IE9 is... fast?

[chessnerd]

This article says that the third Platform Preview "screams" - http://www.informationweek.com/news/windows/operatingsystems/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=225701362&subSection=Infrastructure

This one says its preformance is "impressive" - http://www.pcworld.com/businesscenter/article/199720/ie9_preview_delivers_new_features_and_impressive_p erformance.html?tk=hp_blg

A leading Microsoft man is saying they are "all in on HTML5" - http://www.wired.com/epicenter/2010/06/new-hardware-accelerated-ie9-previewarrives/

Fast? Powerful? Standards Compliant? These are not adjectives typically associated with Internet Explorer. What the heck is going on?

IE9 is actually looking pretty solid. Other websites are giving it similar praises. In any case, IE9 shows massive improvement over IE8. In these very early builds, Microsoft's browser is showing major improvements including:

* A score of 83/100 on the Acid3 test ( up from 28/100 in IE8 )

* Support for more HTML5 features ( way more than IE8 )

* Full hardware acceleration

* Third place Sunspider benchmark ( behind Chrome 6 and Opera 10.6 betas )

Say what you want about Microsoft, but it looks like IE9 might actually be a decent web browser. After all, this is just a platform preview, not even an alpha build. I expect that the betas will be even better.

Will it pull me away from Opera? Probably not. However, given that Microsoft is now actually trying to support web standards, I suppose anything is possible...

Thoughts?

[sanderd17]

Well, microsoft following the HTML standards is a real surprise.

But you know what would be even a bigger surprise: IE coming to an other platform :lolflag:

[Redache]

But you know what would be even a bigger surprise: IE coming to an other platform

er, they already did with MacOSX when it was first released...

It looks ok but they are so selective in the testing, it's hard to tell whether it's genuinely that good.

I'm not sold.

[chessnerd]

Well, microsoft following the HTML standards is a real surprise.

But you know what would be even a bigger surprise: IE coming to an other platform :lolflag:

Actually, IE versions 5.5 and earlier were released on Mac OS, and for a while Microsoft had a beta of IE for UNIX. Now, they have no plans whatsoever of returning to other platforms.

It actually discusses that in the top article. Microsoft wants to focus on only Windows. In a way, it makes sense. By designing their browser around the OS it will make their hardware acceleration better and should make their browser easier to support because they aren't trying to design it to work on multiple platforms.


It looks ok but they are so selective in the testing, it's hard to tell whether it's genuinely that good.

I'm not sold.
That will remain to be seen.

Who knows? Maybe by the final build IE9 will be way faster than even Chrome and Opera. Maybe it will be the first browser to support full HTML5 and its hardware acceleration will blow Firefox's out of the water. It might just leave other browsers out to dry and grow back to 90% marketshare again.

Or maybe it will be a dud like Vista and simply be a feeble attempt at playing catchup. Then Microsoft will put all of it's efforts into IE10, which will be better, but too little, too late.

Likely, the final result will be somewhere in between. Either way, I think it will be interesting...

[aeiah]

when they had little competition and said competition didn't follow standards, they didn't need to follow standards either. now that there's firefox, safari, opera and chrome(ium) all snapping at IE's heals they have to make it standards compliant and resource efficient. they were always capable of doing it, they just never needed to before.

[SunnyRabbiera]

Feh if thats the only thing going on for it

[Johnsie]

Platform previews are skeletal and are always much faster than the final versions. They will add the non-skeletal features onto it and it will become more bloated and slower. It's the same with Firefox previews and even Ubuntu dev releases.

[Sporkman]

when they had little competition and said competition didn't follow standards, they didn't need to follow standards either. now that there's firefox, safari, opera and chrome(ium) all snapping at IE's heals they have to make it standards compliant and resource efficient. they were always capable of doing it, they just never needed to before.

Competition is a good thing - in the end, we consumers win. :)

[eriktheblu]

One of my biggest complaints about MS Windows is the integration of the browser. It's like building a house using the plumbing as a support structure.

