digg

Join DiggAbout

Discover the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.

Warning: The Content in this Article May be Inaccurate

Readers have reported that this story contains information that may not be accurate.
See the original image at readwriteweb.com

Internet Explorer 8 Has Arrived

readwriteweb.com — Microsoft's next-generation web browser, Internet Explorer 8, has arrived. In a surprising move, after the demo of IE8 and its new features at today's session of the MIX08 conference.

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • tylerbanfield, on 03/06/2008, -89/+72Not something I'll personally be using, but I guess it's good for all the people who haven't made the move to an open source browser.
    • legoalert33, on 03/06/2008, -45/+139Open source doesn't necessarily mean best. If Microsoft improved that much and IE8 is better, I would rather use IE8.
      • AzureRise, on 03/06/2008, -24/+78You're right, doesn't necessarily mean best, it just usually is.
        • mythicflux, on 03/06/2008, -17/+5Passion is always better than just a paycheck.

          (Ironically passion without a paycheck usually gets you nowhere)
          • MWeather, on 03/06/2008, -0/+5Nowhere but happy and broke.
          • GliTCH82, on 03/06/2008, -0/+3I think somewhere in there you'll find a median where you can get compensated for your work, churn out great results that you're proud of and that your customers absolutely love.
        • cotaskmemalloc, on 03/06/2008, -39/+5Ah yes, another dickass comment from another brainwashed commie. Go fight the good fight for Comrade Stallman.
          • cotaskmemalloc, on 03/06/2008, -15/+2Guess I struck a nerve. Go back to 1960 you hippies.
          • Blandyman, on 03/06/2008, -7/+7... I think Bush is Bush but no better than Hitler and I think free health care would be great for citizens but not for illegal aliens... I think illegal aliens should be sent back to their country.

            And that's how most digg users think. It's just idiots like you (Actually, the lot of you) that are... well, stupid is about all I can say. Anything more and your minds can't comprehend.
          • slippiefist, on 03/06/2008, -1/+5Godwin'd
          • PullingTeeth, on 03/06/2008, -1/+21960s was a wonderful time, I'd personally love to be able to see Hendrix, the Beatles, Led Zep, and the Who play live, amongst many other activites (not necessarily drug related...). Thank you for your kind offer, sir.
          • bbardlbradd, on 03/06/2008, -3/+1Commie? Communism isn't actually a bad model theoretically... It's been implemented in a very many wrong ways. OPEN YOUR MIND HIPPIE!
          • cotaskmemalloc, on 03/06/2008, -1/+1bbardlbradd:
            Open my mind because *I'm* a hippie? What the hell are you talking about?
            And yes, yes it is a bad model. I think you'll find that history agrees with me.
        • djbon2112, on 03/06/2008, -2/+11I consider myself a libertarian (a capitalist at heart) and I'm a supporter of Open Source. Not all of us are "commies".

          Sorry, wrong reply link, that's directed at cotaskmemalloc
          • cotaskmemalloc, on 03/06/2008, -17/+2That makes about as much sense as saying you're a fascist who is for government subsidized healthcare. Whoop dee *****, you support open source. Do what you want. At least I get paid for writing my proprietary software.
          • MacEnvy, on 03/06/2008, -0/+10None of the open source advocates I've ever met are "commies", or they'd be demanding that the government take over, fully fund and personally oversee all OSS projects.
          • djbon2112, on 03/06/2008, -0/+5@ MacEnvy I know, I was replying to costakmemalloc's comment above ("Ah yes, another dickass comment from another brainwashed commie. Go fight the good fight for Comrade Stallman.")
          • Blandyman, on 03/06/2008, -0/+8cotaskmemalloc:

            Nah, it's not your software if someone else is paying you to make it. You're just a puppet making the big man some money...

            Hey, on a national scale, don't they call that... communism?
          • cotaskmemalloc, on 03/06/2008, -1/+1Blandyman:
            No, you idiot. They call it capitalism. Go back to school.
      • IphtashuFitz, on 03/06/2008, -9/+34Because IE has historically been so closely tied Windows it's been an excellent vector for exploits of all sorts. Unless Microsoft has completely unwed IE from the operating system, which I don't think they're able to do given past decisions and a history of backward compatibility, I'd still consider an open source browser to be much more secure than IE8. There have been documented cases in the past where earlier versions of IE had exploits that Microsoft didn't publicize or fix in a timely manner. Documentation and patching of open source browsers have historically been much more rapid and transparent. Given the history of IE and the likelihood that it's tied just as tightly to Windows I personally won't trust it until it's been in use and vetted by the general public for quite some time. Even then you'll have to trust that Microsoft will be fully forthcoming with bug reports and patches, which they've demonstrated you couldn't always trust in the past.
      • xlar54, on 03/06/2008, -12/+13Im not a big fan of having multiple applications on my machine that do exactly the same thing. Too much clutter. This is where IE does win, and wins big. For the casual web browsing individual, theres no point of installing an open source app when there is one already installed that does what you need. Firefox IS a good browser, no doubt about it. But IE is already here, so...
        • DRINKxREDxBULL, on 03/06/2008, -3/+8I keep suggesting FF to the casual browsers in my family, and that is exactly what they say. "Why do I need a to use FF when IE works fine."
          • Tenoq, on 03/06/2008, -0/+15I answer that one simply: "Because I'm not debugging your machine again without charging you."
        • natterca, on 03/06/2008, -5/+9I guess you use Notepad to do all all your editing?
          • DRINKxREDxBULL, on 03/06/2008, -3/+5Would you bother downloading Notepad++ if all you need to do open one text file?

            Average internet user != average digg user. That is why FF will never get more than 40% market share. None of my 14 aunts and uncles (except the 2 programmers) will install FF. With the amount of time they spend on the web, the benefits of fully customizing a FF browser are very marginal.
          • HardSide, on 03/06/2008, -0/+1Yes I do...
          • xlar54, on 03/07/2008, -0/+1Youd be surprised. I dont need some fancy multi-tabbed *application* when all I need to do is edit a file really quick. There really isnt that great a difference between IE and FF that most people would care to switch. Its just the client. And if average Joe wants to go to YouTube, he really couldnt care less if its via IE or FF. He wants YouTube. This is the same reason Linux wont make it on the desktop. People dont care about *Windows*....they care about Word...Excel.... etc....
        • puppetj, on 03/06/2008, -2/+10No wonder, comment's like that is for the reason for microsofts power, lol!
        • MWeather, on 03/06/2008, -1/+17I have different needs than you apparently. I need my browser to not open me up to malicious code. Of all the choices available, IE fits my needs the least.
        • amirman, on 03/06/2008, -1/+9the casual web browser is exactly the kind of user that needs the security of a browser like FF.
        • lovekudu, on 03/06/2008, -0/+1 MWeather : I sugg you up after reading the first sentence of your post, but the second one just has me confused...
      • MrViklund, on 03/06/2008, -0/+3He didn't say that either did he? He said "OPEN SOURCE".
    • tehpwnerofn00bs, on 03/06/2008, -18/+15Microsoft beta software? Yeah right. Its buggy and insecure in final versions; I'm not touching this.
      • CaptEnder, on 03/06/2008, -7/+1It hovers on the edges of a crowded room, not really sure of itself or if anyone will like it?
    • feliks2, on 03/06/2008, -16/+6Open source? Try Opera, even better.
      • IronPwnage, on 03/06/2008, -3/+6Ops. i R retart/
        • feliks2, on 03/06/2008, -2/+2I don't get it. Have you ever used Opera?
          • danomagnum, on 03/06/2008, -3/+7(opera's not open source, buddy)
          • feliks2, on 03/06/2008, -2/+6No *****, I know. I meant something along the lines of
            "Why open source, when you can use Opera which is better than any of the open source browsers. "
    • Dylson, on 03/06/2008, -9/+3Possibly the stupidest comment i've ever read.
    • Speck, on 03/06/2008, -3/+11You're so cool. Now tell that to the 80% of the 4MM + website visitors I get each month who are using some flavor of IE. As a developer, I *have* to care, irrespective of my personal taste.
      • mbthompson, on 03/06/2008, -3/+3Thank you for using the proper term "irrespective" and not the ad-hoc replacement "irregardless" which is a word that I loathe to hear. Just for that reason alone you gain a digg from me.
      • shrewduser, on 03/06/2008, -1/+4you wouldn't need to care if IE followed proper web standards....
    • MrViklund, on 03/06/2008, -3/+7Agreed. This comment should have 500+. But I guess it's the IE-Fanboys digging it down. Now wait. IE-fnboys??? X_x
  • JayCruz, on 03/06/2008, -21/+233The Browser wars.
    • BinaryFragger, on 03/06/2008, -0/+81It's nice to see the competition heating up again, with Firefox 3.0, IE8, Opera 9.50 and Safari 3.1 all currently undergoing beta testing. It'll be interesting to see which innovations will be created due to the rekindled browser war (anything but proprietary HTML tags, please!).
      • jgtg32a, on 03/06/2008, -2/+28Nah its all about interface and addons now
      • Cryoniq, on 03/06/2008, -19/+5hah.. you must be wasted.. what competition? Firefox and Opera own the land. IE should be put to rest and burn.
        • blazes816, on 03/06/2008, -2/+7In the same way that Antarctica rules the world, right?
        • YourMaster, on 03/06/2008, -0/+10Nobody has EVER had a military victory against Antarctica!
          • paradigmx, on 03/06/2008, -1/+1ironicly enough, there's been a cold war(pun not intended) in Antarctica for the past 30-40 years.

