How does the browser compare to iPhone and s3 stock browsers?

[a5cent]

I think you meant this more as a joke but I honestly think that this is exactly what will mostly happen.

Oh and the mobile Gmail site uses swipe to refresh, for example. From what I understand, this is one of the things not yet supported in IE.

Not a joke, but the only solution to the problem I can think of. I just doubt that it is a realistic solution, hence the emoticon. It would also imply that WebKit adopt emerging internet technologies at the same conservative pace as Trident does today (to avoid enterprise rage). Finally, we could also solve the adoption rate issue by doing away with all the internet standard bodies and defining WebKit's implementation as the standard. Again, no joke, but not really serious either. It doesn't really seem viable.

Anyway, I'm not 100% sure what you are referring too with Gmail's swipe capability (I'm not a web developer, so I'm somewhat out on a limb here). Perhaps WebKit's implementation of their own proprietary touch API (touchstart, touchmove and touchend)?

 

[SZRimaging]

Not a joke, but the only solution to the problem I can think of. I just doubt that it is a realistic solution, hence the emoticon. It would also imply that WebKit adopt emerging internet technologies at the same conservative pace as Trident does today (to avoid enterprise rage). Finally, we could also solve the adoption rate issue by doing away with all the internet standard bodies and defining WebKit's implementation as the standard. Again, no joke, but not really serious either. It doesn't really seem viable.

Wouldn't that just make the people behind Webkit the ruling standards body? Not to mention, Trident, Gecko and whatever Opera uses would be left out in the cold...

 

[a5cent]

Not to mention, Trident, Gecko and whatever Opera uses would be left out in the cold...

Not out in the cold, but dead. That suggestion implies that all browsers not currently using WebKit switch to it. It implies conceding to WebKit, that their dominance of the mobile web allows them to dictate standards.

Apparently, StevesBalls thinks this is likely to happen. I doubt this is realistic, but I'm no web developer.

Finally, we could also solve the adoption rate issue by doing away with all the internet standard bodies and defining WebKit's implementation as the standard. Again, no joke, but not really serious either. It doesn't really seem viable.

Wouldn't that just make the people behind Webkit the ruling standards body?

This is what I meant:

As it is now, the W3C standards and their implementations are separate entities, which would need to be merged. WebKit's implementation then defines/becomes the standard, thereby making it impossible, by definition, for WebKit to deviate from the standard. What previously would have been a proprietary feature, or a feature based on an incomplete standard, just becomes the standard.

After rethinking that comment, I realize it is unnecessary. If WebKit is the only rendering engine in use, globally, then there is no such thing as a proprietary feature. WebKit could also just choose not to release features based on incomplete standards and nix the tradition of prefixing altogether. Add to that a guarantee of perpetual backward compatibility and it amounts to the same thing. Then the two entities can remain separate.

Anyway, the requirement is that corporations with large corporate intranets shouldn't need to worry about proprietary functionality or changing standards incurring large maintenance costs down the road.

As you can see, I don't think about these things all too often :wink:

I'm not sure there is anyone to "blame". Google is trying to make cutting edge technology, so they use cutting edge techniques. And, just like MS did back in the days of IE4 and IE5, sometimes they need to go invent their own stuff to make it work. Even if it doesn't end up being the standard, it helps advance what is possible.

And yet we all rightly blame Microsoft for the idiocy which was IE6, which still plagues corporate intranet applications to this day. Microsoft barely cared about standards compliance back then. The reason Microsoft got away with it is because they had a monopoly on the desktop browser market. Today it is WebKit that has a de facto monopoly on mobile browsers. Many mobile websites are tested using nothing but WebKit, wile companies like Google seem more than happy to ignore Firefox, IE and Opera outright (leading to the suboptimal experiences described by deuxani), even though I recognize nothing that would warrant a proprietary WebKit implementation.

Are we not creating a new IE6 for the mobile web? Are you sure it is good policy to be unsure about weather or not Google and Apple are behaving responsibly (the whole blame thing)?

 

[snowmutt]

I know next to nothing about these complaints, or how the internet works with mobile. But, I can say one thing: I can hardly wait until some standard is set that will allow all browsers to work with all sites. Maybe it won't ever be 100%, but there is no excuse for millions of different handsets to have problems. Mobile exploded so fast, I think it was unavoidable.

I like the IE10 experience in my limited experience. Seems a ton better in WP8. However, if it is still not up to Android and iPhone levels, then that will cost sales. For some users, that is the most important part of their smart phone. Truthfully, I surf the web a ton more from my phone then from any computer. I am sure I am not alone.

 

[a5cent]

I can hardly wait until some standard is set that will allow all browsers to work with all sites.

