IE8 - what a fail :O

[SpriteSODA]

Hi guys,
About 30 mins ago Microsoft released their new browser - Internet Explorer 8. I launched my virtualized Windows XP, and installed it. The process was annoying - after downloading the 17MB installation file, it continues to download some more unknown amount of bytes, then install it, then request to reboot. Fine. After the reboot, I launched IE8, and surfed to the Acid3 test. The socre: 20/100 ........!!!!!

My firefox 3 manages to score 71/100, and my WebKit powered Epiphany scores a perfect 100/100 .

[miggols99]

Well at least now it passes the Acid 2 test...

[bashveank]

No matter how technically good the browser is, the fact is that it will shortly be more widely used than any other browser and all websites will conform to it's standards no matter if they match up with the real web standards or not. In that respect, it succeeds brilliantly.

[Vince4Amy]

Microsoft bashing - what a fail.

[TalioGladius]

There's nothing worse than the endless prompts and whinings of recent microsoft software. I tried ie8 out on a 7 VM when it released and it's honestly nothing but dog poop.

[eragon100]

No matter how technically good the browser is, the fact is that it will shortly be more widely used than any other browser and all websites will conform to it's standards no matter if they match up with the real web standards or not. In that respect, it succeeds brilliantly.

I wouldn't count on that. According to a list made by microsoft, on default settings, it literally doesn't even support www.microsoft.com !

google.com isn't working either, nor does hotmail.com. Firefox 3 runs them fine, so I doubt it. :wink:

[mihai.ile]

so what if it does not pass acid3? it passes acid2 and is a big improvement over ie7. I would not call it a fail but a great improvement over older versions. I give a big thanks to Microsoft (from a web developper view) that it at least passes acid2 test and look forward for better results on acid3 in the future.

P.S: Just because it doesen't have an apple or a fox or "chrome" or a red "O" on it instead of "Microsoft" does not mean is a "complete fail" in my opinion.

[conundrumx]

P.S: Just because it doesen't have an apple or a fox or "chrome" or a red "O" on it instead of "Microsoft" does not mean is a "complete fail" in my opinion.

While it would certainly be looked on more favorably if someone other than Microsoft released it, that only tints some of the "as usual" comments. I'd like to think people are perfectly capable of detaching the product from the people who made it for the sake of review.

[SpriteSODA]

I wouldn't be picking on it if they were'nt arrogant to claim that it supports all the regulations.

In addition, that 'Compatability View' button will keep many websites from upgrading their code and make it correct, as all the users of IE8 could still browse their crappy code.

[oasmar1]

IE8 is my prefered browser on Windows, it runs incredibly fast (So what if its 0.02s slower than Firefox). Also, in pwn2own contest even as beta software it appears to be more secure than Safari.

[mihai.ile]

Well... I think that any web developer would like to have the code as better as it gets, so in the long run people will try to code for IE8, but in case of some requirements they could code for the browser to switch to IE7 for some features.

The great (I mean really GREAT) thing is that now you can code web pages knowing that IE8 don't have that many restrictions as IE6/7 had, which is quite good!

[marco123]

Hi guys,
About 30 mins ago Microsoft released their new browser - Internet Explorer 8. I launched my virtualized Windows XP, and installed it. The process was annoying - after downloading the 17MB installation file, it continues to download some more unknown amount of bytes, then install it, then request to reboot. Fine. After the reboot, I launched IE8, and surfed to the Acid3 test. The socre: 20/100 ........!!!!!

My firefox 3 manages to score 71/100, and my WebKit powered Epiphany scores a perfect 100/100 .

Oh well, just be thankful we don't have to use it and leave it at that. You'll only have crybabies all over your thread if you point out it's flaws. People are very thenthative lately.;)

Cheers, Marco.

[SpriteSODA]

okay, maybe I should've chosen better words than "Fail", its more like a disappointment.

[geoken]

I don't see how it's MS bashing to point out how bad the browser is. It's measurably inferior to every other browser in the context of it's intended function (to render the formats it supports).

If you go to CSS3.info and try some of the new CSS3 rules with Firefox 3.1, Opera or Safari you'll find that almost all of them are supported. The only one I've seen IE8 support is the font url tag, and even then the kerning/character spacing was all over the place while FF 3.1 looked prefect.