[RiceMonster]

It's good to see IE is finally starting to follow web standards, and that they didn't just stop at acid2 compliance.


Competition is a good thing - in the end, we consumers win. :)

I agree.

[Frak]

One of my biggest complaints about MS Windows is the integration of the browser. It's like building a house using the plumbing as a support structure.
IE is no longer an integral part of Windows. You can remove it fully.

For the OP, this is service for the designers more than anything. People will eventually update to IE9 and designers won't have such a tough time translating across browsers.

Also, my feature of choice: WebM is supported in HTML5-Video through a DirectShow filter.

[Simian Man]

A few months ago at a conference, someone from Microsoft Research said that they believed the main reason people had switched from IE to Firefox and Chrome was performance and that the primary task for IE9 was to close that gap.

I personally didn't switch for performance but for customizability. What do you guys think?

[Frak]

A few months ago at a conference, someone from Microsoft Research said that they believed the main reason people had switched from IE to Firefox and Chrome was performance and that the primary task for IE9 was to close that gap.

I personally didn't switch for performance but for customizability. What do you guys think?
I switched from IE because, well, IE's just not designed well. It wasn't speed so much as it felt like a disservice to every site I went to. IE just does so many things differently that inflating the IE number feels like putting unneeded work on the designers.

Standards compliance more than anything, though.

[McRat]

This article says that the third Platform Preview "screams" - http://www.informationweek.com/news/windows/operatingsystems/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=225701362&subSection=Infrastructure

This one says its preformance is "impressive" - http://www.pcworld.com/businesscenter/article/199720/ie9_preview_delivers_new_features_and_impressive_p erformance.html?tk=hp_blg

A leading Microsoft man is saying they are "all in on HTML5" - http://www.wired.com/epicenter/2010/06/new-hardware-accelerated-ie9-previewarrives/

Fast? Powerful? Standards Compliant? These are not adjectives typically associated with Internet Explorer. What the heck is going on?

IE9 is actually looking pretty solid. Other websites are giving it similar praises. In any case, IE9 shows massive improvement over IE8. In these very early builds, Microsoft's browser is showing major improvements including:

* A score of 83/100 on the Acid3 test ( up from 28/100 in IE8 )

* Support for more HTML5 features ( way more than IE8 )

* Full hardware acceleration

* Third place Sunspider benchmark ( behind Chrome 6 and Opera 10.6 betas )

Say what you want about Microsoft, but it looks like IE9 might actually be a decent web browser. After all, this is just a platform preview, not even an alpha build. I expect that the betas will be even better.

Will it pull me away from Opera? Probably not. However, given that Microsoft is now actually trying to support web standards, I suppose anything is possible...

Thoughts?


They've been working on for what, 15 years? With thousands of programmers? That's like 20 billion dog years or something.


IE is the cause of Virus Generation. We really needed them to "fix" it 10 years ago.

But MS said "New and SuperImproved" with IE8, so we will wait and see. If they can just secure it, they'll be doing their friends and neighbors a HUGE favor.

[Sporkman]

A few months ago at a conference, someone from Microsoft Research said that they believed the main reason people had switched from IE to Firefox and Chrome was performance and that the primary task for IE9 was to close that gap.

I personally didn't switch for performance but for customizability. What do you guys think?

I switched because IE doesn't run on Linux. :P

[kamaboko]

I've yet to find the OMG! browser. All of them lack in areas.

[SmittyJensen]

IE is no longer an integral part of Windows. You can remove it fully.

For the OP, this is service for the designers more than anything. People will eventually update to IE9 and designers won't have such a tough time translating across browsers.

Also, my feature of choice: WebM is supported in HTML5-Video through a DirectShow filter.
Can you back that up? I thought I read that differently off a microsoft blog post (from an employee) but maybe they were saying what you were saying.

[Frak]

Can you back that up? I thought I read that differently off a microsoft blog post (from an employee) but maybe they were saying what you were saying.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_Explorer#Removal

See the Windows 7 part.

