IE8 Beta Released To Public

Tim writes "English, German, Simplified Chinese, and Japanese versions of Internet Explorer 8 have been released for public beta. New features include accelerators, which provide instant context menu access for a number of common tasks; automatic crash recovery, which prevents a single page's failures from taking down your entire browser; and browser privacy, a feature that didn't make Firefox 3. I'm primarily a Firefox user, and I've been using IE8 at work (MS) for the past few weeks. It's a definite improvement over previous versions, and brings a lot to the table that Firefox requires extensions for. Give it a spin, submit feedback, and help keep all browser makers on their toes by facing each other's competition."

Comments

Shows what competion can do.

[xzvf]

While IE8 doesn't work on my chosen platform, it shows again how open source sparks development in stagnant environments. This product would never have happened without Firefox.

Re:Shows what competion can do.

[Bashae]

Yup, I'm wondering why the beta is available in german rather than a language with more speakers, such as spanish. Are they perhaps trying to win back the notoriously large amount of Firefox users in Germany?

Re:Shows what competion can do.

[Anonymous Coward]

I believe that German was chosen over Spanish for the betas because it's the second-most popular spoken language for programmers (at least, it used to be; I'm not too sure anymore). They cover the top two for debuggers out there, and then also include packages for Chinese and Japanese to test the character rendering and what-not.

Re:Shows what competion can do.

[Swizec]

If that were the case then it would've been offered in Slovenian ... we use firefox quite extensively.

Re:Shows what competion can do.

[naylor83]

Yep, it's kind of mind-boggling what the Firefox team has accomplished indirectly.

Re:Shows what competion can do.

[will_die]

According to the European and thier language report German is the 2nd highest known language in the EU at 32% of the population speaking the language. Spanish is at 15% and is 5th.
For the top 5 it is:
English 51%
German 32%
French 26%
Italian 16%
Spanish 15%

Also by mother tounue German is at 18% and Spanish is at 9%

Re:Shows what competion can do.

[eggoeater]

Germany has the largest economy in continental Europe.

Re:Shows what competion can do.

[shird]

What makes you think those people seeking an alternative browser wouldn't have chosen Opera instead? (not open source, and frankly much better than both FF and IE IMHO).

Yes FF has a bigger market share than Opera, but Opera may have had that share if FF didn't exist, prompting MS to take the same action.

Re:Shows what competion can do.

[TheP4st]

Native Spanish speaking population in the world 330 million
Native German speaking population in the world 100 million

Re:Shows what competion can do.

[nhstar]

Opera is a good choice, and a fine browser. And it is still, hands-down best for testing standards compliance (in my humble opinion).

The only real fault they made at getting market share was waiting as long as they did before making it available for free. I don't pretend to know the finer-points of their business model, or Mozilla's for that matter, but people saw two browsers available gratis and one where you paid $35us (if i remember right...). If you could buy a Porsche or or have a VW, which would you be driving?

Re:Shows what competion can do.

[jorx]

Opera wasn't free until Firefox existed... so, there's that...

Re:Shows what competion can do.

[MobyDisk]

In that case, they would have released it in Klingon. Everyone who I know who speaks even a small amount of Klingon, uses Firefox.

Re:Shows what competion can do.

[GIL_Dude]

Actually almost all Microsoft Beta code is available in the same languages at first - English, German, Japanese, and sometimes Simplified Chinese. The thing is that they are trying for coverage of the code to make sure localizations fit dialogs, etc. For example, of the languages that use an English like character set (what is it called, Roman or whatever), German tends to have the longest words / phrases. So by covering German they find out whether all of the localizations are going to fit in the space provided. In a similar way, by covering Japanese (and in this case Simplified Chinese) they are covering localizations in non-Roman character sets. Its really not about the number of users / speakers - its about the coverage of testing on the localizations and getting them to fit properly.

Re:Shows what competion can do.

[laejoh]

It's an insider joke: Die IE8, Die IE8!

Re:Shows what competion can do.

[duffbeer703]

How many Germans use a computer every day?

How many Mexicans, Columbians and Venezuelans use a computer every day?

Re:Shows what competion can do.

[Beezlebub33]

Spanish is at 15% and is 5th.

That's in the EU. Off the top of my head I would say it's second (possibly first) in North America, and certainly first in South America.

I don't think so on the last one. Around 50% of the population of South America is in Brazil, and for them it's Portuguese (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_america). If you look at the statistics for internet users in South America, it's going to be Portuguese as well.

Re:Shows what competion can do.

[FredFredrickson]

Two words: Mouse Gestures. Cannot browse without it.

Re:Shows what competion can do.

[psychodelicacy]

But the bulk of that figure for Spanish is made up of people living in Latin America, where studies suggest only a relatively small percentage of the population uses the internet. Cuba has only recently begun allowing PCs in private homes. Some countries in Latin America have less than 3% of the population using the internet; Germany has over 40% (Data refers to years 2004-06; Source) Personal computer ownership per 100 is generally much lower than internet usage per 100 in Latin America, suggesting that this is also a market that can't necessarily choose which software is installed on the computers used.

So, in terms of numbers there are certainly more Spanish-speakers out there using the internet, but a lot of them are in situations where internet usage is rationed and/or not entirely under the user's control. In contrast, Germany has a high rate of internet usage and a high take-up of Firefox - and most users are probably using their own machines, not internet cafes or the like. The figures don't, at first, seem to make sense, but when you take into account the low rates of internet usage and computer ownership in the majority of Spanish-speaking countries, it begins to seem less anomalous.