[swoll1980]

Microsoft bashing - what a fail.

This isn't bashing! ie8 failed the test miserably. Announcing the fact that ie8 got the worst acid3 score I have ever seen (personally I'm sure there's worse) Is not bashing, it's news. I'm sure people would find this interesting.

[stchman]

IE8 is my prefered browser on Windows, it runs incredibly fast (So what if its 0.02s slower than Firefox). Also, in pwn2own contest even as beta software it appears to be more secure than Safari.

Thankfully Firefox is available for Windows. No reason to use IE in any form.

[Rokurosv]

IE8 is my prefered browser on Windows, it runs incredibly fast (So what if its 0.02s slower than Firefox). Also, in pwn2own contest even as beta software it appears to be more secure than Safari.

IE8 isn't safer than Safari, is the combination of OS X+Safari that's weak cause the OS doesn't protect itself from the browser, unlike Linux or Windows.

Tried it, and it's a great improvement from IE7, in terms of CSS and Javascript, in functionality and resource consumption is a little bloated. I just wish people would stop using IE6 and start using IE7 or 8

[swoll1980]

okay, maybe I should've chosen better words than "Fail", its more like a disappointment.

When something scores 20/100 it's usually called a fail. It doesn't matter who developed it. If Firefox would have scored 20/100, the same thread would have been started, I'm sure.

[stchman]

When something scores 20/100 it's usually called a fail. It doesn't matter who developed it. If Firefox would have scored 20/100, the same thread would have been started, I'm sure.

In MLB when a hitter goes 25/100 he is considered pretty good. 30/100 is great. 35/100 is exceptional. 40/100 is practically unheard of.

[Rokurosv]

In MLB when a hitter goes 25/100 he is considered pretty good. 30/100 is great. 35/100 is exceptional. 40/100 is practically unheard of.

But when everyone else is reaching 60+ and you keep getting 20/100, then you're not that great

[Mehall]

In MLB when a hitter goes 25/100 he is considered pretty good. 30/100 is great. 35/100 is exceptional. 40/100 is practically unheard of.

Yes, but Firefox gets something in the 80's I think, Safari? 100 I believe? Opera is 100 and Chrome is a solid result too.

Compare like for like.

[ghindo]

At the very least, IE8 is better than IE7 in many regards. For that, Microsoft should be applauded.

And the Acid tests shouldn't be the sole measure of a browser's worth. Just saying.

[swoll1980]

Yes, but Firefox gets something in the 80's I think, Safari? 100 I believe? Opera is 100 and Chrome is a solid result too.

Compare like for like.

Firefox 3.1 scores a 93/100

[swoll1980]

In MLB when a hitter goes 25/100 he is considered pretty good. 30/100 is great. 35/100 is exceptional. 40/100 is practically unheard of.

In baseball the only guys batting .200 are the pitchers. That's what DHs are for.

[forrestcupp]

Who cares about Acid3? Acid3 is meaningless.

What about the fact that IE8 RC1 caught 69% of malware, while Firefox 3.07 caught 30% and Safari 3 caught 20%. That seems a lot more important to me than an Acid3 test, especially when IE8 has compatibility mode and most websites are designed for IE anyway. I know you guys are thinking that we don't have to worry about malware in Linux, but we're talking about IE which runs in Windows where malware matters.

Also, they've made the compatibility mode so that a web designer can add a tag, and IE automatically switches without having to press the button. That's pretty cool to me. I know it's better practice to design your site correctly. But if you've already designed your whole site, it's a lot easier to add a tag than to redesign everything.

[mihai.ile]

actually this tag idea could be great when one needs specific per browser optimisations.

[SpriteSODA]

its not great, it's a simply and ill solution to the problem. We really don't want web builders to customize their websites for the browsers, we want them to code it right, so it would be universal to all browsers.

[namegame]

its not great, it's a simply and ill solution to the problem. We really don't want web builders to customize their websites for the browsers, we want them to code it right, so it would be universal to all browsers.

As of now, that's fairly difficult... Since every browser renders things differently, only fairly simple/mundane sites are truly universal.

[kidux]

Microsoft bashing - what a fail.
I have to disagree. This isn't MS bashing. Perhaps a bit colored, but we can overlook that as the OP gave a perfectly honest review using tools available to anyone.

