Microsoft Edge preview builds are ready to try
microsoftedgeinsider.com
microsoftedgeinsider.com
The problem with "IE Mode" as implemented is that it only works for devices connected to AD/fully managed. Our "internal" sites (both Java Applet and modern) are externally accessible and via BYOD like a lot of enterprises today. Employees work from home. Employees work remotely.
I can see why "website list" would be their preferred solution to routing, but unfortunately it won't work for a lot of enterprises in 2019. We aren't using internal sites like 2005 anymore, they're "internal" only in name and function, they're very much externally accessible (even via VPN in some cases, but you aren't managing the actual device).
Presumably, this type of enterprise is the type Microsoft is targeting with IE compatibility mode.
I'm talking about employees being able to input their leave/overtime into an externally facing "internal" web-portal, or looking up tickets/jobs.
Requiring that they allow full enterprise control of every device that would access an internet facing website seems dragonian.
1. Move away from what is probably a home grown bespoke time tracking system and use one of the many SASS vendors. The company can easily pay some consultants who would gladly take their money.
2. Provide a company device.
3. On the extreme, setup some Citrix terminals they can log into from their devices.
It is already. But I don't see the relevance.
> Provide a company device. On the extreme, setup some Citrix terminals they can log into from their devices.
In order to use a web browser to connect to an internet facing website? I genuinely don't understand what you think got said for this reply to make sense. It certainly doesn't seem relevant to the discussion of how IE Mode routes.
It is a public facing "internal" enterprise website. It has mixed content (Java Applets and web content). It has to target IE11 for web content due to the Java Applets. IE Mode doesn't solve this well because any device an employee can use can also access the site (it is on the internet after all).
A Citrix terminal(???) is a worse solution than just having everyone use IE11 as today.
The relevance is that instead of the corporation biting the bullet and moving away from a home grown app and expecting Microsoft to support them forever, the company should be investing in newer (ie less than a decade and a half old system).
In order to use a web browser to connect to an internet facing website? I genuinely don't understand what you think got said for this reply to make sense. It certainly doesn't seem relevant to the discussion of how IE Mode routes.
The internet facing “website” that is still using proprietary old IE technology is no more of a modern definition of a website than one requiring RealPlayer or a Gopher client.
And depending on any Java applet doesn’t help the majority of users who are using mobile devices.
It is a public facing "internal" enterprise website. It has mixed content (Java Applets and web content). It has to target IE11 for web content due to the Java Applets.
The problem is that depending on Java applets in 2019 doesn’t serve the employees well and neither did whoever decided it was a good idea not to start a migration strategy a decade ago....
- We know Java Applets don't work on non-IE11 browsers and mobile devices, that's why we've spent the last three years migrating to modern web standards, that's why we have mixed legacy/modern content, which incidentally exactly the scenario IE Mode was invented to solve. Thus the entire point of this feature and my post.
- If you ONLY have Java Applets IE Mode does nothing for you. It is a migration helper.
- Our time management system is from a popular vendor and uses modern web technologies, it isn't relevant here.
- No "proprietary IE technology" is used. The website has Java Applets built using Oracle's technology on it. IE11 supports Java Applets. Edge, Chrome, Firefox, Safari, and others do not.
- Companies have invested tens of years into now defunct technologies. Suggesting they migrate tens of years of investment in an eighth of the time isn't at all realistic or constructive. It is an ongoing process. We'll be stuck mid-migration for another five-ish years (thousands of man hours still to go).
- Thank you for telling me what the company should have done 12 years ago, and 8 years before I joined. Very constructive.
Well that's the whole point. MS is forcing your company's hand into doing something about that site that's very important for you but somehow was ignored for years. Everyone knows most companies won't move a finger without external pressure. MS is providing that pressure.
The only alternative would be to build support for Java applets into a modern browser. Which is exactly what everyone tried to get rid of. So expecting IE mode to fix that issue for you makes no sense. I don't understand how this could even be a complaint.
You just replied to a post that said verbatim: "we've spent the last three years migrating" with this. So, no. If you had read the previous posts in the thread you'd know that already.
2. IE11 supports Java Applets. Edge, Chrome, Firefox, Safari, and others do not.
Those two sentences don’t go together. For all intents and purposes using Java applets in a browser is “IE only”.
