back to article Windows 10 Edge: Standards kinda suck yet better than Chrome?

Weary old web warhorse Internet Explorer (known to thousands of Reg readers' spouses and parents up and down the land simply as "the internet") is destined soon for the dustbin of tech history. After decades of dominance through proprietary lock-in and anti-trust-busted software bundling, the monster lurking in web developer …

Page:

  1. AMBxx Silver badge
    Go

    It seems good, but...

    Not until AdBlock is available in some easy to maintain form (HOSTS file doesn't count).

    1. This post has been deleted by its author

      1. Frank N. Stein

        Re: It seems good, but...

        No extension Support at launch? Then I will use Chrome until they have plugin support, namely, Adblock.

    2. Turtle

      @AMBxx Re: It seems good, but...

      "Not until AdBlock is available in some easy to maintain form (HOSTS file doesn't count)."

      I am waiting for a NoScrpt workalike, myself. NoScript is the one reason and the only reason that I use FireFox.

    3. Bob Vistakin
      Happy

      They should keep IE, but simplify it for its most common use

      Get rid of the address bar and everything else except one big button in the middle - "Download Chrome".

      1. Stuart Castle

        Re: They should keep IE, but simplify it for its most common use

        Or they could offer a choice, you know, like the Browser Choice screen? Not everyone likes Chrome.

        1. sabroni Silver badge

          Re: Not everyone likes Chrome.

          No, some of us like to be able to control when an app updates itself, something Chrome makes very awkward.

  2. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Hmmm

    If this thing can safely break the auto-run html5 video feature that the latest version of Chrome is refusing to stop, I'll switch thanks.

    1. Bob Vistakin
      Joke

      Re: Hmmm

      I will miss those great Internet Explorer ads though.

  3. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Soon?

    Internet Explorer will soon be ... in the dustbin of internet history.

    IE6 was only recently - finally - disposed of. So, I don't think "soon" means what you think it does...

    1. Steve Davies 3 Silver badge

      Re: Soon?

      I agree. IE will ONLY be removed from a good many companies (and HMG) dead cold hands at the turn of the next decade (at the earliest) no matter what MS might try to do.

      There are just far too many internal applications that just won't work on any other browser. This might be by design (job contimuation) or accident (even more job continuation). Who really knows.

      Also, MS seems to still be having problems with its own website not working all that well with Edge.

      It is almost as if Bono has deviced to go it alone and form U1.

      1. TechnicalBen Silver badge
        Joke

        Re: Soon?

        "There are just far too many internal applications that just won't work on any other browser."

        It's questionable if they even work on IE...

        1. JustNiz

          Re: Soon?

          Never mind internal. Many of Microsoft's own mainstream commercial products rely on IE-only crap. Sharepoint is just one example.

      2. Vic

        Re: Soon?

        There are just far too many internal applications that just won't work on any other browser. This might be by design (job contimuation) or accident (even more job continuation).

        I worked on a browser-based project a couple of years back. The intent of the spec was that only IE need be supported. The spec actually said that only IE would be usable...

        Needless to say, we accidentally forgot to implement that bit.

        Vic.

  4. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

    "considerably more compliant with the HTML standards that define the web."

    Embrace...

    "Edge has a lot of new features for users"

    Extend...

    Remind me, what comes next?

    1. dogged

      What Edge doesn't do is implement CSS with "-webkit-" prefixes. If anything has embraced and extended web standards, it's WebKit.

      Mozilla and MS (with Edge) are the only things preventing it from extinguishing them.

      Like the first commenter, I'm not switching until there are equivalents of AdBlock, NoScript and Ghostery - I'll stick with Firefox until that happens.

      After it happens (since Edge supports a plug-in architecture, it will happen), I might well switch. Some ad-hoc testing in a Win10 VM indicates that it's orders of magnitude faster in use than either Chrome or Firefox (although to be fair, this may be because there are no plugins).

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        I hope Edge still has a DOM object interface for user applications. Otherwise the need for a major redevelopment will prompt a move to Linux.

        1. dogged

          You say that but you're on the Register. Here, everything from war in the Middle East to a slightly uncomfortable bowel movement is viewed as MS's fault and grounds for a move to linux.

          1. Anonymous Coward
            Linux

            > Here, everything from war in the Middle East to a slightly uncomfortable bowel movement is viewed as MS's fault and grounds for a move to linux.

            And that's wrong how?

            1. dogged

              linux has many virtues but being high in fibre isn't one of them.

              1. mmeier

                Actually I consider Linux the "Granola OS"

                All the nuts and flakes in one pot. And Toe Cheese!

      2. Mike Dimmick

        -webkit- prefixes in Edge

        Microsoft have discovered that a very large part of the web - particularly the mobile web - doesn't work properly without -webkit prefixes. So they've implemented a ton of them in Edge: http://www.justrog.com/2015/05/the-web-no-longer-works-without-webkit.html .

