Can Microsoft really build a better browser?

[nsane.forums]

At last year's PDC, held in November, Microsoft showed a graph showing scores of a variety of Web browsers in the SunSpider JavaScript benchmark, to show off the progress that the company was making with Internet Explorer 9. Another such graph was shown off at the recent MIX event. What was most interesting about the graph was not IE9's progress, but Opera's.

Opera 10.10, released at about the same time as Microsoft held its PDC event, fared pretty badly. Faster than IE8, but slower than everything else, including the (private) PDC IE9 build. Opera 10.50, released a few weeks ago? It's the fastest browser on the chart. It's faster even than prerelease versions of Firefox and Chrome, not to mention faster than the public IE9 Platform Preview build. SunSpider isn't the be-all/end-all of JavaScript performance, and it fails to represent real-world scenarios in a number of ways. However, it's clear that Opera's JavaScript performance has improved substantially over the period of about six months.

View: Original Article

[oZ.]

they probably can but other browser developers like Mozilla, Google will always be WAY ahead of MS.

so in the end IE still suck

[Bizarre™]

Who knows? Maybe if they buy Google, Mozilla, Opera, etc. :P

[Night Owl]

Yes, Opera has really gotten fast in just a few short months.

I agree with Bizarre™, Microsoft will probably have to buy another company to seriously improve Internet Explorer.

[oZ.]

Yes, Opera has really gotten fast in just a few short months.

I agree with Bizarre™, Microsoft will probably have to buy another company to seriously improve Internet Explorer.

i have a feeling that they would buy Opera, since Google and Mozilla is huge and well-known it's a bit hard to buy them off and people would think oh ? MS = Mozilla so Firefox or IE might BOTH suck

- and opera is doing a good job even though the surfing experience is still crappy to me compare to Firefox (i always update my Firefox so it's latest)

[DKT27]

I think they would had already thought about buying Mozilla, but they can end up buying Opera, like they did to Yahoo search.

[oZ.]

I think they would had already thought about buying Mozilla, but they can end up buying Opera, like they did to Yahoo search.

I just hope they won't buy Mozilla...or else it's ganna suck

Opera is the way for IE

FYI: im having Chai Tea + triple triple :wub:

[ESET Freak]

No way Microsoft's gonna buy Firefox! I must say IE8 has done a great job, but only a new version every year and resource hungry is really putting them back, and the addons aren't great and it's too little compared to Firefox. They should make IE open source and introduce more updates, and the AddOns must be improved too.

[telsa]

For some reason, though, IE8 launches faster than Mozilla Firefox 3.6.2. I still prefer Firefox though.

[DKT27]

Addons. ;)

[DreamHaters]

I think Google has more money to buy all browsers.

The thing why IE always fails, is that they dont update frequently and have outdated stuff on there browser.

And it dont look clean and simple to me while FF and Chrome do.

[HX1]

I actually disagree with the method you hint at.. While making it simpler, and easy to use for people with no knowledge I think a piece of software should retain it ability to address advanced issues and offer greater end-user accessibility and customization..

When a program 'DUMBS itself up' to reach a greater audience then I think that possibly the concentration and focus on the direction has been altered and the objectivity has changed. From becoming the best available piece of software out there, to being just the most widely distributed and used. This in effect is the same way that skill over time is sold out to mass production, poor quality, lack of creativity and innovation, and leaves the endpoint user or client with no ability to choose. Instead having functionality hard coded into the product which may be an undesired operation of function. This in turn can create a monopolization within the area, which can create its own lifespan.. at which point nobody has a choice.. but to continue to cycle through useless crap that does not endure nor encompass the wide range of uses, life cycle, and ultimately becomes undesirable.. Long term goals would not be in mind with this mission statement or planning.

The problem IE has had is that from its original version, it had not changed much, and even with major version updates still retains the same image and functionality characteristics. It is a different time now, there have been many movement in many fields, the endpoint being developments which have changed the way people write code, and even use the browser. It is common place for the average user to write code and use it on a daily basis, where 10-12 years ago you would have had to hire someone to d the work for you.

Microsoft had even stated that it would not be trying to score high or validate the Acid Test, with the release of IE8... That means that if the browser engine does not process various code efficiently and correctly, that the entire world wide web, which validate to various standards and is written accordingly will not process efficiently through the browser.. making it possibly one of the only browsers out there who has not taken the initiative to become compliant. Instead they decided to address other areas... almost nothing more than a patch or step in the process to becoming something better... This should note how much of the browser and the idea behind it needs to actually be addressed...

I hope that IE9 will be a great version of a NEW browser from Microsoft and not just more hype.. Judging by the direction it has taken in the past two years.. I think this could be a great possibility... I hope they 'seize the day' or 'Veni Vidi Vici' being its motif when done.. and something that will be prepared to take us into the next 10 years.. at which point there will more than definitely be complaints and concerns for every piece of software written including our fated browsers of choice..

I don't think Microsoft needs to go out and buy a browser to have something that works.. Their resources; ( and this is what gripe a lot of people ) are far reaching and is something that it would seem they could easily do.

Right now on start-up, as mentioned above.. FF, IE, Opera, Iron - first being the longest to start.. However an empty profile.. renders a much faster startup time for FF.. putting it in between Opera and Iron... All of this changes though when we start going with no add-ons and using warm startups.. so its hard to say.. Opera 10.5 has my eye right now.. but I have to have my tools and added function of FF... for me in my configuration.. I feel for the resource usage and what I can do with it FF still has the #1 spot.. That being said I think that change is essential to be implemented ahead of trying to keep up .. it should be innovated.. not patched to be what the rest are..

This is a hard thing to do when development heads get wrapped up in achieving numbers and understanding what they are being told.. and go to implement this in motivating the process.. It doesn't become an objective or goal for what it should be.. but only on how to beat the other guys at their game.. Which is why I hate 'Who's the better guy' type wars.. Everyone become a sell-out and eventually you have no identity, and simply wind up being the representation of someone else's territorial pissings...

Anyway.. <_< just an 'IMO'

[*dcs18]

Firstly, the biggest drawback of Internet Explorer is that it revolves around the activeX methodology. While activeX does render pages more accurately, it's susceptible to vulnerabilities and exploits.

Secondly, addons have been quite instrumental in making Firefox the no. 1 browser whereas the only noteworthy addon for Internet Explorer is IE Pro.

[bj11]

Yes