Companies have invested tens of years into now defunct technologies. Suggesting they migrate tens of years of investment in an eighth of the time isn't at all realistic or constructive.
The industry has been moving away from Java applets since the introduction of the iPhone in 2007. Java applet deprecation is not a new or unforeseen development.
Not really a point of contention. Also not really relevant to this discussion. The whole "12 years ago a company [I didn't even work at] should have done X Y Z" isn't constructive, or remotely relevant to a discussion of IE Mode today and how it operates.
One of the major issues with Windows has always been that they have hack on top of hack to keep backwards compatibility. You can read Raymond Chen’s MSDN blog to get an idea of how bad it is.
The answer has to be somewhere between Apple - not long enough to be appropriate for the Enterprise - and too long in the case of Microsoft where it slows down development, causes an increase security vulnerability surface, and causes Windows to be a resource hog compared to other operating systems.
Most users have little to no "tech hygiene" so allowing random devices maintained by these users to connect will open your company to a world of hurt.
For basic standard activities most companies offer locked down environments like Citrix or externally facing portals that can be safely accessed form any home computer. The alternative is to use a company issued device for work.
That's not the usage I set out above at all. Not even ballpark.
I am talking about an externally accessible "internal" enterprise website, and that IE Mode cannot be used well with it. I'm not sure how you got from website to "access sensitive parts of the enterprise network." Employees are BYOD to access the company's "internal" website from an external endpoint. That's the topic. That's where IE Mode applies.
It reads like you and the sibling comment forgot what is even being discussed. This is IE Mode for websites. Specifically for "internal" enterprise websites. I am discussing the highly common practice of allowing access to "internal" websites externally (inc. via privately owned employee's devices over the internet).
Trying to fix the problem on the browser side is the wrong answer, which is what Microsoft is trying to nudge enterprises to by progressively making it harder to use legacy dependent apps like that.
That logic could be used to magic anyway any need for IE Mode for anyone. Why even take part in this discussion if you dismiss the need for the very thing we're discussing? Seems fruitless.
I honestly have no interest in discussing the merits of IE Mode conceptually. I am talking about the implementation from the point of it existing on-wards. You're welcome to find someone else to argue this with however.
I replied to to your later generalization related to the devices' "managed" status, the one turning your original point into an "inflexibility" and "employee privacy" issue. BYOD is/should not be 100% your regular private device. Moreover it's there to allow you more flexibility not less, so you don't have to use a company device and work from the office. You can't give perfect flexibility/privacy to your employees while ensuring even a modicum of security. And someone will always complain about something.
The problem isn't that companies manage BYOD devices, it's that they still use legacy sites that only work with IE. So coming back to your original point, the solution as I already said is to provide you with something like Citrix or equivalent (device is no longer relevant), or for the company to fix its websites. Not for MS to implement the magic button that makes your company's legacy sites work for another 20 years. But if you have a security team at all your BYOD will still remain a (partially) managed device regardless.
MS is on one hand intentionally restricting the compatibility mode to force lazy companies with bad practices to upgrade their aging sites without straight up cutting them off. On the other hand I'm not sure if MS could even implement a true "IE mode" since nobody wants that legacy code in any modern browser.
Nope. Its totally solid, and has completely supplanted Chrome on my Mac, including for web development (it has the same Chrome development tools).
Highly recommended - sort of like the VSCode of browsers in my opinion.
MS not even close to the decadent stuff that G is doing, insensitive, business models, product users are also completely different.
Google on the other hand shows ads across the internet, so they have to track you a lot more intimately in order to make you buy a new toaster or whatever (I haven't seen online ads in years, so I don't really know what they're like).
Apple telemetry and intrusive advertising for their services is so similar on iOS on volume/scale/purpose to everything people are complaining about on Windows 10, but I guess Apple gets a free pass because they are the "scrappy underdog" that also had a larger market cap for a few recent years?
So, Apple wants to make sure you have a good experience on their devices so you'll buy more, Microsoft wants to know which of their products will fit your usage.
To me, Microsoft's telemetry is more creepy than Apple's, but both pale in comparison to Google's tracking. I choose to avoid all three companies' products as much as possible because I don't like being tracked.