            Most of the major superpowers want to control it due to it containing large quantities of oil, but its extraterritoriality and isolation are preventing any major conquest by any nation.

            but this is off-topic, carry on
          • int19h, on 03/25/2008, -0/+1paradigmx,
            "Cold war" is an exaggeration, but it was interesting:
            http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antartica#Politics
        • IllBeBack, on 03/06/2008, -1/+1FireFox and Opera own nothing. Yet.
    • over900000, on 03/06/2008, -10/+92Now that, IE8 will be standards compliant what will everyone bitch about??!!
      • woofers07, on 03/06/2008, -4/+153I'll still be bitching about all the a-holes that will still be using IE 6 or earlier.
        • feliks2, on 03/06/2008, -5/+16People seriously still use IE6???
          • gllopc, on 03/06/2008, -2/+42OMG, yes. Corporations aren't moving to IE7, primarily due to it's interface. It's just different enough to create a hundred Help Desk calls for every 2000 users or so. (My estimation)
          • puppetj, on 03/06/2008, -13/+2i still use ie6, but only to windows update, i ant moving to ie 8 unless it forced or comes with vista..which i wont be using as a standard for ahwile
          • diggduggjoe, on 03/06/2008, -1/+6Amazingly, quite a few people. I, generally, do not recommend upgrading unless there is a need. The problem is, as we all know, IE is knitted pretty tight into Windows. Many programs use IE to render their interfaces or use portions of its libraries. I had my scanner break upgrading to IE7. Fortunately, it was not an orphaned unit yet. HP had a patch. However, you can easily break stuff that has nothing to do with browsing. I use Firefox for nearly everything, but Windows Update. I have a mixed bag of PCs. I tested 7 and that got me the broken scanner, so I have several PCs still using IE6.
          • Tenoq, on 03/06/2008, -0/+6Some websites don't work on IE7 or Firefox - they only work on IE6. Victoria's (Australia) Department of Education site is one of these. Various banking sites in Australia are also buggy under IE, or require particular settings. :p
            Yeah, people will still use old versions because there are still websites out there that are IE6-only designed. *sigh* ActiveX FTL.
          • ScottMitchell, on 03/06/2008, -2/+4Let me guess - you don't work for a large corporation?
          • jetfuel, on 03/06/2008, -1/+3I haven't downloaded IE7, but I rarely use IE anyway.
          • LocalDocal, on 03/06/2008, -0/+1I still use IE6. Actually, I'm a Firefox user and I prefer Opera as the alternative, but my problem is that some of the websites I use requires IE, thus I must use it sometimes. I never switched to IE7 because I did not like it (and I don't give a ***** if the usual people on Digg considers me a luddidite for it).

            However, and I do hate to admit this, Internet Explorer 8 sounds surprisingly good. Hell, I'm downloading the beta now to try it out.
          • diggimator, on 03/07/2008, -1/+1In January 2008 IIRC IE users were 50% IE6, 50% IE7. For IE7 Microsoft should've just gone ahead and copied Firefox's superior interface instead of inventing an inferior one that does the same thing. As it stands, web devs have to check compatibility with IE6, IE7, Safari 3, and FF2.
      • mvent2, on 03/06/2008, -16/+9Its not quite. Its abysmal on the Acid3 test.
        • gr00vy, on 03/06/2008, -3/+47Everything is.
          • mvent2, on 03/06/2008, -11/+14Other browsers at least render something readable. IE desn't even reach 20/100 yet.
          • over900000, on 03/06/2008, -7/+24@mvent: you either pass it or fail it. Everything fails at Acid3.
          • MikeSD34, on 03/06/2008, -7/+24Some browsers don't even pass Acid 2... You know, like the crowd favorite Firefox.
          • xlar54, on 03/06/2008, -0/+16How do they even come up with a proper test when nothing can pass it?
          • iofthestorm, on 03/06/2008, -2/+5Firefox 3 nightlies have passed Acid 2 for a while, which is all that matters since Firefox 2 isn't getting any rendering engine updates anymore, and Firefox 3 will be out hopefully in a month or two.
          • MWeather, on 03/06/2008, -0/+4@MikeSD34: Firefox 3 does, and it's beta has been out for quite a while.

            @xlar54: I assume they implement the standard. How else would you do a standards compliance test?
          • Darkhacker, on 03/06/2008, -0/+2@xlar54

            Good question. It's actually quite difficult. They read the W3C specifications over and over and very carefully write code to do certain tasks and see if a browser renders it according to how it should look. In fact, shortly after ACID2 was released, one of the Safari developers found a bug in ACID2 ( http://weblogs.mozillazine.org/hyatt/archives/2005 ... ) and once it was fixed, Safari became the first to pass it. It's like trying to complete a jigsaw puzzle blindfolded. They're basically rendering a page by hand with paper and pencil.

