Microsoft considers adopting WebKit for Internet Explorer

2

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 59
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by shawnathan View Post


    About time, I'm sick of always having to include ridiculous amounts of extra code in a website to cater to IE's ass backwards web standards.



    Yep, that was my first thought too, but you just *know* they will add asinine extensions to it that everybody will feel they *must* use. Apple did too, you know: the search field and the slider. Fortunately, nobody uses them and they are gone in iPhone.
  • Reply 22 of 59
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by nizmow View Post


    The majority of these are standards yet to be released. Acid3 includes CSS3 tests, for example -- this is not final yet. So basically all of those links are pointless.



    I know it's not ENTIRELY standards compliant -- no browser is -- but we're just getting a bit picky here.



    Regardless, I didn't come in here to defend IE8, I don't even have it installed. I just came to point out that this story is extremely misleading and largely nonsense.



    um, sorry, but you are wrong on a lot of points here. First of all, though many of the standards linked to are still in development, the fact that the other major browser engines have much better support than IE8.0 makes the links NOT pointless. Secondly, your poor attempt at minimizing the significant deficiencies in standards compliance in IE 8.0's rendering engine by falsely calling it "nitpicking" shows that you have an inherent bias here, so everyone should take your claims about IE with more than a little skepticism..



    As to your comment about the story being "extremely misleading and largely nonsense" -- such a claim requires a well-articulated argument for it not to ring totally hollow..
  • Reply 23 of 59
    My attitude to Mircosoft Internet Exploder is, Who Cares what they do.



    I have a all Mac home and I will not even bother to look at a PC, since the great computer software company can not develop IE for Apple (nothing since IE5 for Mac) I do not need them to surf the web. I can do that with either Firefox or Safari and do it cleaner and faster. I do need Microbloat to surf the web.



    Mircosoft can take a long walk 0ff a short dock and I would not even bother to throw them a life ring.



    That car saleman that MS has a CEO talk all he wants and I will simply ignore that idiot.
  • Reply 24 of 59
    wingswings Posts: 261member
    I hope that MS sticks with IEx for as long as it takes.
  • Reply 25 of 59
    Quote:

    I hope that MS sticks with IEx for as long as it takes.



    Huh? Why? WebKit is just the browser rendering engine. It has nothing to do with how the browser looks and etc.
  • Reply 26 of 59
    Once more...



    ABOUT BLOODY TIME!!!!!!!!!
  • Reply 27 of 59
    jragostajragosta Posts: 10,473member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by nizmow View Post


    This story is amazingly inaccurate. Though I can't quote exactly what Steve said, I was present at the talk and he in no way implied that Webkit would ever be used for IE. He did say it was interesting, but he also firmly stated that a proprietary closed-source engine is the solution MS has chosen and they are going to stick with it. The main reason is so that they can implement proprietary extensions before they are standards -- something Google is doing with Chrome, before you get all anti-Microsoft (Gears, for example, they even mention this in their delightful little comic).



    Thank you for restoring my faith in the world - I thought I had drifted into an alternative reality.



    Microsoft will shift to an industry standard when h*ll freezes over-- and maybe not even then.
  • Reply 28 of 59
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by AppleInsider


    While Microsoft rapidly developed IE up to version six in 2001, new innovation stalled after the apparent death of the rival Netscape browser between 2000 and 2001.



    Which indicates that as usual they were only interesting in grabbing market share and not in creating anything that benefits their users, given the appalling state of IE6.



    I once read that around that time Microsoft considered the browser "complete," and didn't see any point in further development, assuming, perhaps, that their own technologies such as .NET would take the internet by storm - predictably that didn't happen. Given Ballmer's quote that they are "considering the future of the browser," they still haven't grasped that the browser is the foundation for all future web applications, and preferably without Microsoft's rubbish extensions. Chrome is how browsers ought to be - a secure, robust platform for running web applications.