The one thing I'd like to see out of the thousand Chromium clones is one which modularizes the install more. I don't care about flash, bluetooth/usb, all of the SSDP stuff, PNACL, the PDF viewer, the hidden Google extensions, and others I can't think of right now but they are an absolute pain to remove and even harder to keep removed while staying up to date.
I really like it. In my opinion, its the best version of Chrom(ium) you can get on Windows and Mac. Very snappy.
And they already have some neat developer tooling around it. There is a vscode extension to do live reloads with with it, and see/manipulate the DOM and do other debugging/measuring of your application.
Good work here!
I don't see how it wouldn't, unless they added code back in on top of Chromium to support the API they're removing.
https://github.com/sizeofcat/microsoft-edge-macos-scripts/tr...
Sounds good.
The somehow lost the market share, possibly because they focused on something else instead of innovation and solving the problems of the users.
I think it is naive to expect them to suddenly change, especially given the recent history of clearly going against user's interests in introducing mandatory telemetry. Case in point: win10 still overwrites user's default application preferences and fonts pretty much on every update.
With IE, they started being user-hostile and taking their users for granted because they owned the market. The same thing they are currently doing with Windows 10. They do this because they feel like they can.
However, in markets they are trying to win, they are much more user-friendly and provide great products. You can see this in VS Code and the new Edge (personal opinions). Though, I do agree that just because they are being friendly now doesn't mean they won't do the same shit they did with IE once they gain the market back.
This isn't about Microsoft or Google's culture or history, this is the fact that any company that has little to no actual competition for a market will abuse that fact and take their users for granted.
Edit: Whatever goodwill on settings was eaten up when change default search provider was hidden two levels deep, first under "Privacy and Services" and then under "Address Bar".
Edge team, you know full well most people will want to change this at first. It should have its own settings top level page, more or less in line with firefox.
It probably won't; Chrome Edge can't directly share so much OneNote code in the same way, and so presumably the focus will move to "Share with OneNote"/"Print to OneNote" instead.
In maybe better news, at least the "Collections" tools currently in "Experimental Options" sound like they may, when fully baked, be improved experiences over the venerable "Set Tabs Aside", maybe.
Wut? That's exactly what I use Edge for.
In early Windows 8 history the UWP PDF Reader (that went on to also be the EPUB Reader) was available as a separate app in the Windows 8 Store just called "Reader", before it merged into Edge. I wish they would spin it back out into a new Reader app again, just to keep a useful extra option around for PDF and EPUB files, but it sounds like the code shares too much with the EdgeHTML Renderer they are entirely spinning down for them to do that, which is a shame.
Maybe they have a Linux or FreeBSD version in the works. From what I'm seeing right now, the new Microsoft supports open source, so long as you're on a proprietary platform. Should I be surprised?
Chrome/Chromium on Linux isn't even all that well supported sadly enough.
What makes you think that? I'm using Chromium as my daily driver and it even comes with hardware video acceleration (chromium-vaapi package from Fedora + RPMFusion). In my experience Linusmx support is a lot better than Firefox'.
It is definitely better than Firefox on Linux but that doesn't make it well supported.
Meanwhile we still have stuff like extensions, privacy policies, dev tools, etc. Also they have the ability now to tweak webkit to their needs.
You're right, most "new browsers" are essentially just chromium, I'm hoping since MS is large enough that they'll make it unique in some way - great dev tools and privacy would win me over for example.
Opera is also based on Blink.
But I am tired of 2 problems that never seem to get fixed and am contemplating switching to Firefox because of this:
1) Bookmark (favorite) maintenance still sucks. As one example, try moving a folder in the favorites bar from the bar to the ordered favorites list.
2) Edge advertises syncing (bookmarks, open tabs, etc.) across machines with the same user signed-in, but I have never gotten this to work.
It's not. But hey! Good news! When this Beta will become stable Edge release, all you issues will be solved!
Also, the synchronization engine is entirely different from both past Edge and Google's proprietary Chrome stuff, so all new places for all sorts of new bugs.
Switching to Chromium won't be a magic fix for Edge's issues.
As a user of current Edge:
1) The Favorites Bar shows up as a folder in the Favorites list sidebar, and doing in the list sidebar seems to work better for moving things around, in my experience. (I currently feel like favorites management is worse in Chrome Edge, but mostly because I don't like a lot of the feel of Chrome.)