Re:Shows what competion can do.

[limaxray]

German is actually the second most communicated language, right after English. This directly translates to the fact that German is the second most common language on the internet. Granted, most of it is probably porn, but never the less it means more German speaking people would use IE8 than most other language speakers. Why is this? Because Germany has by far one of the strongest economies in the world (3rd behind the US and Japan) and thus can afford greater internet access. Actually, funny thing is the top four economies in the world are the US, Japan, Germany, and China; native speakers of the same four language released.

Spanish, on the other hand, while spoken by many in the real world, isn't nearly as common in the information world.

Re:Shows what competion can do.

[Aedrin]

This has been questioned before. Their simple response was that German provided more unique wording situations that may or may not work in the UI. So it's completely about testing coverage, not winback opportunities.

Re:Shows what competion can do.

[jrumney]

Microsoft has long had a policy of translating into German and Japanese first. German words tend to be longer than other languages (except perhaps Dutch) so translation into German catches problems where text overflows the space allocated for it on the screen, and Japanese catches all the stupid character==byte assumptions that programmers make. I'm not sure why they don't do Arabic early as well to flush out left to right assumptions (also affecting Hebrew) and assumptions that characters have a one to one relationship with glyphs (also affecting Indian and South East Asian scripts).

Re:Shows what competion can do.

[pcolaman]

They primarily speak Portuguese, not Spanish.

Re:Shows what competion can do.

[Insanity Defense]

dont forget brazil!

Why not? Brazil's language is Portuguese not Spanish.

Re:Shows what competion can do.

[ColdWetDog]

You come off as an angry 14-year-old who hasn't the faintest clue what's going on.

Maybe he is a 14-year old who hasn't the faintest clue what's going on, you insensitive clod.

Re:Shows what competion can do.

[Yvan256]

Don't attribute all the credits to Firefox alone. Apple has been pushing Safari a lot lately and Opera aren't just sitting around, Opera is improving a lot too.

Re:Shows what competion can do.

[Hyppy]

Hey dude. If you're going to talk smack about a politician's lack of knowledge, you might try to spell "than" properly. You come off as an angry 14-year-old who hasn't the faintest clue what's going on.

How about a couple of facts?

1) GP's author is not a native English speaker.
2) I don't see "than" or "then" anywhere in the GP.
3) I have yet to see someone in this thread "talk smack" about any politician.

If you're going to burn karma, at least make it worth it. Perhaps, try replying to the correct post. Otherwise, you come off as an angry 14-year-old who hasn't the faintest clue what's going on.

Re:Shows what competion can do.

[whoisjoe]

I use Firefox, but I only know how to swear in Klingon.

Re:Shows what competion can do.

[Hyppy]

much like 'axe'/'ax' instead of 'ask

So, in your observation, citizens of the United States speak African American Vernacular English?

Re:Shows what competion can do.

[rocketPack]

I think my dad is at home right now, why? Or did you mean, "Wer is ihr Vater?"

Re:Shows what competion can do.

[Chelloveck]

I'm wondering why the beta is available in german rather than a language with more speakers, such as spanish.

I have no inside knowledge of IE8, but I've worked on other localized products before. It's quite likely that the German translators were done, but the Spanish translators were still working on it. In other words, it may not have really been a conscious choice by MS to include German but not Spanish, just an artifact of the translators' schedules.

Re:Shows what competion can do.

[AmberBlackCat]

And Firefox would never have happened without earlier versions of IE.

Re:Shows what competion can do.

[T-Bone-T]

People don't get Opera because there are free alternatives that don't have ads. Which would most people use: a free, ad-supported browser or the free and ad-free browser that came with their computer? People are stupid but they aren't that stupid.

Re:Shows what competion can do.

[MobyDisk]

That's half the language. If you study the Klingon learning tapes, that is the first thing they teach you.

Re:Shows what competion can do.

[pcolaman]

You do that. I want a 10 page report by tomorrow :p

Re:Shows what competion can do.

[eugene ts wong]

A spelling Nazi that actually speaks German? Wow...

Standards-complient or not?

[tomandlu]

I assume yes. Call me naive, but I suspect MS know that they have more to lose by breaking web standards. Basically, they can't get away with that sh*t anymore - at least as far as the web goes. The average user is probably no wiser, but there are enough special interest groups to keep an eye on them in this area.

Re:Standards-complient or not?

[ByOhTek]

languages change over time, word shift meaning. New words come in, old words go out.

If you want to complain about this, let me ask you, do you ever use the word 'nice'? Check the entomology on it and revert to using in it's original form only please.

Re:Standards-complient or not?

[Khuffie]

According to Ars Technica, sites with proper HTML information will display in standards mode, and sites without will not. There's a button at the bottom that allows you to switch between the two. I have to say, I like IE8. It won't make me switch from Opera, but it's much speedier to use than IE7, and I'll probably find myself using it instead of Firefox whenever I come across a website that doesn't work in Opera. (Which is rare, and whenever that happens and I launch Firefox, it prompts me if I want to update, which gets annoying).

Re:Standards-complient or not?

[ShieldW0lf]

Developers, Developers, Developers.