[slooksterpsv]

I've used IE9 and I like it for its Hardware Acceleration and Anti-aliased fonts, makes it look nice and renders fast. Even better than IE9 is HTML5 - Flash has a new contender besides Silverlight. Has anyone played the RPG game that was coded with HTML5? It's awesome.

[juanoleso]

I personally didn't switch for performance but for customizability.

Same here.

[Shakz]

Nothing to even try it out on for me. My 4 machines all run nix. Good for those that still use windows though would be great if they could make something a bit more resistant to malware. Kinda sounds like hype to me though.

[chriswyatt]

Well, hats off to Microsoft for making a web browser that doesn't suck.

[RiceMonster]

I personally didn't switch for performance but for customizability. What do you guys think?

I agree. For me it was about features, interface and customization.

[uberbuntufan64y]

i heard ie9 will work with ubuntu! :guitar:

[SmittyJensen]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_Explorer#Removal

See the Windows 7 part.
that just removes the exe. isnt ie tied in to explorer (or has this been solved in >xp versions or what?) or windows or something?

[Frak]

that just removes the exe. isnt ie tied in to explorer (or has this been solved in >xp versions or what?) or windows or something?
It just leaves the .net components. Many applications would fail without the trident .net component (steam comes to mind). That's better than the previous remove methods that just removed the shortcuts to iexplorer.exe.

[uberbuntufan64y]

did anyone also hear that internet explorer 9 will work on ubuntu linux? i thought i read an article on it.

[Npl]

It just leaves the .net components. Many applications would fail without the trident .net component (steam comes to mind). That's better than the previous remove methods that just removed the shortcuts to iexplorer.exe.If you remove trident, then some thinks like the help system wont work. Funny thing is though that under Ubuntu its exactly the same issue, try removing Firefox`rendering engine "XULRunner" and look at all the packages that depend on it.

I think the craziness of comparing browsers simply by some benchmarks should stop. Comparing Javascript performance is nice but leaves aside tons of more important stuff like how fast a browser can display cached pages and handles multiple open pages (tabs) - eg. I hate it when theres a notable delay switching between Tabs and this alone kept me from using Firefox (no idea if thats improved since I last tried it).

[StephenWoods69]

I thought they said IE 4,5,6,7,8 was going to be super fast and support all the latest web standards but they never actually did. To be honest I used all the internet explorers from 4 upwards and they were okay. I would probably still be using IE but I use Ubuntu solely now and have no intention of ever going back to windows and for the meantime I'll stick with Firefox as I like it.

[Dustin2128]

I don't really care if its fast, I'm never going to use it. There's only one thing I care about for those poor people using IE: standards compliance. That's the only way it affects me as a web designer; I can spend 20-40% of my time redesigning the site to work with IE. If IE could simply behave like all other browsers available to humanity, my sites could be amazing and I wouldn't have to spend as much time on them, which equals happier customers. That and I'd hate it slightly less. I still think its wrong to of them to practice vendor lock-in, it sets the computer industry back years from lack of competition (that windows users know/care about)

[NightwishFan]

I switched for performance. On WinXp with 128mb of RAM... Firefox2 made mincemeat of ie6. Though that one switch eventually led me to use 99% open source in the coming years. 1% is rarely flash and drivers. My new Asus laptop runs on 100% open source. As soon as I get some money I am going to get a system76. :)

[speedwell68]

I agree. For me it was about features, interface and customization.

Me too. That is why Firefox remains the best browser for me. It is certainly not the fastest, I believe that accolade belongs to Chrome(ium) or maybe Midori. But Firefox is quick enough and whilst Chrome now has hundreds of addons, it doesn't even come close to Firefox.

[dragos240]

The creators of IE9 are all nines.
http://tomopop.com/ul/avatars/1911.jpg

[McRat]

I switched for security and stability. I crashed IE a lot.

