
Busting IE8’s Mythbusting - noodle
http://www.geektechnica.com/2009/06/busting-ie8s-mythbusting/
======
snprbob86
First: I use Chrome. IE is an awful browser. IE8 is bearable. I think that the
advertising campaign that they are using for IE8 is disingenuous and
despicable. As a Microsoftie, I'm not proud of it. I'm going to let it slide
simply because I want as many people as possible to upgrade from IE 6 and 7. I
do, however, believe there are more honest ways to go about it.

I think people have found my defensive insight into Microsoft to be a valuable
perspective. Let's keep the streak going...

While the advertising teams have taken serious liberties, the engineering team
has been honest.

I can't find the source now, but I've heard that they were only aiming for CSS
2 support because CSS 3 is an unfinished draft:
<http://www.w3.org/Style/CSS/current-work>

Many people complained about broken standards, so Microsoft decided not to
ship a browser which map to unfinished standards. This would create future
compatability issues. I think that's a reasonable call considering the
critical mass of their browser which causes it to be a defacto standard.

This looks to be in line with independent findings which show IE8 has
fantastic CSS 2 support, but weak 3 support:
<http://www.quirksmode.org/css/contents.html>

Additionally, the IE team has made significant contributions to the W3C with
CSS 2.1 test cases: [http://blogs.msdn.com/ie/archive/2008/03/06/ie8-and-
css-2-1-...](http://blogs.msdn.com/ie/archive/2008/03/06/ie8-and-
css-2-1-testing.aspx)

~~~
cookiecaper
I wrote this on Reddit recently:

"It's about control, which leads back up to money.

"Windows is the default OS and IE the default browser. This is also why IE is
broken. Microsoft doesn't want IE to render the same as its contemporaries
because then you don't need to test on IE anymore, which means you don't need
Windows anymore.

"Microsoft controls things this way and it's been part of their corporate
philosophy for a long time -- Embrace, Extend, Extinguish. They make something
mostly compatible with the standard or competing product and then add
proprietary extensions or quirks, and their marketshare alone forces people to
take notice, and the hope is that eventually people will forget about the non-
IE stuff and not bother to test on it anymore, meaning that now things don't
work unless you have IE, meaning that you can't use the internet without
Windows. That doesn't happen as often with the internet anymore, but as most
of us know, it was quite successful for a pretty long time, and it's still
successful for many non-web technologies (see DirectX v. OpenGL, etc.).

"And while things are no longer panning out to complete MS dominance, IE still
plays a major role in defining what techs get on the web and what doesn't. For
instance, crappy HTML 5 support because HTML 5 harms Silverlight. This is all
intentional, don't fool yourself."

Not sure what you mean by "Microsoftie", but it'd be interesting to hear an MS
advocate's or employee's position on this.

~~~
netsp
_Microsoft doesn't want IE to render the same as its contemporaries because
then you don't need to test on IE anymore, which means you don't need Windows
anymore._

Are you implying MS are purposely breaking IE in order to sell Windows
licences to web developers? How many licenses exactly do you think are on the
line here?

~~~
bengtan
There's one here. I'm an Ubuntu user, but I have a paid copy of XP that I use
in VMWare so I can test IE6 & 7.

EDIT: But I'm probably an outlier.

~~~
ersi
You could try out "ie4linux" (unofficial, of course)
<http://www.tatanka.com.br/ies4linux/page/Main_Page>

I've heard it's nice, I think it's essential IE files and wine slapped into a
pretty package - but I've also heard/seen that you can have several versions
of IE for testing stuff out. Might.. be nice. I dunno.

~~~
bengtan
I do also use ies4linux. It's quite good for testing how IE handles CSS
layouts, but it doesn't render fonts the same way IE renders fonts on Windows
(presumably because the fonts available differ on Ubuntu).

------
billybob
The IE8 comparison is very misleading. They give IE checkmarks for "security,"
"privacy," and "ease of use," where Firefox and Chrome get none. What, so
Firefox and Chrome have ZERO security and privacy? Wow, thanks for warning me,
Microsoft!

The truth is that all three browsers have security and privacy features, which
are too complex to be reduced to a single checkmark. Firefox at least gives
some quantified argument on its pages: "An independent study shows that, in
2006, IE users were vulnerable to online threats 78% of the time. Firefox
users? Only 2%."

It's interesting that this comparison doesn't concede a single category. In
"performance," they say, "hey, let's call it a tie!" Actual timed measurements
of Javascript performance show that IE8 is WAY slower than the competition.

[http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/09/01/27/ie8s_javascrip...](http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/09/01/27/ie8s_javascript_performance_lags_well_behind_safari_chrome.html)

[http://service.futuremark.com/peacekeeper/browserStatistics....](http://service.futuremark.com/peacekeeper/browserStatistics.action)

Microsoft's browser comparison truly is deceptive. I'm glad they're moving
people away from IE6, but they're far from having the best browser our there.

~~~
bhrgunatha
_In "performance," they say, "hey, let's call it a tie!" Actual timed
measurements of Javascript performance show that IE8 is WAY slower than the
competition._

Plus neither of the links you posted tested Firefox 3.5 which has improved
javascript performance which implies IE8 slips further behind.

------
darshan
Complaint #1: _its_ is a possessive; _it's_ is a contraction for _it is_. (The
author kept using _its_ as if it meant _it is_.)

Complaint #2: The author kept using the form:

The Lie: <a summary of the author's opinion> The Truth: <an explanation of the
author's opinion>

That's messed up. The "lie" should be what he thinks Microsoft got wrong.