[forrestcupp]

As of now, that's fairly difficult... Since every browser renders things differently, only fairly simple/mundane sites are truly universal.

And even then, it's hard to get around the differences that come from the fact that you don't know what resolutions people are using. I know you can make a web page resolution independent, but there are still going to be differences.

[Mehall]

As of now, that's fairly difficult... Since every browser renders things differently, only fairly simple/mundane sites are truly universal.

Well.... wrong.

Other than IE, most of the popular browsers are standards compliant enough that most every site that meets the w3c standards should work fine. IE is the only one which has those issues.

[geoken]

And even then, it's hard to get around the differences that come from the fact that you don't know what resolutions people are using. I know you can make a web page resolution independent, but there are still going to be differences.

No it isn't. There's nothing to get around. You target an 800px width and that addresses over 99% of users (height is irrelevant).

I don't think you understand the magnitude of fixes that need to be done for IE. Not only do we have a large amount of IE specific CSS rules (30% of the entire stylesheet wouldn't be a crazy figure) but we take a lot of options off the table during the design phase because of the time/effort that would be necessary to implement something in IE.

I think that's where the real frustration comes from. It's from making a beautiful mock-up in your graphical editor of choice, then running through your design and systematically dropping things because they wont work in IE while knowing that they're totally do-able in FF/Opera/Safari/Chrome.

[MysticGold04]

Thankfully Firefox is available for Windows. No reason to use IE in any form.

I fully agree! I try not to use IE at all.

[swoll1980]

No it isn't. There's nothing to get around. You target an 800px width and that addresses over 99% of users (height is irrelevant).

I don't think you understand the magnitude of fixes that need to be done for IE. Not only do we have a large amount of IE specific CSS rules (30% of the entire stylesheet wouldn't be a crazy figure) but we take a lot of options off the table during the design phase because of the time/effort that would be necessary to implement something in IE.

I think that's where the real frustration comes from. It's from making a beautiful mock-up in your graphical editor of choice, then running through your design and systematically dropping things because they wont work in IE while knowing that they're totally do-able in FF/Opera/Safari/Chrome.

I'm sick of Microsoft forcing the damn standards on people. If everyone decided do the pages the way they wanted too, and all of the sudden none of the MS customers could render web pages Microsoft would have a lot to answer for. People would have to install a browser that conformed to that.

[Dekkon]

Microsoft bashing - what a fail.

Agreed.

It's improving, standards are getting better on it, not great, but certainly better, do you guys even remember Internet Explorer 6, now tell if theres improvement.

It's not like your going to use it anyway. STFU, Already, write a decent review and not a bashing one.

[Sealbhach]

Microsoft bashing - what a fail.

I don't see why. Microsoft has got a colossal marketing machine pumping out all kinds of nonsense and distortions. I think it's important to challenge them on everything they say in comparison the the reality of actually using their products.


.

[gletob]

Did you really give it a chance and try it out? In using it for 5 minutes I found a feature that I like and would like to see implemented in Firfox, the search bar when giving you suggestions doesn't disappear every time you push a letter.

[Giant Speck]

I don't see how bashing Internet Explorer could be considered bashing Microsoft. Microsoft makes great products, such as Windows and Office. However, they seem to fail in the browser department.

Every company makes a failed product every now and then:

1. Smith & Wesson mountain bikes
2. Cosmopolitan (magazine) yogurt
3. Microsoft WebTV
4. Life Savers soda
5. Clairol Touch of Yogurt shampoo
6. Coors Rocky Mountain Spring Water
7. Cocaine energy drink
8. Earring Magic Ken doll
9. Colgate dinner entrees
10. Apple Newton PDA
11. DeLorean
12. Kellogg's Breakfast Mates
13. Crystal Pepsi
14. Pepsi AM
15. Frito Lay lemonade
16. Bic underwear
17. Harley Davidson perfume
18. Ben-Gay aspirin
19. Maxwell House Ready-to-Drink Coffee
20. McDonald's Arch Deluxe
21. Sony Betamax
22. New Coke

Just because a company makes one bad product doesn't mean all their products are bad.

