
The birth of Microsoft's new web rendering engine - aaronbrethorst
http://blogs.msdn.com/b/ie/archive/2015/02/26/a-break-from-the-past-the-birth-of-microsoft-s-new-web-rendering-engine.aspx
======
EdSharkey
YES! 1-2-3-4, I declare a browser war!

Finally. This is the Microsoft I've been waiting for! No more rolling over and
no defeatist talk of adopting WebKit or whatever. Microsoft is going to use
its muscle and position to make a truly competitive browser.

We need more competition, and we need the default browser in Windows to be
just as good as Chrome and Firefox.

Microsoft, I hope you pull every -ms- vendor flaggin', ring-0 kernel hookin',
micro-optimizatin', site-specific D3D driver tweakin' trick in the book as you
reach for parity. This is going to be so fun to watch.

~~~
melling
We have a already have lot of competition. In fact, it's never been better:
Chrome, Firefox, WebKit, Chromium, Opera. You can even get the source code for
Firefox and Chrome and contribute. I'm glad Microsoft is making a better go at
it, but honestly, Microsoft could have built a more compliant browser any time
they wanted too.

[https://html5test.com/results/desktop.html](https://html5test.com/results/desktop.html)

~~~
Mithaldu
Chrome and friends aren't webkit anymore, but only by way of forking.
Otherwise Chrome, Chromium and Opera 15+ are the same engine. The family tree
kind of looks like this:

    
    
        -- Internet Explorer
        
        -- Firefox
        
        -- Safari
          \
           -- Chrome, Chromium, Opera 15+
    
        -- Opera 12 (abandoned)
    

I'm a little unclear on how differentiated Webkit and Blink are in practice,
but sadly we have only 3.5 major engines competing at this point.

~~~
Touche

        -- Konqueror
          \
           -- Safari
             \
              -- Chrome, Chromium, Opera 15+
    

If you want to go further Firefox's lineage is interesting but it's parent
browsers are all dead.

~~~
mkr-hn
Everyone forgets the people who created/invented the things Apple puts in its
software.

------
FreakyT
I'm glad to see that Microsoft is finally ripping out all the weird legacy
modes -- IE11 essentially ships with 6 different rendering engines! [1]

* IE5 (quirks mode)

* IE7 (compatibility view)

* IE8, IE9, and IE10 (available from the x-ua-compatible meta tag)

* IE11's actual rendering engine

As an aside, the hilariously long user-agent string is perhaps the best
evidence that string-based browser detection is something that web devs should
avoid at all costs. It manages to include "Safari", "Chrome", "AppleWebKit",
"KHTML", "Mozilla", and "Gecko".

[1] [https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-
us/library/dn321432.aspx](https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-
us/library/dn321432.aspx)

~~~
leeoniya
if you're not detecting on the client (via javascript), then you have to rely
on headers. well, maybe via IE conditional comments + cookie setting on
transparent pixel request

~~~
stephenr
the point is you should be doing feature tests, not browser tests.

~~~
leeoniya
there's no such thing as a feature test on the server side.

~~~
stephenr
The things that are different are almost exlusively related to client side
tech- html, css and js.

------
doppel
I really really hope Microsoft adopts the strategy from competing browsers:

\- Make one version of Spartan and keep it AUTO-UPDATED, instead of shipping a
new version every couple of years that is, more or less, completely decoupled
from the previous version.

\- Decouple the browser from the operating system. I don't really care if they
make it cross-platform (though it would be nice), but if the browser stops
updating unless you upgrade to the next version of Windows you WILL end up
with legacy sites again and again that cater to a specific version, and then
we can start over and just replace every rant against IE 6-7-8 with Spartan
1-2-3.

~~~
Mahn
> Make one version of Spartan and keep it AUTO-UPDATED, instead of shipping a
> new version every couple of years that is, more or less, completely
> decoupled from the previous version.

This is what IE 11 currently does, so I would imagine they will continue doing
so with Project Spartan.

~~~
jonathansampson
We have actually been updating Internet Explorer for some years now. We don't
touch machines that have opted out of updates, but for everybody else we've
been moving them forward regularly.