            It's very likely that ACID3 will have to fix some bugs of there own while it's still be developed and not all the blame rests on the rendering engine developers.
          • Tenoq, on 03/06/2008, -1/+2Err, Firefox does pass Acid2, MikeSD34. Edit - as iofthestorm just said. And it's doing a much better job of Acid3 than IE - but it's still abysmal.
          • Bamborzled, on 03/06/2008, -0/+2Acid3 isn't even meant to test standards-compliance; it's intended to test obscure edge cases and support for new features.
      • thejokell, on 03/06/2008, -5/+59How about that GIANT toolbar? I want my browser to dedicate the most space to the site I'm looking at as possible. IE7 and 8 don't do that.
        • LightSpeed4, on 03/06/2008, -19/+8are you ***** kidding? did you ever actually use ie7, or are you the type that bitch about something they never used?

          ie7 literally deleted the the traditional bars and only has 1 bar, squeezed history, favorites, and everything into one button, and made the other buttons small just to give the sites the most space.
          • feliks2, on 03/06/2008, -5/+20"made all the other buttons small"
            LOL, the buttons are huge and terribly placed.
            Why the ***** are the bac/forward buttons seperate from the stop/refresh buttons, sepperate from the favorite buttons seperate from the other buttons. What the ***** were they thinking? And the tabs are monstrous. Try Opera sometime.
          • amirman, on 03/06/2008, -1/+6check this out.
            here's IE : http://flickr.com/photos/22238462@N08/2313981600/
            here's FF : http://flickr.com/photos/22238462@N08/2313981502/
            the end.
          • therightclique, on 03/06/2008, -3/+3so those pictures prove that they're exactly the same.. and that isn't even IE7's default layout, which is even smaller, giving more room to the page. that doesn't mean IE7 doesn't look really really stupid and feel bulkier due to pure ***** design.
          • amirman, on 03/06/2008, -0/+2you must have missed the part where FF has packed about 20 times the function in the same amount of space.
          • amirman, on 03/06/2008, -0/+1also, if firefox had only one page open like IE did it would have been considerably smaller since it wouldn't be unnecessarily displaying the tab bar. and yes, yes it was the default layout, i noticed it was smaller than it used to be but it still wastes a lot of space.
          • darkism, on 03/06/2008, -2/+1I loathe IE as much as the next guy, but what's *really* unnecessary is the giant bookmarks bar in the FF screenshot.
            People actually use it?
          • amirman, on 03/06/2008, -1/+1if you look at my screenshot, i very obviously DO use it. and you know what's great? if you don't want to use it you can REMOVE IT. IE doesn't let you remove their toolbars.
        • HigherLogic, on 03/06/2008, -3/+1I'm downloading IE8 right now to test it out so I don't know the answer to this one, but it would be nice if IE let you customize the look and feel of the GUI like in Opera and, to some extent, Firefox (althought Firefox doesn't offer too much customization).

          It's fine if they want to provide a default interface, but one thing that really bothered me about IE7 was the layout of everything and the inability to move things around or even completely hide something. A prime example is the stop/refresh button on the top to the very right of the address bar. It's out of place.
      • getisboy, on 03/06/2008, -2/+14how about the use of a comma where there should not be one?
      • Cryoniq, on 03/06/2008, -14/+1ROFLMAO! Standard compliant according to who?!? Microsoft?!? Lol! You too must be completely wasted. Either you just don't understand or is not that sharp, or you just haven't been around for 15-20 years to understand this..
        • Nekiruhs, on 03/06/2008, -1/+5IE 8 passes Acid2. Standards compliant says I.
        • Ebeniz, on 03/06/2008, -0/+3So you've been using IE for 20 years huh????
      • splobk, on 03/06/2008, -10/+4I downloaded and couldn't check my HOTMAIL.

        It kept 'working on my request' and i restarted IE twice, restarted my comp once.. i really wanted to use it, didn't work. I'm back on Firefox.
      • BossKey, on 03/06/2008, -2/+1People will still have stuff to bitch about.
        You can be 100% standards-compliant and still have security holes big enough to drive a truck through.
      • DeathfireD, on 03/06/2008, -1/+3activeX security, that alone is enough to bitch about.
        • fredclown, on 03/06/2008, -1/+2ActiveX is not insecure. It's just as insecure as Firefox Addons. You can create Firefox Addons that do malicious stuff just as easily as creating ActiveX addons that are malicious. What is insecure is people just accepting whatever they are prompted with.
      • Kanidia, on 03/06/2008, -0/+2I can still bitch about my old IE hacks that would accidentally get targeted on IE8 as well, making the site look like "height: 10000px"
      • rnelsonee, on 03/06/2008, -1/+4Oh, we can still bitch about it not being standards complaint. IE8 gets a miserable 17 out of 100 on the Acid3 test (http://acid3.acidtests.org/ )
        Although, honestly, IE8 still does better than expected for 'older' standards. I'd be happy if they finally got the box model right - I need to check that part out.
        • fredclown, on 03/06/2008, -0/+2Acid3 just came out and no browser fully supports it. Also, it uses cutting edge things that has still not been finalized in the spec.
    • futbball09, on 03/06/2008, -9/+25All of these features have been implemented in my Firefox browser for a year! Thats what open source will get you.
      • HigherLogic, on 03/06/2008, -1/+24What about Opera? It brought countless innovations, some more than a decade ago, before anyone else. Most of them are used by all modern browsers now (like tabbed browsing). They're not open source. One feature I'd like to see other browsers integrate is a true multiple document interface (MDI).
        • iofthestorm, on 03/06/2008, -3/+5To each his own I suppose, but MDI sucks IMO. TLAs FTW.
        • HigherLogic, on 03/06/2008, -1/+2It's great if you have a larger than normal resolution. What exactly sucks about MDI though?
          http://img222.imageshack.us/img222/6985/mdirocksha ...
          • HenkPoley, on 03/06/2008, -1/+1Uhm, pressing one button (F4 ?) and having all your 40 or so tabs resize to a poststamp. Taking ages.

            Oh, and maybe someone can explain me what is not-MDI about Opera < ~6. I could never see any glaring difference for the user side of the story.
        • busta, on 03/06/2008, -1/+2It requires unnecessary user management of the various windows. It's a waste of user effort for very little gain.
        • Karmavs, on 03/06/2008, -1/+1You mean like multiple windows? IE1 had it.
          I've never seen any benefit to having multiple windows inside a tab inside a window over having multiple windows… — It's practically useless if you don't maximise the main window anyway, so all you gain is an extra toolbar
        • HigherLogic, on 03/06/2008, -0/+1One parent window with multiple child windows. Tabbed browsing is actually a good example, except tabbed "windows" cannot be "separated" from the toolbar, resized, minimized, moved around, etc. Maybe a popup window would be a better way of thinking about it.

          And it's not multiple windows inside one tab inside a window, it's being able to take a tab and turn it into a window. There's no gain in a toolbar either. If you don't see the advantage of having child windows inside a parent window, then you're basically saying you don't see the advantage of tabbed browsing either.

          As I said earlier though, it's great if you have a high resolution. I break tabs up into windows mainly for work purposes, like comparing websites when doing development work, writing an email in a window when I need to see content from one or more tabs, etc. See the screenshot for an example (linked above, though I don't use them like that, was just showing an example).
    • TheRealTopherG, on 03/06/2008, -6/+26Netscape Navigator... FTW!!!
    • Holk23, on 03/06/2008, -14/+4www.firefox.com
    • Daggity, on 03/06/2008, -7/+2Internet Explorer Strikes Back.
    • gypsi, on 03/06/2008, -2/+6why do people keep asking if ie is good enough to compete with better browsers, when we should just use those better browsers?
    • CoolWind, on 03/06/2008, -1/+10I just installed IE8 and opened this thread and was unable to leave a comment. It was unusably slow. In fact it's still thrashing.
      • Karmavs, on 03/06/2008, -0/+3who ever would have guessed that the first beta of a product would not be suitably fast/stable for the general popuulation? Not me for sure.
    • Richggs, on 03/06/2008, -6/+6WARNING!! I just tried to install IE on vista and i couldnt boot, someting to do with winloader.exe Complete and utter fail.
      Why is it even messing around with boot files?
      • Septimus, on 03/06/2008, -2/+3It doesn't.
        • Richggs, on 03/06/2008, -3/+3Clearly it does, i didnt ask for a wise ass remark on the matter.
    • spanglegluppet, on 03/06/2008, -7/+6I just installed it then on Vista, and it will open for about three seconds and then will have a spasm and need to shut down. ***** you, Microsoft.
      • HardSide, on 03/06/2008, -2/+4"***** you, Microsoft"...yet you use there operating system and you are trying to use a BETA version of there software. ***** microsoft? NO, ***** YOU.
    • wetard57, on 03/06/2008, -3/+4http://ie7.com/
    • TnTBass, on 03/07/2008, -0/+1I installed it on Vista x64. I cannot get into Windows Live Mail. LOL