The absurdity of the situation is that we already have that standard! Most of the standards that specify how the world wide web works are defined by the W3C. Obviously, the purpose of having standards is to promote compatibility, so any browser can correctly display the contents of any website. Obviously, this isn't working. What or who is at fault, or if anything/anyone is at fault, is debatable.

I like the IE10 experience in my limited experience. Seems a ton better in WP8. However, if it is still not up to Android and iPhone levels, then that will cost sales.

IE10 is one of the most standards-compliant browsers currently available and also one of the fastest. But that isn't worth anything if the sites you visit aren't standards compliant or require a LOT of WebKit specific features to get the full experience.

The mobile browsers included in iOS, Android, Blackberry, Bada, Tizen and WebOS are all based on WebKit. WebKit is the core piece of software used to build these browsers. The development of WebKit is funded largely by Apple and Google. Together, the browsers on these mobile operating systems are responsible for 95+% of the worlds mobile internet traffic.

As a result, for mobile websites, Google is free to use any amount of non-standard features they want, because it will still work for 95% of users... just not for us WP folk (or those using mobile Firefox or Opera).

Users notice that Google's services look great on iPhone or Android mobile devices, but not on WP. Most users will naturally jump to the conclusion that mobile IE is "not up to Android and iPhone levels", which is simply false. Google is just serving mobile IE vastly inferior web pages.

For desktop browsers the situation is entirely different. Here Google has no problem sticking to the standards, or at least giving users a standards compliant version that is almost identical to their WebKit based version. The reason they do this for desktop browsers is because much of that traffic comes from desktop IE. Were they to employ the same strategy they use for mobile, they would instantly alienate something like 80% of the worlds desktop internet users, which isn't a good business strategy.

My view is, that if Google can do it for desktop, they can do it for mobile. Of course it's not completely crazy to disagree. :wink:

 

[Daniel Ratcliffe]

The absurdity of the situation is that we already have that standard! Most of the standards that specify how the world wide web works are defined by the W3C. Obviously, the purpose of having standards is to promote compatibility, so any browser can correctly display the contents of any website. Obviously, this isn't working. What or who is at fault, or if anything/anyone is at fault, is debatable.

IE10 is one of the most standards-compliant browsers currently available and also one of the fastest. But that isn't worth anything if the sites you visit aren't standards compliant or require a LOT of WebKit specific features to get the full experience.

The mobile browsers included in iOS, Android, Blackberry, Bada, Tizen and WebOS are all based on WebKit. WebKit is the core piece of software used to build these browsers. The development of WebKit is funded largely by Apple and Google. Together, the browsers on these mobile operating systems are responsible for 95+% of the worlds mobile internet traffic.

As a result, for mobile websites, Google is free to use any amount of non-standard features they want, because it will still work for 95% of users... just not for us WP folk (or those using mobile Firefox or Opera).

Users notice that Google's services look great on iPhone or Android mobile devices, but not on WP. Most users will naturally jump to the conclusion that mobile IE is "not up to Android and iPhone levels", which is simply false. Google is just serving mobile IE vastly inferior web pages.

For desktop browsers the situation is entirely different. Here Google has no problem sticking to the standards, or at least giving users a standards compliant version that is almost identical to their WebKit based version. The reason they do this for desktop browsers is because much of that traffic comes from desktop IE. Were they to employ the same strategy they use for mobile, they would instantly alienate something like 80% of the worlds desktop internet users, which isn't a good business strategy.

My view is, that if Google can do it for desktop, they can do it for mobile. Of course it's not completely crazy to disagree. :wink:

The thing is, if we can then persuade users to shift to Outlook mail and Bing (I routinely use both on my phone, and use a lot more Bing on my desktop than I used to), then maybe we can shove out this WebKit thing. As it stands though, with iPhone and Android dominating, they could literally turn around and make it so if you were to access Google from a Windows Phone, it would see

"client=mobile
browser!=WebKit"

Google could then turn around and say "Sorry, this phone is not supported. To use Google please buy an iPhone or Android". And people would most likely do that en-masse, thus killing off WP and FireFox OS.

 

[a5cent]

The thing is, if we can then persuade users to shift to Outlook mail and Bing (I routinely use both on my phone, and use a lot more Bing on my desktop than I used to), then maybe we can shove out this WebKit thing.

I don't think we can or even need to shove WebKit out. We just need standards that can be enforced. Standards are useless otherwise, right?

Someone once told me, the great thing about standards is that everyone has their own... :wink:

Anyway, Bing and Outlook mail are standards-compliant, so none of the competing browsers, mobile or not, have problems with those sites.

The only way to shove out WebKit would be by doing the same thing to Apple/Google that they are currently doing to Microsoft. Even if that were possible, I would be equally opposed to that too.