        1. sabroni Silver badge

          Re: -webkit- prefixes in Edge

          Yeah, but that's Google stinking up the web with non-standard markup and therefore ok. Totally different to the IE specific stuff that we all loathe.

        2. Destroy All Monsters Silver badge

          Re: -webkit- prefixes in Edge

          Here, everything from war in the Middle East to a slightly uncomfortable bowel movement is viewed as MS's fault and grounds for a move to linux.

          AND IT'S TRUE!

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Exterminate. For the record.

      Certain things, even rhetorical, deserve being spelled out.

  5. Paul Shirley

    still riddled with Flash badness though

    Another chance to tell Adobe which orifice to shove Flash back up missed :(

    1. David Austin

      Re: still riddled with Flash badness though

      Including Flash with Internet Explorer 11 was Windows 8's biggest of many sins in my eyes.

      We're just at the point where binning it is a viable option, and Microsoft make it the flash and PDF Support the only "plugin" available in Edge.

      Too late to do much about it now, But I'd really urge Microsoft to ship Windows 10 with the plugin off by default, rather than on by default...

    2. Michael B.

      Re: still riddled with Flash badness though

      In the advanced settings there is a simple switch "Use Adobe Flash Player" so disabling Flash is only 3 clicks away.

      1. Can't think of anything witty...

        Re: still riddled with Flash badness though

        I got a new work laptop in January this year and have not installed flash on it - despite the fact that i use it quite a bit for non-work (mostly out of office hours... ... mostly).

        Can honestly say that i really don't miss flash to any significant amount. the only website that still seems to need it is the BBC with some of their content and generally, i don't feel like i'm missing out on anything as i prefer to read the news stories (not watch them) and i have the iPlayer app on my phone and xbox if i do need catch up.

        As soon as they get rid of it, it will be a distant memory and i cannot wait.

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: still riddled with Flash badness though

          if it wasn't for the fecking BBC I'd disable flash on our site in about 5mins. But to fork the BBC's website is a step too far for our users :o(

        2. Teiwaz Silver badge
          Thumb Up

          Re: still riddled with Flash badness though

          Have an upvote.

          I expressed almost exactly the same sentiment on a previous article about Flash. BBC is the only site I regularly visit to which lack of flash is a bit of nuisance, but i too prefer to read (even just the single paragraph accompanying a vidclip is generally all I want to know without siting through a clip that adds no extra info.

          I'm sure that the written word is being phased out on the BBC news site, it's like Fahrenheit 451...

          1. Longtemps, je me suis couche de bonne heure

            Re: still riddled with Flash badness though

            But I think the BBC is following its users in this case, not leading them...

      2. DougS Silver badge

        @Michael B - easy to disable Flash

        You miss the point - by including it and having it enabled by default, web designers can assume that anyone running that browser has Flash available.

        The designers typically use different code for different devices, so while the Safari version will assume no flash, the Edge version will assume flash is present. Sites with Flash will probably break if you try to visit them in Edge with Flash disabled, because they will ignore the small percentage of people who change their defaults.

  6. Wardy01

    wtf!

    I'd like to take this opportunity to point out that something Microsoft did was highlighted as positive on here.

    What's going on?

    I'm confused?

    True though ...

    1. Jeff Lewis

      Re: wtf!

      Really? Did you actually read the article? Are you familiar with the phrase 'damning with faint praise'?

    2. Charlie Clark Silver badge

      Re: wtf!

      Actually, since IE9 the relevant developers have been working quite hard to implement web standards but were hamstrung by backwards compatibility due to the clusterfuck that is ActiveX. Edge is the result of the realisation by management that maintaining support for that kind of stuff, that they have been actively discouraging since Vista, was not compatible with actually updating the browser.

      Where IE 8 is required it's easy enough to run a thin VM with IE 8.

  7. thomas k

    sounds nice

    still no reason to upgrade to 10, tho, speaking for myself

  8. Pascal Monett Silver badge

    The king is dead !

    "Windows 10, due in two weeks, will use Microsoft's latest browser creation: Edge"

    Long live the king !

    Microsoft has never bowed before standards before. The lip service it is paying at this point is because it no longer has any choice.

    As soon as it can, it will revert to its true nature. And we all know what that is.

    1. dogged
      Meh

      Re: The king is dead !

      With your absolute knowledge of the future, can you give me Friday's Euromillions numbers?

    2. Charlie Clark Silver badge

      Re: The king is dead !

      The IE team has been much more engaged in standards than Apple over the last few years.

      1. Pascal Monett Silver badge

        @Charlie Clark

        That is such a relief.

        On the other hand, when you're starting from nothing, it's not difficult to improve.

        Microsoft has lots of room to improve as far as respecting standards is concerned. Has everyone already forgotten the kerfuffle around the OOXML vote ?