      Oh, Firefox works just fine for Windows Live Mail. Nice.
  • jasmin888, on 03/06/2008, -93/+282YAAAAAAAAWN
    • JoWiGo, on 03/06/2008, -5/+72As a developer I'm fairly excited. I'm looking forward to when Microsoft releases it in a Windows update so that more people have it.
      • TeacherOfHeroes, on 03/06/2008, -4/+3didn't they force the last update on users or something? While devs may win, users don't really have a say anymore, it seems.
    • cotaskmemalloc, on 03/06/2008, -30/+15Someone needs naptime. How's kindergarten?
    • Tserk, on 03/06/2008, -3/+8Boring to you, terrifying to me (a UI developer).
    • noelsusman, on 03/06/2008, -1/+8The fact that I have to restart my computer just to install a web browser is enough to make me want to yawn forever.
      However, I will still give it its fair chance. Who knows, maybe it's better than firefox.
    • mundus, on 05/15/2008, -1/+3And I still don't care!
    • jasmin888, on 03/06/2008, -2/+1Anything IE is purely defensive on the part of MS. They allocate just enough resources to stay in the market. There was a lot of criticism over IE7's lack of standards compliance. Now they trumpet standards compliance this time round. Let's hope it actually happens, though they're already backing down on that promise. Personally I hate to have to deal with lackings so obviously the result of negligence.
  • eclip5e, on 03/06/2008, -10/+125Hooray for passing ACID2 tests, and a nice use of microformats to implement web slices.
    • over900000, on 03/06/2008, -16/+25Shame Firefox 2 doesn't pass ACID2.
      • Syphon8, on 03/06/2008, -7/+45Firefox 3 does, and it's been perfectly usable for awhile.
        • MikeSD34, on 03/06/2008, -8/+15The public doesn't use betas. Developers do, but the public doesn't. I applaud their effort, but until its released you really can't say 'Firefox Passes'. Just like you can't say IE passes, because the general population isn't using it.
          • kris33, on 03/06/2008, -2/+16This is a beta too.
          • iofthestorm, on 03/06/2008, -1/+4The point is that it will soon become the stable version, and Firefox 2 wouldn't get rendering improvements anyway (if it did, it wouldn't be Firefox 2) so for all intents and purposes, Firefox can pass Acid 2.
        • grumpyrain, on 03/06/2008, -0/+8Firefox 3 is more usable than Firefox 2 on digg. FF2 crashes on at least one article a day. No such problems with 3 so far.
          • CoolWind, on 03/06/2008, -1/+4My firefox 2 never crashes on digg, and I'm using 25 add-ons, but not the performance boosters.
          • danomagnum, on 03/06/2008, -0/+8Ya know, now that you mention it, i haven't had any of those loading comment page javascript bog downs since I've switched to 3.
          • betterth, on 03/06/2008, -1/+1Using 2, and no problems at all concerning crashing or bogging down.
      • PleaseJustDie, on 03/06/2008, -4/+28firefox 3 does, so if you want an ACID2 compliant Firefox you can download the beta of that or wait for it to be fully released.
        • Karmavs, on 03/06/2008, -1/+2Or use safari, or opera. No beta testing required
      • mattus, on 03/06/2008, -4/+23Firefox 2 was released over 18 months ago. Firefox 3 will be out shortly and renders the Acid test perfectly.
        • gsnedders, on 03/06/2008, -0/+1Acid2 was released almost 3 years ago. Safari shipped a version that passed just over two years ago, before Firefox 2.0 even shipped! The fact that Firefox 2.0 is old is irrelevant.
      • manitoba98xp, on 03/06/2008, -8/+5But Firefox 3 does, and it should be out soon-ish-maybe.
      • over900000, on 03/06/2008, -17/+6Does FF3 pass ACID3 like Opera?
        • Syphon8, on 03/06/2008, -2/+13Fx2 passes ACID3 better than Opera. Fx2's score is 50, Opera's is 46.

          Fx3 scores 67.
        • mvent2, on 03/06/2008, -1/+13Opera doesn't pass Acid3. Not even close.
        • Karmavs, on 03/06/2008, -0/+1Webkit gets 82, if that's your basis for which browser to chose
      • axiomata, on 03/06/2008, -12/+9I hear Firefox 3 does.

        ...
      • Eibx, on 03/06/2008, -0/+1Well it's great that they complete a ACID test, but the only thing it is, is a HTML and CSS valid smiley.
        - Think about it, a world where you hadn't have think about cross-browsering.
      • int19h, on 03/25/2008, -0/+1Except it doesn't if the same page is served from a different server.
    • Rpd9803, on 03/06/2008, -6/+3I liked Web Slices when they were called Web Clippings. And Im sure someone else preferred Active Desktop, altho Web clippings are importantly different.

      Another MS innovation.
    • amadeusdemarzi, on 03/06/2008, -11/+1Sadly, this beta doesn't pass Acid 2 yet :(
      • praveenmarkandu, on 03/06/2008, -0/+9yes it does. i just tried it. wtf are you talking about?
        • amadeusdemarzi, on 03/06/2008, -0/+1Looks like I had the same problem as below. Chill bra :)
      • mattletron, on 03/06/2008, -0/+4I can confirm that it does indeed pass the Acid 2 test. Just tried it. In fact I'm posting this comment with it. :)
      • iofthestorm, on 03/06/2008, -1/+3It just doesn't support copies of Acid2 on other domains because of some cross-domain security thing. The developers posted something to that effect on the IEblog. Haven't tried it myself because I don't have any reason to download IE8.
      • Shadow503, on 03/06/2008, -0/+1DTFF!
    • handsoffme, on 03/06/2008, -6/+5I was unable to get it to pass the ACID tests.

      Acid2: http://www.myuid.com/~kevin/acid2.jpg
      Acid3: http://www.myuid.com/~kevin/acid3.jpg

      Also I noticed many rendering bugs on CNN.com. But hey, its beta.
      • Bartboy919, on 03/06/2008, -0/+10http://www.istartedsomething.com/20080306/ie8-acid ...
        • Tenoq, on 03/06/2008, -0/+1So the acid2 test isn't designed to test cross-domain linking? Because your link says that's precisely where IE8 Beta fails - although it sounds like it's an issue they plan to resolve.
      • tarscher, on 03/06/2008, -1/+1it probably has nothing to do with rendering bugs: When you develop a site you need to make one for IE (to fix all the IE6-7 rendering bugs) and one for the other (compliant) browsers. Since IE8 is compliant but renders the non compliant ie code, you get weird results.
      • comradeTJH, on 03/06/2008, -0/+2Does ANY browser render the acid3 test correctly?
    • UnterDenLinden, on 03/06/2008, -1/+12But does it pass the electric kool-aid acid test?
      • SuperCow1127, on 03/06/2008, -0/+2That's not really the kind of test you "pass."
    • LightSpeed4, on 03/06/2008, -2/+13Ah, the double standard that because IE doesn't (didn't) pass Acid 2 it sucks, but for Firefox it's OK because it's only testing invalid code anyways. Love it.
      • Nanobe, on 03/06/2008, -1/+3News flash: Firefox passed Acid 2 ages ago. In fact, the nightly trunk builds passed Acid 2 pretty close to the time Firefox 2 was released.
        • betterth, on 03/06/2008, -1/+4Then why doesn't my fully updated version of Firefox 2 pass? You would think since FF2 came out 18 months ago, and it passed as you say, roughly 18 months ago, that my fully updated FF2 would pass :|
          • Nanobe, on 03/07/2008, -0/+1No, because you're using a fully updated *Firefox 2*. Firefox 2 updates are only security and stability updates. All of the layout engine work is being prepared for Firefox 3. Some major parts of the engine were totally rewritten during the Firefox 3 development process, and those kinds of changes are simply too high-impact to put in a bimonthly security update.
        • Kral, on 03/06/2008, -1/+2Just like IE8, that version of FireFox is still a development build. The rendering changes won't go into FF2 just like IE's rendering changes won't go into IE7. Welcome to the world of software, I'll be your guide.
    • RyeBrye, on 03/06/2008, -0/+2does it have data: urls' yet, or does it still need the ghetto alternative test?
      • jonathansnook, on 03/06/2008, -0/+4yes, data URLs are supported (which it needed to pass Acid2)
    • Nanobe, on 03/06/2008, -2/+5Yes, it just barely passes the Acid 2 test. I say "barely" because in each case where I use CSS "generated content" and other advanced CSS 2.1 features that everything but IE < 8 support, IE 8 really barfs on it. In other words, IE 8 added support for the features tested in Acid 2, but with tons of bugs that happen to not show up in the particular conditions in Acid 2.