Spartan is neat because it's a separate app, built on a different architecture
that will not only continue to allow us to update in an evergreen fashion, but
it will allow us to do so at a much faster rate.

~~~
hipsterrific
I like the fact that you guys are sampling more and more of the web rather
than sticking to the top 9K sites. This will make fixing issues in one browser
less of an issue (hopefully I'm crossing my fingers).

------
adrusi
But it will still be non-free, and probably won't sync history/bookmarks/open
tabs with mobile, except perhaps windows phone. And it only works on windows.

I don't see what would entice users to switch from Firefox or chromium or
opera (or midori, konqueror, etc) to a new Microsoft browser.

Its probably still worth telling users not to use internet explorer, just in
case they ever end up buying a Mac or Linux PC, and out of principle to
support free software.

Its good to see competition, but I theorize that this will hurt Mozilla and
benefit Google and Microsoft. The quality of chrome has been stagnating
recently due to its large market share, while Firefox has been steadily
advancing (because Mozilla's primary agenda is to move the web forward). Users
have started a slow migration back to Firefox, which I love. A good internet
explorer, paired with effective marketing, could threaten chrome and force
google to get their act together, ending the Firefox rennaissance.

But realistically I don't see Microsoft marketing this effectively, and
internet explorers reputation as a piece of crap will haunt it for years to
come.

~~~
Veedrac
It sounds like your primary concern is that it might be good...

~~~
GhotiFish
Personally for me? I am deeply concerned that internet explorer becomes not
terrible.

People would be stupid enough to then use it.

Then microsoft would have more clout.

They would immediately use that clout to cause enormous industry problems,
push bad standards, fail to comply with open ones, push windows specific
extensions, ect ect ect.

I am 100% concerned that internet explorer might not suck. If that happened,
the internet would be in a much worse place.

------
johnkchow
_This interoperability-focused approach brought the obvious question of
adopting an existing open-source rendering engine such as WebKit. While there
were some advantages, upon further investigation it was not the right path
forward for two important reasons. First, the Web is built on the principle of
multiple independent, yet interoperable implementations of Web standards and
we felt it was important to counter movement towards a monoculture on the Web.
Second, given the engineering effort required, we found that we could deliver
an interoperability focused engine to customers significantly faster if we
started from our own engine (especially if unshackled from legacy
compatibility concerns), rather than building up a new browser around an open-
source engine. We will continue to look at open source and shared source
models where it makes sense and look forward to sharing more details in coming
posts._

This is a powerful paragraph from the article. I'm all for competition, and if
they actually produce the next great browser, that'll just mean better
browsers overall (and probably even better tooling for us devs). I'm a bit
skeptical whether they can pull it off, but at least I have a good feeling
that they're out to prove us all wrong.

~~~
amelius
I just wished we could put on top of our HTML something like:

<meta render-engine="webkit" />

or something along those lines.

~~~
munificent
We just need to implement an HTML renderer (or two or three) in JS and then
ship the renderer with your site.

~~~
amelius
Bingo :) But it makes me wonder how well is asm.js supported by the new IE?

~~~
jonathansampson
[http://blogs.msdn.com/b/ie/archive/2015/02/18/bringing-
asm-j...](http://blogs.msdn.com/b/ie/archive/2015/02/18/bringing-asm-js-to-
the-chakra-javascript-engine-in-windows-10.aspx)

------
cromwellian
(general reply to some of the negative comments in this thread)

When someone is taking the right steps, I think they should be praised.
Whatever bad feelings about Microsoft people have, they seem to be a newly
revitalized company of late, are implementing cultural changes the way they
interact with other ecosystems, and are shipping more open source, and seem to
be playing well with others.

We should reward good deeds, not punish them.

------
hyperbovine
> Finally. This is the Microsoft I've been waiting for! ... Microsoft is going
> to use its muscle and position to make a truly competitive browser.

Oh-ho man, what I wouldn't give to teleport this comment back to 1997 or so...

~~~
72deluxe
Haha very true. It reminds me of the time Apple announced that Internet
Explorer was going to be the browser for classic Mac OS, with Bill Gates
calling in, to shouts of NO!!! NO!!!!! NO!!!!

It makes me chuckle. It always boggles the mind that the web is mostly just
rendering of documents and flinging backwards and forwards of requests, yet
the passion it invokes with browser wars and web developers. A browser is
essentially a HTML Help File viewer yet you get followings and wars! It
doesn't make sense.