        Apparently they have.

  9. Fred M

    "After decades of dominance through proprietary lock-in and anti-trust-busted software bundling, the monster lurking in web developer nightmares will no longer be the default browser for Windows."

    "Regrettably, since Apple doesn't allow other browser rendering engines in the App Store there will never be any real competition there."

    And yet Apple don't have to face any anti-trust action. Odd.

    As always, XKCD says is best. https://xkcd.com/1118/

    1. Def Silver badge

      That's because all anti-trust action as far as web browsers was concerned came from Opera crying about nobody using their web browser. Since they fired most of their developers and switched to Chromium, I think it's fair to say they don't give a shit any more anyway. (Which is fine, because nobody who used to use their browser gives a shit about them either these days.)

    2. Steve Davies 3 Silver badge

      Apple Brwosers and the App Store

      You don't have to buy an iDevice you know.

      There are plenty of alternatives from the Android world.

      Apple do not have a monopoly on smartphones. IF they did then there might be a case for an anti-trust investigation.

      On the plus side, that iDevice won't ever run flash.

      Flash or a different browser? What would really be better for the user experience?

      1. picturethis
        Alien

        Re: Apple Brwosers and the App Store

        "Apple do not have a monopoly on smartphones."

        Maybe not, but they're not doing too bad in having a monopoly of owning their customer's data, wallets and purses with their explicit consent no less! I guess (most) people will give up anything for simplicity (not having to learn or be responsible for their own actions) and consequently paying to be led around by the nose-ring Apple has inserted into them.

        I can't help but really wonder where this is all going to end.. What will Apple do when everyone in the entire world owns one of their phones (I refuse to use their model name)? They'll probably sponsor SETI so that they can be the first to sell into a new market.

        1. DougS Silver badge

          Re: Apple Brwosers and the App Store

          The iPhone has a ceiling on its market share because Apple chases only the high end market. Many will never be able to afford it, many others who can afford it will choose a cheaper option, others will never choose them because they dislike Apple, prefer Google, prefer Android, don't like the "walled garden", etc., etc. There's zero chance of the iPhone reaching even a third of the market, let alone enough to constitute what is deemed a monopoly share.

    3. JW 1

      Always this old canard

      I'm by no means an Apple fan (don't own a single device) but Microsoft was busted due to an ILLEGAL monopoly. They coerced PC vendors to sell only Windows with ONLY IE on it. And, since Windows was at one time >90% of the PC market they controlled a monopoly on OS.

      Apple, nor anyone else for that matter, has ever come close to that monopoly power. While Google may own a great deal of the search market they aren't forcing themselves on people. You can easily switch engines.

      Just stop it with the why not Apple? Apple does not hold a monopoly on anything.

      1. DougS Silver badge

        Re: Always this old canard

        Gotta love that haters will actually upvote such drivel, and downvote those who explain why it is drivel. I'm pretty sure someone could suggest nuking Apple HQ as the proper response to this and still receive upvotes from those morons.

      2. Jeff Lewis

        Re: Always this old canard

        If you're going to critique someone for their ignorance - be sure of YOUR facts first.

        There is no such a thing as an 'illegal' monopoly. Monopolies are quite legal. What is illegal, on the other hand, is the use of the power of your monopoly to distort the market unfairly or to act in a way that reduces the competitiveness of the market.

        That's what Microsoft was charged with. it was questionable then, but like it or not, that's what they were charged with. They've done their time so to speak and so it's time to let go of that one.

        Now, onto Apple. You don't have to have a monopoly in all markets. Apple has a monopoly position in music services and of all things, electronic books. No other electronic music sales company comes even close to iTunes in terms of sales - which is why Apple can demand exclusives - which distort the market.

        They were actually indicted for conspiracy for colluding with several book publishers to fix pricing on ebook sales.

        While I don't think it's likely to happen, the iPhone could become the majority phone - and because of Apple's 'ecosystem' that could easily lead to another claim of monopolistic practices. And this is where you make another mistake WRT Google: being a monopoly doesn't go away just because people 'could' switch. By that logic, Microsoft didn't have a monopoly because people 'could' have switched to Macs, or installed some other browser on Windows. Interestingly - even when given the chance to choose some other browser at first install time, most people still chose IE.

        Google isn't just a browser - it's an entire ecosystem of interlinked services. It's Android which is also linked into it. It's apps are in iOS. Once you buy into the Google system - it's not that easy to pry yourself back out... much as once you buy into the Apple ecosystem, it's hard to break free of it. That difficulty of escape also factors into whether or not a company is or has a monopoly position.

  10. swisstoni

    Forking ridiculous

    Hey I know competition is a good thing, but I do wish they'd just forked web-kit and saved us web devs the inevitable head aches to come.

Page:

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019