Slashdot Mirror


Microsoft.com Makes IE8 Incompatibility List

nickull writes "Microsoft is tracking incompatible Web sites for its upcoming Internet Explorer 8 browser and has posted a list that now contains about 2,400 names — including Microsoft.com. Apparently, even though Microsoft's IE8 team is doing the 'right' thing by finally making IE more standards-compliant, they are risking 'breaking the Web' because the vast majority of Web sites are still written to work correctly with previous, non-standards-compliant versions of IE."

6 of 358 comments (clear)

  1. Google.com?! by kramulous · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I'm no web developer but how can google.com be on that list as well? It is one of the simplest websites around. A text field, few links and a bit of javascript.

    How the hell can a web browser, that let's face it, is probably going to be the dominant web browser, not render that.

    No wonder the general population get pissed of with 'the computer's not working again'. These days I tell them that I don't know Windows. I'm going to have to start walking around with a Ubuntu live on USB.

    --
    .
  2. Re:Options by nmb3000 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    What if we could just define which rendering engine to use in pages, e.g. IE7 or IE8 in a meta tag...

    Oh if we only could!

    Watching the development of IE8, the teams is taking great pains to make sure that site authors and owners have an overall say about how their page is rendered with respect to new IE standards-compliance. You can use both a META tag as well as a HTTP header to tell IE8 to use either the new rendering engine (default) or to fall back to the IE7 standards. Companies can also specify compatibility options using GPOs which should help keep older intranet sites working.

    I think it's a pretty good tradeoff between pushing for modern standards and not "breaking the web". Yes, it is largely IE's fault that there are so many non-conforming sites out there, but compatibility is important regardless, especially for "offline" sites which cannot be fixed easily or cheaply (CD help files, embedded web servers, etc). At least by having the new rendering mode the default it will encourage standards compliance (or at least IE's [admittedly improving] version of it.)

    --
    "What do you despise? By this are you truly known." --Princess Irulan, Manual of Muad'Dib
    /)
  3. Re:Options by duguk · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I was testing my *new* site in IE8 yesterday, I'm using the "

  4. Re:Where's the story? by Dionysus · · Score: 5, Interesting

    validating Google.com. Don't think google ever tried to be compliant.

    --
    Je ne parle pas francais.
  5. Re:Options by Hurricane78 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    No it is not. You apparently never tried to program a real web application to work in that thing.

    It contradicts its own rules, based on random things like race conditions between the first execution of JavaScript in an <IFRAME> and the end of page the rendering routine.
    Been there, seen it, circumvented stuff like that in anything from 2 minutes to no less than two weeks of hard debugging.

    In the matrix of IE, you only have to remember one thing: There is no standard.
    Everything can change, and change back in the blink of an eye, for no reason at all.

    I fear that to be a Trident developer, you must be a genius to understand that mess, and crazy to stand it, at the same time.

    --
    Any sufficiently advanced intelligence is indistinguishable from stupidity.