Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The birth of Microsoft's new web rendering engine

blogs.msdn.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 247 posts

Re: The birth of Microsoft's new web rendering engine

#231

Post by path411 »

girvo wrote: post #163
path411 wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What about chrome doesn't respect web developers? Chrome's web debugging in browser is very good, and until recently firefox didn't even compete in that regard.

Are you kidding? Firebug was the gold-standard for a very long time, and for a very good reason. If you're talking Firefox's built-in tools, then sure, but talking about Firefox while ignoring extensions is laughable.

Firefox didn't make Firebug though. Chrome has supported developers directly a lot longer than Firefox has.

Re: The birth of Microsoft's new web rendering engine

#232

Post by rhengles »

blacksmith_tb wrote: post #175
Encosia wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Have you used IE in the past few years? IE is (by far) already the fastest browser on my two Windows 10 machines right now. That was also the case when they were running Windows 8 and 8.1 in the past. The latest versions of IE make Chrome feel like Netscape Communicator 4, and they're noticeably faster than Firefox too. If it had a nice LastPass extension, Ghostery, Buffer, and a few others, I'd probably be using IE…

Sadly, judging from FF and Chrome both, extensions lead to unavoidable slowdowns. Which makes them a "can't live with them, can't live without them" proposition. Every time I create a new profile, I am shocked by how fast it is. Then the avalanche of ads and tracking pixels forces me to install ABE or uBlock, and the downward spiral begins.

I think MS already has a solution for this.

http://blogs.msdn.com/b/ie/archive/2010/09/17/add-ons-stayin...

Re: The birth of Microsoft's new web rendering engine

#234

Post by jamra »

gtjrossi wrote: post #179
Throwaway90283 wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd like to see some competition as well, but in my perspective, they're taking the wrong approach. This entire project seems to be about improving compatibility with older websites, by adding more algorithms and layers to the rendering process. I don't believe everyone is using Firefox and Chrome because they have better compatibility than IE. I think they should focus on cutting the fat, and making the lightest wei…

Actually, our approach is effectively yielding the results you're looking for. Removal of old IE legacy cruft is slimming Spartan's disk and memory footprint when compared with IE. Advances in the Chakra engine are pushing performance ahead. We're rearchitecting our DOM, which is yielding perf and security wins too. We're planning an extension platform also, with top add-ons like ad block being a clear target. There'…

So when your browser doesn't work on modern web sites that make up 90% of what people visit, people will site "broken compatibility" and then move to Chrome or Firefox. You'll then reiterate your focus on the few outdated sites that no one visits stating that "broken compatibility" is the cause.

I think you may be mistaking broken compatibility with backwards compatibility. I don't use IE because it doesn't work with modern web sites.

Re: The birth of Microsoft's new web rendering engine

#235

Post by tracker1 »

EdSharkey wrote: post #42
melling wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We have a already have lot of competition. In fact, it's never been better: Chrome, Firefox, WebKit, Chromium, Opera. You can even get the source code for Firefox and Chrome and contribute. I'm glad Microsoft is making a better go at it, but honestly, Microsoft could have built a more compliant browser any time they wanted too. https://html5test.com/results/desktop.html

We got the Gecko family of browsers, the Trident family of browsers, and the WebKit family of browsers. Sure, there are varying JS engines, and Blink and Servo are on the way, but WebKit is the 900lbs gorilla. It is a monoculture in a lot of ways. I use and promote Firefox because I want to check the other vendors. Microsoft makes, hm, how can I be positive here ... patchy software. There are always lots of rough pat…

IE6 was pretty damned awesome at release... IE5.x was a bit of a mess in that transition, but 6 was pretty damned awesome (proprietary bits included)... That said, it got stale pretty fast (by the time Phoenix was renamed Firefox) and slid even faster as others worked to make a better browser experience. The sad thing is, we're just now shedding IE8, and IE9 is still holding on... I'll be happy once I can get to an IE10+ only position...

For me, one thing I've been wanting to do is a compute heavy challenge-response for API requests.. meaning web workers, and that's only IE10+ ... will probably do a proof of concept with node (server) with scrype (client/server) against a pool of computed hashes... which could be very interesting in terms of reducing a DDOS against an API.

Re: The birth of Microsoft's new web rendering engine

#236

Post by icantthinkofone »

wnevets wrote: post #171
icantthinkofone wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No web developer worth his salt writes code for any one browser. You write code to the standard and test in browsers. Anyone doing differently should be fired on the spot. I'm not aware of any professional web developer who does that.

what.

I said, "You don't know what you're talking about and shouldn't be replying here!"

Re: The birth of Microsoft's new web rendering engine

#237

Post by icantthinkofone »

guardian5x wrote: post #224
icantthinkofone wrote: post #192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Speed is not the mark of a good browser. If you are using speed as your mark, then you have never coded for the web and have never gone through the trials and tribulations of IE. If speed was the target, then Lynx would be the best of browsers. http://html5test.com/ http://css3test.com/

html5test might not be the best comparison either. They test things that are not part of the official html5 spec. The scoring seems sometimes arbitrary.

Tell me when you've found better. In the meantime, you didn't say anything about the other test.

Suffice to say, if IE11 was that great, they wouldn't be dumping it and rewriting. That's considerable effort.

Re: The birth of Microsoft's new web rendering engine

#238

Post by wnevets »

icantthinkofone wrote: post #236
wnevets wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

what.

I said, "You don't know what you're talking about and shouldn't be replying here!"

What does your comment have to do with anything I said in mine? Its as if you replied to the wrong one.

Re: The birth of Microsoft's new web rendering engine

#239

Post by Encosia »

icantthinkofone wrote: post #223
Encosia wrote: post #201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Err, Chrome's absolute #1 selling point for at least the first year or so was speed, e.g.: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w7VNjGuSK_k https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FaNpWJY9SEs https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RrDHrwLUtvk I agree that speed isn't everything, but switching to IE is often a relief these days when Chrome has managed to spin up my Surface 3 Pro's fan yet again just browsing average sites. > then you hav…

Speed is NEVER the mark of a good browser. It can be a point on a list but, if it fails to properly implement standards or work in all devices, that's a failed browser. It's not the whole picture. But you say you agree with my point. If your Surface 3 can't handle the computing needs of a browser, that's not a resounding recommendation for owning a Surface. As far as developing for the web, I've own a web dev company…

So, you're telling me that Chrome running poorly on an i7 processor (while Photoshop, Visual Studio, WebStorm, Firefox, and IE all manage to run fine) is the Surface's fault? It's awfully hard to take any of your points seriously with these lines of reasoning.

Seriously though, everyone I knew who jumped from Firefox to Chrome ~5 years ago did it 100% for performance. We were switching to Chrome for speed even despite it lacking a lot of key features (e.g. dev tools, extensions, third-party cooking blocking, Flash blocking). Speed might not be the only important mark of a good browser, but it is a crucial ingredient.

Re: The birth of Microsoft's new web rendering engine

#240

Post by Encosia »

icantthinkofone wrote: post #237
guardian5x wrote: post #224

Earlier quoted context omitted.

html5test might not be the best comparison either. They test things that are not part of the official html5 spec. The scoring seems sometimes arbitrary.

Tell me when you've found better. In the meantime, you didn't say anything about the other test. Suffice to say, if IE11 was that great, they wouldn't be dumping it and rewriting. That's considerable effort.

On my machine, Chrome Beta channel scores 51% in 52ms and IE TP scores 44% in 41ms. If no browser is even making a passing grade on that test yet, it seems more aspirational than anything.
Post reply on HN