Developers have moved on. IE is one of those things you test for once you've finished your work in Firefox.

This private browsing thing, if it wasn't a closed source application from a group that has a history of co-operating with US intelligence gathering organizations, might be vaguely interesting.

But the circumstances being what they are, it strikes me as a way to help the overstaffed NSA by red flagging your most sensitive items for their attention.

Re:Standards-complient or not?

[Metasquares]

I was going to ask what the root of the word "nice" had to do with the study of insects, but I guess that proves your point. :)

Re:Standards-complient or not?

[ByOhTek]

DAMNIT

I didn't mean entomology, I meant etymology...

But, using both the original and current meaning, that was a nice error...

Re:Standards-complient or not?

[wwahammy]

It passes the ACID 2 test on its default settings. I'm using it right now in fact (I like the IE RSS reader) and it actually renders Slashdot correctly. IE7 has been a disaster for the last few months on Slashdot. Not sure what changed but it didn't work at all.

Is it compliant with every single standard Firefox is? No. CSS Selectors I know is an area that still isn't up the standard. It is a lot closer than IE7 is though.

Re:Standards-complient or not?

[JasterBobaMereel]

So IE8 is less broken, less CPU/Memory hungry, and more "standards compliant" than IE7 .... but if it is still slow, power hungry, and breaks pages then it's not for me thank you ...

Re:Standards-complient or not?

[ShieldW0lf]

Nonsense. IE remains the majority browser. Developers who want to actually produce a product that works correctly for the majority of users target IE first (because Firefox usually does the right thing when dealing with IE-isms, and IE-isms are easier to undo to target Firefox than vice versa).

No, developers use Firefox to do their development. Why? Because of extensions like Web Developer and Firebug and YSlow and Selenium and Firecookie and FirePHP and Venkman. To name a few.

The fact that Firefox is also highly standards compliant is a bonus.

After you've used all these tools to get your application working properly, that's when you check it out in IE and see if there are any problems that need further attention.

As for the whole trustworthiness angle, well, call it FUD if you want. It's easy enough to submit code for independent critical review. When organizations don't choose to do so, the uncertainty and doubt that remains is real and intentionally created. Personally, I don't use MS products any more for anything outside of testing my web apps in IE, and have no intention of ever doing so again. I do not choose to trust them.

Re:Standards-complient or not?

[ByOhTek]

You know what, screw this stuff. I'm just gonna fast forward a few thousand/millon years...

Ogun tugle morf korblit anizag norple.

Excellent feature...

[HetMes]

..that will definitely be craved by many Slashdot users, and not because of the gift shopping or use of public terminals. Question is how long it will take before Firefox sees its market share diminish because of this feature, and, consequently, how long it will take Firefox to include it in an update.

Re:Excellent feature...

[bigstrat2003]

Excellent feature that will definitely be craved by many Slashdot users, and not because of the gift shopping or use of public terminals.

Nah, we have no girlfriends or wives to hide our porn browsing from. We wear our pr0n history like a badge of honor.

Re:Excellent feature...

[pizzach]

..that will definitely be craved by many Slashdot users, and not because of the gift shopping or use of public terminals. Question is how long it will take before Firefox sees its market share diminish because of this feature, and, consequently, how long it will take Firefox to include it in an update.

Considering that private browsing appears to already be included with 3.1 and the betas were around Sept 9th the last time I checked, I don't think the Moz folks are quaking in their boots yet. The feature is likely to hit both browsers roughtly at the same time.

http://ostatic.com/168982-blog/are-you-ready-for-firefox-3-1

Re:Oh, I'd like a version

[tomandlu]

You want MS to provide a linux version so that you can either state your intent to never install it, or so that you can sh*t on it? I'm sure they'll get right on that...

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Browser privacy

[LiquidCoooled]

I wonder how the browser privacy feature will work regarding external content from sites:

flash files store preferences outside of explorers' reach.
java applets get placed outside of the cache.
movies files play outside of ie.
pdfs might open outside.
word documents listed in word recent files list.

theres many more programs and protocols which would leave tracks.

people expecting privacy mode to actually keep things private are going to be in for a BIG shock.

good luck

Re:Browser privacy

[morgan_greywolf]

Use Opera Portable. It obliterates (erases AND overwrites) any and all signs of your activity when you exit. And it's had that feature for several years. Perfect for visiting internet cafes or libraries.

Re:Browser privacy

[GeckoAddict]

I wouldn't count on this new feature to do much of anything... an article from FoxNews says the following scary line:

Although casual users cannot see the previous user's search history, authorities such as the police will be able to access it if necessary.

Kind of makes it seem like it's still stored somewhere, and while I don't know how the data is stored, I can't imagine it will take too long to figure out how to view the history of others.
Also interesting is that people at MS apparently nicknamed it 'Porn Mode'.

Re:Browser privacy

[SanityInAnarchy]

Perfect for visiting internet cafes or libraries.

Only if you're not particularly paranoid. Let's look at this again:

It obliterates (erases AND overwrites) any and all signs of your activity when you exit.

That implies both that you actually exit, and that you're actually running an unmodified version of Opera Portable. It also assumes that the host filesystem is actually overwriting the same blocks... and a few other things.

It also implies that you haven't already been pwned by something as simple as a keylogger.

So, better than nothing, but you've got to figure that whatever you do on a public terminal is public knowledge. Any attempt to prevent that is playing an arms race that you will lose.