    Using WebKit should be a no-brainer for them, given IE8 Beta conforming to, what is it, 20% of the ACID Test? They've proved they cannot write a decent browser, so they should just use one that works. Not that I care what MS, of course.
  • Reply 29 of 59
    This would be so awesome! Our web application renders so slow on Internet Explorer, but is a speed demon with every other browser. I'm also guessing that if this happens, it won't be any time soon. Probably IE 9 or even 10.
  • Reply 30 of 59
    slewisslewis Posts: 2,080member
    Null.
  • Reply 31 of 59
    you have to laugh at Balmer on the "cheeky" comment when you realize a common description of their browser is....







    <...... a poorly regarded and nearly unusable product based on a very old version of Microsoft's proprietary web engine.>



    Cheeky?\
  • Reply 32 of 59
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by themoonisdown09 View Post


    This would be so awesome! Our web application renders so slow on Internet Explorer, but is a speed demon with every other browser. I'm also guessing that if this happens, it won't be any time soon. Probably IE 9 or even 10.



    I don't think it will ever happen.

    MicroSoft never admits they have a terrible product, and describing "opensource" as having a lack of inovation clearly means at the top they don't even understand the issues confronting them let alone have a strtagey to deal with it.
  • Reply 33 of 59
    pxtpxt Posts: 683member
    The only reason Microsoft ever uses a standard is to fork it.
  • Reply 34 of 59
    solipsismsolipsism Posts: 25,726member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Erunno View Post


    Actually yes, you'd still have to test your site with each browser to check for implementation bugs.



    Yes, hence my comment "becomes considerably easier" for web developers.
  • Reply 35 of 59
    kaiwaikaiwai Posts: 246member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by sflocal View Post


    Translation:

    "We don't want to admit that we do not have the ability to develop a better browser and use a competing package from our main competitor who has shown to do the job better, faster, and cheaper. But we're willing to spend a 1/3 of a billion dollars to show tell the world we know better!"



    You've got that right; its all about dogma - you'll never ever *EVER* hear in a million years a Microsoft executive go, "that is a f*cking great piece of software, lets drop out useless backwards proprietary riddled POS and adopt this opensource one instead". You'll never see.



    Whilst Apple is out picking the best of what the IT world has to offer - Microsoft is stuck in NIH land like Apple were 15-20 years ago.
  • Reply 36 of 59
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by bloggerblog View Post


    Oh great, now we have to test our code in:

    Safari

    Mac Firefox 2 & 3

    Windows Firefox 2 & 3

    IE 6 & 7 (8 to come)

    Chrome

    IE Webkit



    That's 10 browsers, if not more.



    Just for the record, I [email protected] hate [email protected]#[email protected] who stick to IE6 as on date. I recently did work for a website which had 27% of IE6 traffic....
  • Reply 37 of 59
    ronboronbo Posts: 669member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by nizmow View Post


    This story is amazingly inaccurate. Though I can't quote exactly what Steve said, I was present at the talk and he in no way implied that Webkit would ever be used for IE. He did say it was interesting, but he also firmly stated that a proprietary closed-source engine is the solution MS has chosen and they are going to stick with it.



    Yeah, it's kind of funny how people seem unable to understand the answer Balmer gave. They have no intention of using Webkit.
  • Reply 38 of 59
    benroethigbenroethig Posts: 2,782member
    If IE moving to webkit means better website compatibility with other webkit browsers, I'm all for it.
  • Reply 39 of 59
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Ronbo View Post


    Yeah, it's kind of funny how people seem unable to understand the answer Balmer gave. They have no intention of using Webkit.



    I don't doubt it, his answer was very clear - but adopting WebKit would still be their best bet, because they obviously can't do the job themselves and are incapable of keeping up with emerging standards.
  • Reply 40 of 59
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by nizmow View Post


    This story is amazingly inaccurate. Though I can't quote exactly what Steve said, I was present at the talk and he in no way implied that Webkit would ever be used for IE. He did say it was interesting, but he also firmly stated that a proprietary closed-source engine is the solution MS has chosen and they are going to stick with it. The main reason is so that they can implement proprietary extensions before they are standards -- something Google is doing with Chrome, before you get all anti-Microsoft (Gears, for example, they even mention this in their delightful little comic).



    This sounds more like the Ballmer we all know and loathe...
Sign In or Register to comment.