Even less sense is made when they reinvent all application features in a web
browser to make web pages behave like desktop applications. Kind of useful,
but an incessant broken/fix/reimplement cycle

------
WalterBright
I hope those 9,000 sites include github. IE hangs when confronted with a
github display of a PR that has more than 1000 lines of diff's.

~~~
jonathansampson
Do you have one that we can use to check future builds of IE against?

~~~
joshschreuder
Try this:
[https://github.com/golang/go/commit/b986f3e3b54499e63903405c...](https://github.com/golang/go/commit/b986f3e3b54499e63903405c90aa6a0abe93ad7a)

To be fair, it's extraordinarily slow even in Chrome, but IE11 rendering on
this page is pretty bad.

~~~
ygra
Impressive to see the difference between browsers there, though. IE is
unusable with ~420 MiB of memory for that tab. Chrome is unusable as long as
the page loads; after that only slowed down slightly, with ~540 MiB of memory
for that tab. Firefox is snappy, fast and takes only 180 MiB of memory for
that tab.

------
kibwen

      > the new engine began as a fork of MSHTML.dll but has 
      > since diverged very quickly
    

Curiously, this means that Spartan will still be able to trace its lineage
back to 1992's NCSA Mosiac (in contrast to Mozilla's Servo, which is a
greenfield project). I expect that it will be fascinating to compare the two
projects as each matures.

~~~
ethomson
To be pedantic: even if there is code from MSHTML.dll in Spartan, there's no
code from NCSA Mosaic in MSHTML.dll. Internet Explorer originally licensed
_Spyglass Mosaic_ , which licensed the name (and the code) from NCSA, but did
not actually use any of the code. Though I suspect that there's not actually
any Spyglass Mosaic code left in IE these days.

(Edited, I said that there's no MSHTML.dll code in Spartan. That I _do_
believe exists.)

(Source:
[http://ericsink.com/Browser_Wars.html](http://ericsink.com/Browser_Wars.html))

~~~
0x0
Internet Explorer 1.0's "About" box claims it is "Based on NCSA Mosaic":
[http://utilu.com/IECollection/img/iecollection_ie100_win40nt...](http://utilu.com/IECollection/img/iecollection_ie100_win40nt.png)

(Curiously, Internet Explorer 1.0 showed a version number of "4.40" in the
about box.)

~~~
jonathansampson
IE is (originally) based on NCSA Mosaic code, by way of Spyglass. Spyglass had
nearly 70 or so vendors using the same code if I'm not mistaken.

The original source code of IE 1 can be seen (an Easter egg) in the video on
our blog post (at about 40 seconds):
[http://blogs.msdn.com/b/ie/archive/2015/02/26/a-break-
from-t...](http://blogs.msdn.com/b/ie/archive/2015/02/26/a-break-from-the-
past-the-birth-of-microsoft-s-new-web-rendering-engine.aspx).

~~~
ethomson
More than 100, in fact. But in the end only one of those vendors actually
mattered.

------
Someone1234
I feel like the "A new Web rendering engine is born" section covers quite
honestly why they have chosen to fork IE. It seems, to me, to be pretty frank
and doesn't contain much "doublespeak."

PS - This was originally a reply to a comment which got removed.

~~~
michaelpinto
The amount of that article which was focused on legacy was very depressing.
When it started to go about how it would break some Little League site that
was IE specific that got me very unexcited. Microsoft today needs to learn the
lesson of Apple in the very late 90s and just say "no".

~~~
untog
They can't. All of the success MS has is based on enterprise - Apple are lucky
in not having that restriction. At this point, if MS decided to say F everyone
it would come back to bite them very hard.

I have a lot of respect to these IE devs for not just quitting and doing
something easier, to be honest.

~~~
michaelpinto
Actually it seems strange now, but back in the 90s Apple (and NeXT too) were
very focused on the enterprise. They were just "lucky" to have done badly at
it. In fact they actually even made servers:
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Network_Server](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Network_Server)

------
Gravityloss
Is it just me or is there some kind of an air of sadness about the video?

I like that they have real developers and not pr people talking about the
product, and I don't like fake positivity. I guess it's impossible to please
people like me, if you're Microsoft.

------
joosters
Will there be any useful privacy options in this new browser?

e.g. will the cookie options be something more than a global allow/disallow
all cookies?

Will it offer a way to control/block/clear other client-side data, like flash
cookies, local storage and so on?

