Slashdot Mirror


A First Look At Internet Explorer 8 RC1

bogaboga writes "TG Daily reports that Microsoft quietly released the first update to its IE8 beta 2 to its closest partners last week. This new version only scores a dismal 12/100 on the Acid 3 test, though the score improves significantly if one leaves the [browser] window open for at least a minute. It is marked as 'Release Candidate 1.'"

13 of 271 comments (clear)

  1. Could have fooled me by JoeCommodore · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I actually saw an IE8 ad earlier this week on-line (geared for enterprise computing firms) I thought it was final and out already.

    Yep, MS even has a slick site already up for it:
    http://www.microsoft.com/windows/Internet-explorer/beta/default.aspx

    --
    "Enjoy what you're doing! If it becomes drudgery, you're doing it wrong!" - Jim Butterfield
  2. Re:Good by Kokuyo · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Just don't add a usability POV to that mix. IE7 and 8 give me nightmares.

  3. Re:Damn, did I really not know? by poetmatt · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Whoever labeled lloyd troll obviously is a Microsoftie.

    I'd be surprised if Microsoft ever decided to release a well tested and thoroughly prepared release. It seems to not be a priority to them at all.

  4. 12/100? by Masami+Eiri · · Score: 4, Interesting

    IE6.5 gets a 12/100 on the Acid3 test if you let it sit for a few moments. No, seriously. I wish I was kidding.

  5. Re:Why It Takes an Extra Minute by aztracker1 · · Score: 1, Interesting

    I liked IE4/5 compared to NN at that time. I've been less inclined to like IE since around Firebird/fox 0.6 or so, when I switched. It's the plugins that sway me to FF over Opera. IE7/8 isn't so bad, but still has some quirks to it. IE6 in today's web world is an abomination that must die. If people are using older windows, Opera 9 is a far better option. For people on at least Win2k/XP they have very little excuse for the older IE.

    At this point it's nowhere near a fav. but the IE8 version is a vast improvement, even if passing ACID3 wasn't as high of a priority.

    --
    Michael J. Ryan - tracker1.info
  6. Why not rename it? by Sloppy · · Score: 2, Interesting

    One of the reasons I've heard for MS is not fixing all their rendering bugs, is that there are so many web pages out there that already work around the bugs, with user-agent sniffing. i.e. If the user-agent contains "MSIE", then use a different stylesheet, or embed a style attribute in the HTML to override the stylesheet.

    But couldn't they fix the bugs if they just changed the user-agent string to not include "MSIE?" Internet Explorer is already a brand name with so much infamy and negative goodwill anyway, that renaming the product makes sense even if they don't fix any of the bugs. But if they do that, then they could fix the bugs too, without triggering all the world's websites' MSIE workarounds.

    --
    As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
  7. Re:Why It Takes an Extra Minute by gnick · · Score: 2, Interesting

    IE8 version is a vast improvement, even if passing ACID3 wasn't as high of a priority.

    Well-phrased. I'm a FF user, but stray to IE occasionally depending on what I'm doing. I have Opera & Chrome installed too, but I have run them very few times since install.

    For me, like (I suspect) the vast majority of web users, a good report card on ACID3 isn't a big selling point. The question is, "Will the pages I use the most render quickly and look nice?" NOT "Is the browser standards-compliant and will it make web development easy for people that I never see or care about?" For right or wrong, the most popular web sites will neglect web-standards to conform to IE rather than neglect IE to conform to web-standards. As long as that's the case, why should MS care? For now, ACID3 doesn't significantly affect their market share.

    MS didn't fail ACID3, they just blew off trying to pass it because they didn't care.

    --
    He's getting rather old, but he's a good mouse.
  8. Re:Why It Takes an Extra Minute by gnick · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Exactly. Do you have any idea how many college exams I blow off every year? I haven't taken a course in nearly 7 years, so I typically blow off all of them.

    Does that imply that I failed hundreds and hundreds of times?

    You're [sic] logic is amazing.

    --
    He's getting rather old, but he's a good mouse.
  9. Re:Why It Takes an Extra Minute by Mister+Whirly · · Score: 2, Interesting

    As long as the page I want to see loads in my browser, no I don't. I don't do any web developing or anything related, so why should I care? Oh wait, then I would have yet another reason to bash Microsoft on Slashdot. Ok, I care a lot now!

    I also don't know all the inner workings of a combustible engine, yet I still manage to get where I am going in my car. Amazing isn't it?

    --
    "But this one goes to 11!"
  10. Re:Good by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    But of course, you see, you are making your own problem worse by trying.

    If people just stopped supporting IE, or at least nag IE users to upgrade, it will happen.
    Nag them in every page, big red double bordered box at the top, red letters.
    Link them to Alternative Browser Alliance, or a similar site.

    If everyone done this, there WOULD be a change, maybe not instantly, but it would happen.
    Stop letting MS bully you into changing!

  11. I don't want your Mozilla bloatware! by TravisO · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Are you out of your mind, my FireFox 3 folder is like 27mb, I can't afford to waste that much space!

    And Opera 9.5 is 5mb! (I only checked because I know some Opera zealot would HAVE to reply to this and try to one-up me).

  12. Re:Why It Takes an Extra Minute by not+already+in+use · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I wouldn't expect slashdot to look at this objectively, but the GP is correct. The only reason exploits are such a big deal with IE is because of the sheer size of the installed base.

    No hacker worth his salt is going to go looking for exploits in a browser with 10% market share. Also contributing to the viability of IE exploits is the fact that if you're running IE, you're running Windows so you know the target OS.

    It's not defective by design, it's defective by popular demand. This is hardly Microsoft's fault. You could say they've been doing everything in their power the last couple years to deter people from actually using their browser.

    --
    Similes are like metaphors
  13. Re:But does it fix the critical vulnerability? by BasharTeg · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Actually it does mitigate that vulnerability. Internet Explorer 7 and 8 both have the ability to enable DEP/NX heap protection. Unfortunately, due to certain extensions like Adobe Flash being written like shi... written in such a way that they weren't compatible with DEP/NX (I won't even get into them dodging protected mode, just see: http://keznews.com/4244_Vista_hacked_on_3rd_day_thru_Adobe_Flash__Linux_Undefeated_), but anyway, because of extensions like Flash and Java which weren't compatible with DEP/NX, Microsoft was unable to enable by default the DEP/NX protection in Internet Explorer 7 at release. However, you can enable it now since most plugins have been modified to work with DEP/NX.

    To enable this protection in IE7 right now, go to Tools, Internet Options, Advanced, and check the check box next to "Enable memory protection to help mitigate online attacks". If you're running IE8 beta 2, you should notice that this check box is checked by default. This change should mitigate a significant number of future remote attacks against Internet Explorer 8.

    If you check the advisory, one of the work arounds is enabling the DEP/NX protection in IE7.