Slashdot Mirror
Next IE Version Will Feature Web Audio, Media Capture, ES6 Promises, and HTTP/2
An anonymous reader writes "Microsoft [Wednesday] announced it is developing at least four new features for the next release of Internet Explorer (IE): Web Audio API, Media Capture and Streams, ES6 Promises, and HTTP/2. The company says this is not an exhaustive list of what to expect in the next version, but merely what it is currently confident that it will be able to deliver. For those who don't know, HTTP/2 is a faster protocol for transporting Web content. It is based on Google's SPDY open networking protocol and is currently being standardized by the IETF. Web Audio is a JavaScript API for processing and synthesizing audio in Web applications while Media Capture provides access to the user's local audio and video input/output devices. Promises is meant to help developers write cleaner asynchronous code."
is to be standards compliant so i don't have to write my html/css/js to work on everything else, then modify it to also work with IE. years after the nightmares of IE6 and 7, i still have to troubleshoot IE more than any other browser.
I've seen two pages now where a textarea was apparently randomly incorrectly injected (the command starts mid-tag?) into the site using javascript:
document.write(decodeURIComponent("role%3D%22form%22%3E%3Ctextarea%20name%3D%22cx%2Fadtag%22%20rows%3D%225%22%3E%3C!--%20%20Begin%20Rubicon%20Project%20Tag%20--%3E%0A%3C!--%20%20Site%3A%20SlashDot%20%20%20Zone%3A%20SlashDot_Tier1%20%20%20Size%3A%20Leaderboard%20%20--%3E%0A%3Cscript%20language%3D%22JavaScript%22%20type%3D%22text%2Fjavascript%22%3E%0Arp_account%20%20%20%3D%20'10840'%3B%0Arp_site%20%20%20%20%20%20%3D%20'35246'%3B%0Arp_zonesize%20%20%3D%20'146692-2'%3B%0Arp_adtype%20%20%20%20%3D%20'js'%3B%0Arp_smartfile%20%3D%20'%5BSMART%20FILE%20URL%5D'%3B%0A%3C%2Fscript%3E%0A%3Cscript%20type%3D%22text%2Fjavascript%22%20src%3D%22http%3A%2F%2Fads.rubiconproject.com%2Fad%2F10840.js%22%3E%3C%2Fscript%3E%0A%3C!--%20%20End%20Rubicon%20Project%20Tag%20--%3E"))
Malicious attack? Or just stupidity? Hard to say!
With HTTP/2
Not april 1.
to not use it.
"Have you ever thought about just turning off the TV, sitting down with your kids, and hitting them?"
Unless this is 100% controlled by the user, it's a terrible idea.
And, even if it's 100% controlled by the user, it's a terrible idea -- because, let's face it, the security record of IE pretty much guarantees this will get hacked.
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
...Bill_the_engineer to troll this crap into /dev/null
Not right now, at least, considering the very recent public discussions.
Koans and fables for the software engineer
will it still be able to download Firefox and Chromium?
Good people go to bed earlier.
How about they get the version that came with Win. 8 working right before moving on to bigger, better things? IE has been my last choice in a browser for well over a decade because almost anything else works better.
Time Bomber the Book coming soon.
Microsoft stops porting new versions of IE to a Windows version for which "mainstream support" has ended, which happens roughly two years after the following major version of Windows comes out. After that, all users get is "extended support", which means five years of security updates for the existing versions of IE. So if any of your users use Internet Explorer on Windows Vista, you're stuck on IE 9. And if IE 12 doesn't come out before January of next year, Windows 7 users will be stuck on IE 11.
Awesome, finally we'll see a MIDI plugin for those leftover Geocities, Tripod and Angelfire websites.
Unless this is 100% controlled by the user, it's a terrible idea.
The getUserMedia function requires the user to click through a prompt to start recording.
With the stupidly slow release cycles of IE, Microsoft will always play catch up with the "real" browsers.