      One of my sites makes use of the :before and :after pseudo-elements to create an inner highlight border (similar to the effect in Tango icons), but IE 8 screws up the overflow or something and the headings end up like eight times taller than they should be. It's going to take a lot of work to get around IE 8's new CSS bugs. Or I could just use the meta thing, but that's a cop out.

      Hopefully a lot more gets fixed before the final release. The IE blog says their goal is to have full CSS 2.1 support by the IE 8 release, which I can guarantee won't happen. IE 8 has made progress, but it's still nowhere close to Firefox, Opera, and Safari, and even those don't have *full* CSS 2.1 support.
      • hobbitaussie, on 03/06/2008, -0/+5Have you reported any of those? If you don't then don't complain about them if they aren't fixed in the release.
        • Nanobe, on 03/07/2008, -0/+1I run one of the most comprehensive web browser bug resources on the Web. I frequently submit bugs, and some of the IE developers read my blog (the IE platform architect left a comment on it just yesterday).
    • Dongvid, on 03/06/2008, -1/+3None of my linux browsers pass Acid2 or Acid3 flawlessly. Actually, Konqueror gets the closest on acid2 and opera beta on acid3. Curse you, ***** linux browsers! My windows partition version of Opera (9.50 Beta Kestrel) is the best so far, though. I blame the plugins.
    • yabos, on 03/06/2008, -0/+2What the hell is a web slice.
      • usherzx, on 03/06/2008, -0/+1i think it is a spider web cut into slices, like cake, pie or pizza?
      • int19h, on 03/25/2008, -0/+1It's exactly two lines of javascript.
  • mcollins08, on 03/06/2008, -63/+47IE kinda sucks...
    • dnields, on 03/06/2008, -14/+26only kinda???
    • jhaks, on 03/06/2008, -0/+2Yeah. You know it sucks because IE 8 just came out in beta and you've used it extensively.
  • ligyron, on 03/06/2008, -44/+3Fun
    • edwartica, on 03/06/2008, -5/+11for those who like to exploit security holes.
      • wageslaven, on 03/06/2008, -3/+4Right. Because IE was a vector for security issues in 2004... time for some new FUD.
  • TomScrace, on 03/06/2008, -18/+211I'm quite prepared to give this a chance, but I don't hold out much hope.
    • brucemanly, on 03/06/2008, -4/+12Me neither, I personally use firefox, but as I work tech support for one of the uks isps I am forced to support IE7 and find found its interface very annoying, I really hope the improve this, as It drives me up the wall that the file menu seems to be off by default on nearly every computer i look at
      • cotaskmemalloc, on 03/06/2008, -11/+7It's a web browser. Do you really need a file menu for most tasks? Of course not. It's a ridiculous waste of space.
        • dlllb, on 03/06/2008, -5/+5Yeah, as he works in Tech support he kind of needs access to more things other than a huge Back/Forward button.
          • cotaskmemalloc, on 03/06/2008, -4/+6Boy, he sure must be suffering if he needs to get to 'Save As' or 'Export' by having to press the Alt key to make the menu pop up. It's a waste of space.
          • Tenoq, on 03/06/2008, -3/+2cotaskmemalloc - haven't worked in tech support?
          • cotaskmemalloc, on 03/06/2008, -0/+3Tenog - haven't pressed the alt key on your keyboard?
    • eggsovereasy, on 03/06/2008, -2/+5Just push alt, it's not hard.
    • Nanobe, on 03/06/2008, -2/+3I don't think it's ready for average people (or even power users) to use yet. The changes in standards support, which improved a lot over IE 7 but still seems to fall way short of the rest of the browsers, cause lots of major sites to screw up. I'm talking about big sites like yahoo.com, cnn.com... heck, even Microsoft's own live.com looks like someone took a hatchet to it. Unless you intend to browser in IE 7 compatibility mode, you might want to hold back until things stabilize a bit.

      Or just use any other browser and not have to worry about these version-to-version compatibility issues. Your choice.
    • JoeCool51, on 03/06/2008, -1/+4HA! HA! I'm using the Internet!
  • johanm, on 03/06/2008, -40/+15to quote idiocracy: "breaking news: ***** sucks!"
  • EwMo, on 03/06/2008, -65/+22Buried for "Internet Explorer" reference.
    • onixxino, on 03/06/2008, -2/+5Buried for being bias without even try it
  • gannondork, on 03/06/2008, -51/+31Firefox!!!!
  • Timan, on 03/06/2008, -10/+224Just a tip for web devs out there, if you know some of your visitors will be using the beta, this will force ie8 to view your site in ie7 mode. Quick fix for alot of the problems in the beta...
    < meta http-equiv="X-UA-Compatible" content="IE=7" />
    • IphtashuFitz, on 03/06/2008, -22/+19Sucks that you have to modify content based on open standards just to remain compatible with a Microsoft product.
      • stoanhart, on 03/06/2008, -3/+32You don't. This will tell IE8 to use IE7's suck mode. You could also strip all IE7 hacks and not put that code in, and IE8 will use the actual standards. This is MS fixing their mistakes, so from here on in there should be very, very few special cases.
        • pixelperfect, on 03/06/2008, -5/+5oh... besides those existing billion odd pages out there that were developed by microtards.
    • edwartica, on 03/06/2008, -4/+8Wonder when the new IE tag plug in (for firefox) will be available.
      • blazes816, on 03/06/2008, -0/+2I'm pretty sure that the IE tab plugin uses the currently installed IE renderer on your computer, so there won't need to be a new one.
    • Forbizzle, on 03/06/2008, -1/+9please don't add even more code to justify people using a broken browser. IE8 is definetly a huge step in the right direction for Microsoft, and their recent anoucement to default to standards mode instead of their homebrew was awesome. But this is madness. IE 8 is beta, so if you're doing this for defects, then wait them out don't adjust your content. The bugs are Microsofts, not yours. The second you take ownership of their mess they'll be complacent with them again.

      If you're doing this because your page doesn't work with standard compliant browsers, then fix your crap already. If you can't find a way to do it properly, seek help because there is always a way.
      • eternicode, on 03/06/2008, -0/+5Do people not read? The IE7 X-UA-Compatible tag is a quick fix for those whose sites break in IE8. It makes the site behave properly in IE8 while either a) the developer, who is cursing MS for making him maintain his site, sits in front of his TV once more, or b) the developer, rejoicing at a finally standards-compliant IE, eagerly attacks the code of his pages to make them work in IE8.

        It's not adding code to justify users using a broken browser. It's adding code to give yourself time to fix a website, so your already updated users do not suffer needlessly.