------
amelius
I'm just amazed that they had to figure out that the "long tail" matters. It
seems so obvious. It is almost like the owner of a hardware store coming to
the conclusion that his customers want more than just a swiss army tool.

------
jonathansampson
@IEDevChat on twitter is now (and for the next two hours) answering questions
regarding Internet Explorer and Project Spartan. Just ask your question(s)
with the hashtag #AskIE.

------
leeoniya
"Fixing patterns instead of sites"

I don't understand this statement

~~~
Igglyboo
They aren't targeting specific sites that are broken they are targeting more
general patterns that seem to cause problems.

~~~
leeoniya
I understand the language. I don't understand what they mean by "patterns".
Common edge cases where js/css/html is broken in specific ways?

If you write html/css in a relatively compliant way, things will not be so
broken that a browser vendor needs to account for them in a "long tail". If
your js is broken, well tough luck.

Are they just talking about how to implicitly handle commonly malformed HTML,
as all browsers do?

~~~
CJefferson
If people in the past have written bad js which worked in IE, Microsoft aren't
now going to break that code. They don't consider saying "tough luck" to
businesses with code which works for them today acceptable.

~~~
leeoniya
my problem is they're selling this as a "clean break" with no baggage. but
then in the same breath explain how they've found a way to still accommodate
that baggage and calling it a "long tail".

IE is still gonna live next door (to be used for enterprise/compat) probably
for a while. I don't understand what they are saying about solving
incompatibility issues of IE-specific code in Spartan - which is presumably
NOT IE.

~~~
cwyers
Basically, they took Trident, refactored it and stripped out all the
compatibility shims, and made it into EdgeHTML, which they will be working on
making similar to WebKit/Blink/Gecko in terms of how it renders web pages. For
pages that still need IE, you can switch to Trident, which will still be
around.

------
taf2
When MS decides to release an open source rendering engine - we can start
taking them seriously... until then they're never going to be worth taking
seriously.

~~~
mtrpcic
Releasing a rendering engine is what it takes, but releasing the entire .NET
core isn't good enough?

------
mattdesl
For add-ons and DevTools plugins: it would be cool to have AtomIO style
architecture. Easy to install, easy to develop for, easy to publish to npm,
and written in pure JavaScript. IMHO it would quickly propel Spartan to the
forefront of the developer community and would really help move the web
forward.[1]

[1] [http://mattdesl.svbtle.com/motion-
graphics](http://mattdesl.svbtle.com/motion-graphics)

~~~
Ajedi32
You mean like Vivaldi?

------
touristtam
Now if they could just force this new web browser onto every single Windows XP
and later installation out there, so we could get ride of the horrendous
amount of IE version < 11 still in use, I would see this in a positive light.
The only way I am using IE at the moment if for corporate website that are
engulfed in MSFT technologies.

~~~
scholia
If Microsoft tried that, it would probably end up back in court. Microsoft
actually has very little power over its large customers, or those customers
wouldn't still be using XP, launched in 2001.

If Microsoft could wave a magic wand then everybody would be on IE11, but it
can't. In fact, it can't even make them patch security holes that were fixed
years ago.

------
q2
>>> This is an ambitious goal given that the Web consists of over 44 billion
Web sites

This is not the number of "web sites" but number of "web pages" [1].

[1] [http://www.worldwidewebsize.com/](http://www.worldwidewebsize.com/)

------
edoloughlin
_we felt it was important to counter movement towards a monoculture on the
Web_

Am I alone in wishing there was an actual monoculture on the web? Where you
could spend time making your app/site more functional instead of more
compatible?

------
melling
What keyboard is he using @3:10? It curves down? Looks a little like a wing.

~~~
wluu
That's the Microsoft Ergonomic Sculpt keyboard.

I've got one, and while it's not a mechanic keyboard. It is quite comfortable,
and if you want an ergo keyboard I'd highly recommend it.

Here's a review by Marco Arment: [http://www.marco.org/2013/08/30/sculpt-
ergonomic-keyboard-re...](http://www.marco.org/2013/08/30/sculpt-ergonomic-
keyboard-review)

------
runewell
Auto-update is the main feature I care about. With auto-update we don't have
to worry about legacy browsers holding back the entire industry.

------
nakedrobot2
Is there anything wrong with the ones that already exist, which developers
already cater to? What are they accomplishing here, exactly?