2) Syncing has more worked than not for me over the years, but it's never been entirely reliable. Bookmarks have seemed reliable, but I don't use them much and wouldn't likely notice if they synced very slowly. Open Tabs have never synced, but the History of them does (and shows up in the Windows Timeline thingamajigger), and faster usually than I expected, but sometimes hit or miss. Overall reliability seems to fluctuate with project priorities, and right now with Edge work on "Chrome Edge" being the focus and it having an entirely different synchronization system, I am not surprised that reliability is especially all over the place right now.
Firefox?
The other kind of instability with Firefox surrounds the corporation that produces it. Mozilla is a bit of a wildcard because you never know what sort of guerrilla marketing advertisement or third party integration they're going to throw into your browser without giving you much of a choice. I actually trust them less than Google because there are way fewer eyes on them.
Finally, in my opinion, it's just not as consistently good as Chrome. I don't think Mozilla can compete with the level of production quality that Google has put into Chrome. Not even close. Where Chrome is modern, crisp, clean and beautiful looking with a great UX, Firefox is just ugly, primitive, old smelling and annoying to use.
I know Microsoft can do better than Moz on the production quality front. Who knows what if their UX will remain stable though. They kinda ruin everything with the constant push for signing up to a Microsoft account. Mostly I care about the production quality and the general UX though.
Note: I downloaded the beta version, and within 10 minutes of using it, it crashed. I reported the crash however so hopefully they can fix this
At least they kept some of the most garbage parts the same... like the addon store not even having a search function. Apparently not even sort beyond alphabetically. But that fits MS apparent mantra of dumbing down stuff so much as to make more advanced use-cases near impossible. And doesn't seems to have uBlock anyway, so who cares... I just hope I don't have to search a new trustworthy one once current edge is gone :(
Yeah, still a long way off from what I'd wish for...
You can install add-ons from the Chrome Web Store.
Firefox is fully open source.
[1] https://gs.statcounter.com/browser-market-share/desktop/worl...
Judging by my experiences as a PC technician, 99% of those people wouldn't know if it's the browser that's slow or their PC or whatever crap adware they've managed to install or whatever. Most people don't know and don't care. Google has just leveraged their position as the dominant search engine to ensure their browser is the default. I've installed Firefox on enough devices to see that users just don't care - they'll use whatever is most convenient at the time and then they'll stick to it because they know it and because of habit. Hell, many people don't know what a browser even is, much less what the differences are between them. It's just that "internet thing".
Brave already does this. Most people don't really care.
*Stream 1080p with Netflix, Amazon, etc.
Is there somewhere else to find this?
EDIT - Use the "More platforms and channels" link under the big Windows download button, then the dropdown menus on that page to get the Mac version.
Seem to be working here.
This will eventually replace the current Edge on Windows 10, so the answer is "yes - sometime in the future". Additionally, it's already available on Windows 7 and 8.
To me, this means many developers will be more able to argue the case for deprecating IE11 support.
When it will become the Windows 10 default is an interesting open question right now, and the exact roadmap doesn't seem entirely transparent yet. This move to the Beta release channel seems to indicate possible confidence in it.
Windows 10 isn't the only target market though. Microsoft has made it clear they want Windows 7 users, the odd minority of users still on Windows 8 and Windows 8.1, and even macOS users for this new Edge. This "cross-platform vision" was supposedly a key reason to rebuild on top of Chromium in the first place.
(Interesting rumors even state that Microsoft is hoping to push it as the "final" default browser for Windows 7 in a final security/feature update/mini-service-pack roll up sometime before the April 2020 end of security date for Windows 7 in a hope of leaving Windows 7 at the end of its ordinary security support life and the start of its extended support phase in a better place than Windows XP was left.)
You can set which page to open on startup, but you can't seem to override the page that shows when a new tab is created.
It may prolong some Enterprise's dependency on very old sites or addons they should have weened themselves out of a decade ago, but you can't magically fix sunk costs (or stupid, for that matter).
The more apps that politely say that IE11 isn't the right tool for browsing anymore, the quicker the user base will dry up.
>No support for the biggest open source OS.
The irony is stunning.
I don't sign up for their crypto stuff either and there's a toggle to hide it.
Brave Rewards are off by default and you can hide the icon.
HTH
In case you have any other feedback, I would encourage you to also use the smiley icon on the top right of the browser to directly them to us.