        Or perhaps I misread your comment, in which case I apologize.
    • Pritchard, on 03/06/2008, -4/+1Great. Now I'm making sure that my IE7 compliance which was non-compliant to the Standards Compliance is activated, due to IE8 now being compliant.

      What the *****?
    • RonniSR, on 03/06/2008, -0/+1Thanx for the tip, definitely useful!!!
  • dcollins, on 03/06/2008, -25/+61The one thing I would like to see is a lighter IE (I don't know if this will be it). Firefox loads much faster than the current IE.
    • EXreaction, on 03/06/2008, -9/+189I'd like to see a lighter Firefox...not that I like IE, but I hate it when FF slows to a crawl and locks everything up.
      • mrn111, on 03/06/2008, -1/+138Especially loading a certain web site's comment system.
        • ruddy, on 03/06/2008, -5/+17digg sucks bawls with it's comment system. ie6 or firefox ***** bricks when you have to load this page.
          i hate you kevin....
          • popfrogs, on 03/06/2008, -1/+18Yep, especially compared to Slashdot. Equal number of comments shown, Slashdot loads instantly, Digg holds your browser hostage for 60 seconds while the page loads and renders.
          • iofthestorm, on 03/06/2008, -1/+9Slashdot owns digg in terms of comment system, even with more advanced features. However, Firefox 3 has much better javascript performance and no longer dies when loading digg comments.
        • endlessoul, on 03/06/2008, -0/+6Ooh! Burn!

          But no, seriously, when are they rolling out the comment system?
      • stoanhart, on 03/06/2008, -4/+40You guys should try FF3B3 - the digg comment woes are over.
        • xaxxon, on 03/06/2008, -1/+8If only the plugins worked with ff3.. then I would use it. I cannot live without firebug (among others), though. Not even when I'm not doing development.
          • majglow, on 03/06/2008, -0/+9Firebug works on FF3 (I'm using it). I don't know what you're talking about.
          • theaceoffire, on 03/06/2008, -0/+2Is greasemonkey fixed?
          • Psythik, on 03/06/2008, -0/+3http://www.oxymoronical.com/web/firefox/nightly

            Makes FF2 addons compatible with FF3. Worked on about 85% of my addons.
          • grumpyrain, on 03/06/2008, -0/+1Sure, keep it around. Unlike IE8 (which overwrites IE7), FF3 beta leaves FF2 in place. ABP and NoScript work in FF3, what other extensions do you need to surf digg?
        • flaremon, on 03/06/2008, -0/+4have you tried using the nightly tester tools?
      • jetsetter883, on 03/06/2008, -3/+1god forbid you like IE!
    • renegadeafk, on 03/06/2008, -2/+24Firefox 2 is pretty slow, but firefox 3 beta 4 is currently way faster than IE in UI speed/responsiveness, startup time and page rendering.
    • LittleDas, on 03/06/2008, -3/+19Firefox is faster when you start...
      but firefox has serious issues with keeping RAM usage low, I often find that by the time I've been browsing for a while, firefox will be taking up several hundred Mb with only a google tab open.
    • slothlovechunk, on 03/06/2008, -0/+7I had the opposite experience, so I tried out IE7 for awhile. It definately started up faster, but bugged me in a lot of other ways. So when the Firefox 3 beta came out I was pretty happy with it. I will try out ie8 and see if it bugs me like ie7 did. Basically I don't know what I hate about ie7, I just know I've given it a fair shake and it doesn't feel right.
    • mburk, on 03/06/2008, -3/+4Yeah, watch your RAM usage in task manager for FF and then IE7. Even better, look at the difference with IE7 when you have the window open and when it's minimized. Now do the same with FF. IE7 is pretty sexy with RAM usage compared to FF.
    • gcnaddict, on 03/06/2008, -1/+2IE8 is comparable to F3B3 in load times. The only one that wins in some instances is Safari. This is directly from a slide in the keynote.
    • bxblox, on 03/06/2008, -0/+4I like firefox but after having it running, even with one tab, for a couple of hours it starts to use a ridiculous amount of ram.
    • renegadeafk, on 03/06/2008, -0/+1Firefox 3 seems to have much better ram usage as well, IE7 for me uses over 100 mb of ram all the time and now firefox usually stays under that around 80 or less with the same amount of tabs open.
    • jetsetter883, on 03/06/2008, -0/+1and uses more resources.
    • joeTaco, on 03/06/2008, -1/+2If you want speed and low memory usage, use Opera.
  • zakharm, on 03/06/2008, -34/+19I'm still on IE6! Why upgrade when you can just use Firefox??
    • atarix64, on 03/06/2008, -4/+34Dude upgrade to IE7 or IE8 do you have any idea what a pain IE6 is for doing cross browser design. But yet 30% of the poopulation still uses it...

      Not to mention is sucks.
      • PoopOnPaul, on 03/06/2008, -1/+20I really want "poopulation" to have been intentional
      • petermac99, on 03/06/2008, -0/+3I think the point was why upgrade when you don't use it.
        I'm a web developer and still have IE6 on both my windows boxes. IE7/8 is of no use to me since I know that when I do my IE testing in 6 it will carry forward to the future releases.
        • ruddy, on 03/06/2008, -0/+1it depends if you're good or not. if you know all the ie quirks you can get around it, but most people still have to reference all the other browsers.
      • Jaliyl, on 03/06/2008, -0/+5Dugg for Poopulation

        And he uses Firefox so the fact that he has IE6 means nothing, I still have it on my seldomly used XP install.
      • ApostropheMan, on 03/09/2008, -0/+0Do you know how to spell "irony"? Stupid Yank.
  • rexprime, on 03/06/2008, -36/+13was i.e.8 really needed... or asked for
    • CitizenC, on 03/06/2008, -0/+27Yes, absolutely. On both counts.

      Current & past versions of Internet Explorer do not comply with web standards in the same way that Opera or Firefox does. This new version DRAMATICALLY improves on this. Us web developers have been bitching at Microsoft to support web standards in their browser for years; they're finally listening.
  • ahpro, on 03/06/2008, -90/+344www.getfirefox.com
  • Bakie, on 03/06/2008, -26/+103Link to download:
    http://www.microsoft.com/windows/products/winfamil ...
    • diablozx9, on 03/06/2008, -16/+83I dont see the Linux version ?????
      • kashk5, on 03/06/2008, -4/+13I don't know why people are digging you down, that was pretty funny
      • TeagueSterling, on 03/06/2008, -0/+2I wonder how long till it runs under WINE?
        • TheRealTopherG, on 03/06/2008, -0/+1Why oh why would you ever do that!?
          • autoatsakiklis, on 03/13/2008, -0/+1To check if your website is compatible with IE.
      • Karmavs, on 03/06/2008, -0/+2 
    • Jaliyl, on 03/06/2008, -15/+9Bad link, heres a better one. http://www.mozilla.com/en-US/firefox/
    • tcpip4lyfe, on 03/06/2008, -1/+4I tried to go into it with an open mind and really give it a chance.
      Faulting application TrustedInstaller.exe, version 6.0.6000.16609, time stamp 0x4757584b, faulting module wcp.dll, version 6.0.6000.16386, time stamp 0x4549bdde, exception code 0xc0000005, fault offset 0x00150a05, process id 0xba8, application start time 0x01c87f2cc4042453.
  • angelfelix, on 03/06/2008, -9/+33I'm using it and at first sight it actually seems much faster than IE7
  • sochee, on 03/06/2008, -21/+10Isn't like, IE7 supposed to be nextgen? Why are they pumping them out so quickly?
    • ingoldsby, on 03/06/2008, -9/+20Because IE7 can't compete with browsers like FIrefox and Opera.
      • wageslaven, on 03/06/2008, -3/+4No. Because as always, software gets better with time. Whats your malfunction? Out with the old, in with the new.

