Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft Adopts SVG For Internet Explorer 9
An anonymous reader writes "SVG has been a published standard for almost a decade. Microsoft has had nothing to do with it, even while every other major browser adopted SVG as a supported format and interface. Just in the last few weeks, though, Microsoft has thrown a surprising amount of its weight behind SVG." This means for IE 9, but it's a start.
I commend the decision, but I don't trust them.
-jcr
The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
Agreed. The new browser probably won't run on XP such that people will be forced to buy Windows 7 to run MS's newer browser.
Table-ized A.I.
Agreed. The new browser probably won't run on XP such that people will be forced to buy Windows 7 to run MS's newer browser.
And you think this is a BAD thing? So Mr. Linux what version of the kernel are you running? 1.0? Which dist, Ubuntu 1.0? I bet your Linux install isn't a 10 year old operating system, nor would you even consider running or supporting one that is that old. So why should Microsoft? XP was written a very long time ago before any of this intertubes stuff ever was even popular. The sooner MS can kill it off, the better the entire planet will be. The only thing that MS should kill off sooner is IE6.
Oh my god, they're not giving 100% support to an OS that's almost 9 years old?!? Burn them at the stake!!!
Unity? Screw that: XFCE. Slashdot Beta? Screw that: SoylentNews. Australis? Screw that: Pale Moon. UX developers DIAF
There appears to be an inverse relationship between IE market share and its implementation of standards. Applaud MS for good decisions, but never forget how they acted when they owned the market.
SVG graphics on web pages is simply the most appropriate thing. Web developers/designers all over have been chomping at the bit to use SVG because the results are beautiful and scalable. MSIE support is and has been the one thing preventing them from actually doing it.
So Mr. Linux what version of the kernel are you running?
And which version of windows are majority of users running? If most Linux users would use kernel 2.4 and FF would only support 2.6, you think it would be taken lightly?
Why else ? "Embrace, extend, extinguish" is the Microsoft motto when it comes to competing standards.
Now the world has gone to bed, Darkness won't engulf my head, I can see by infra-red, How I hate the night.
it's their only business model... SVG is the new target to pervert. Expect their web development tools to produce subtly broken SVG that only renders correctly on the IE version... they did the exact same with html. They will go to great lengths to ensure their development tools produce websites that don't work right on other browsers. Ever such subtle glitches, but the users will end up blaming the other browser that they picked on the ballot page.
Donald 'Duck' Dunn: We had a band powerful enough to turn goat piss into gasoline.
Yeah, but.... a lot of companies have dropped their SVG support after MS (or was it Adobe) decided to stop supporting their SVG plugin.
Now IE9 will have native SVG support, that just means *most* browsers will have it (ie not IE7 or 8), which still means that it is not widespread enough for adoption. Maybe in a few years when everyone has migrated from IE8 to 9, but you know how long that will be. In the meantime, all the other browsers will be running something much better like webGL and MS will be still playing catchup.
Call me a suspicious paranoid old bugger, but if you been buggered by someone decades, you tend to grow a bit cautious.
The more I read about IE9, the more I wonder "what's the catch". Because MS finally getting it and playing nice just doesn't seem to be an option.
And low and behold. No IE9 for XP, despite it still being sold by MS and still being widely used. The excuse: "we can't because we are only a multi-billion dollar company and can't afford to hire the very best and just make it work".
An MS apologists commented on the last article that it was impossible to run IE9 under XP because of the hardware rendering... clearly he doesn't know that A: DirectX entire point was to abstract hardware to the point it also (used to) support it purely running in software mode" and B: That all the other browsers have no such problem.
No, I see MS making the same mistake they made countless time before. Not killing of their old crap. Learn to clean up after yourself. You dumped IE6-7-8 on the world, now get rid of them.
It would be doable for MS, and they are not. Why? Because they are still the same old "can't do" company. MS apologists and the naive jumped in Windows Mobile 7 to, and then finally it was announced, no multi-tasking and no copy&past... so it was just like all the releases before, fundemental things that WERE PROMISED, not making it into the release.
So, I am going to see what MS finally delivers. Their promises have no value.
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
Problem with that little theory is that the "pull" is stronger in the other direction. If you're running XP and IE8, and you need SVG, instead of paying $100 to upgrade to IE9, you'll just download FF or Chrome and Microsoft loses more browser share.
There are two kinds of people: 1) those who start arrays with one and 1) those who start them with zero.
Yes, the SVG support in the Platform Preview is definitely a work in progress; it really should be viewed as an early alpha in overall completeness and quality. However, MS has apparently committed to a full and proper SVG implementation in IE9. Some links worth checking out:
Platform Preview gives Web developers first taste of IE9 - Scroll down to SVG heading for a nice summary
SVG in IE9 Roadmap - Official IE blog post on SVG
C-A-N-V-A-S.
Thanks.
Never heard of DirectX, did you? XP doesn't have Windows Presentation Foundation (which uses DirectX for acceleration btw), but this is hardly the same as not having GPU support.
I'm fairly sure MS made the conscious decision to build IE9 on top of this new framework so it wouldn't be compatible with XP.
Understandably, because why would people upgrade to Vista/Win7 when they can get all the goodies for naught?
If they only wanted to do hardware acceleration, that was already possible with Windows 95 SR2 and DirectX 1.
Next: Step two: Extend.
Any sufficiently advanced intelligence is indistinguishable from stupidity.