, our computer has never had an undetected error." - Weisert | | "If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you are seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
If we look at it through the business perspective, replacing IE may not be a good solution. Look @ WP7. NEW code, NEW design, but 3% market share!
Behzad
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, I think IT types want to rewrite everything but that is not always good for the customer.
I actually like IE but it doesn't seem to cope as well as Chrome or Netscape with the increasing number of sites running scripts. I've meet web developers who deliberately do not test against IE despite its market share. I think I would be furious if I was one of their customers.
Anyway IE now has a bad rep so moving to Spartan is probably a good marketing move.
|
|
|
|
|
Although I "kind of" like the latest IE, I think it should be killed. Start from scratch, kill the legacy support and move on! Yes it will cost money for enterprises to update their legacy systems, but a new start would be better!
|
|
|
|
|
Just so you know how it works in real life:
MS killed legacy support for XP, and IE8. No way to go beyond IE8 without paying to update 400 systems where I work + all the software that would be broken.
Result? They're moving on to FireFox. Moreover, as more of the software is now browser based, it won't be long before any O/S will due, so long as a compliant browser is available.
So - dropping legacy support not only installs confidence in users, especially the big ones with much money invested, but drives people to find alternatives.
| "The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein | | "As far as we know, our computer has never had an undetected error." - Weisert | | "If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you are seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
Moving to FireFox just tells me that your organisation has someone high up in your organisation that is for open source. Management decisions are based on a good story, or copying their peers, rather than any real analysis.
In 1995 Netscape's Marc Andreessen claimed that Netscape would reduce Windows to a “poorly debugged set of device drivers”. (I am an old git) Twenty years later browser have nowhere near the capabilities of Windows. HTML 5 was a big step forward but it took a long time. The problem is getting agreement and the basic technology is brain damaged (HTML + javascript).
I don't see Windows going away soon despite Microsoft's amazing incompetence.
|
|
|
|
|
IE is still important. I remember this every time I see non-IT people using their Windows computers opening the browser that came with the OS. If IE isn't more secure or displaying all of the latest web technologies, then lots of our work will go to waste.
Hogan
|
|
|
|
|
IE name has inherited bad reputation, no matter how Microsoft improves IE, the perception of people is hard to change.
It is better to come up with a new product and build it from scratch than spending any energy on IE.
Make it simple, as simple as possible, but not simpler.
|
|
|
|
|
Totally Agree 
|
|
|
|
|
Someone please tell me!
Life is too shor
|
|
|
|
|
|
LOL! TOUCHÉ
|
|
|
|
|
|
Those lazy workstation admins are the problem, not keeping their software up to date. That doesn't mean Microsoft isn't to blame for the bad quality of the IE, they just had to follow all the specs of HTML, XHTML, XHTML, CSS and so on... and everything would have been fine. But no, they had to make their own implementation of the specs and changed everything that was over their head, probably.
Everything else is actually fine, except for a few missing features and some minor garbage.
|
|
|
|
|
IE is a Browser. It is meant to render HTML and CSS, and run JavaScript.
Unfortunately, this browser don't understand HTML 5 and CSS 3 completely and responds quite slow while running JavaScript.
In the JavaScript centric applications world, Frameworks has evolved but this browser could not grow up and is still a kid.
Life is a computer program and everyone is the programmer of his own life.
|
|
|
|
|
I wouldn't blame the workstation admins, or otherwise you would have the same problems with Firefox and Chrome. (to be clear, I'm not an admin myself - I'm a developer).
They are 3 main areas where IE is behind:
- support for official specs
- performance: IE JavaScript engine is much slower than Chrome's JavaScrpt engine for instance
- developer tools: again, Firefox or Chrome developer tools are much better. Even in IE11, when inpecting the DOM, it doesn't refresh if an element is updated with JavaScript - what's the point to inspect the DOM then?
The good news is that Windows 10 will come with a new browser (codenamed Spartan), although it's is still going to use Microsoft's Chakra JavaScript engine and Microsoft's Trident rendering engine (not WebKit). So, let' see....
Alex Sanseau
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