[Frak]

Me too. That is why Firefox remains the best browser for me. It is certainly not the fastest, I believe that accolade belongs to Chrome(ium) or maybe Midori. But Firefox is quick enough and whilst Chrome now has hundreds of addons, it doesn't even come close to Firefox.
I don't know, I haven't had any problems finding plugins that match what Firefox offered. Adblock? Chrome has it. Developer extensions? Built in and plenty of (really good) extensions on Chrome's site. Etc.

[chriswyatt]

IE9 was my idea. Then those b******s at Microsoft stole it from me :mad:

[doorknob60]

It just leaves the .net components. Many applications would fail without the trident .net component (steam comes to mind). That's better than the previous remove methods that just removed the shortcuts to iexplorer.exe.

Actually, Steam uses Webkit now :) But yeah, many apps need that, but you can still remove IE, just not the base stuff behind IE (don't want to remove that).

[Dustin2128]

IE9 was my idea. Then those b******s at Microsoft stole it from me :mad:

That's what I've always thought of when I see those 'windows was my idea' commercials :lolflag:

[siimo]

Yup I am testing IE9 at work. It really is rocket fast doing complex renderings using javascript, see flickr explorer demo or other demos on http://ie.microsoft.com/testdrive/, some of them really struggle on Firefox/Chrome but fly on IE9 thanks to the GPU acceleration.

But fear not, Firefox 4 will have GPU acceleration (already in nightlies) and from what I heard Chrome 6 too.

I don't think Linux will benefit from it though (just like Flash 10.1), too bad Linux doesn't yet have a unified GPU acceleration API that all 3D cards support.

So Linux is at the risk of becoming a 2nd class citizen of the web again if people rely on these high performing html5 applications? OK I know this is exaggerating it a bit but I am concerned.

[siimo]

Some tests of GPU IE9 vs Firefox 4 vs Chrome 6 vs Opera
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OIZUdZdFzOo

[McRat]

Some tests of GPU IE9 vs Firefox 4 vs Chrome 6 vs Opera
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OIZUdZdFzOo

Odd that somebody would run 4 apps concurrently on Win7 and the MS product would operate better in that environment.

Run them all together on a Mac and try again. Wait ...

[Simian Man]

I don't know, I haven't had any problems finding plugins that match what Firefox offered. Adblock? Chrome has it. Developer extensions? Built in and plenty of (really good) extensions on Chrome's site. Etc.

One that I noticed is the Firefox "gTranslate" plugin which will translate selected text to/from any language. Chrome has one that translates an entire page, but that's useless to me.

Also this isn't an extension, but Chrome doesn't seem to allow you to scroll pages by clicking the scroll-wheel and moving the mouse.

[SmittyJensen]

I don't know, I haven't had any problems finding plugins that match what Firefox offered. Adblock? Chrome has it. Developer extensions? Built in and plenty of (really good) extensions on Chrome's site. Etc.

Chrome is probably the best browser out there right now but I just use ie8 because I don't really need anything else

[squilookle]

I have read a few positive things about IE9, and I'm looking forward to it.

I also don't think Microsoft have had a choice but to improve the browser. I believe the marketshare in the browser market place is slipping, and they must be getting afraid of that - why would anyone want to see theit marketshare fall?

I just hope that, if this version IS good, that people will judge it on it's merits on not on the faults of the earlier versions. Good luck to them.

[Frak]

One that I noticed is the Firefox "gTranslate" plugin which will translate selected text to/from any language. Chrome has one that translates an entire page, but that's useless to me.

Also this isn't an extension, but Chrome doesn't seem to allow you to scroll pages by clicking the scroll-wheel and moving the mouse.
Only in Linux. IIRC the scroll is available in Mac OS X and I know it is available in Windows.

[siimo]

Odd that somebody would run 4 apps concurrently on Win7 and the MS product would operate better in that environment.

Run them all together on a Mac and try again. Wait ...

Please stop spreading your Microsoft FUD. Besides, um, you are missing the point.
1. Firefox was the fastest not the "MS Product"
2. Chrome/Opera GPU acceleration isn't quite as good as IE9 and Firefox, it is as simple as that not some MS conspiracy theory.