Re:Browser privacy

[sootman]

Also interesting is that people at MS apparently nicknamed it 'Porn Mode'.

Those crafty Microsoftians, always innovating! Only 3 years behind this time... I think that's a new record! *rolls eyes*

Extensions are bad?

[Cryophallion]

and brings a lot to the table that Firefox requires extensions for

You say that like it is a bad thing. I prefer the use of extensions for my browser, instead of the bloatware that tends to happen. What if I don't care about privacy? I don't need that installed then. I like that I can choose the features I want, instead of having everything thrown in there.

Also, extensions have a great benefit with regards to updates. they can be updated at any time, and therefore don't have to wait on a new browser update for tweaking things and adding functionality. They also allow me to leave an extension that I don't want to update as is while still being able to update the browser (and possibly its security).

This is not to say that Firefox is not getting large, or that microsoft is not trying to assist people who don't have the savvy to look for extensions. I'm just saying extensions have a lot of benefits, and can be a very important tool.

Re:Extensions are bad?

[houghi]

What Firefox could do is add the most used extensions in by default. That way tech savy people can still do whatever they like, while people who do not know how to get extentions, still will be able to have the functionality.

Best of both worlds. And if bandwith download is an issue for you, then perhaps you should not download Firefox in the first place.

Re:Extensions are bad?

[mdwh2]

It's not that extensions are bad, it's just more of a hassle if the functionality is not included as standard.

It's one reason I can't be bothered to try switching from Opera. Sure, I've downloaded Firefox, but I don't have to time to try to hunt down all the extensions to replicate Opera's standard functionality, and wonder if each extension is the one I want.

This is even more of an issue if you are trying to persuade a random non-geek user to switch from IE - you can't say "Go to this link", instead you have to say "Go here, then install it, then go here, here and here, and install all those things". For now, Firefox has done well because its standard features are still better than IE (and the extra standard features of Opera do not seem to be known by as many people). But you can't expect an average user to grapple with trying to hunt down extensions, just to replicate what'll be standard behaviour in IE.

As for bloatware, you need to compare real world filesizes. Last time I checked, Opera was still smaller than Firefox (even without any extensions), though I haven't checked the current sizes.

Re:Extensions are bad?

[nmg196]

> You say that like it is a bad thing.

It *is* a bad thing. Usually built in features work - extensions in my experience, often don't and can easily be incompatible with each other.

I've only got a handful of extensions (5) installed and Firefox 3 crashes about 12 times a week according to the logs. According to the same logs, IE has only crashed twice EVER since I built the machine 6 months ago and I use it almost as often (I'm a web developer).

I think it's the extension-heavy approach which makes Firefox the least stable piece of software I've ever used. I doubt it crashes if you don't install any extensions. More basic features should be built in in my opinion - so you don't need to install an extension to get an extremely rudimentary feature like a close button on each tab.

Re:Extensions are bad?

[Cryophallion]

Interesting. Let's take a slightly deeper look, by looking at the most popular add-ons, and see if most non-savvy people would want them:

1.Ad-block plus - Users might like it, but people running the sites and companies would absolutely hate it. Get ready for a huge backlash on enabling this one in the base package.

2. DownloadHelper - Again, users may like it, but the people running the video sites would be fuming. As would people who do simple paid-for web tutorials, who would have everyone able to get their stuff extremely easily. Once again, good size backlash. This also has features that may need to be updated more frequently, such as when embedding code changes or something on the popular sites changes.

3. No-Script - I don't know if this would really help most non-savvy users, as they wouldn't understand why many more popular sites won't work that well, not to mention all the ajax-y things they'd miss.

4. Download-them-all - May be a good thing to implement (along with Download Status bar, a personal favorite). I'm not sure how many people would use its benefits though, but this one is a serious contender.

5. Flashgot (See Download Helper)

6. Firebug - No real use to non-savvy people.

7. Fast-video Download - See Download Helper

8. Cooliris - Cool, but no real functionality. Of course, Compiz, Widgets, Apples, etc all live off of cool, but I don't think this should be standard, especially since it is windows only.

9. IE Tab - Very nice for people who still stubbornly make IE specific sites, but still windows only.

10. Colorful tabs - cute, but not really functional. Might be a nice option though.

So, of the top 10, only one could really have a good argument made for it being in the base package. I actually think Mozilla does a pretty good job finding the middle ground of stuff to keep in the base, and stuff to have as extensions, and that helps keep the energy where they think it should be, instead of focusing on little segments.

I might add that I like extensions also since they can add new functionality before a new version comes out.

And if bandwith download is an issue for you, then perhaps you should not download Firefox in the first place.

Isn't Firefox smaller in download size than IE?

Re:Extensions are bad?

[Cryophallion]

Out of curiosity, what extensions are you using? I have around 7 or 8 depending on computer, and I've had no crashes. As always, people's problems vary, but I'm curious as to what may be crashing you.

As for the most popular extensions, such as downloadhelper, firebug, etc, those tend to be pretty darn reliable, which may be due to many bug reports, the open source concept of helping out with fixes, or because people tend to use things that work, but I have had very few problems.

On the other hand, I've had VERY bad luck with active-X "extensions" in IE, and even when not allowing ActiveX, I crash more with IE.