Either we have standards, or we don't. Right now we don't.

 

[eric12341]

I get the feeling IE10 even is more of a battery hog than the other browsers as well.

Highly doubtful.

 

[Onyeka Nwankwo]

I see a lot of people saying IE 10 is slower than safara or android browser. I'm not entirely sure where that is coming from?

Here is a speedtest video of the Lumia 920 vs. Galaxy s3 and they seem pretty much even: Nokia Lumia 920 vs. Samsung Galaxy S3 Speed Test, Which Is Faster? - YouTube

 

[Slai]

Yeah looks equal.

 

[brmiller1976]

So tell me who is the loser in the end? It's the customer. Google can run its platform anyway it likes, it DOES NOT depend on Windows Phone. But a lot of Windows Phone users do depend on Google services. So would it kill Microsoft to do whatever needs to be done to make these websites open the same way they do in all other browsers?

Rather than expecting Microsoft to "fix" Google's obvious decision to deliberately provide poor user experience to Windows Phone users, customers would be better off with the decision to switch from Google to a provider like Bing or Yahoo, both of which, unlike Google, are competent enough to code mobile search, e-mail and other services that work correctly with Windows Phone handsets.

 

[brmiller1976]

IE still lacks in HTML5 support compared to WebKit, that's just a fact.

IE 10 gets a better score for HTML5 compatibility than the Ice Cream Sandwich browser (which is the most common browser on new Android phones).

Blaming the competitor that he does not go out of his way to make his sites accessible to your competing platform?

Not really (although that sort of thing was "predatory" when Microsoft did it to Google, but Google fanboys love to come in and justify it).

I simply view it as an opportunity to upsell people to the superior services offered by Microsoft and other competitors. Outlook.com is clearly superior to Gmail, Bing gets better results 80% of the time than Google, Bing Shopping is actual price-based search and not an effort to deceive and rip off consumers for the benefit of advertisers, and Skydrive brings it all together. Best of all, using Microsoft's best-in-class services to replace Google's poorly-coded solutions that don't render correctly delivers a full cross-platform experience (across ALL major OSes, not just the ones that Google "likes.") And Microsoft doesn't violate your privacy and sell the contents of your private e-mail to advertisers -- unlike Google.

Google's incompetence in developing a compelling UX for Windows Phone simply provides another motivation for people to switch from the lazy incumbent to the innovative upstart.

 

[a5cent]

WP customers would be better off with the decision to switch from Google to a provider like Bing or Yahoo, both of which, unlike Google, are competent enough to code mobile search, e-mail and other services that work correctly with Windows Phone handsets.

... or ANY other browser on ANY other connected device (handset or otherwise)... because Microsoft's modern websites are standards compliant.

P.S. strange... 10 years ago I would never have imagined writing such a sentence.

 

[brmiller1976]

Yep. "Google Everywhere" is the newest codeword for "half-assed user experience, proprietary code, and your privacy delivered to advertisers on a platter."

 

[AngryNil]

For the general Webkit argument - no, Microsoft should not be forced to use Webkit for the reasons stated. Webkit is not eternal and you shouldn't be catering your experience around compatibility with one browser engine. That's like writing a great app for one platform and dishing out web views for the rest. No one approves of that, you shouldn't approve of Webkit complacency.

so google is going out of its way to do this to Internet Explorer? Yet their mobile website opens perfectly find on every single Android browser, iPad, iPhone, BlackBerry etc etc? Give me a break. I'm sure it's some screwup in Internet Explorer. People don't hate IE for no reason you know. It's because of crap like this.

Oh, it works fine on every single Android browser? Who would have guessed.

People do hate IE for no reason, just like you.

 

[Daniel Ratcliffe]

Jeez! Good to see a comparison test! Holy wow that's pretty fast though!

 

[WasteSomeTime]

Are there any 3rd party browser which do a better job that I could maybe purchase of the market place? And I do mean an actual browser and not just a different skin if IE, I know android has those.
Sent from my SGH-i677 using Board Express

 

[Daniel Ratcliffe]

Are there any 3rd party browser which do a better job that I could maybe purchase of the market place? And I do mean an actual browser and not just a different skin if IE, I know android has those.
Sent from my SGH-i677 using Board Express

I'm afraid you can't do this. You're locked to Internet Explorer re-skinned.

 

[WasteSomeTime]

I know that ms doesn't allow custom keyboards and so forth but there are 3rd party music players.
Sent from my SGH-i677 using Board Express

 

[ynight]

It needs some getting used to. I'd say it's quite smooth. But the only backward button thing I never understand why...
Sent from my RM-820_nam_att_100 using Board Express