Google Chrome had Web Audio API implemented in version 10. That was release in 2011. Google in the meantime has shipped *25 versions* of Chrome. Same goes for Firefox, which had Web Audio implemented for even longer than Chrome, but used a different API. They've been on the same API since Firefox 25, which was released in October of last year. Since then, Mozilla has shipped another 4 versions of Firefox.
Microsoft in the meantime was only able to announce they were going to have Web Audio in their next major release. That's because since October last year (when IE11 came out), they have released a staggering *zero* versions of IE. While the rest of the world was moving forward, they were just shipping security updates. They just can't keep up like this. Every time they release a major version they're sorta on the same page again as the competition, but it's a matter of a few months and they're so way behind again it's impossible to ever compete in a serious way.
Microsoft still hasn't learned their lesson from IE6 as IE is still holding the web back. Get your act together, Microsoft. Stop slowing everyone down.
Pretty good is actually pretty bad.
Hey, in about a decade a web designer can even assume that the majority of their visitors have these features!
Adding more bells and whistles will just make it an all the more a ripe Swiss cheese of vulnerabilities.
Can you summarize?
Well, HTTP 2.0 is DOM Events 2.0! IE and IIS will support HTTP 2.0 while the rest of the world scraps it (it's a turd in need of flushing) to work on HTTP 3.0.
Do you even lift?
These aren't the 'roids you're looking for.
Mandated SSL pretty much breaks all proxy servers out there unless they do MITM.
It does nothing to actually reduce page size and simplify things. In fact it make it in some cases more complex.
For example pretty much every web browser out there can only connect two times to one box. So you see tons of extra 'servers' that resolve into the same box somewhere. They alleviated some of that with mandated pipeline. But it does nothing for the middle of the page. To fix many of the shortcommings of http they should look at what the proxy guys have been going thru. Make it EASIER to and faster to proxy and by happy happenstance you make the web faster.
For example they could add in a list of server aliases. Proxy servers could then know foo.xyz is the same as 123.foo.xyz and 321.foo.xyz and abc.randomsite.com. They are fighting the biggest resource they have the local proxy copy to work around badly chosen default settings.
Also variable encoding is done thru ? on almost every page out there. Yet proxy servers have to ignore it because it may change. Instead of 'this is variable but it will never change' http codes returned. The guidelines are horrible so the proxy guys have to take poor shortcuts to get the web to look right.
We are fighting every step of the way the ability to cache data.
SPDY/HTTP2 spent a lot of time making the connection setup faster. But very little tools for the http page, server, and proxy itself.
Still no WebGL then? Fucking luddites.
Not really.
For example pretty much every web browser out there can only connect two times to one box.
When was this? I thought browsers had long since given up on RFC 2616's limit of two connections per host. True, RFC 2616 says "A single-user client SHOULD NOT maintain more than 2 connections with any server or proxy." But RFC 2119 defines "SHOULD NOT" to "mean that there may exist valid reasons in particular circumstances when the particular behavior is acceptable or even useful, but the full implications should be understood and the case carefully weighed before implementing any behavior described with this label." For results of the 'careful weighing' that browser makers have done, see answers to "Max parallel http connections in a browser?" on Stack Overflow.
They alleviated some of that with mandated pipeline. But it does nothing for the middle of the page.
What do you mean by "middle of the page"? Even with a two-connection limit and a server that is taking a long time to render a dynamic page, the browser is allowed to use this second connection as a pipeline to retrieve resources referenced by the part of the page that has been downloaded.
I know it's not a "standard" (yet?) but asm.js is one of the best things that happened to web browsers. It already works well in Firefox, Chrome and Safari, yet performance in IE is much worse than in the other platforms. Given all platforms support WebGL at this point, we are pretty much only waiting for IE to adopt proper support for asm.js.
To summarize the summary, people are a problem.
Get free satoshi (Bitcoin) and Dogecoins
Thanks.