~~~
cwyers
Well, let's flip the question around -- why are there three major open-source
rendering engines in the world right now already? Why did Google fork Blink
from WebKit?

The answer seems to be, major browser vendors have a hard time cooperating at
the engine level. Apple and Google had different opinions over WebKit, which
eventually led to it being forked. Microsoft has no real reason to think that
it could partner with Apple or Google any more successfully than they
partnered with each other in developing a rendering engine.

~~~
tmzt
Partly due to the different sandboxing implementation, Chrome had their own
already and Apple was pursuing something called WebCore2 IIRC.

------
ulfw
Too bad there won't be a OS X Version.

~~~
pjmlp
What about that Windows version of Safari?

~~~
thejake
Your point? That is also too bad.

~~~
pjmlp
That many jump the gun on Microsoft, but give a free pass to the others.

------
lawnchair_larry
Based on the team pics, it looks like they got rid of individual offices over
there. That's too bad.

~~~
jajaBinks
I'm a developer with Azure. Most of the developers still have individual
offices (a few folks are also 'doubled up' in individual offices because of
space constraints). Only some teams have moved to an open-space office layout.

------
joeblau
Does anyone have metrics on how much of the traffic on the internet is HTTP/S
vs everything else?

------
somanim
This is rubish. Bring back the glory days of Opera. Webkit has turned to trash
and Chrome/Firefox along with it.

------
andhof-mt
Browser war? Sure.

But regardless of the improvements MS makes, they still have years worth of a
bad reputation they have built up to get over.

It will take leaps and bounds for them to ever build up the respect that
Mozilla and Google have for building web technology.

~~~
bwy
I don't quite follow your reasoning here. It's got a really bad reputation
with devs and people "in the know," but for the average user turning on the
computer, it's perfectly fine, and that has to count for something.

~~~
mark-r
That's the part I find interesting - despite being good enough for all the
major sites on the internet, they kept bumping up against cases where it
didn't work. But I don't understand why they needed a new browser to fix that;
the article implies that all it required was a change in focus.

------
0x0
[http://xkcd.com/927/](http://xkcd.com/927/)

~~~
Ajedi32
This isn't a new standard. This is a new rendering engine which implements
existing standards.

------
pdknsk
It doesn't matter unless they make it open-source or at the very least cross-
platform. I'm not downloading a 4GB VM from
[http://modern.ie](http://modern.ie) to try it.

~~~
jonathansampson
We created [http://remote.modern.ie](http://remote.modern.ie) so you can
_stream_ Internet Explorer to your Mac. Even to your iOS device :)

~~~
joshstrange
Please, let's not pretend remote.modern.ie OR the VM's are ANYTHING close to
running the browser locally. They are, at best, a band-aid. Yes, pjmlp, safari
is OS X-only now but just because I'm a Mac user does not mean I support that
decision, I don't. Also you know how many times in the past 10 years I've
heard someone say "Well it works in Chrome/FF/IE but not in Safari?" Never.
That's not to say it never happens but I've spent many agonising hours trying
to make IE behave when it works PERFECTLY in Chrome/FF/Safari. I've had a
handful of "It works in FF but not Chrome" and "It works in Chrome but not FF"
but I've got a landfill full of "It doesn't work in IE".

Things I need before I'm going to pretend IE isn't a steaming pile of shit,
hell I'd settle for just 1-2:

* Evergreen browser (I'm sick of dealing with 7/8/9, I don't look forward to playing the same song and dance with 10/11/12/etc)

* Cross-platform (Testing on Linux or a Mac is painful)

* Open source (IE is the ONLY major browser that is not OS, and yes I know Chromium != Chrome but I'd be fine with IE doing the same sort of thing)

~~~
sandstrom
Actually IE11 isn't too bad.

Still a bit worse than the others, but Safari has also lagged lately (and
Safari also isn't evergreen).

(I agree with all of the above for the older IE < 10)

------
hrremmer
Hahaha. Microsoft and Internet are fundamentally incompatible. All you need to
do is go to their homepage to see they don't get the Internet. Never have,
never will.

~~~
jongalloway2
Some interesting information to the contrary:

[http://rainypixels.com/words/the-story-of-the-new-
microsoft-...](http://rainypixels.com/words/the-story-of-the-new-microsoft-
com/)

[http://paravelinc.com/work/microsoft.php](http://paravelinc.com/work/microsoft.php)

------
higherpurpose
The main thing I would want from a Microsoft browser is actually keeping up to
date with the latest in security protocols and crypto algorithms. IE has
always been several years behind everyone else in this area, which just meant
developers had to keep their websites less secure just to be able to serve IE
users as well. That needs to end.

