
The most modern browser there is: Internet Explorer 9 reviewed - evo_9
http://arstechnica.com/microsoft/reviews/2011/03/the-most-modern-browser-there-is-internet-explorer-9-reviewed.ars
======
nopassrecover
I really don't know how this is on HN - this is barely much more than a PR
plant espousing how fantastic IE9 is. Don't get me wrong, I'm glad IE9 is more
standards compliant than past IE versions, but this is basically a promo
piece. This made me chuckle though, in the tradition of "it's not a bug, it's
a feature":

"In contrast to the other browser developers, Microsoft's approach to
standards support has been conservative. The company doesn't want to ever have
to remove or fundamentally modify a feature that it has implemented due to
changes in specifications. As such, it has taken a policy of only implementing
those specifications that are unlikely to undergo any further changes. As a
result, Internet Explorer 9 will compare unfavorably on sites like HTML5 Test,
but Microsoft views this as far preferable to making developers have to alter
their real-world applications just because a specification has changed. "

~~~
Timmy_C
You obviously stopped reading after the first page.

The second page of this article points out a lot of features that Microsoft
FINALLY got around to implementing and some of the short-comings that are
still lingering. If I remember correct, the last couple paragraphs claim that
Firefox 4 or Chrome will pass up IE on features in the near near future. Not
exactly a PR plant at that point.

~~~
nopassrecover
No I read the second page. They looked like "half-criticisms" that won't
affect the IE userbase - "geeks won't like it", "the 64 bit version sucks"
etc.

~~~
Timmy_C
True, those aren't exactly the harshest critiques.

------
jameskilton
No-one cares if the browser is modern right now. In 2 years, when Chrome,
Firefox, Safari, Opera, et.al. have moved on and are even more awesome, we
will be stuck with the _exact_ same IE 9 that was released today (sans
security fixes).

Microsoft has taught me to dread Internet Explorer, and I see no reason not to
feel the same way with this one.

~~~
kj12345
Right, we're getting a nice snapshot of technology with IE9, and if that
doesn't include Web Workers or some other feature, fine. But the key advantage
of Chrome is that WebGL barely worked a few weeks ago, it's better now, and it
will be much better a few weeks in the future. Without agressive updating, IE9
will be out of date in a very real way by September.

------
mccutchen
That's a fairly inflamatory headline, and the reviewer's definition of
"modern" is never explicitly given. I'd argue that the Chromium and WebKit
nightlies I downloaded this morning are more "modern" than IE9.

 _Edit:_ Still, kudos to Microsoft on what appears to be a solid, modern web
browser. I'm just taking issue with the review's angle.

~~~
nopassrecover
The reviewer gives a hint at their definition of "modern" as "most recently
released" when they state "It's arguably the most modern browser on the
market—for a few weeks, at any rate."

------
cryptoz
IE9 runs on exactly 0 mobile devices. I don't think it's fair to call a
browser "modern" when it's the _only_ browser that doesn't run on at least one
mobile device. Safari, Opera, Chrome [1], and Firefox all run on a variety of
platforms including many mobile devices.

And given that most people see "mobile" as a defining element of modern tech,
it's pretty awkward to call a Windows Vista/7-only web browser "modern".
Microsoft even has their own, Windows-based mobile platform but it runs IE7/8.
If IE9 is modern, why can't I hold it in my hand like _every other web
browser_?

[1] While I suppose Chrome isn't branded as such on Android, the Android 3.0
browser is so close in both appearance and capability (and likely, code) that
it seems silly to keep them apart.

~~~
powertower
I do not associate the word "modern" with "mobile" at all (at least not in the
Windows OS / desktop browser market).

Though, falling over backwards trying to post something negative whenever
Microsoft is praised is associated with a few other things such as: zealotry,
lack of confidence, ignorance.

~~~
cryptoz
I am pleased with IE's changes and Microsoft's dedication to bring a better
web along. But I strongly disagree that this alone means that IE is now
"modern" because is so many other ways it is stuck in the past. It may be an
excellent browser (I don't know, my OS doesn't support it) and it may be the
fastest out there and it may be very standards compliant. But that definitely
doesn't automatically make it modern.

------
vecter
Props to Microsoft for

    
    
      1. Breaking compatibility with WinXP for performance gains.
      2. Not supporting non-finalized web standards.

~~~
MatthewPhillips
Actually I disagree with point #2 because their definition of "finalized" is
stuff that other browsers have done for 2 years.

Are we really going to have to wait another 2 years for cache.manifest,
geolocation, web fonts, web sockets, web workers, drag and drop (and many
other things that I can't think of off the top of my head)?

~~~
kenjackson
Why don't they just finalize these things and put MS's feet to the fire.

------
powertower
The IE blog is quite good and devoid of any marketing / bs:
<http://blogs.msdn.com/b/ie/>

------
AlexandrB
I'm currently a big fan of Chrome, but it sounds like IE might be finally
worth using. I can't wait to try it.

Also, it seems to me as though Microsoft, at their best, can do a really good
job with a product (see also Kinect, Windows Phone 7[1], Bing[2]). But then
there are the huge flops like Vista and Kin. It almost seems like what
Microsoft really lacks is someone who understands quality and can kill bad
projects before they are released. There are still great products being made
at Microsoft, but it's sometimes hard to see them past all the crap.

[1] Too bad about the update situation though.

[2] I realize Bing is bleeding money, but I think Bing is a well-designed
search engine in search of a sustainable business model.

~~~
superstructor
Generally in agreement - albeit a GNU/Linux, Android, iOS and Google user as I
still think those a superior to your respective examples.

The one product I'd point out your wrong about is Bing - its been proven very
clearly that they literally steal their search result rankings from Google by
crawling Google instead of running their own algorithms.

------
DjDarkman
> Though Windows XP's market share is declining on the back of strong
> corporate uptake of Windows 7, it's still the most common version of
> Windows. And it can't be used with Internet Explorer 9.

> The performance improvements made by the use of DirectWrite and Direct2D
> allow a new class of Web application to be developed.

Sorry it does not allow anything, IE9 won't make IE8,IE7 and IE6 magically go
away. Overall this whole article is pointless, it's just an IE9 praise
completely out of touch with reality.

~~~
superstructor
I've measured on large sites (millions of unique users) IE6 is less than 4% of
traffic. So I don't understand why people still hold it up as a problem. No
one cares about it anymore, even serious eCommerce sites have given up on that
4%.

IE9 being stable means a large number of users will upgrade. This allows
creating web applications with far more capabilities than was possible
previously with a large group receiving the best experience. IE7/8 can survive
the same content with progressive enhancement, feature detects, shims and so
forth.

The reality is IE9 greatly improves the browser landscape. Its a step forward.
Sure it might not be as good as Chrome/Safari/Firefox/Opera by a web
developers or power users standards and it may not be updated as often. But
the average windows user does not care about your opinion. None of the
available browsers are "modern" either. All have serious bugs and braindead
behavior in some way or another.

