The Browser You Loved to Hate | Hacker News Reader

The Browser You Loved to Hate

browseryoulovedtohate.com

35 pointsojr54 comments

Don't care how good the browser is, Microsoft has caused me so much pain over the last decade and a half with their products I am simply unwilling to trust them ever again. I tolerate their products because I have to, but whenever I have the chance to slit the throat of their technologies in the workplace, I do so without remorse.

Do I sound angry? No, I'm not angry. I've just been burned too many times by Windows, Office, IE, and Exchange to be stupid enough to ever trust them again. The line about "this time we're better" is such a broken record.

I think you're doing something wrong...

It's possible, but completely abstaining from Microsoft products has made my life a lot happier. I'm not as angry as I used to be.

Odd, opposite here. Always have a better/easier experience with enterprise Microsoft products.

Do you work for Microsoft? I can't recall any enterprise Microsoft products that I would have chosen to use out side of the office.

No. I don't typically use any MSFT products outside of work other than Windows and Office. I was implying that at work, implementing things like AD permissions, Windows Server, SQL server, exchange, network shares, etc. etc. etc., MSFT solutions make for a much more pleasant experience with very few issues or headaches.

I'm a client/server web enthusiast, so I like my linux boxes and vim editor, etc. I'm not intrigued by heavy frameworks and bloated IDEs.

+1 Since I stopped writing C# code in Visual Studio, I software development doesn't make me nearly as angry as I used to be. Now I write Clojure code on OS X, and couldn't be happier.

Translating: "we never gave a fuck about web standards because we were a monopoly, now we realized we're losing the war and decided to improve things. Hope it's not too late..."

Exactly. I think they figured that out while making IE7 and IE8, but took little steps in the right direction...then on their ninth version, finally got it.

...but you still have to upgrade your copy Windows

Not if you're running Windows 7.

If you're running XP or Vista and you're happy with that, then you probably don't care very much about which browser you're using.

Interesting view. I certainly care about what browser I use on my XP installation. I (and my coworkers) have always cared which browser we use. But, we aren't Web 2.0.

Sure, some people who are trapped in XP at work might care, but do you really care that you don't get IE10?

You still have decent browsers to choose from (Firefox, Opera and older versions of Chrome if you can find them).

To better explain my point - if you care about which browser you're using, you're probably not pining for IE.

What annoys me is that most of the tiles are just variations of some "Comebacks come in many shapes and sizes" meme they invented. It always amaze me how Microsoft's marketing manages to be completely disconnected form reality time after time.

I don't know any power-users who will switch to IE after seeing this website. If anything, they'll see this as an insult to their intelligence and stay even further away from IE than they did before.

Every time Microsoft tries to be hip and cool, I hear a collective facepalm.

I think most of us can agree that IE 10 has come along way. The reason web developers hate IE is when we have to build sites for older versions of IE because people can't or won't upgrade. Sometimes clients require support for these older browsers. I have no problems with IE 10, but those older versions that just won't die are the problem.

> The reason web developers hate IE is when we have to build sites for older versions of IE because people can't or won't upgrade.

It's not just older versions of IE that we dislike developing for. It's been the current version of IE at the time that has always given me headaches as well. At this point, it's comical to me how backwards and standards-incompliant every subsequent release of the browser has been over the years. I share milesf's distrust.

It's more than that. Here are some features that other browsers have that IE10 still doesn't have:

* SPDY (supported by Firefox, Opera and Chrome)

* FlexBox (partially supported in IE10, FF and Safari, full support in Chrome and Opera)

* WebGL (partial support in FF, Opera and Safari, full support in Chrome)

* Shared WebWorkers (fully supported in Chrome, Safari, Opera [even BB browser...])

* File API (partial support, full support in FF, Chrome, Safari, Opera [also BB browser...])

* WebM/Ogg (fullly supported in FF, Chrome, Opera)

There are a few things that IE10 has that other browsers don't have yet, but knowing M$, this is likely the last update for a year or so. I expect FF and Opera to catch up soon in those places where they lag behind.

Sure, IE10 isn't that bad, but there are still some things that can't be used yet that developers (like myself) really want (especially a unified video format...).

http://caniuse.com/

Since I fist say it back in 1995 or so, IE has never supported a computing platform I was running, so honestly I've never given it any thought. So the "loved to hate" bit is wrong.

Looking at it now, it still doesn't.

So, moving on...

If they were going to rebuild it from the ground up anyway, would it really have killed them to just use Webkit?

A browser rendering engine is a pretty crucial piece of strategic infrastructure for an operating system company. Having future features controlled by a competitor isn't a great place to be in.

webkit isn't controlled by a competitor necessarily. It's an open source project with contributors from lots of companies. Apple started it, so they likely have the most say right now but I think plenty of people at Google have a bit of power. I'm sure that if Microsoft was to put serious effort into it, they would get decision making power too.

Agreed! Google, Apple and Adobe own/use it. If they all want common web standards, why are you implementing different variations?

Unless there is a security risk or something glaring we're missing...

Edit: Atleast IE9 and IE10 pass the Acid3 test 100/100. Not sure how that reflects on html5/css3.

How are they owning it? WebKit is open source.

They're the primary developers.

WebKit is open source, and you can fork it. But you can't make changes to the main version unless they are approved, and Apple is the gatekeeper there.

That was kind of my feeling about Windows 8, why not just standardize around Unix like everyone else? The most obvious answer is inertia, but there might also be internal political roadblocks as well.

What's the point of having open, published standards if you only have one implementation?

You might ask, what's the point of having more than one rendering engine implementation, but look what happened with IE6.