[murderslastcrow]

If the original post is correct, this actually makes me happy! I've been dealing with too many Windows users who are unwilling to change browsers and complain about IE's problems. It also means Microsoft, at least in its browser development, is serious about being a real competitor, not just relying on hegemony.

In the world of client-based computing, the browser is really the final frontier these days.

If Microsoft makes good products, I will praise them for it and be glad that they're giving more to their customers for what they paid. I don't hate or resent Microsoft, I just don't use things that make my life harder than it has to be.

[alexan]

Microsoft hold all the "secret keys" for hardware acceleration through directX. To be fairer, any test shoudl be made with OpenGl acceleration or (best) on a farrier platform (actually the comparison test are made on a field build, developed and maintained by Microsoft: aka windows).
Don't you wonder why there's no IE9 for MAC/Linux?
IE is the only browser strictly sticked with the OS (Safari is an exception, but part of it are opensource.. so merged with other project).


Given to this rate,IE9 will be the fastest one: don't forget that's microsoft the one who set the rules for GPU developers (aka: directX).

Hardware developer should put some brain in their work.. and start to support OpenGL: if they don't want to (keep) be just MS's servant.

[beastrace91]

Is it going to finally gain spell check? Lacking feature is lacking.

~Jeff

[spoons]

Microsoft hold all the "secret keys" for hardware acceleration through directX. To be fairer, any test shoudl be made with OpenGl acceleration or (best) on a farrier platform (actually the comparison test are made on a field build, developed and maintained by Microsoft: aka windows).
Don't you wonder why there's no IE9 for MAC/Linux?
IE is the only browser strictly sticked with the OS (Safari is an exception, but part of it are opensource.. so merged with other project).


Given to this rate,IE9 will be the fastest one: don't forget that's microsoft the one who set the rules for GPU developers (aka: directX).

Hardware developer should put some brain in their work.. and start to support OpenGL: if they don't want to (keep) be just MS's servant.

The GPU designers DO support OpenGL though.

[alexan]

The GPU designers DO support OpenGL though.

I am talking about priority.. the latest technology is usually pushed for windows (gaming, windows... you know?). So, hardly GPU designers take multi platform issue in serious account.

The problem is that they have the logic of the "global share"; but today 50~60% of market global share it's XP... and it is intentionally blocked to directX9. Support for OpenGL by GPU designers would mean respect for over an half of the clients... they simply don't care enough: OpenGL is for Linux, Mac, WinXP *AND* Vista/Seven.

It's actually not enough DO.. they should discard DirectX at all.


There are ridicolus cases in which software companies like Valve is forced to support three different platform (XP/Vista/Seven).. when all everything they should need it's support the latest OpenGL (retro-compatible until needed)
<--- ¢¢

[alexan]

I highly doubt you know what you're talking about.

DirectX: only windows (yeah... xbox too)
Microsoft DirectX is a collection of application programming interfaces (APIs) for handling tasks related to multimedia, especially game programming and video, on Microsoft platform
OpenGl: virtually on anything
OpenGL (Open Graphics Library)[2] is a standard specification defining a cross-language, cross-platform API for writing applications that produce 2D and 3D computer graphics.

You know... it's a bit complicated if you plan to make gpu hardware without take in account on which APIs it should work.

[Frak]

DirectX: only windows (yeah... xbox too)
Microsoft DirectX is a collection of application programming interfaces (APIs) for handling tasks related to multimedia, especially game programming and video, on Microsoft platform
OpenGl: virtually on anything
OpenGL (Open Graphics Library)[2] is a standard specification defining a cross-language, cross-platform API for writing applications that produce 2D and 3D computer graphics.

You know... it's a bit complicated if you plan to make gpu hardware without take in account on which APIs it should work.
What I'm saying is, which GPU vendor are you talking about?

[alexan]

What I'm saying is, which GPU vendor are you talking about?

