Microsoft mocks Internet Explorer haters in new ad [video]
venturebeat.com
venturebeat.com
Like it or not, a lot of people will think of this ad first (and what it tells them), the next time one of us tries to warn them about IE
(EDIT: MY opinion will say the same until that view counter says a million and I highly doubt it will even get close. The only people who really care anyway are the "trolls" that Microsoft is talking about!)
In a matter of minutes or hours that number will suddenly increase significantly.
So it's an anti-spam measure. There's a short explainer here: http://www.seroundtable.com/youtube-301-views-15347.html
It'd be a bad argument, but that's why I really don't like this ad - it's a (mostly) negative ad and emphasizes a negative point (how bad IE is perceived), which is not how you change people's thoughts. This video has many repetitions of IE SUCKS in it. If I were advertising a product, no matter what people thought of it, I wouldn't be flashing "my product sucks" all over the place for the majority of the commercial in order to make the last 5 seconds try and turn that on it's head.
You change preformed thoughts by repeating "my product is now great" over and over, not "my product isn't terrible anymore!"
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.
That being said, Microsoft is full of talented people and they do create some fantastic products. IE is slowly getting to a more respectable point and hating on it so harshly seems juvenile.
Now if only they would let them make the decisions instead of those clueless PR and marketing people. Let the products speak for themselves instead of trying to dumb down everyone into using them through a fishy marketing campaign; they already have the talent to achieve this, but right now I get the feeling it's helplessly sitting there watching events unfold.
However the hate in me burns with the power of a thousand sons, when it comes to IE. The almost constant changes of MS standards with each new version of IE, inevitably breaks something, and will often require separate CSS styling..
And dont get me started on maintaining an app, that was built on IE6..
If I was in a room with Hitler, Osama bin Laden and the devlead for IE6, and had a gun with only 2 bullets.. I would shoot the IE6 lead twice..
That said and done, i really hope they start to embrace the "real" standards, as the the new development team proclaims.
That's a little bit harsh, isn't it? While I would never defend it's usage today, it wasn't that horrible at the time it was released.
However, as Microsoft decided to kill off development it soon grew too old for it's own good.
It wasn't exactly good either, IE5/Mac was better on many fronts, and released at least a year before.
I think it was bad even considering that it was released in 2001. Not supporting PNG alpha channel is just an example.
But I do agree that Microsoft taking so long to release IE7 made things even worse.
Windows Update has been reasonably coherent since Windows XP. They've had the ability to push out software for a long, long time. Why isn't every person using Windows XP, Windows Vista, Windows 7 and Windows 8 currently using Internet Explorer 10?
The issue at hand isn't that Internet Explorer 10 is bad. It's not! It's a great browser.
The issue is that Microsoft doesn't care about providing an ecosystem that protects people from legacy browser lock-in. They have the ability to transition tens of millions of users to a modern browser. But they haven't, and they won't. Actions speak louder than words. Or perhaps, in this case, inaction speaks louder than words. Until they join the rest of the browser vendors in the 21st century, they're simply not worth trusting.
For how long? Hell, we know microsoft will have to be pushed kicking and screaming into supporting WebGL (and likely the fullscreen API as well as they go hand-in-hand), and they've just proposed their alternative to WebRTC (how not unexpected). See also: their proposing a brand new touch API, but not implementing the one which everybody is already using and the current standard.
> And, you know, IE6 was actually the best web browser out there for a long time.
IE5/Mac says "bitch, please". Also Phoenix was already a better browser than IE6 about 2 years after the latter's release.
I think it's reasonable they might implement it on top of DirectX and then tell us how much faster it is.
> likely the fullscreen API as well as they go hand-in-hand
Why does Metro IE need the fullscreen API? Pointer lock maybe, but what's the use of going fullscreen in a fullscreen browser?
I'm not aware of their even planning to do it.
> Why does Metro IE need the fullscreen API?
1. IE is also available in desktop mode
2. The fullscreen API allows making a given element of the page, such as a video or a canvas, fullscreen. Not just remove the browser chrome
3. Even if the API was a noop in a chromeless browser — which it is not — it can be implemented as a noop for compatibility
4. Fullscreen web application may benefit from disabling e.g. some of the built-in gestures where that makes sense
Maybe MS should have given the new generations of IE a new name. Rebranding would probably have been cheaper and more effective than marketing campaigns trying to make IE respectable.