On another note, is it the sites you are working on that tend to crash, or basic browsing? Maybe IE is more forgiving of code you are still working on and may have forgotten a curly brace or two?

Re:Extensions are bad?

[Rynor]

I also only use a few extensions, but as far as I know they haven't caused a single crash yet.

Most of the crashes I experience are due to Flash, and even that doesn't come close to crashing 12 times a week.

Press the button and protect your privacy ....

[Cyberurchin]

> and browser privacy, a feature that didn't make

Yeah, but the user has to turn it on .... Press the button, enter "InPrivateBrowsing" and your privacy is protected .... Kind of silly. Shouldn't such a feature be activated in the first place? And then, when the application requires the long-term cookies or you want a history, you turn off certain parts of it?

Re:Press the button and protect your privacy ....

[Apple Acolyte]

If private browsing were on by default, then everyone other than /. geeks would think their browsers were dysfunctional for not saving login cookies and whatnot.

Re:Press the button and protect your privacy ....

[somersault]

Considering a lot of people will just be wanting to browse at work or whatever and be able to easily find things in the history, I don't see why it should be on by default. Isn't 'browser privacy' basically just a way of hiding your pr0n-browsing history?

What is really worrying is...

[Pvt_Ryan]

timesonline.co.uk Writes:

Once the setting is chosen, others using the same computer will not be able to see which sites have been accessed. Other browsers have similar functions, but this one is far more prominent. Although casual users cannot see the previous user's search history, authorities such as the police will be able to access it if necessary.

So basically the data still exists, just people who nothing will not be able to see it, I knew we were wrong in all those security model that try and keep the experts out. It's really Joe "average" Blogs we should have been protecting against all this time.. DOH!!!

I'll definitely be surrendering Firefox for IE now..

Re:What is really worrying is...

[LiquidCoooled]

I believe they are talking about the logs kept by the ISP rather than anything stored on the machine itself.

Its currently the same situation for users who delete their own history, its gone from the local machine, but that does not mean it was not logged elsewhere.

indeed.

[apodyopsis]

It's a definite improvement over previous versions, and brings a lot to the table that Firefox requires extensions for.

That may be true. But given the speed that developments and innovations get put into FF and the general convenience of the plugin system I think I'll stage with the Fox. If there is anything amazingly good and useful you can be sure we'll all have it very soon indeed.

Re:Microsoft Does Not Deserve Another Chance

[Bashae]

You don't have to go back if you don't want to, but there are many people still using IE, and it would be easier to write websites if every single bit of JS or CSS didn't have to have a workaround for it. If IE8 brings us one step closer to that dream, then I welcome it with open arms! Even if I'm not ever going to use it.

Re:Oh, I'd like a version

[morgan_greywolf]

You want MS to provide a linux version so that you can either state your intent to never install it, or so that you can sh*t on it? I'm sure they'll get right on that...

No need to wait for MS to do that. I'm sure this will be in ies4linux eventually, thanks to Sérgio. Want it sooner? Donate time or money to either ies4linux or to Wine. Or both.

Thoughts

[Max Romantschuk]

New versions of IE is a Good Thing... Competition is good with something like browsers.

For the average Joe having features which normally require extensions just be there is probably a good thing. Perhaps Firefox should have the option to enabling a set of officially sanctioned extensions while installing? Bloating is not the solution, but checking the "enable feature X" checkbox beats searching for the actually good ones...

Private browsing is a two-sided thing. It's a good feature, but sort of pointless if you actually want to store bookmarks of things like your favorite naughty sites... I run two Firefox profiles personally. Unfortunately it's a bit difficult to set up, but I get the best of both worlds.

Re:Thoughts

[Chapter80]

Many will disagree, but I feel the solution to this is to have "distributions", much like the distros of Linux.

Imagine being able to download from the official Firefox site such distributions as:

• Firefox Standard
• Firefox Lite
• Firefox for developers
• Firefox with Taco's favorite extensions
• Firefox for teens
• etc.

Re:I tested it

[MyLongNickName]

Why? Did you find a gaping security hole?

Crash recovery...

[HappySmileMan]

Sounds like a great feature, I can't try IE8 since I'm on Linux, but from the descriptions I've read of it, it seems like they're doing something right this time instead of just jacking up the release number.

I can't believe I'm actually sitting here hoping that Firefox will copy a feature from IE. Good game, Microsoft.

Re:Crash recovery...

[Dude McDude]

Implementing a feature Opera has had for years, now that's what I call innovation.

Opera doesn't recover tabs. If a webpage crashes it takes Opera down with it. IE8's crash handling gracefully closes/reopens the offending tab without having to close the browser.

Re:Oh, I'd like a version

[Gavagai80]

Lots of linux users would like to have IE, because we need to test websites in it. I have the wine versions of IE6 and IE7, but they're extremely slow and mostly broken, so a version from Microsoft would be great. And if it turned out to be the better browser, of course, I'd use it regularly.

Reboot

[QuietLagoon]

Do you still have to reboot after installing the IE8 application?

Re:Reboot

[Dude McDude]

I was prompted to reboot once it was installed.

Re:Crap...

[daveime]

So not like Firefox 2 then, which has upgraded itself no less than 16 times on my PC here ? Firefox pushes out beta stuff too, then try to cover it with automatic patches. But they're OSS, so that makes it okay ...

Took it for a whirl and discovered, 30 seconds...