Complaint #3: The whole thing is just his opinions. It would be nice to link
to some actual benchmark results, for example, rather than just countering
Microsoft's "IE8 is the fastest" with "No it's not!"

Not worth reading.

~~~
billybob
Here's another test. Out of 10 browser versions tested, the only one that IE8
beat was IE7.

[http://service.futuremark.com/peacekeeper/browserStatistics....](http://service.futuremark.com/peacekeeper/browserStatistics.action)

~~~
rbanffy
That's unfair. It should be noted it also beats IE6.

~~~
rbanffy
But things may change as you do down the version ladder. I bet it is slower
than IE 2 or 3.

------
ralonso
As a long-time and primarily Windows user and developer, even though knowing
that they're false, I was interested in seeing these so-called "facts"
Microsoft has been spreading around about IE8 being busted in a clear, concise
and researched way.

...But as I opened the page, this came up:

"Windows 7 is the best Windows yet (unlike Vista) and IE8 is the best IE yet
(unlike IE6-7)."

Can't they be even more biased? Despite Vista having a bad launch, it was far
from being a bad OS and is, as of right now, extremely solid; IE6 and 7 were a
significant improvement over their predecessors.

I'm sorry to de-rail the topic.

~~~
youngian
Here's how I read that statement: IE6 and IE7 were only the "best IE yet" at
release due to how truly awful each previous incarnation was. IE7 is a lousy
browser, so calling it the "best IE yet" at the time was like saying that
chewing on tinfoil is more fun than chewing on rusty razor blades. It might be
an accurate statement, but it doesn't mean you're enjoying that tinfoil. IE8,
on the other hand, actually feels like a step (admittedly a smallish step) in
the right direction.

Similarly, Windows 7 is actually more _usable_ than previous Windows. Vista
was shinier than XP, and had a couple nice features like integrated search,
but there's a reason Dell had to start selling machines with XP licenses
again.

I think the author intended the statement to be something like this: that
Windows 7 and IE8 actually _deserve_ the title of "best ___ yet."

------
makecheck
What this says is that Microsoft is willing to be very deceptive about a free
product. But you can't blame them at all, it's just a web page. Even if this
deception actually has some demonstrated effect on browser market share, those
market share changes will be based on the personal decisions of people to
switch. It's not like Microsoft has gone and deleted everyone's IE7 and
Firefox installations without permission.

Remember that _any_ source of information should not be implicitly trusted.
[Trust me! ;) ] If an individual decides to believe Microsoft's statements
without doing any further research, and downloads and permanently switches to
IE8 based on lies, then it's that person's problem.

------
oomkiller
Lets be real here. MS's marketing lies does not make people want to use IE.
There are a few major reasons why people still use IE, and all of them are
marginally valid.

    
    
      Deployment tools for organizations
      That's what has always been used, why should I change?
      It's installed by default on Windows, and many users lack the knowledge that there IS something else, in addition to not knowing how to install that "something else."
    

The only way we can get rid of IE is to ensure that it is NOT distributed with
versions of Windows, providing deployment and security lock-down tools for
organizations, and educating the public about all of the options.

------
mtarnovan
Microsoft marketing has gone from uninspired and mildly disingenuous to
outright pathetic lies.

This should come to no surprise to anyone, they feel the heat building up from
multiple directions (the web slowly replacing the OS, apple gaining more and
more marketshare, oss quality steadily increasing, drastic measures imposed on
them by anti-monopoly organisations in the EU and many more). They face this
heat, as noted by multiple commenter above, with their usual
embrace/extend/extinguish tactic. Wonder if it will work on HTML5, the stakes
are unusually high on that one.

------
enra
I'm almost starting to think that this recent IE8 promotion and "facts" is
actually a clever marketing strategy.

Just releasing a poor or decent browser doesn't get that much mentions or
headlines - but with outrageous claims or even lies you get tenfold mentions
in blogosphere and media. It might not be a smart for Microsoft appear as
liars but hey, at least people know that IE8 is out.

~~~
zimbabwe
The media really doesn't care much for web browser competition. Blogs, do, but
the blogs that care are the ones read by people who already know IE is bad.

Microsoft isn't doing some clever targeting with this. It's pretty obvious
that they're going after ignorant people with an ignorant tactic, and let's
face it, they couldn't attract users any other way.

~~~
rbanffy
For them, the best way to attract users is to make OEMs bundle only Windows+IE
with computers they sell. Most people don't reinstall the OS or even know what
IE is.

Targeting smart people is seldom a smart strategy - they are not as numerous.

~~~
zimbabwe
Point. But I was talking about outside of bundling, since I figured it was a
given. I'm guessing Microsoft here is trying to retain that hold, at a time
when many people download Firefox or Chrome or Safari first thing on bootup.

~~~
rbanffy
They never engage competition on a level playfield - for them, it's a waste of
resources.

Bundling makes a lot of sense because they can deal with ten, at most, clients
and have a huge impact on just about every computer user on the planet.
Groklaw has an interesting piece on the probable reasons why Asus pulled the
plug on their ARM-based netbook and I guess this is their typical behaviour.

Want to bet the net MSN Live Messenger (or, will they call it "Bing
messenger"?) will make every search on the system default to Bing?

Playing fair is so strange to their corporate DNA it would provoke a violent
allergic reaction.

~~~
zimbabwe
Microsoft is stuck in a bad place. I don't doubt they've got some brilliant
people working for them, but they made a bunch of tasteless products and now
they can't even scrap it all and start again because they have to offer
support for all the crap they've made. So they take the only viable path,
which is continuing to force crap into crap and making everybody unhappy.

~~~
rbanffy
Not everybody.

I won't let them ruin my day.

