
Internet Explorer 9 demos set for March MIX conference - barredo
http://www.betanews.com/article/Internet-Explorer-9-demos-set-for-March-MIX-conference/1266426157
======
thechangelog
As a web developer I'm keenly interested in any new IE releases. I can't help
but wonder, however, why Microsoft need's to mark each release as a major
version (7, 8, 9).

Microsoft itself has made it clear that everyone should upgrade to the latest
IE version, yet uptake has been slow. Couldn't they just bury new rendering
engines in service packs and leave the version numbers alone? IE users would
enjoy a better web experience, Microsoft wouldn't be stuck supporting old
browsers for as long, and I could avoid going prematurely grey.

~~~
chadgeidel
They can't "hide" an update to IE because too many corporate apps (not on the
Internet) depend on IE6 behavior.

~~~
thechangelog
While they certainly can't break old releases, it seems that with IE 8 onwards
they could implement something like that, doesn't it?

~~~
chadgeidel
Oh, I see what you mean.

Yes, that seems like a great idea!

------
mmastrac
As 'blah' as the release of a new IE is, it's nice to see that there's some
progress being made. It's still far too painful to fix code that works
identically between Firefox and WebKit and breaks in weird and wonderful ways
once IE is in the picture.

I hope their focus on correctness is as strong as the focus on matching JS
speed in the other browsers, however. You can't do all the cool stuff that
speed enables when you spend half the time figuring out when your elements
need layout.

------
snitko
All that 2D stuff sounds fascinating, but unless they fix all the stupid
things that even ie8 renders wrong, unless they implement svg, html5 and a
good js-engine, nobody cares. Microsoft is still trying to "lead" the web
instead of just admitting they suck at web and doing their homework good (i.e.
fixing everything up to the level when it works 'fine').

Of course I realize, it's probably a part of the plan - hold back the industry
as long as possible in an attempt to give less advantage to the competitors.
But it doesn't seem to work, because people always find workarounds, don't
they?

------
apike
I think the big deal about IE9 is the major improvement in Javascript
performance. Given that, emulating some of the various web standards IE lacks
using Javascript will become more practical.

~~~
lukifer
I particularly hope that <canvas> can be implemented using the Direct2D engine
they're touting so heavily. It would be beautiful to use a proprietary
standard to forcibly implement an open one. :)

~~~
mmastrac
Is that Direct2D engine developer-accessible? From my understanding, it's just
a rendering technology for HTML/VML (a la Cairo for Firefox).

~~~
xal
It looks like it's a proprietary competitor to canvas which microsoft doesn't
like.

~~~
mmastrac
I'm pretty sure it's just a rendering technology - not a canvas competitor.
Even Firefox will be supporting it:

[http://www.osnews.com/story/22543/Direct2D_Acceleration_Fire...](http://www.osnews.com/story/22543/Direct2D_Acceleration_Firefox_Measures_up_to_IE9)

------
johns
Sadly, just like IE8, IEx doesn't matter until IE6 is gone. Unless they allow
IE9 to emulate IE6 on command so corp IT departments can install it without
fear of breaking old apps. Like Windows XP mode in Windows 7 but for IE>

~~~
bugs
I'm always curious as to what these apps require that newer browsers can't
handle or rather handle differently, does anyone know of any examples off
hand?

~~~
bho
Examples are usually at any big non-tech corporation: engineering firms,
insurance companies, etc. They are typically found in their reporting tools or
HR tools, or even the internal company website. I worked at a place where
everything revolved around IE6.

I couldn't even browse the company websites in anything non IE. They must have
checked the useragent, or used only ActiveX specific code.

------
dandelany
"Web developers attending the conference will need to see how the new browser
functions, especially with respect to its all-new support for Direct2D
rendering (a Windows-only feature that has potential to flatten its
competition), as well as improved support and functionality with Silverlight
(a cross-platform feature)."

Read:

"We know the house has no foundation, but it's okay, because look at all the
sweet shit we added! There's a windvane on the roof, and we gave 'er a new
coat of paint, and we even added on a sexy garage in which you can only park
Ford cars! Cool, huh?!"

~~~
kevingadd
To be fair, Direct2D and Silverlight are actually potentially quite useful
features:

Direct2D is a hardware acceleration layer for 2D graphics. If it's fully
integrated into IE that means we might finally be able to get a full quality
<canvas> implementation in IE (Even if we still have to build it ourselves
with JS) - way better than the current VML based hacks.

Silverlight also gives developers a nice alternative to Flash if all they need
to do is get access to things the browser doesn't expose yet. It's still not
as good as pure js/html, but it's at least got functioning open source
implementations (unlike Flash).

~~~
dandelany
Yes, but Direct2D is proprietary and Windows-only, and Silverlight has <50%
adoption...

------
hexley
All that waffling on and a mention of whether it's HTML5 compliant and whether
it supports the <video> tag at least.

------
simonw
SVG and canvas support would be awesome - and it sounds like SVG at least is
likely.

~~~
dandelany
(from <http://processingjs.org/blog/?p=77>):

F1LT3R[13:10] asked the experts: So the IE development team are officially
doing nothing except listening to users re: the Canvas at this time?

EricLaw [MSFT] (Expert)[13:12]: We’re doing lots of stuff :)

Seems like they're dodging the question, as usual.

------
dschobel
That chart of sunspider performance tests makes me laugh every time. The scale
is so skewed by IE7 that IE9 actually looks competitive. They should have just
thrown in IE6 numbers to really flatten out any differences.

------
rauljara
Internet explorer's version of progress is not even close to caught up to
what's already out there. It is slower and less compliant than browsers that
have been out for almost a year. And 32% on the acid3 test? Seriously? You can
tell exactly where their priorities don't lie.

------
hexley
All that waffling on and a mention of whether it's HTML5 compliant and whether
it supports the <video> tag at least.