[Assmasher]

...later that the link option "Open in New Window" doesn't appear to function anymore. Well done Microsoft.

Lots of IT/Legal Depts. won't like InPrivate

[Jumperalex]

What I'm really curious to see, and I can only assume it will be there, is if they also include the ability to LOCK-OUT the InPrivate feature. Many corporate (and especially government) IT/legal departments excplicitly WANT your browsing to be tracked. Sure I can go in and delete stuff manually (except when I am not given permissions to access that folder ... which I'm not) but right now all of our standard desktop configurations prevent you from clicking the "clear private data" button.

So not only are the advertisers (as I've read elsewhere) possibly not going to like this feature, but many corp/gov types won't install it until/unless they can excplicitly prevent its use.

Re:Lots of IT/Legal Depts. won't like InPrivate

[Hanners1979]

I'd fully expect all of that those kind of settings to be available via Group Policy, you've been able to configure most of IE's major settings across your network that way for some time now.

Re:Lots of IT/Legal Depts. won't like InPrivate

[Jellybob]

Any IT department that *really* wants your browsing history is going to route any traffic on port 80 through a proxy, so they can get reports on what you've been doing from one central location, instead of having to trawl through every user's history. The InPrivate feature isn't going to stop that being possible, so IT departments are fine.

Re:Lots of IT/Legal Depts. won't like InPrivate

[hab136]

many corp/gov types won't install it until/unless they can excplicitly prevent its use.

They don't have to do anything to the desktop - they can just look at their proxy/firewall/router logs. Your choice of browser does nothing to stop corporate tracking/filtering.

Re:Oh, I'd like a version

[dotancohen]

You want MS to provide a linux version so that you can either state your intent to never install it, or so that you can sh*t on it? I'm sure they'll get right on that...

That's short sighted.

I would try IE8 if it ran on my platform of choice, which happens to be Kubuntu. If IE won't run on it, I won't try it. IE8 might be the best browser since Amaya, but if it won't run on my system, I won't try it.

Not all Linux users hate Microsoft or are FOSS zealots. Most of us just love Linux. We are open to trying MS products, and when MS creates a better product than Linux||Firefox then we will use it. I only wish that MS Office 2007 would run on Linux, I would pay for it and use it in a heartbeat. But I am not about to use MS's bloated, insecure operating system to get it.

Automatic crash recovery sounds interesting

[hcdejong]

but does it also prevent tabs from hogging resources (e.g. in Firefox, where an applet loading in one tab can lock the entire application).

Re:Automatic crash recovery sounds interesting

[blueZ3]

Yep, that's my one beef with FF.

I use FF for basic browsing (without many extensions) and I mostly think it's great. Rarely crashes, renders most sites fine, etc.

But I really, really don't like the apparently single-threadedness. Each tab should be its own thread, IMO, so that when one tab is busy with some random java applet, the others are still getting enough CPU slices to actually be usable.

Another time you get this behavior is when you open multiple tabs one right after the other. The tab you are viewing slows to a crawl while content is loaded in the other tabs.

I'm not saying this is better in Opera/IE/Safari/Lynx, but I'd really like to see this fixed.

Running multiple versions of IE

[Jason Levine]

Now if they would only give us some way of running multiple versions of IE side by side. There are still a lot of people using IE6, so I need to test sites against that. But I can't if I upgrade to IE7. And if I upgrade to IE8, I can't test against IE7 or IE6. We need a standalone version of IE6 for web developers to use for website testing. The time limited VM that they provide is a start, but I don't want to boot up an entire VM of Windows just to test one page.

Re:Running multiple versions of IE

[Dude McDude]

And if I upgrade to IE8, I can't test against IE7 or IE6.

You should be able to test against IE7 using IE8's compatibility mode

Re:Running multiple versions of IE

[Anonymous Coward]

You're looking for IE Tester.
It does pretty much what you describe, and even goes back to IE5.5.

Re:Running multiple versions of IE

[lawndart]

http://tredosoft.com/Multiple_IE

Multiple IE works for me, as long as you aren't on Vista. I have all the IE versions back to 5 running.

Re:Running multiple versions of IE

[eddy the lip]

Everyone's posting this, but you've got the current high-score ;) I've used Multiple IE, and it mostly works, but I've run into a few issues. One is the recent forced-upgrade to Vista, which Multiple IE doesn't run on (yet), so I can't use it on my main dev box. I still have an XP machine around, but I've come across some weird issues there as well. One has either something to do with cookies or forwarding, which makes even logging in to some online apps impossible. Testing against IE6 on a virtual image of XP there's no such problem. Cost me a morning of headaches yesterday, though, before I gave up trying to fix it and re-installed the image from MS (stupid time limited image.) I applaud TredoSoft for the effort, but those edge cases can be a bitch.

Re:Running multiple versions of IE

[Bogtha]

No, using IE8's compatibility mode means you are testing against IE8's compatibility mode. Sure, in theory it will behave identically to IE7, but testing is not a theoretical exercise, you need to know how IE7 actually behaves.

Re:Took it for a whirl and discovered, 30 seconds.

[Ma8thew]

I think that's why they call it a beta.

Re:Is Microsoft trying to hurt Google? Yes

[walterbyrd]

Msie, apparently, has a firefox like drop-down box of search engines, and wikipedia, etc. But the msie drop-down menu does not include google. Ouuu what a burn! Also, if you highlight a street address, msie will take you to msft maps, not google maps.