Edit: Fixed formatting and reworded while I was at it.

> If they were going to rebuild it from the ground up anyway, would it really have killed them to just use Webkit?

First thing, Microsoft isn't willing to use an LGPL-licensed project. Perhaps if it was permissively-licensed, they've used BSD code before, but even so very unlikely.

Second, browsers are a crucial part of an OS. Microsoft wants to own their browser in the sense of not depending on an external development community to drive it. Microsoft has the resources to do so, so it does make sense.

Finally, even if they had used WebKit, it would have been bad for everyone but WebKit users. WebKit is already too dominant on mobile, sites only work on it, and that is a huge problem for the web. Yes, it's ironic given that IE was the previous dominant implementation. But still, we need diversity in the browser market to keep the web open, even if that diversity comes from Microsoft with it's sordid history.

Recently, I hit a JS issue in IE10 that existed in prior versions of IE. I used to fix it with conditional comments - but since IE10 removed those, it required an even uglier hack to fix.

I don't know if my JS is bad, but the fact that every other browser handled it fine left me with the same awful taste in my mouth as every other version of IE. I really don't want to hate IE10, but so far, no good.

The reason IE was bad was Microsoft's business practices. The problem is the carpenter, not the wood.

Amen Brother. IE was/is broken on purpose to prevent web apps from competing with Microsoft's bread and butter desktops apps, IMO. MS is scared they losing IE's drag on the momentum of the web. This is forcing them to update IE so its at least close enough to other browsers that it is not abandoned completely and suddenly I am supposed to be impressed?

Additionally, why is Microsoft marketing material making the front page of HN?

IE has caused a lot of pain for web developers. The browser itself has gotten better, but semi-recent decisions (like the fact that WindowsXP is stuck with IE8) still cause pain with these developers.

Even if this was resolved and all Windows machines were magically upgraded to IE9 or IE10, I still couldn't trust microsoft to act developers interest. With this in mind, I will continue to evangelize other platforms when given the opportunity.

It was a great commercial, though. It definitely made me feel silly for evangelizing other browsers, until I remembered that these problems with IE still remain.

tl;dr: Wounds inflicted by IE still remain. And trust will be an issue for a long time.

This time around MS did it right with IE10 - however they fucked it up with Windows 8 (on which it runs) really badly. Hopefully the version for windows 7 will be released sooner rather than later.

Can you explain this? As a Windows 8 user I'm wondering what the issue is.

Try asking a non-savvy user to use Metro. Or do anything when logged in to Windows 8 for the first time for that matter.

They mixed mobile and desktop approach within the same OS. Time will tell, but I'm not betting on it. I may be wrong though.

The preview has been available for a couple of weeks: http://ie.microsoft.com/testdrive/Info/Downloads/Default.htm...

they fucked it up with Windows 8...only in the eyes of hipster geeks who probably haven't spent any real time with it.

I've been using it on my main workstation for the past few weeks and I think they did a great job.

EDIT: Oh, I forgot to mention...it's not perfect (oh noes!!)

Off-topic: Is there some js library that handles the Pinterest style look with infinite scroll? I've been seeing this design pop up more and more.

The original - http://suprb.com/apps/gridalicious/ Others - http://masonry.desandro.com/ , http://isotope.metafizzy.co/

No, the tense is wrong. I still love to hate IE. If it was the best browser around by a mile I'll still hate it, but maybe I'll use it. Maybe..

The site tries so hard to tell me how great IE 10 is, then provides me a download link to IE 9.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lD9FAOPBiDk&feature=youtu... absolutely hilarious and on the spot for haters in all fronts.

Not really no. Most of the criticisms that have been levelled against IE are technical in nature and very real (dragging their feet on web standards, breaking their own compatibility guidelines from version to version, etc).

Any piece of PR that has to resort to portraying their opponents as having the IQ of the average YouTube commenter, has automatically lost any credibility. Then to fall back on badly judged kitten memes was just cringe-worthy.

Nobody is disputing that IE has come along way. The issue isn't whether the latest version of the browser is capable, but rather whether we'd want to get back into bed with Microsoft given their past history. And thankfully there is so much choice in the market now, that people can choose not to use browsers for even the seemingly trivial reasons; such as historical prejudice.

Thus as long as there is competition in the market, I'm going to support the platforms that have a history of promoting a free and open web.

Still hilarious, I see where you are coming from but it's just not about that -- this is a high value production of a recurring discussion in every single online forum, it's like seeing a book become a movie and the writers/directors managed to bring life to things exactly as you imagined them. I myself don't care that the ad is about IE, I suffered it all -- from xml data islands to lack of text shadows even today, so much that I can't bother to see that as PR just like my eyes learnt to skip banner ads after a few years. I was more amazed by the portrait than the product in question.

Publicity stunt by Microsoft?

No shit!

According to the whois[1], yes.

[1]https://www.networksolutions.com/whois-search/browseryoulove...

The contact email @microsoft.com at the bottom of the page didn't make it obvious to you?

You know that old TV show set in an office, where all the female staff took a break to drink Diet Coke and ogle at the window cleaner? Turns out it was just a publicity stunt by Coca Cola.

Images for text? No thanks.

I get it. IE is better. Just don't insult designers/developers you're trying to impress by half-assing proper semantics.

Pet peeve: I would never use IE as long as there is no built-in password manager. You shouldn't have to rely on 3rd party add-ins for this.

Previous submission: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4515019

I still prefer chromes context menus, but I've been using IE10 as my primary browser for a while now and have no major complains.

Great job. Now upgrade every damn user immediately.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com