According to Russian publication Wzor, Microsoft finalised Internet Explorer 8 on February 21st.The final build that was prepared and passed to internal staff and partners is 8.0.6001.18691. Microsoft is reportedly readying this build for distribution via TechNet/MSDN and Connect before a general release to web.
The software giant released a final test build (RC1) last month before readying the RTM last week. According to Microsoft Internet Explorer 8 includes the following enhancements:
- Faster Internet Explorer 8 is more responsive with new pages and tabs, opening up fast and reliably. You can now get to the information you care about most, in fewer steps; one click access to your webmail, favorite news sites or other online services.
- Easier Reduce the steps to accomplish many common tasks, and automate your access to real time information updates. You can keep track of your favorite sports team, news, weather with a single click.
- More Private Helps protect your privacy and confidential information where ever you go on the web.
- More Secure Helps protect and stop malicious software from reaching your PC, and makes it easier to detect when a website is an imposter.
Although, we now need to think of a way to somehow get corporations and people who aren't technologically minded to embrace and download Internet Explorer 8.
I don't see that happening anytime soon though :/
Although, we now need to think of a way to somehow get corporations and people who aren't technologically minded to embrace and download Internet Explorer 8.
I don't see that happening anytime soon though :/
Agreed. In my college. all the computers are on IE6 and Firefox 2. I used to go about installing IE7, but it always requires a restart, so I don't so it anymore. I do install FF3 across the computers, though. They need it.
Edit:
Firefox FTW
Well RC1 was stable enough to be the RTM, possibly a few bugs removed.
Have you ever thought providing comments with more substance might actually add to the discussion? Maybe saying why you seem shocked at this news would benefit this discussion?
Last edited by CalumJR on 23 Feb 2009 - 19:07
I feel, they are hurrying this release and i dont get whats so urgent....
I haven't used the release candidate much, so I can't comment on the stability of it now, but during beta 2 I had a fair few problems.
Responses like the one above really do help improve the discussion on articles, rakeshishere. Thank you
Is that not just sites that are coded for IE6's funny way ? Surely they will update to the more open minded standard IE8.
I doubt that.
CSS 3.0 is still being developed AFAIK so it's not a "standard" yet.
And IE8 is fully-complaint with approved standarts. It shouldn't be compatible with drafts.
The compatibility issues were up to web designers. It is their websites which need updating.
I agree that Internet Explorer 7- were all terrible at rendering webpages. Internet Explorer 8, in my opinion, is still the worst out of all the major browsers.
Having said that, it is still the webdeveloper's responsibility to update their website to work correctly when new technologies are released. As a webmaster you are there to maintain your website and that does mean updating it as and when needed.
There is nothing Microsoft can do. Their older browsers were terrible for web standards and now they have finally improved a bit with Internet Explorer 8 webmaster will now have to change their code so it works better with web standards.
I, for one, am glad they adopted most, if not all, the CSS 2.1 standards.
LOL its not MS's job to fix all the sites that are broken. Its the webmaster that must do that.
This is just
wrongnot-kosher.Opera 10 alpha,Safari 4 developer preview,Chrome 2 passes Acid 3 test with 100/100 ..... Thats IE for you on the people who still use it
a) Have web sites that are broken until updated to the "final" CSS3
b) Need a "CSS3 draft compatibility" list for all browsers that puts the browser into a compatibility mode for CSS3 draft (much like the IE7 compatibility list in IE
Yes, it's nice to know that the other browsers are closer to supporting CSS3 if/when it is finalized, but until that happens - does it really matter?
But in either case, site compatibility seem to be about Microsoft having to use the IE 7 rendering engine compatibility list in IE 8, so I don't think this should be a major issue, at least not with the big sites like Microsoft.com and Gmail.com. It's updates like this that I'm talking about:
http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details...&displaylang=en
They'll likely have updated this both in time for this RTM release, and are ready to do it in the future as well.
Do you have any recollection of how long Acid 2 was around before the majority of the browsers passed it? The Acid 3 test is something to aspire to, not something they have to pass right now.
The incompatibilities have arisen because existing standards were incorrectly implemented in IE7 and before.
Secondly, draft feature implementation in other browsers (except for Opera, who think they know best) is done in a standards-compliant way e.g. -moz-border-radius instead of border-radius. Webkit has the -webkit- prefix and Microsoft has the -ms- prefix which they're now starting to use (see: filter => -ms-filter move.)
Acid 3 was also a wishlist of new features that the group compiling the test wanted implemented.
When that happens though I'm sure the same pack of people who hate IE will still find something else to hate on. Standards and Acid 3 is just what flies now.
If IE all of the sudden went from quirks mode to a strict compliance mode as is required for ACID 3 the web would be a horrible horrible place for end users. I imagine the "IE7 compatibility mode" work and how to seamlessly integrate that into the final product is requiring a lot of work.