I don't necessarily want Microsoft to be a _leader_ in this area (not sure I'd
trust Microsoft with any new security protocols anyway), but at the very least
it should be a _fast-follower_. Looking forward to Microsoft adopting
ChaCha20-Poly1305 or at least helping to speed up the standardization at IETF
and then adopt _that_ standard if their excuse right now is that they can't
adopt "non-finalized standards".

~~~
AlyssaRowan
The agl draft is actually an out-of-date, expired first draft, but it did the
job to get it kickstarted! [https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-agl-tls-
chacha20poly1...](https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-agl-tls-
chacha20poly1305/)

AEAD_CHACHA20_POLY1305 is however about to be an RFC (via CFRG) -
[https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-irtf-cfrg-
chacha20-po...](https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-irtf-cfrg-
chacha20-poly1305/?include_text=1) \- , and the _proper_ TLS WG draft will
essentially just link to that: [https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-
mavrogiannopoulos-cha...](https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-
mavrogiannopoulos-chacha-tls/?include_text=1)

------
hmottestad
So fun thing to do in these kinds of videos is to look for women.

FYI. This video has 1 woman, at the end. She doesn't say anything, she just
stands there, and she's only visible for a few seconds.

Summing up. Microsoft's new engine, still fighting to gain traction with 50%
of the population ;)

~~~
10098
What the hell does that have to do with anything?!

------
amelius
Here's an idea for an architecture that doesn't suffer from compatibility
problems ever:

\- Every web site refers to the bytecode for its required render engine

\- This engine is loaded in an intelligent/cached way, and run in a sandboxed
environment whenever the website is visited

\- Since the website picks its own render engine (or provides its own), the
developers of the website know for sure that it will render the website
correctly

\- Besides the render engine, also the scripting language could be
referenced/provided in the same way.

An architecture like this could boost the proliferation of open-source render
engines and in-browser languages.

~~~
TazeTSchnitzel
so, Java, then

the problem with bytecode is you lose virtually all the benefits of the web

it's also not novel: you can do this today with JS, and your users will hate
you because it can't be indexed and you can't select text

~~~
amelius
This approach doesn't need to depend on Java. It would preferably use a
minimal, non-garbage-collected VM, or something along the lines of
NativeClient (or simply asm.js initially).

"It can't be indexed" happens to hold for a lot of websites that are basically
single-page web-apps and which build their contents from within javascript.
Fortunately, Google and others are using AI techniques to index pages. No need
for special markup, or special structure.

Text-selection can be built into the render-engine of choice. Granted, this is
not a guarantee that it will work for all websites, but even today you can
turn off text-selection for a website, so you don't have that guarantee now
either. Also, AI or OCR could help here. As an added benefit, it would allow
one to even select text in an image.

Also note that this doesn't work so well in JS, because JS is not a multi-
threaded language and it typically suffers from garbage-collection pauses.
This is not good enough for UI work, unfortunately. And also not good enough
as the target of compilers.

But, granted, to get this started, JS (or the asm.js subset) could be used
initially (and be replaced later).

------
rebootthesystem
>Our mission to create a Web that “just works”

Errr. Sorry MSFT. The web pretty much does work. So long as you don't use IE.

Seriously, I haven't touched IE in probably four years. OK, here and there
when there's no choice for some reason. I could probably count those instances
-over four years-- with two hands.

We don't even test on IE any more. It's shit and I have no problem ignoring
it. MS needs to understand that standards compliance is important. Don't waste
my time and money dealing with your crap just because you were too incompetent
or couldn't bother to make your browser standards compliant.

And it is slooooooow.

This coming from someone who's been with MS since day one. They are going to
have to walk on water for me (and I am sure others) to give the new browser
more than 30 seconds of a chance. That's how much trust they've lost.

Oh, yes, what's up with this business of breaking fonts with a routine OS
update. Do any of you folks at MS actually use the operating system you create
and maintain? Nobody tested this KB3013455 update? Nobody saw that it is
destroying fonts on various systems? And you are going to create a new
browser?

Sorry. A bit tired of bullshit. Don't tell me. Show me.