Different scale of courage to get in the business.. where at the top you can find Nvidia (with ATI, recently, compete)... and SiS at the lowest

[Frak]

Different scale of courage to get in the business.. where at the top you can find Nvidia (with ATI, recently, compete)... and SiS at the lowest
The top 3 support enough to not even warrant it a problem.

[alexan]

The top 3 support enough to not even warrant it a problem.

Even if you're entitled to your own opinion, I don't share your optimism: until MS position it's somewhat dominant (taking all money and not paying for their errors, see vista) it is not granted that under such pressure the "top 3" could alway afford to support their interest (linux freedom field).

Anyway.. this is getting in a loop discussion. So I quit this there ----> .

[Frak]

Even if you're entitled to your own opinion, I don't share your optimism: until MS position it's somewhat dominant (taking all money and not paying for their errors, see vista) it is not granted that under such pressure the "top 3" could alway afford to support their interest (linux freedom field).

Anyway.. this is getting in a loop discussion. So I quit this there ----> .
You are well aware that enterprise apps take crazy advantage of OpenGL right? You are also aware that these same companies make the same chipsets for Mac OS X?

What I'm saying is, not only do I think you have no idea what you're talking about, I don't even think you know what you're talking about.

[ankit singh]

It means that microsoft has really felt the heat of opensource and now its silently preparing its weapons to stay in competition.I tested IE9 and it is really very good.Much much better than its previous versions and is competent enough to keep the dumb windows customers on their side.

Its now for sure that their next OS will also be surprising and
Linux might end up with those having high adrenaline.

[Frak]

It means that microsoft has really felt the heat of opensource and now its silently preparing its weapons to stay in competition.I tested IE9 and it is really very good.Much much better than its previous versions and is competent enough to keep the dumb windows customers on their side.

Its now for sure that their next OS will also be surprising and
Linux might end up with those having high adrenaline.
Open Source != Open Standards

[McRat]

nevermind, just watching the parade.

[Frak]

nevermind, just watching the parade.
I like parades.

[giddyup306]

It's funny because when I use IE 8 on my mom's computer it says something along the lines of "welcome back we know we suck". :lolflag:

Swiftfox FTW. It's like Firefox on speed!

[Frak]

It's funny because when I use IE 8 on my mom's computer it says something along the lines of "welcome back we know we suck". :lolflag:

Swiftfox FTW. It's like Firefox on speed!
General warning about SwiftFox: The binary shipped is proprietary. It is under a proprietary license that does not permit redistribution. As for the speed, it is purely a placebo effect; the CFLAGS do not give roughly any perceivable performance increase and the only other dramatic speed increases come from settings that can be changed in about:config in regular Firefox. Swiftfox is nothing more than a proprietary version of Firefox with a different logo.

[Stancel]

Funny story, when I was using Windows Vista, it wouldn't let me install IE8. I know, right? I would download IE8, try to install it and get an error message. Apparently this is a common problem (http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8&q=IE8+won't+install).

[slooksterpsv]

Funny story, when I was using Windows Vista, it wouldn't let me install IE8. I know, right? I would download IE8, try to install it and get an error message. Apparently this is a common problem (http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8&q=IE8+won't+install).

Absolutely. A lot of times, people had the IE 8 beta installed on their computer - oddly enough sites were pushing the IE8 beta like it was required to view their site - and so people had IE 8 beta, but when they'd try to install IE 8 they'd get errors during installation.

Overall, if that doesn't fix it, make sure your HAL's in msinfo32 are as follows:
No SP = 6.0.6000.16347
SP1 = 6.0.6001.18000
SP2 = 6.0.6002.18005

Sometimes an incorrect HAL'ed SP can cause the issue as well. =P - I fix Windows computers and lately mine's not making me happy, about to nuke it and put Ubuntu on the full 500 GB, then Win 7 in vbox =D.

[uberbuntufan64y]

):PI;ve been wandering if it was true, but IE9 I've seen as listed for running natively on Linux. so internet explorer 9 on linux is in the making or something?

[whiskeylover]

Just downloaded the IE9 Platform Preview. It is fast.