IE9 and Horrible HTML5 Scores

[Blacklac]

Heh, the Blackberry Playbook scores higher than any other browser (Desktop included) except Chrome on the Desktop. Who fell behind now...

 

[eric12341]

its like the old acid3 test debates. Opera got a perfect score but still could not properly render some sites, especially opera mobile. Now on IE9M I haven't encountered any rendering problems. That site linked was probably designed to not let other browsers access it so that point is moot especially since it was the only example given m

 

[Michael Goff]

People take that site seriously? I'd rather look at the tests that the w3c came out with. They know what the format will actually support.


Edit: Also, the numbers change based on browser. Mobile Firefox gets lower than when its user-string is desktop, iPad, etc.


Sent from my Titan using Board Express

 

[rezzet#CB]

its like the old acid3 test debates. Opera got a perfect score but still could not properly render some sites, especially opera mobile. Now on IE9M I haven't encountered any rendering problems. That site linked was probably designed to not let other browsers access it so that point is moot especially since it was the only example given m

Actually, that's exactly part of my point. I'm not saying that that particular site is meant to be optimized for other browsers, but I'm also pretty confident no one "blocked" other browsers either. As a matter of fact Safari has started playing the site decently when it rolled out HTML5 update months after the site went online.

But the point is, that there is a large community of HTML5 developers writing for Chrome because they believe that is the browser of the future more or less. They have a reason to believe that. And I already explained why in earlier posts (and why IE needs to catch up fast to stay relevant). BTW, you can find tons of HTML5 projects @ Chrome Experiments - Home

 

[Eirenarch]

I perfectly agree with the observation you made explicitly by linking to a site that has "experiments" in its name. Chrome is an experiment and should not be rolled out in production. This is precisely why I do not use Google products except the search engine. They are experiments. The GMail even had a beta tag for many years. No betas on my phone, thank you. Go download IE developer preview or whatever...

 

[rezzet#CB]

I perfectly agree with the observation you made explicitly by linking to a site that has "experiments" in its name. Chrome is an experiment and should not be rolled out in production. This is precisely why I do not use Google products except the search engine. They are experiments. The GMail even had a beta tag for many years. No betas on my phone, thank you. Go download IE developer preview or whatever...

Early on, you had some constructive replies, now, I'm feeling more and more trolled by you. Experiments? Beta Tags? That's what matters to you? I hate to point out to you, but general consumers, developers and plain statistics seem to think your opinion is in minority there. Google's "experiments" as you call them are being adopted pretty quickly in the main stream, can't deny that. But I get it, you just want to sit and wait, and hope everything works out for the best. Because we are all windows phone fans - the system that is near perfect and needs little to nothing to improve on (at least that's what I gather from vocal number of people here anytime someone raises a BS flag on any topic it seems, including this one).

 

[Eirenarch]

I already pointed out how these experimental features are bad to consumer experience (existing websites break because the implementation of a feature has changed).

Please point out how these experiments are adopted by consumers in the real world. I have failed to see them possibly because I use IE as my primary browser (as a developer I have all of them installed).

I am not talking about Windows Phone here I am talking about browsers in general.

 

[rezzet#CB]

I already pointed out how these experimental features are bad to consumer experience (existing websites break because the implementation of a feature has changed).

Please point out how these experiments are adopted by consumers in the real world. I have failed to see them possibly because I use IE as my primary browser (as a developer I have all of them installed).

I am not talking about Windows Phone here I am talking about browsers in general.

I think you can answer your own question by the looking at how many features an Android device has vs Windows device. On top of that, majority of Google services are highly revered by the consumers. From Google Docs, to calendar, to Gmail, to search engine and so on an so forth. All of those services were "experiments" that made Google stock skyrocket and secure them giant market share. Just face it, the reason why they are doing so well is because they make pretty damn good software that public likes. You can't deny that.

Your attitude seems to resemble something like: "Blah, who needs this stuff. All I need my computer/phone to do <insert some common task>". But that's the thing, you are speaking for yourself, and not for the majority of the public who seems to like what Google does these days. Clearly.

Innovation by the means of experimentation to find what works is not a horrible thing, as you paint it to be. Eventually bad things will weed out, good things will improve. If you are going to sit and wait for standards to arrive, you are sure to secure the last place in the race.

I don't see how pushing for things like Google Wallet is a bad thing for example. Sure they are having some hick ups, but if they grab that mobile pay market, good luck catching them. Being first matters. (iTunes vs Zune anyone?) I also don't see how making a browser that is capable to run hardcore animations and play advanced games is not going to be preferred by developers and consumers.

I do not like IE in its current state. And I say it as both a designer and a consumer. But my objective with the thread was to get a feel of what other people thought about lacking HTML5 performance of IE as of right now, not to personally promote Chrome or defend Google, which feels like exactly what I'm passively doing by defending basic truth that as much as we hate to admit it, Google is ahead of the curve now and we still need to catch up. And in my opinion, a web browser is one on those things where I'd like to see MS do better.

Anyway, we can agree to disagree. Even so, I still appreciated your feedback. I'll wrap this up before this thread gets completely out of control. You may have the last word if you wish, sir. Good day!

 

[welsbloke]

thewildernessdowntown.com

That is the sort of pants sites that really annoy me. They make them knowing that it will only work on X browser. Now this is an extreme example but plenty of developers seem to developer for their own wants and needs rather than working on a general experience which is exactly why standards matter. This business of inventing standards and hoping it takes off is nonsense.

Unfortunately this silent rebellion by these web developers is just making it move full circle, whats worse is you need 2 or 3 browsers now just to view a bloody website. At least during the last browser war you pretty much got by with one albeit IE with its own propiertary plugins.