        As always.
    • DjArcadian, on 03/06/2008, -15/+10IE7 is the Windows ME of internet browsers.
    • manitoba98xp, on 03/06/2008, -6/+4It's still only a beta, but I agree, the end-user improvements are minor. While this is a huge leap for developers, it really should be IE 7.1 or 7.5.
    • Kratos76, on 03/06/2008, -4/+1Why is sochee getting burried? This is a legit question. IE7 has barely been out a year, and only mandatory in Windows Updates for a few months. How long was IE6 out before an update? YEARS!! (that said, still use FF)
    • pnmoore, on 03/06/2008, -1/+8This is the most incredible statement I have ever seen! First Microsoft sucks because they are slow to roll out new versions. Now they suck because they released a new version too quickly?

      Wow. I guess if you are the "evil empire" of the moment you just can't win any which way you turn.

      Oh, and there is the fact that IE7 has been out for a while. This wasn't THAT quick...
      • Cooperfan, on 03/06/2008, -0/+1I guess the thing he's trying to say is, if they are able to release a relative good version of IE so quickly, why did it take them years to improve IE6?
        I think the answer to this question has to do with innovation of competitors.
  • colincornaby, on 03/06/2008, -26/+13Internet Explorer now passes the ACID 2 tests!... On the day that the ACID3 tests get released. Always a step behind I guess (meantime the Safari 3 nightlies are very close to passing ACID 3)
    • over900000, on 03/06/2008, -4/+18Firefox 2 doesn't pass ACID2!
      • colincornaby, on 03/06/2008, -1/+16So? WebKit/Safari passes ACID2. So does Opera. It's not like if Firefox can't do it, nobody can. (Plus Firefox 3 passes...)
    • bobdigi, on 03/06/2008, -5/+18Does the average user REALLY care about ACID2 tests? My browsing experience with Firefox has been rather fine.
      • IllBeBack, on 03/06/2008, -0/+1The same can be said for the browsing experience with Internet Explorer. No one cares if it can pass the Acid2 test.
      • naylor83, on 03/06/2008, -0/+1Users don't care, but browsers complying to the standards make it possible for developers to deliver the same user experience across browsers. So in the end, the user wins too.
    • majik92, on 03/06/2008, -1/+1I agree, although browsers can boast about how they pass these tests, most web users just want a easy and functional web experience.
      • moger777, on 03/06/2008, -0/+1Passing the acid tests makes makes life much easier for developers. It's nice to know that the css/js you use for one browser will work for all other browsers. Unfortunately developers will have to deal with stubborn people who won't upgrade there browsers.
  • nicksauce, on 03/06/2008, -43/+23Since when is Internet Explorer still relevant?
    • nightmare1228, on 03/06/2008, -1/+12I like firefox as much as the next guy, but the truth is that more than 80% of users still use IE. It is a decent browser, and since it comes pre-installed on every windows machine, most users end up using it.
      • 4DFX, on 03/06/2008, -9/+3Those 80% of users are, like Bill once described them, idiots.
        • wageslaven, on 03/06/2008, -5/+5...right. When did Bill G say this? Most users use IE because it is a better browser. And, YES, I have used FF on GNU/Linux & Windows. Thanks.
          • naylor83, on 03/06/2008, -2/+1Lol, yeah right. IE is a better browser. I'm glad you think so.
          • autoatsakiklis, on 03/13/2008, -0/+1You are wrong. Most users use IE because this is they only browser they know (since it comes preinstalled with windows).
    • thebellmaster1x, on 03/06/2008, -3/+8Since the majority of PC users use IE? I dunno.
    • pnmoore, on 03/06/2008, -0/+4I use Firefox myself, but asking why the MARKET LEADER is still considered relevant is an asinine question! Even if it sucks, it is the most used browser still.
    • FutureGuy, on 03/06/2008, -0/+1this is earth, its the year 2008, where are you from?
    • Pureeviljester, on 03/06/2008, -2/+1it'll be relevant to me until windows update page runs with Firefox
  • Crash1337, on 03/06/2008, -34/+24Firefox FTW
  • Plasmodia, on 03/06/2008, -50/+36Hi guys. I upgraded your Internet Explorer!

    http://www.mozilla.com/en-US/firefox/
  • Qinar, on 03/06/2008, -36/+19http://www.mozilla.com/en-US/

    enough said
  • Wargalas, on 03/06/2008, -37/+15Wow, I guess Microsoft has yet another piece of ***** to shove down our throats and claim that it's a "critical update", like they did with Windows Search.
    • vtnerd, on 03/06/2008, -2/+8Not yet, it's still in beta. Yay for reading.
    • bunkka, on 03/06/2008, -0/+1you don't have to buy their products if that is the way you feel.
  • Ploosheeta, on 03/06/2008, -53/+352What's Internet Explorer?
    • gannondork, on 03/06/2008, -36/+25It's a piece of malware aimed at low intelligence types who install it on their system so that others may preform back door attacks with greater ease.
    • jgtg32a, on 03/06/2008, -14/+495The program you use to DL Firefox.
    • bobdigi, on 03/06/2008, -12/+7Internet Exploder am i rite.
    • LightSpeed4, on 03/06/2008, -22/+8It's alot like Firefox except it loads itself and web pages much faster and it doesn't have huge memory leaks
    • pengas, on 03/06/2008, -9/+16Its the ***** browser used by over 80% of the world internet users.
    • MirandaJanell, on 03/06/2008, -2/+21The bane of all web application developers.
    • FutureGuy, on 03/06/2008, -8/+3Its a browser, its used to navigate this thing called Internet (a series of tubes). Ohh and this is earth, its the year 2008, where are you from?
  • Signa91, on 03/06/2008, -22/+8meh, since i really cant seem to make my Firefox work the way i thought it would (i downloaded it last week), im good with internet explorer. i really dont see a difference.
  • skews13, on 03/06/2008, -15/+12i just downloaded it,and it seems to have cleared up some browsing issues i have encountered using a vista os.
    • MrViklund, on 03/06/2008, -2/+4Whats Vista?
      • Karmavs, on 03/06/2008, -1/+3It's that Operating system Microsoft released shortly after fading into irrelevance
  • Shiftgood, on 03/06/2008, -12/+38Does this mean i dont have to sit and de-bug for 1,000 hours on IE?
    • gcnaddict, on 03/06/2008, -2/+7That's correct. In fact, the dev tools make debugging much easier for you, too. There's the ability to select something on a page after the page has been rendered and edit (enable/disable) certain aspects of that element's CSS code and see the result in real time.
      • xaxxon, on 03/06/2008, -6/+8or you can get firefox and use firebug. Fantastic piece of software.
        • blazes816, on 03/06/2008, -0/+7That totally helps when you need to develop for IE.
    • estvir, on 03/06/2008, -4/+15If it takes you that long chances are the problems aren't related to IE sucking.
      • jabberwolf, on 03/06/2008, -1/+1Depends, are you on a page where the developer was a ***** and didnt test out his/her product on multiple browsers?
    • MarkKezner, on 03/06/2008, -1/+2Not exactly. You should still support at least IE 6 and 7.
      • TheWindBlows, on 03/06/2008, -3/+1A good web developer that wishes to assit others will add a small tag that say.

        Please Use a w3c standards compliant browser. (which links to an about-standards page)

        in that page give an explaination and some suggested browsers.

