-- Internet Explorer
-- Firefox
-- Safari
\
-- Chrome, Chromium, Opera 15+
-- Opera 12 (abandoned)
I'm a little unclear on how differentiated Webkit and Blink are in practice, but sadly we have only 3.5 major engines competing at this point. -- Konqueror
\
-- Safari
\
-- Chrome, Chromium, Opera 15+
If you want to go further Firefox's lineage is interesting but it's parent browsers are all dead. -- NCSA Mosaic
\
-- Spyglass Mosaic
\
-- MSIE
\
-- Spartan
I'd be really interested to know how much code from Spyglass or NCSA Mosaic survives in modern versions of Internet Explorer (and even Spartan).Spartan/IE engineers -- any info?
-- Internet Explorer 6-8
-- Internet Explorer 9-10
-- Internet Explorer 11
-- Internet Explorer new?
-- Firefox
-- Konqueror (abandoned?)
\
-- Safari
\
--Chromium, Opera 15+
\
-- Chrome
\
--IOS safari
-- Opera 12 (abandoned)
and that's why i use and only advertise firefox. It is the only browser that respect webdevelopers.the later is actually even better.
also, Firefox has venkman before all that.
sign. kids and Google marketing
blink webkit gecko
The closed source solutions are the ones we need to hope and pray die away trident. They're evil because there is no hope for any innovation as we saw in the last decade with IE6. MS can do anything they like to re-market their browser but as long as it's closed source engine it has no place in the web IMO. I hope it reaches 1% market share and is forced to go the way of Opera.
Microsoft makes, hm, how can I be positive here ... patchy software. There are always lots of rough patches reflecting pointy-haired boss decision making process, and there's cruft that builds up. But, very often you'll see these weird, beautiful bits just sticking out all over the place in Microsoft code. The weirdo geniuses at MSFT are allowed to do their thang and leave their mark. And the seminal releases of their software are always the best. Like, there are parts of IE6 that make me go, "how the HELL did Microsoft pull this tech off in 2000?" IE6 was this crumbly tower of awesome. If IE6 were a game, I won that game.
Anyhow, if development on Spartan goes RIGHT, then this browser will be the 2015 version of IE6. It will be the completest vision of kickassitude. There will be weird, crazy bits, and it'll take Microsoft and the rest of us a decade to untangle the proprietary parts. I can feel my blood pressure rising already!! The rage and the triumph and the glory!
For me, one thing I've been wanting to do is a compute heavy challenge-response for API requests.. meaning web workers, and that's only IE10+ ... will probably do a proof of concept with node (server) with scrype (client/server) against a pool of computed hashes... which could be very interesting in terms of reducing a DDOS against an API.
http://www.netmarketshare.com/browser-market-share.aspx?qpri...
Unfortunately, they have no mobile market share, and this is where most people will be browsing the web.
http://9to5mac.com/2015/02/24/ios-android-duopoly-marketshar...
http://www.netmarketshare.com/browser-market-share.aspx?qpri...
It's also interesting to note that the "Android browser" (so not Chrome) still has a significant market share 15.65%.
"Unfortunately, they have no mobile market share, and this is where most people will be browsing the web."
That time is now, can we not be excited for it? Have you heard the parable of the prodigal son?
I really don't see this as some big move. They've been doing this stuff for years. I think the consumer oriented Spartan browser is a clever move, but MS was getting there anyway. Seems like they're being clever and using Spartan and web-standards as a way to sell Win10. We're not getting these toys on 7 or 8. Want the new fancy browser? Get Win10.
I hope that all those who currently talk about how wonderful IE11 is take note that Microsoft is, essentially, saying they're abandoning it for all these reasons.
1. Safari iOS
2. Firefox
3. Chrome / Chrome Android
4. IE11 / IE11 Metro
I only curse IE9/IE10 when they don't support a moden feature, but I don't mind using display:table instead of flexbox (to name an example) as long as it gets the work done in IE9/IE10.Although I don't bother testing IE10- to be honest, I just blindly trust the document modes of IE11, I'd rather spend time testing different mobile devices than testing different IE versions.
PS. I might be biased in the sense that I have been doing web development since like 15 years ago, and I'm already accustomed to the broken box model of IE. With Firefox I literally have to ask myself every time "what the f%@k did I do wrong???", but with IE literally is "oh you silly IE, I just have to set X and Y extra attributes and it's done".
I don't remember every edge-case I have faced since ever, but for example, the following selector used to fail with Webkit browsers, and the response from Apple were "WONTFIX for performance reasons":
.checkbox:checked + .sibling + .second_sibling { display:block; }
Also, in my experience, the sites that look broken in IE11 (ex. Facebook) is because the website author (or the compatibility lists from MS) set an old/faulty document mode via X-UA-Compatible.
I'm not trying to claim that IE is a better browser than Firefox/Chrome, because this is subjective (and personally I prefer Opera), but I'm trying to say that you must not develop a website in Firefox/Chrome assuming they never have faults.
IE is not as broken as people claim, and there are edge cases where IE is right and the other browsers wrong.