April 21, 2011 11:00 AM

IE9: A Leap in the Wrong Direction

Why Microsoft needs to overhaul its web browser strategy
Dev Pro
InstantDoc ID #135942
I've been nursing several grudges against Internet Explorer (IE) 9 for a while now—and was planning on keeping them to myself. But when Microsoft started up the spin machine for IE10 a mere 29 days after IE9 was officially released, they struck a nerve. More importantly, the way they struck that nerve convinced me that their direction is about as wrong as it could be when it comes to what IE9 and IE10 are going to mean for web developers.

A Question of Direction
Chrome, Firefox, Opera, and Safari all share a common trait—which is that each of these browsers is trying very hard to establish itself as the "platform of choice" for web content among the denizens of the Internet. Superficially, Internet Explorer shares this same commonality.

The difference, however, is that while Chrome, Firefox, Opera, and Safari are all striving to make their browsers the platform of choice across all operating systems, Microsoft is taking an entirely different approach by targeting only the latest versions of Windows (Vista and/or Windows 7). More specifically, Microsoft is really stressing the "native" capabilities of the operating system as being the key to achieving their goals.

Consequently, while Chrome, Firefox, Opera, and Safari are all striving to enable developers to create HTML5 applications that enable robust end-user experiences across all operating systems, Internet Explorer has a chip on its shoulder, trying to prove that Vista or Windows 7 is the key to a successful browsing experience.

In Microsoft's defense, the prospect of end users adopting browsers as their "platform" doesn't look too appealing when you're sitting atop an empire based upon the sale of operating system licenses. As such, it's not that surprising when the blog post introducing IE10 ends up reading more like a manifesto for how great the latest versions of Windows are.

The Spin Machine Is Out of Control
Yet Microsoft amazingly continues to both apologize for IE6 and beg people to upgrade to a better and safer browser while simultaneously continuing official support of IE6 until April 8, 2014, and releasing IE9—which won't run on Windows XP.

Consequently, Microsoft continues to send very mixed messages.

On one hand they tell developers that IE6 was the worst browser ever, and IE9 will make up for all the pain developers have suffered at the hands of IE6—only to tell us, merely 29 days later, that IE9 needs to be thrown under the bus to make way for IE10. Yet, simultaneously, Microsoft is telling businesses running Windows XP that IE6 is perfect for their needs and will be fully supported until 2014 at the same time they're telling consumers running Windows XP that IE8 is what they should be using.

Sadly, Microsoft and the IE team are getting really good at telling people what they want to hear. For eons now the Microsoft spin machine has been telling developers that IE9 will have the best support for HTML5 of any browser available—while the reality is much more complex than that.

Only, instead of addressing that complexity (or Microsoft's laudable stance of only implementing finalized features), Microsoft and the IE team have cherry-picked tests and prominently displayed them to the point of making it seem like Internet Explorer 10 is the only browser that complies with web standards while all other modern browsers (including IE9) fall short.

Take a look at the chart yourself. It speaks volumes. Before the release of the IE10 preview, IE8 was listed in this chart to show its woeful inadequacies. Now that IE10 is the new focus, IE9 has been thrown under the bus. For example, IE9 used to weigh in with a perfect 100 percent on all existing tests, but now that IE10 is the new focus, new tests have been released and IE9 just isn't as standards compliant as it used to be (only a few months ago).



ARTICLE TOOLS


Comments
  • Charles
    1 year ago
    Apr 21, 2011

    @SiliconDragon - not quite so. Every version since IE7 (2006) has been removable (i.e., not part of Windows Explorer) and even IE6 is upgradable. I've been running IE8 on an XP box for years. More generally, IE will remain relevant while it still has a significant share of the market. Although share is much reduced from a decade ago, it is still in the lead. Given that the growth rate of IE8 was actually almost as high as Chrome over the last couple of years (and higher the FF), I think IE still has some life in it.

  • SiliconDragon
    1 year ago
    Apr 21, 2011

    IE has become irrelevant since it's tied to a specific platform. My current and previous companies have both removed IE from their list of supported browsers. FF4 is my current company's suggested browser for Windows.

    I only use IE for regression/compatibility testing web pages, and Opera is my main browser with FF & Chrome running close 2nds. IE is the only one that's not removable or upgradable, so it sees no airtime any more. And that from a former IE team member. /shrug

  • Charles
    1 year ago
    Apr 21, 2011

    On-premise Windows will remain a cash cow for many years. But MS is moving away from 100% sale of licenses. Their cloud focus implies a mixed strategy.

    IE6 was the last non-removable version and was part of XP and Windows Server 2003. It is these OSs that will be supported until 2014, not IE6 per se. Many corporates feel 2014 is too soon to retire these OSs. So, no mixed message at all. MS is saying to corporates that it is time to move on.

    The IE team has been fairly honest about HTML5 in recent blogs. They effectively admit IE9 has a constrained implementation of HTML5. Their argument centres on interoperability for emerging specs. Several so-called HTML5 features are not in the W3C draft, but are separate submissions to the W3C. Which is preferable? Support for long lists of non-standardised functionality whose future is unclear or constrained implementation of emerging specs that have wide cross-browser support today and look certain to be included in future standards? The latter approach is less innovative. But which is better for web developers? Be careful. The day may come when web developers say if it renders in IE it will render anywhere.

    There is one way IE9 fractures the browser world. If you stack up a dozen animated layers using HTML5, you can see a big performance difference between IE9 and other browsers. Any web developer who wants this level of intensive graphics today is faced with a dilemma. It is only going to work acceptably well on IE9.

    Anyone stupid enough to believe that a set of Microsoft tests for an emerging spec that yield the best results for IE represents a dependable benchmark of standards compliance has only themselves to blame for being disappointed. Its like thinking Google Chrome is the fastest browser because it scores highest on Google's V8 benchmark or Apple Safari has the best HTML5 implementation because other browsers stumble over Apples HTML5 showcase. Surely we not this naive!

  • boydtwa
    1 year ago
    Apr 21, 2011

    Would you like some cheese with this wine? Word to the author "Developers" are always working a moving target. The announcement was targeting Developers. If you are a manager type get some frickin context will ya. Microsoft did not throw IE9 under the bus. rather they reached a point where they have a stable and sustainable browser that implements as many of the "standards" they could at this time. What is the alternative? Continue to use older versions while the Firefox's and Chrome's of the world continue to point fingers at what a screw up MS is?
    Anyone who is not at Windows Vista SP2 (a free upgrade from Vista) deserves to have their computer melted down as a result of surfing the Internet. Security costs money and anyone who is not willing top pay for it should go reap the benefits of their "choices"
    To quote the author "Personally, I don't have much of a problem with the hype around each new release. Instead, what I'm getting tired of is the need to keep up with supporting the dead, bloated, bodies of past browsers like IE6, IE7, IE8, and now, amazingly, IE9". You ought to thank Microsoft for being so magnanimous. What would Firefox tell you if they had a problem in a previous version... "Upgrade?" What is the root of your objection. Some one has to pay for an OS to get a newer browser? They don't cause they can use Firefox or Chrome and not pay a thing. If a user chooses to continue to use an OS that is over ten years old then they don't need the gee wiz features to begin with. And if they do then they need to realize there is no free lunch in this world. Eventually you need to pay the piper. Don't like the Microsoft tune? Buy a Mac...What you spent a lot of money on the hardware...Snap out of it. YOU STILL PAID MONEY. No one should blame Microsoft for making the browsing experience second to none in the windows environment. This time they are doing it AND complying with standards. Developers win and Users win. Whiners go home!

You must log on before posting a comment.

Are you a new visitor? Register Here