The <em> element is for "emphatic stress". The <i> element is for other types of unemphasized "offset text" (or "text in an alternate voice" as this explanation puts it), such as foreign language loan phrases, technical terms being defined, taxonomic names including a genus (roadrunner, Geococcyx californianus; coyote, Canis latrans), and the like. A long time ago (pre-D2), Slashdot's stylesheet added excessive side margins for the <blockquote> element. To work around this, some users got in the habit of putting quoted lines in an alternate voice (<i>) rather than using a block quotation. I seem to remember having switched my own posting style from <i> quoting to <blockquote> quoting soon after D2's introduction.
Since when? I thought releases.mozilla.org supported only HTTP and HTTPS, and ftp.mozilla.org wasn't for anonymous downloads of high-traffic release files according to its MOTD. The alternative is to use someone else's desktop computer or perhaps your Android device to download the Firefox installer.
IE 11 already supports some of WebGL.
IE just announced every item on my 'do not want' list for their next browser release!
It's almost like they're reading my mind, and blasting audio advertisements, and monitoring my web cam, and messing with my data connections, all at the same time!
But first fix all the issues with IE such as its poor support for HTML5, speed, security and the general pain in the backside the whole application is as a whole!
I really like to just glance at a version number and see what it is.
It's really tedious when having to track down version problems and having to look at version number that are only different in the 5th decimal place or a sub version or something.
It's great to look at a version and see that "AH! I'm on version 25 when I need to be on 27." not "Ah! I'm on 3.12.156.23 and I need to be on 3.12.157.23. How stupid of me!"
I tried the theremin demo in Firefox 29.0.1 for Windows, and I noticed a delay of about 120 ms from my click to the beeping.
2011 all over again! If we're lucky we'll get this new version of IE before 2016.
MS: Where did you want to go a couple years ago?
... to download Chrome
enterprise use of Windows 7 is to high for it to be cut off next year.
Windows 9 better be out next year as windows 8 is bombing hard.
I'm looking forward to my next IE one night stand at the Super 8 while downloading Firefox.
Both IE and Firefox run like shit especially when you have flash video's playing in websites you visit. Chrome, the fastest.
to wear a condom
Still no TWAIN/Scanner support? Ho Hum, useless for anyone not a camwhore.
You can't do standards, you can't do real science, all Microsoft can do is pollute the code stream.
No fucking thanks. I'll stick with ASM and non-Visual C++.
Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
All this 'stuff' we keep adding is already duplicated by local operating systems. It's not necessary. Fuck SaaS.
windows 8 is bombing hard.
I think people here tend to live in a bubble and don't realize it is an echo chamber, we all know the shrill cries of the minority detractors are the loudest but the fact remains that Windows 8 has higher usage share than OSX or Linux on desktop computers (I suppose they are "bombing hard" too?) and people certainly could switch to Windows 7 or Linux if they really did hate Windows 8 that much but it seems they dont. People use the OS to use their applications and once you have opened your applications they are exactly the same as in Windows 7 anyway which even further supports the idea that all this "hate" is generated from a small minority - who oddly enough don't switch to Linux themselves and don't convert those who's claimed anecdotal evidence they parrot.
You seem to be confusing yourself, you said "So if any of your users use Internet Explorer on Windows Vista, you're stuck on IE 9.", but in actuality you can upgrade your users to an alternative browser.
We're dealing with two different people who have users. One is the operator of a web site, whose users are the viewers of a web site. The other is the administrator of a local-area computer network, whose users are the users of the computers. The network administrator can upgrade his users. The operator of a web site cannot so easily, as many users tend to be fickle and switch to another site before switching to another browser.
I thought the http workgroup decided that that http 2.0 was garbage (including SPDY) and that they were suggesting punting 2.0 and starting on 3.0?
IE is the worst peace of trash I have ever used and is horrible for web developers, so it can die for all I care...