The ad targets haters that convince "regular users" that IE sucks...haters needed to do that because regular users couldn't totally grasp how much their web experience is affected for using that crappy browser and how many features they were missing.
The fact that a lot of them do not realize how awful their experience is, is due to countless hours of near-suicide frustration from programmers and coders around the world trying to make IE compatible applications.
Most discussion of technology on the internet is just noise written by people who don't have the slightest clue what they are talking about.
I liked IE6 because it got me out of the hell that was IE4.
I liked IE8 because it got me out of the hell that was IE6.
I suspect I'm going to like IE10 because of IE8.
I'm going to hate IE10 because it's not Webkit/Gecko.
When I stated as an entrepreneur, the banks forced me to use IE as using any other browser will be full of incompatibility bugs. They made them on purpose.
So they forced me to use a Windows machine when I worked with Unix. I had to spend a thousand dollars so I could use my ebank and read-write my customer's Office documents(because MS also made very hard for Office documents for being standardized).
When I created my site I had to spend a lot more money so it worked on the main browser: Explorer. It was kind of hard to understand why it was so difficult to make something that worked in all browsers, it was always Microsoft fault there.
I calculated that I doubled my expenses because of non expected stupid incompatibility bugs on my web site. The people that made it really cursed the Redmon company.
The moment I could jump ship and work without Windows or Explorer I experienced an Enlightenment, a liberation: Now I just don't hate them, I simply don't care because I know the only reason they are doing the right things is because they lost the monopoly in some areas and had been forced to react.
Good for them, I prefer "don't be evil" than "embrace, extent, and extinguish" for now.
It's all great that Microsoft is trying to push the web forward again, they used to before IE6, but I'm not sure I like this new direction. WebGL, WebRTC and other APIs being pushed by every other major browser vendor looks much more promising and useful. Karaoke isn't making the web more practical, although it's a nice feature for entertainment.
Seriously, I started my web dev career at a time when IE had a market share of 80% and... I'm OK now.
I'm glad that Microsoft decided to embrace web standards and is committed to make IE easier to develop for but they'll have to do much more than this if they want to be taken seriously again.
Can you elaborate on which MS decisions you preferred over w3c?
Oh wait, I can't test your browser without a VM because I didn't buy your OS? Fuck you.
Or do you mean an internal cause?
Bashing MS just for fun isn't very smart (for all their sins, there's a few good things coming out of Redmond - and Microsoft Research is just fantastic for the most part), but Microsoft is just lowering itself to the level of their critics here.
While a large part of the public has a biased opinion of Microsoft, Microsoft also has a biased opinion of their users - otherwise their marketing wouldn't feel so out-of-touch. I don't see any winners here.
The reaction after that is: "Hmph. I wonder if it runs on any OS I run. (brief google) Nope, I guess not!"
> IE implements HTML6.
> and 7, 8, and 9.
Oh, if only.
Good ad though, but they're still not there yet.
What else is there to say, really?
http://cbateman.com/blog/whats-missing-in-internet-explorer-...
That's probably not even the full list of what's missing in IE10, as html5test puts IE10 way below the others in HTML5 features:
http://html5test.com/results/desktop.html
I wouldn't hold my breath for WebGL appearing even in IE11. Whatever Microsoft is saying, the "security" of WebGL is not the main reason why Microsoft is not the adopting it - not even close. Just like security is also not the main reason why Apple is not allowing other JS engines on iOS.
The security reason is used mainly as a "reasonable" excuse to cover for the real reason why they aren't implementing it (they obviously don't want OpenGL to gain anymore traction that it has already gained in mobile and Linux). If security would be an excuse to not implement something, we'd probably still be in the dark ages of the web. Consider Flash, it's one of the least secure pieces of software out there, and yet it's also what enabled video on the web for everyone. It's the reason Youtube exists today.
The lack of support for XP, which is still like 40% of the market, means Chrome is still by far the most secure browser on XP, which is something companies who aren't going to get new PC's and Windows licenses anytime soon should start considering.
No full screen API, no Web Audio API, and no WebRTC (and no Opus either) are also very regrettable omissions from IE10, and it will be another year or two before it will get them. Who knows how far ahead Chrome and Firefox will be by then.