Ie 8

[yasunobu13]

link

my emphasis

Consistent with our efforts to promote further interoperability across the Web, Microsoft will be releasing Internet Explorer 8 to render content in its most standards-compliant way by default. Giving top priority to Web standards interoperability allows us to help web developers and designers drive toward the ideal of “write once, run anywhere”, freeing up more time to innovate rather than modify content for different browsers. This commitment also addresses several development and design pain points from previous Internet Explorer releases.

However, browsing with this default setting may cause content written for previous versions of Internet Explorer to display differently than intended. This creates a call to action for site owners to ensure their content will continue to display seamlessly in Internet Explorer 8. As such, we have provided a meta-tag usable on a per-page or per-site level to maintain backwards compatibility with Internet Explorer 7. Adding this tag instructs Internet Explorer 8 to render content like it did in Internet Explorer 7, without requiring any additional changes.

We are encouraging site administrators to get their sites ready now for broad adoption of Internet Explorer 8, as there will be a beta release in the third quarter of this year targeted for all consumers.

According to this, the doctype will also come into play allowing for IE 5 Quirks mode rendering as well.

[gerbick]

I predict that this will be the most bloated POS in quite some time.

[hanratty21]

I predict that this will be the most bloated POS in quite some time.

I predict that you are 100% wrong. Microsoft has over and over again proved their commitment (see: continued YHOO interest) to future proofing their company by adopting web standards and moving towards a more web service based business. Putting out a 'POS' browser would lend nothing to that cause.

</gerbick contrarian>

[gerbick]

I could be wrong. Feel free to follow me around with signs pointing to me that said "I'm with stupid" when I'm wrong because in this case, if wrong, I get a browser that's worth a damn.

I don't mind being wrong. I'm not Subway.

[hanratty21]

Lots of FF fanboys on this site. I always wonder if they love FF because of what it is...or because it's not IE. In my day job, I work with lots of enterprise class web based financial applications, most of which simply will not work with FF. I am sure I'm not the only one.

*goes to buy new t shirt*

[Genesis F5]

I'm sure we're still a long ways off from seeing it in the wild (we're only getting a beta this year). Hell, they still haven't officially announced XP's SP3 release yet, have they? Maybe they're waiting so they can bundle IE8 in there.

[jAQUAN]

A company must have a good track record in order to be enthusiastic about any new product. They don't have one so I don't care.
Perhaps they realize their only a year or so out from dropping below the "must work in this browser" line.

[jAQUAN]

Lots of FF fanboys on this site. I always wonder if they love FF because of what it is...or because it's not IE. In my day job, I work with lots of enterprise class web based financial applications, most of which simply will not work with FF. I am sure I'm not the only one.

That is not because FF is a bad browser. It's because those apps were developed on yet another bad microsoft product. There's nothing they do that couldn't have been done on another more future proof platform.

[hanratty21]

Alas - spoken like a fanboy. When I see someone refer to MS as 'bad platform' and FF as 'future proof' I tend to dismiss the arguments. I am not a particular fanboy of one or the other...just like to understand that both probably have the pluses and minuses.

[gerbick]

I like things to work. Neither browser renders CSS1/2 as I'd like. Whomever gets it right 100% with CSS3, I'll use.

Find a fanboy statement in that... I ****ing dare you.

[ihoss.com]

I'm actually pretty excited about IE8, and I hope they can make a good, standard compliant browser. I'm not sure if I'm going to use it when it comes out, but I don't mind if it takes up a majority of the market, as long as I can develop for it. I think Microsoft realized some time ago (pre IE7) that they needed to rewrite their browser. A lot has happened since IE6 came out, especially since FF and Opera took a large share of the market.

[hanratty21]

I like things to work. Neither browser renders CSS1/2 as I'd like. Whomever gets it right 100% with CSS3, I'll use.

Find a fanboy statement in that... I ****ing dare you.

gerbick = css3 fanboy.

[gerbick]

swing and a miss.

new technology fetish. **** get's me randy...

[FlashLackey]

Lots of FF fanboys on this site. I always wonder if they love FF because of what it is...or because it's not IE.

Do not speak in vain of the holy trinity: in the name of the Google, the Firefox and the Holy Obama. Not to mention the virgin Mac.

I still think the whole thing would be solved if they just made a W3C plug-in that rendered all standards-based content exactly the same in any browser.

[whispers]

I used to be a IE fanboy, when F first came out.. I wasnt ready for it..didnt do what I needed at the time.. after a couple releases..it was faster and stable..and the work flow (tabbed browsing became essential as well other stuff and plug-ins) increased...

the last few updates.. I cant say Ive seen improvements, and in fact notice performance issues, freezes and loading glitches here and there,..

I guess I feel its 'safer'..... arguably or not.

I have however ran into sites that will (by choice or by function) ONLY work if I am using IE..

[loydall]

I still think the whole thing would be solved if they just made a W3C plug-in that rendered all standards-based content exactly the same in any browser.

Hey - steady on now.. We can put a man on the moon sure but rendering stuff the same in any browser? That's just the stuff of dreams..

Seriously though - I've had so many less problems with IE7 than I did with ie6.. IE7, FF - no problem. If IE8 continues in the same vein then they could do a lot worse I guess.

From my point of view I would rather see MS force an update to IE7 so we wipe out that abomination of a piece of software that is IE6..

[jAQUAN]

Alas - spoken like a fanboy. When I see someone refer to MS as 'bad platform' and FF as 'future proof' I tend to dismiss the arguments. I am not a particular fanboy of one or the other...just like to understand that both probably have the pluses and minuses.

spoken like an elitist. I'm actually %100 anti-organization and that includes brand loyalty. I go where the power is. period. I could be launching a site right f*cking this second if I wasn't busy working around IE 7's AND IE 6's problems. Let's count. Two browsers, two different box models. CSS2 has worked as expected since FF 1. You're telling me I'm a fanboy because I prefer standards? Future proof was no where near my statement. I just hate encroaching on my profit margin because some f*ck head suit wanted their own standard. The W3C is no better than the UN imho but at least it's a page we can all start from.

Just to show I'm not a blind loyalist, FF3 sucks with streaming media. I've heard the audio of a youtube movie for 3-4 seconds after I closed the damn tab. And that's only if FF decides to stop preloading long enough to actually close the tab. It's only on my ancient desktop that it happens but it's bad. In fact, FF does not do flash well. IE sadly, does it better plus it broadcasts HTTPStatus. (unless you're listening for Event.Open that is)

I still think the whole thing would be solved if they just made a W3C plug-in that rendered all standards-based content exactly the same in any browser.

Hell Yes Man!

Actually I'm playing around with another format that might kinda do the same thing.

[FlashLackey]

Hell Yes Man!

Actually I'm playing around with another format that might kinda do the same thing.

Interesting. Another format like a layer of code that breaks down to each browser the same, or something?

I really wonder why the plug-in model hasn't been used. I can't think of any down-sides or problems with it. You would think the standards camps would be all for it considering that it would be more in line with traditional programming theory and best practices to not have single client code dependent on multiple variations of rendering APIs. They could even make "lite" versions available for handheld devices to make that consistent as well.

[FlashLackey]

Hey - steady on now.. We can put a man on the moon sure but rendering stuff the same in any browser? That's just the stuff of dreams..

Hah! Besides that, they might organize into a union and demand the right to continue logging extra hours for time they used to spend fixing browser issues.

Think about how much dev-power has been wasted world-wide, needlessly fixing browser issues.

[cancerinform]

What does IE stand for? I have a Mac and vaguely remember Intersh*t Explosion, is that correct?