Just one more reason to use firefox instead of msie. BTW: according to the same article, firefox installed base is up 6% to 19% while msie fell 6% to 73% of the installed base, or something like that.

http://www.forbes.com/technology/2008/08/27/microsoft-google-browsers-cx_vmb_0827ie.html?feed=rss_technology

Okaaaaaaaaayy...

[ChrisMP1]

Now you can shop for that special gift with confidence knowing your family won't accidentally find out.

Yeah, that's what "InPrivate Browsing" is gonna be used for.

Re:Oh, I'd like a version

[antimatter15]

Don't Firefox, Mozilla, Epiphany, and Galeon all use the Gecko rendering engine? What's the point if they all render the exact same? I understand that as a web developer, it would be useful to test on Opera, Safari, IE and Firefox, but not on the same rendering engine

Loop de loop?

[I cant believe its n]

If one or more of your tabs do crash, your tabs are automatically reloaded and you are returned to whatever page you were on before the crash.

Sounds like a loop to me, unless the crash happened due to random memory corruption in IE? I could be missing some common error that can happend to browsers so please correct me and I'll learn something.
---
When I made the switch to FF, initially I just prefered the look and feel of the browser. First thing I liked about it, was that the adress field was pre selected when you started it. In IE you had to use the mouse. This was just a small difference, but when you have loads of these little differences, where someone has really taken their time with the details researching what comes natural to the user, at least it was clear to me that FF was the way to go.

How about you?

new features not in Firefox ..

[rs232]

"New features include .. automatic crash recovery .. and browser privacy, a feature that didn't make Firefox 3"

What's tools->clear private data .. 'Always clear my private data when I close Firefox'

and .. why does Firefox prompt me with:

Firefix - Restore Previous Session

Your last Firefox session closed unexpectedly. YOu can restore the tabs and windows from your previous sessions, or start a new session if you think the problem was related to a page you were viewing.

| Restore Session | | Start New Session |

Re:new features not in Firefox ..

[et764]

Your last Firefox session closed unexpectedly. YOu can restore the tabs and windows from your previous sessions, or start a new session if you think the problem was related to a page you were viewing.

Ahh, you haven't actually seen IE8's automatic crash recovery feature then. Each of the tabs are isolated from each other, so if one tab crashes it doesn't take down the whole browser. The tab just goes away and then pops back up with a message saying IE recovered the tab. It's definitely not the same thing as "Restore Previous Session."

Re:new features not in Firefox ..

[anaesthetica]

I think this is one of the most exciting features, on a purely geeky level. I can't profess to know how Microsoft engineered this, but it reminds me of the move that operating systems made to protected memory. We used to have to deal with situations in which one application's crash would take down the entire operating system and all other applications with it (Mac OS 9, I'm looking at you).

Now that the web browser metaphor has changed from "windows reading static documents" to "tabbed window with multiple web applications," the similarity to an operating system has become much clearer. A crash in one tab (application) can take down the entire browser (operating system). IE8 seems to be moving toward a protected memory model, which is a major step forward in rethinking how the browser's handling of web pages (i.e. web applications) is engineered.

I'm a Mac user and Firefox user, but I have to give credit where credit is due and say that, on the technical side of things, Microsoft is the one pushing the envelope on this score and getting the geeky things right.

Re:new features not in Firefox ..

[et764]

I can't profess to know how Microsoft engineered this

Here's a blog post from the IE team that describes how the feature works, if you're interested in more. Basically, it creates a couple different processes, which are all separate from the main UI frame. This means one process can crash, bringing down all the tabs in that process, but the rest are unaffected.

I agree, I think it's a pretty exciting feature. It almost makes crashing your browser an enjoyable experience. (I managed to crash a tab when I installed the Adobe SVG plugin to see if I could get another point or two on the Acid3 test).

One negative side effect of this is that there is some overhead in creating new processes. This will probably lead to Slashdot complaining about how much memory IE uses and how bloated it is, but personally, I find the reliability gains worth it. Another positive side effect though is that it isolates the Javascript interpreters from each other, which keeps one misbehaving page from locking up the whole browser.

Re: your wifes browser .. :)

[rs232]

"I never quite undershood how any firefox user thinks it's normal that you'd have to get extentions to do so many simple tasks .."

Yea, selecting 'Tools->add-ons->Get Extensions' is so much more complicated .. :)

'I love when firefox gets updated, and she says "Well we just got (x new feature)". And I can reply, "About time, I've been using that for a year now."'

What 'features' are you refering to that have been around now for a year, apart from 'automatic crash recovery' and 'browser privacy' ?

Personally, I never needed to discuss browser 'features' across the breakfast table . .:)

So what?

[Viol8]

The number of hindi speakers is probably 4 times that.

They don't release to the largest markets but the most useful ones for testing.

Besides , lets be honest - the spanish speaking world isn't exactly renowned for its cutting edge expanding IT industry.

Re:So what?

[jrumney]

The number of hindi speakers is probably 4 times that.

It's about 1.1 times that actually, there's almost the same gap between Hindi and Spanish as there is between native Spanish and English speakers. Mandarin on the other hand has almost as many speakers as those three combined.

Re:So what?

[Anonymous Coward]

Don't mind parent post, he's from Barcelona.

Re:So what?