The IE team's incremental approach will certainly keep sparking debate on how IE sucks, it does not support the latest standards, blah blah blah, but I think many are quick to forget how broad IE is. In addition, many apps, like Yahoo Messenger and Steam use the IE rendering engine in their app, can't break that either.
I think a better gauge for how good a browser is is sunspider or other similar benchmarks. Faster, more efficient javascript execution can and will benefit everyone.
Last edited by Intelman on 23 Feb 2009 - 23:10
About the 2000 incompatible sites, those are the ones which IE8 renders in IE7 rendering mode. To the end user, there will be no difference and those sites will work properly.
Regarding IE8 RTMing, I wish they'd held out a little longer. RC1 didn't feel quite ready to me.
Acid3 isn't primarily about CSS3 compatibility.
Not really a rumour, more just like speculation because Steve Ballmer sort of said he was considering it.
Look at Opera Software. They have been developing websites for a short time than Microsoft and one of their alpha builds already passes the Acid 3 test. That is because they chose to embrace web standards early enough, just like Microsoft should have. Now us web developers are unfortunately paying the price (it will be some time before a lot of people upgrade from Internet Explorer 6 or 7, to Internet Explorer
I really doubt they'll abandon all of the hard work they've put into getting Trident compatible with more standards by switching to Webkit or Gecko.
I agree if they are not going to use another rendering engine then they should focus on that first and, if possible, some CSS 3 support as well.
It may still be in development but some things, like opacity, really is handy. Also, it may well have finished being developed before Internet Explorer 9 is finished.
I hope for the best!
I've played around with IE 8 for a little while, and I can certainly say it's much MUCH better than IE 7. 8 isn't as slow and clunky like its predecessor was. Yes, there are rendering issues, but I expect that will clear up overtime (just to note, I haven't come across any major problems myself when I browsed with IE
Hey, CalumJR, do you or anyone else know when Neowin will do an updated review? The last one was for beta 2.
I'll ask the right people and see if there are any plans for an updated review
It makes sense, though if we did one for beta 2, so thank you for bringing that to my attention.
When I find out, I'll send you a personal message.
I'll ask the right people and see if there are any plans for an updated review
It makes sense, though if we did one for beta 2, so thank you for bringing that to my attention.
When I find out, I'll send you a personal message.
Thanks a lot! The reason I asked is because stuff has changed between beta 2 and the final, so an updated review makes perfect sense.
I think there were a few problems doing this on one of the Windows XP service packs, though, if I'm not mistaken.
But in all seriosness, I think they should drop IE. It's a waste of time. No one apart from the amateurs will use it, and thats just because they have nothing else.
In all "seriosness" [sic], to each their own.
Did you mean to call the VAST MAJORITY of PC users "amateurs" ?
Wouldn't "less technologically-minded people" be more appropriate?
In any case, you are very wrong. A lot of people who know a tremendous amount about technology still use Internet Explorer and will no doubt upgrade to Internet Explorer 8.
Releasing it.
It IS going to get rolled out on Windows update right guys? ....RIGHT?!
especially for vista users!
IE 8 IS WAY FASTER AND USES LESS MEMORY THAN FF3
IE 8 FTW!!!
Thank you
Internet surfing is a key part of the user experience and should be a top priority. It clearly isn't when it comes to IE.
If you are seeing Chrome advertisements, that is because the adverts display what it thinks the reader is interested in, based off content on the page. In this case, web browsers.
As soon as the pages remove their old ie6 hacks, all problems dissapear and even the reason to use compability mode.
In fact, it's so not rocket science that Microsoft even supplies its' own tool to do so! Right-click > Customize Command Bar > Add or Remove Commands...
cause Firefox not only has good speed it's 'extensions' are what really gives it a advantage over stuff like IE... cause i would rather not live without stuff like 'adblock plus' or 'tabscroller' extensions on Firefox because 'tabscroller' makes the browsing experience noticeably more efficient for those who tend to use multiple tabs pretty often as you can set it up to where you hold down the right mouse click and use the wheel to scroll and instantly flip between tabs... it take a little while to get used to but once you do it's clearly more efficient than a stock Firefox install and i would rather not go without Tabscroller installed on any browser.
even 'adblock plus' is pretty much 'must have' for Firefox as it blocks a pretty good percentage of popup's etc.
Really? I do. The only thing I use with Firefox is a plugin to recreate Opera's Speed Dial. I don't use any sorts of extensions with Opera or Chrome, and with IE 7 & 8, I use IE7Pro, and that's only for a couple of things (namely the "Easy Homepage" Speed-Dial clone, ad blocker, and DNS/link caching; in IE7, I also used the crash recovery functions, which are unneeded in IE
Maybe its just me, but I don't see the need behind having a few dozen extentions/plugins; its a web-browser, not your OS.
Commenting has either been disabled on this article or you are not logged in. Click here to login or register, its free!
Note: Anonymous commenting is disabled in order to keep the quality of responses to a high standard.