 

[rezzet#CB]

thewildernessdowntown.com

That is the sort of pants sites that really annoy me. They make them knowing that it will only work on X browser. Now this is an extreme example but plenty of developers seem to developer for their own wants and needs rather than working on a general experience which is exactly why standards matter. This business of inventing standards and hoping it takes off is nonsense.

Unfortunately this silent rebellion by these web developers is just making it move full circle, whats worse is you need 2 or 3 browsers now just to view a bloody website. At least during the last browser war you pretty much got by with one albeit IE with its own propiertary plugins.

I actually agree with a good portion of what you just said. But the thing is, how is a web developer/designer going to write things for a common good? If the developer/designer really wants to push the envelope, he simply will go to the company that gives him tools for best chance of making what he wants to make. The wilderness site probably just wouldn't run on IE because IE doesn't provide the tools needed to make it run.

The company with the customer base is the one who will be dictating a lot of what stays and what goes in those standards. I can tell you as a designer, I can't stand trying to figure out as to why all IE below version 9 tend to render CSS/HTML different from pretty much every other browser out there. Why certain padding/margin/align rules just work 'assbackwards' so to speak. Do you think I'd bother to look at it for 5 minutes if I was running into all these problems and IE had a market share that of say desktop Opera browser? Reason why I have to is because IE is still at the top of the hill (to underline: it's not the quality that keeps it there but fact that it's just prepackaged with OS), and slowly falling down. I just can't ignore it. I like the direction of Metro designed Windows, but for me, IE is still a weakness. I want to like it, but I can't. Yet.

 

[Eirenarch]

@opwave all of Google's product that the public likes work on IE. In fact the only product that didn't they killed (Wave). Obviously Google can make good products that work on IE.

Also in what way is Google Wallet a browser technology?

BTW I am really curious what your problem is with animations and IE. IE does support Canvas and SVG which are what animations are made with and as far as I remember IE and Firefox are actually the fastest in this regard because they are the only browser that render these things with full hardware acceleration.

 

[eric12341]

Actually, that's exactly part of my point. I'm not saying that that particular site is meant to be optimized for other browsers, but I'm also pretty confident no one "blocked" other browsers either. As a matter of fact Safari has started playing the site decently when it rolled out HTML5 update months after the site went online.

But the point is, that there is a large community of HTML5 developers writing for Chrome because they believe that is the browser of the future more or less. They have a reason to believe that. And I already explained why in earlier posts (and why IE needs to catch up fast to stay relevant). BTW, you can find tons of HTML5 projects @ Chrome Experiments - Home

you still missed my point. MS has a site similar to that as well, please understand how ludicrous your point is. Call me a ****** if you like as that seems to be what you do when you disagree with someone and can't properly counter their statements.

 

[Michael Goff]

At least Microsoft's site doesn't change your score based on user-string.
Edit: As for Chrome's tests, they are using web kit specific html5 tags. That is not a good practice.


Sent from my Titan using Board Express

 

[eric12341]

At least Microsoft's site doesn't change your score based on user-string.
Edit: As for Chrome's tests, they are using web kit specific html5 tags. That is not a good practice.


Sent from my Titan using Board Express

another good point but we're just fanboys for disagreeing with him.

 

[thed]

Agreed that the browser needs work, but I'd rather they fix good old HTML4 and CSS3 before worrying about HTML5. The fact that it doesn't pass Acid2 is pretty sad.

 

[eric12341]

Agreed that the browser needs work, but I'd rather they fix good old HTML4 and CSS3 before worrying about HTML5. The fact that it doesn't pass Acid2 is pretty sad.

But it passes acid3, see my post above. Opera passed both acid2 and3 but yet still couldn't properly display some websites that worked flawlessly without compatibility view in IE.

 

[thed]

But it passes acid3, see my post above. Opera passed both acid2 and3 but yet still couldn't properly display some websites that worked flawlessly without compatibility view in IE.

That's great that it passes Acid3, but Acid2 and Acid3 test different things. Acid3 is more for javascript. Acid2 is for CSS.

CSS has been around for a while and it's not going away any time soon. MS really needs to make sure they implement it properly.

If Opera passed Acid2 but didn't display websites properly, then that's probably because they coded Opera to pass it, but were lax on some things that Acid2 didn't test. Either that, or the website wasn't coded properly.

But that's not really the point. The point is not to actually pass the test, it's to make sure that they're implementing CSS properly. The test simply shows that they are not (and interestingly, it also shows that IE on the phone and IE on the desktop are not the same, despite what MS has told us).

 

[eric12341]

That's great that it passes Acid3, but Acid2 and Acid3 test different things. Acid3 is more for javascript. Acid2 is for CSS.

CSS has been around for a while and it's not going away any time soon. MS really needs to make sure they implement it properly.

If Opera passed Acid2 but didn't display websites properly, then that's probably because they coded Opera to pass it, but were lax on some things that Acid2 didn't test. Either that, or the website wasn't coded properly.

But that's not really the point. The point is not to actually pass the test, it's to make sure that they're implementing CSS properly. The test simply shows that they are not (and interestingly, it also shows that IE on the phone and IE on the desktop are not the same, despite what MS has told us).

depending on how the site was coded properly or not I still should be able to access my messages on myyearbook and tagged in opera especially since I could get them on IE flawlessly.

 

[Eirenarch]

Interesting thing about Acid 2. The desktop IE passes it but the mobile IE that is supposed to have the same engine does not.

 

[Michael Goff]

That is weird.

But until I run into normal sites that don't run well, I really won't care so much.