[jrumney]

Hindi is not the national language, it is a national language, one of several including English. And considering that around a third of India's population is illiterate, second languages are not as widely spoken as you would think.

Just guessing, but...

[AnomaliesAndrew]

A large portion of Spanish speakers (e.g. Latin America) live in extreme poverty, so I doubt they'll all be downloading IE8 Beta anytime soon.

What should be compared is how many German speakers with internet access and their own PC vs. how many Spanish speakers with internet access and their own PC.

Re:Just guessing, but...

[Anonymous Coward]

A large portion of Spanish speakers (e.g. Latin America) live in extreme poverty, so I doubt they'll all be downloading IE8 Beta anytime soon.

But, it's free!

Re:Oh, I'd like a version

[Tim C]

I thought that IEtab used the native MSHTML.dll, and thus would still require IE (and presumably Windows)

Have they closed down ActiveX?

[argent]

The only thing worth asking is this: is the plugin model still based on ActiveX and "security zones".

If so, IE is still not acceptable for use with any site that is not completely trusted.

Dear Mods: It's spelled "Funny" :)

[Penguinisto]

The Stealther extension for Firefox already does the privacy thing, and has done so for longer than IE 8.

(Speakin' of which, I wonder if the old Anonym.OS live cd is still useable...)

/P
 

Re:Dear Mods: It's spelled "Funny" :)

[SanityInAnarchy]

The point of Firefox, from the beginning, was to split this kind of functionality off into extensions, so that users can pick and choose what features they need, without being forced to accept bloat.

(Yes, ironically Firefox was an attempt to make a browser-only, bloat-free version of Mozilla. People sometimes talk, now, of doing the same to Firefox...)

Given that, I would call this:

brings a lot to the table that Firefox requires extensions for.

That's Firefox's strength, not a weakness.

Re:Oh, I'd like a version

[FishWithAHammer]

Most of us just love Linux.

Like hell. There's a very common saying, and it's pretty damn true: "BSD users use BSD because they love Unix. Linux users use Linux because they hate Windows."

Go look at Ubuntu Forums or Linux Questions or any of the other community sites; it's a huge whack of Microsoft hate (often leading them to convince themselves that what they're using is better than it actually is, but hey, that's part of the open-source gig these days).

Hopefully

[Holi]

Hopefully they fixed FTP handling, which the broke horribly in IE 7.
I pretty much have to log in twice to get ftp to work in windows explorer.

Dang

[LWATCDR]

When I first went to the download page it looked terrible. I thought they had written an IE only page! Then I fired up Opera and it looked fine.
Did a refresh on Firefox and it was fine!
I hate it when Microsoft doesn't give me a reason to crab about them!
Wait I just went to grab silverlight! Cool they don't support FF3 those bastards!!!!
Anyway it is worth trying out just to see how well it works.

Still not 100% complient with CSS2

[Anonymous Coward]

It doesn't get CSS generated content images right. That's four years old and all other modern browsers can do it. Bah.

common tasks?

[msu320]

New features include accelerators, which provide instant context menu access for a number of common tasks; automatic crash recovery

its good to know what the common tasks are...

Hmmm - clicking favorites crashes IE8..

[GuyverDH]

Installed it.

Kept google as search engine.
declined accelerators
declined web screening

turned off view of favorites, menu bar.

click favorite button that appears next to tabs, crash...

repeat the experiment...

uninstalled IE8 3 minutes after installing...

Re:Crap...

[SanityInAnarchy]

I don't let XP upgrade to IE 7. I don't like the interface and it still 'feels' wrong. Probably because as someone pointed out above, it is even slower than IE 6 (which I liked okay).

Which makes you part of the problem -- part of the reason I, as a web developer, have to ensure our website works on IE6.

IE7 is a lot of things -- among them, it's more standards-compliant.

I get better functionality out of Firefox 3 with a couple of plugins.

So do I -- which is why, on XP, I do upgrade IE, and then barely use it outside of a Firefox IETab.

Re:Oh, I'd like a version

[coryking]

BSD users use BSD because they love Unix.

Which is the best part of BSD. I love unix and I love windows. Nobody cares if I submit new freebsd ports and happen to use a text editor in windows to create the Makefile and Outlook to mail the attachment to the port maintainers :-)

If you tried that on Linux, you'd probably be flamed to a crisp.

Re:Oh, I'd like a version

[Afty0r]

You should be testing IE in the environment in which your site visitors will be running it - on Windows.

Testing Safari on Windows is very different to testing Safari on MacOSX - if your objective is to catch issues before the public would see them, you need to test browser Y on OS Z - not just browser Y on any old OS.

If Microsoft *did* release IE for Linux, that is ANOTHER browser/OS combination I would have to test for.

Not always true

[Nick Ives]

I'd gladly pay MS £30 for a set of working Direct X libraries for Linux. That's about how much a Windows OEM license is; I just hate having to reboot for modern games!

I moved to Linux about 11yrs ago because I really hated Windows. I've been using Debian for 8yrs and now that I've spent (read:wasted :P) all that time getting it working exactly how I want it with all the apps I love I just can't bear to use Windows anymore. It's a pain!

Now that I've been using GNU/Linux for so long I've turned into a total True Believer so I'd never use MS (or Apple for that matter) apps / tools but I don't care about games being proprietary. I'd view it as akin to paying money for a console and I own several of those.