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

IE10: How does it really stack up?

lucidchart.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–67 of 67 posts

Re: IE10: How does it really stack up?

#61

Post by pbhjpbhj »

untog wrote: post #43
pbhjpbhj wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not just one benchmark, but one apparently completely undocumented benchmark run under Windows 8 on a single laptop. They don't mention how many times the benchmark ran which makes me suspicious that the answer might be one?? Unless they release the benchmarking tool then this result seems pretty worthless to me. > we’ve developed a benchmark that runs inside of the Lucidchart diagramming application // So maybe that…

So maybe that line for Firefox could as well read "Lucidchart crashed"? No, I'd say that JS should never crash the browser, no matter what.

OK fair enough but if I code something wrongly it doesn't work and fails badly then I'm at least partly to be blame, no?

It's moot anyway as it appears the test is proprietary and so can't be investigated further?

Re: IE10: How does it really stack up?

#62

Post by digisign »

dangrossman wrote: post #60
digisign wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Chrome and Firefox both work fine on my copy of XP. So those new features can't be very important.

Here, learn why so you can form an informed opinion. http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2010/04/why-mi... IE10 and Windows 8 are even stronger on the security points. Think of PC security as somewhat akin to vaccination. It only works for everyone when enough people are immunized. Herd immunity, it's called. Your sticking with objectively less secure browsers on objectively less secure platforms hurts us a…

Haha, I use a modern Linux 95% of the time these days, but keep an old box around for testing. I run a very tight ship and that box has never been owned (except for the one morning in ~2004 when the dcom exploit hit). Your implication that I'm a security threat is amusing.

The nice technologies the article mentions are operating system level and don't "have to" be tied to the browser. They are using fancy terms to describe security features from the 80's (on more professional systems). "Browsers can't write to the OS to install rootkits"... wow.

MS decided not to backport to further corporate goals, fine. But, the idea that IE has to be part of the OS was debunked a decade ago.

Re: IE10: How does it really stack up?

#63

Post by ygra »

btipling wrote: post #42

Others have already mentioned the probably slow pace of IE updates. Another thing I'll mention is that testing IE requires Windows, and I haven't worked at a place in years where anyone on my team was using Windows. Years. I've worked at Ask.com, Cloudkick, Rackspace, and now a new startup. Until I can test IE on a Mac, I wont bother to support it unless customers mention something is broken, and they rarely do. Beca…

You may have heard of this new thing called “Virtual Machine”.

Re: IE10: How does it really stack up?

#64

Post by pbhjpbhj »

olliesaunders wrote: post #28
pbhjpbhj wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> a look on the Opera website and now it says "Faster & Safer internet" yet it performed worst on this test. // Which page were you on, the front page of the website doesn't say that to me? My first instinct would be that they're referring to their "turbo" implementation and their large mobile install base, cf http://www.opera.com/browser/turbo/ .

> Which page were you on, the front page of the website doesn't say that to me? It's the contents of the tag so it displays on the title bar of the browser you are using to read it with and in the tab if you are using a browser with tabs.

Lol, I don't normally have a title bar (turned off for main FF window) and the relevant part was most likely hidden by having a dozen or so tags open. Thanks answering.

Re: IE10: How does it really stack up?

#65

Post by btipling »

ygra wrote: post #63
btipling wrote: post #42

Others have already mentioned the probably slow pace of IE updates. Another thing I'll mention is that testing IE requires Windows, and I haven't worked at a place in years where anyone on my team was using Windows. Years. I've worked at Ask.com, Cloudkick, Rackspace, and now a new startup. Until I can test IE on a Mac, I wont bother to support it unless customers mention something is broken, and they rarely do. Beca…

You may have heard of this new thing called “Virtual Machine”.

My development environment runs on a VM. You can't run multiple VMs on a host. I actually didn't want to reply to you because of your sarcasm. Also your comment history is very windows focused.

Re: IE10: How does it really stack up?

#66

Post by ygra »

btipling wrote: post #65
ygra wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You may have heard of this new thing called “Virtual Machine”.

My development environment runs on a VM. You can't run multiple VMs on a host. I actually didn't want to reply to you because of your sarcasm. Also your comment history is very windows focused.

The only time I ever had problems running multiple VMs at once was when I used two different VMMs to do so. In fact, testing IE on Windows is equally painful as you need the VMs for the older versions anyway (unless you happen to have a few real machines lying around).

Depending on your site's demographics you may choose to ignore IE testing, I understand. But often that demographic is rather disconnected from your own development OS so you may not always get around it.

Also your comment history is very JS-focused (but how does that matter in any way?).

Re: IE10: How does it really stack up?

#67

Post by btipling »

ygra wrote: post #66
btipling wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My development environment runs on a VM. You can't run multiple VMs on a host. I actually didn't want to reply to you because of your sarcasm. Also your comment history is very windows focused.

The only time I ever had problems running multiple VMs at once was when I used two different VMMs to do so. In fact, testing IE on Windows is equally painful as you need the VMs for the older versions anyway (unless you happen to have a few real machines lying around). Depending on your site's demographics you may choose to ignore IE testing, I understand. But often that demographic is rather disconnected from your o…

My comment history is more varied I think. My development environment runs a lot of stuff, so even if running two vm's at once were realistic, it wouldn't be.
Post reply on HN