[pwnst*r]

I wouldn't count on that. According to a list made by microsoft, on default settings, it literally doesn't even support www.microsoft.com !

google.com isn't working either, nor does hotmail.com. Firefox 3 runs them fine, so I doubt it. :wink:

too bad you're wrong. I downloaded IE8 RC1 this morning and opened up those sites you mentioned.

[tsali]

Just installed IE8 for Vista 32 bit

...13.3Mb download.

EXTREMELY FAST...dusts chrome and firefox on all the websites I use.

I haven't encountered the first rendering issue yet.

IF only FF on Ubuntu on this same hardware were as fast...

But guess what linux fans...I don't remember paying anything for it...it was a free download.

[Dekkon]

I don't see why. Microsoft has got a colossal marketing machine pumping out all kinds of nonsense and distortions. I think it's important to challenge them on everything they say in comparison the the reality of actually using their products.


.

Don't use it? Like most people in the Linux community say, "Why don't you ask for a refund?".

Yes, I realize you pay for Windows.

[Giant Speck]

But guess what linux fans...I don't remember paying anything for it...it was a free download.

Wow. I can finally stop paying my Firefox bill.

[PartisanEntity]

Hey, if it means I spend less time on the sites I make to get them too look okay in IE, then Im happy.

[zmjjmz]

IE8 in Vista and up uses a kernel sandbox, so malware isn't an issue because the OS has something handling that for you.
I'm not sure what the javascript speeds are compared to Firefox 3.1 and Chrome 2.0, but I imagine that it's not much faster, if at all.
Unfortunately IE8 lacks addons, so there's nothing like NoScript to protect you from any vulnerabilities. Chrome and Firefox could easily get addons like that, so there IE is still insecure.

[Trail]

its not great, it's a simply and ill solution to the problem. We really don't want web builders to customize their websites for the browsers, we want them to code it right, so it would be universal to all browsers.

+2.

[Johnsie]

I liked Internet Explorer 8. I'd hardly view the opinions of people on these boards as unbiased, so I take the negative posts with a pinch of salt. It's very easy to say bad stuff about MS Software when you have your brown tinted glasses on.

[geoken]

I liked Internet Explorer 8. I'd hardly view the opinions of people on these boards as unbiased, so I take the negative posts with a pinch of salt. It's very easy to say bad stuff about MS Software when you have your brown tinted glasses on.

And it's very easy to say good stuff when you're just viewing the websites and not creating them.

A lot of the people who complain about IE are people who create websites. I think that's why some of you see extremely harsh comments as being biased. You think to yourselves "It's not half as bad as these people are making it sound so they're obviously biased". The point is that our criticisms don't stem from using IE, they come from doing 2x more work so people like you can visit a site, have it look half decent in IE, then say "WTF are you guys talking about" to all the people who bash IE.

[forrestcupp]

And it's very easy to say good stuff when you're just viewing the websites and not creating them.

A lot of the people who complain about IE are people who create websites. I think that's why some of you see extremely harsh comments as being biased. You think to yourselves "It's not half as bad as these people are making it sound so they're obviously biased". The point is that our criticisms don't stem from using IE, they come from doing 2x more work so people like you can visit a site, have it look half decent in IE, then say "WTF are you guys talking about" to all the people who bash IE.

Well, that's a good point.

[stchman]

In baseball the only guys batting .200 are the pitchers. That's what DHs are for.

The designated hitter should be banned by baseball.

If you cannot field a position you don't deserve to bat.

[KCG102282]

Hi guys,
About 30 mins ago Microsoft released their new browser - Internet Explorer 8. I launched my virtualized Windows XP, and installed it. The process was annoying - after downloading the 17MB installation file, it continues to download some more unknown amount of bytes, then install it, then request to reboot. Fine. After the reboot, I launched IE8, and surfed to the Acid3 test. The socre: 20/100 ........!!!!!

My firefox 3 manages to score 71/100, and my WebKit powered Epiphany scores a perfect 100/100 .

IE8 wasn't meant for XP.

[swoll1980]

The designated hitter should be banned by baseball.

If you cannot field a position you don't deserve to bat.

I like the DH rule. I wish the national league would adopt it, makes for more exiting games.

[sports fan Matt]

the other thing is (i havent tested this) but IE8 may not work with the ncaa streaming video... Anyone know for sure?