        Opera works on Win 98 comps
        Opera is so much faster than IE5.5 too.
        • Zurahn, on 03/06/2008, -1/+2A good web developer won't require additional software for a significant portion of his userbase. IE6+7 currently accounts for a massive percentage of clients.
    • svivian, on 03/06/2008, -0/+1IE6 is still around 30% but hopefully we can finally ignore it by the end of the year.
      Or more quickly if we try and convince people to upgrade: http://www.doheth.co.uk/news/1196216917
  • atarix64, on 03/06/2008, -19/+14McW00ty! Developers, lets hope its Compliant! And a forced upgrade :D
  • Horonto, on 03/06/2008, -33/+20Who cares about IE?

    • holymrack, on 03/06/2008, -3/+13Web developers who have to spend hours debugging and forcing their sites to work with IE, so the vast population who have no idea what Firefox, Opera, Safari, Camino (etc, etc,) are can view their pages the way they intended.
    • gr00vy, on 03/06/2008, -2/+10The vast majority of people using the Web, and the developers that cater to them.
    • KayIslandDrunk, on 03/06/2008, -0/+280% of the people logging onto the web?
  • Syphon8, on 03/06/2008, -18/+11Now I can finally say ***** off to clients who ask me to make sure it works in IE and just test in Fx like a normal human being.
    • gr00vy, on 03/06/2008, -1/+23That is some real business talent you got there bucko.
    • ufee, on 03/06/2008, -0/+3You should still test all browsers. While things are going to get easier, different browsers are still going to display things a little differently.
  • BaronVonZ, on 03/06/2008, -20/+10Wow - IE 8! I'm so excited.... I bet this time microsoft really made a great product like they said they would!

    /will to live
  • darrenism, on 03/06/2008, -6/+16This excites me because I won't have to write broken code for my pages to display properly in IE. I'm still skeptical.
    • TBBucs, on 03/06/2008, -3/+1If your code validates, there really aren't many instances where you have to write "broken code."
      • blazes816, on 03/06/2008, -1/+4If your code is valid, it won't look right in IE (generalization). To get things to display right in IE, you usually have to write broken code. Web standards aren't standard. Yet.
      • svivian, on 03/06/2008, -1/+1@blazes816: You're obviously not writing very good code then. Valid code can still be awful tag soup.
    • marcus1060, on 03/06/2008, -0/+1If they fixes all the bugs in the beta your should be OK.
  • piratemonkey182, on 03/06/2008, -6/+20facebook integration? i already use the facebook rss feed.
    i recently started using firefox, and i dont think this will make me go back to IE
    • Eibx, on 03/06/2008, -1/+2Stay with Firefox, you know it loves you.
    • YourMaster, on 03/07/2008, -0/+1The integration is more than just an RSS feed.
  • moolaismyfriend, on 03/06/2008, -17/+5I other news cavemen have said they have developed a knew club, that will set cavemen apart from their ancestors.
    • GogDog, on 03/06/2008, -1/+8"knew" club?
      • moolaismyfriend, on 03/06/2008, -2/+2Hey when you are doing ten things at once sometimes you fail. Thanks.
  • WileyK, on 03/06/2008, -44/+11Hi guys, I upgraded ur firefox

    www.opera.com
    • over900000, on 03/06/2008, -19/+4Opera is the best browser of them all. Passes ACID2 and ACID3.
      • NathanielJ, on 03/06/2008, -5/+11Passing ACID3 makes a huge difference in my everyday browsing experience.

        Do I really need a tag?
      • NathanielJ, on 03/06/2008, -0/+3Apparently </sarcasm> tags aren't allowed anyways.
        • amirman, on 03/06/2008, -0/+4they don't work in internet explorer.
      • Karmavs, on 03/06/2008, -0/+2No it doesn't.
        The closest browser to passing Acid 3 is webkit, but even it only gets 81%
  • quamsta, on 03/06/2008, -25/+12It's arrived and it's a bloated, dripping sack of *****.
    • cotaskmemalloc, on 03/06/2008, -4/+8Firefox ain't much better.
      • quamsta, on 03/06/2008, -3/+4I agree completely. Firefox is also disgustingly bloated. Opera has minimal bloat, but a pretty unattractive UI.
  • johnmatias, on 03/06/2008, -30/+16What's Internet Explorer?
    • Phlogiston, on 03/06/2008, -11/+7Dugg your comment just for the hope it gives.
    • metalkills, on 03/06/2008, -7/+2talk about uninformed....
      • snotrokit, on 03/06/2008, -4/+2yes you are uninformed. and have no sense of humor to boot.
    • DDION, on 03/06/2008, -2/+7Buried for a subpart attempt at comedy.
    • DarkDx, on 03/06/2008, -10/+4The program you use to DL Firefox..
    • Jaliyl, on 03/06/2008, -3/+5You would have been dugg up if you were 2-3 minutes earlier.
  • over900000, on 03/06/2008, -17/+9Firefox 2 doesn't seem to pass Acid 2.
    • mtekk, on 03/06/2008, -3/+2Acid 2 test only tests for rendering non-valid code correctly. Passing Acid 2 != web standard compliant. Besides Firefox 3 does pass Acid 2.
      • NathanielJ, on 03/06/2008, -5/+9Ah, the double standard that because IE doesn't (didn't) pass Acid 2 it sucks, but for Firefox it's OK because it's only testing invalid code anyways. Love it.
        • mtekk, on 03/06/2008, -1/+2That would be true IF I bashed IE for not passing the Acid 2 test. I have not, there are so many other things to bash it on. I personally think the type of thing Acid 2 checks is useless for anyone but browser developers.
        • naylor83, on 03/06/2008, -0/+3No one (with a clue) has been bashing IE for not coping with Acid2.

          People have bashed it for not being developed for five+ years. People have bashed it for having a sucky interface. People have bashed it for not complying with HTML4 properly, a W3C Recommendation since 24 December 1999. People have bashed it for being insecure. People have bashed it for being slow. And probably a few other things. But not for Acid2 compliance.
        • YourMaster, on 03/07/2008, -0/+1The not being developed part lost its relevancy years before the Acid2 complaints.
      • over900000, on 03/06/2008, -6/+3Pity Firefox 3 isn't officially out yet. I like how everyone dismisses FF not passing Acid2 but when it comes to IE all hell breaks loose.
        • mvent2, on 03/06/2008, -2/+11"Pity Firefox 3 isn't officially out yet."

          Uh, neither is IE8.
  • JoeJim, on 03/06/2008, -12/+6Hung on install.
  • stutimandal, on 03/06/2008, -5/+286It's in Beta. IE 8 Beta. Not IE 8.
    • num3thod, on 03/06/2008, -2/+15As in: it Beta be good : ) Ha!
    • p0tent1al, on 03/06/2008, -2/+13Horrible reporting by the submitter of this story and the blogger. They should say upfront before any of this ***** " IE has arrived" that it's the beta, and save us the trouble of giving a *****.
      • brettmurf, on 03/06/2008, -0/+1Was trying to decide when technology at Microsoft started moving so fast that it would just pop out of nowhere. I am not implying that their products are refined, but just that they take their time with releasing them. My eyes bugged out when I saw the sensational headline.
    • endlessoul, on 03/06/2008, -2/+6Thus, buried for inaccuracy.

      Beta does not mean it "has arrived".
    • kevisazombie, on 03/06/2008, -0/+3Also IE6 is still out there in use by plenty of people so theres not really all that much a reason to get excited.
    • Cryoniq, on 03/06/2008, -4/+3Well.. it is actually IE alpha alpha alpha alpa drunk programmed high on weed version 8. Nothing Microsoft ever produce will go beyond such versions and ever be sharp.
    • duckonquack, on 03/06/2008, -1/+3Well it is usable, it is here and it is IE 8, its just not totally finished.
      • Karmavs, on 03/06/2008, -0/+1No, it's barely usable - here for testing purposes, and a working version of IE8 likely to change substantially before the real release.
      • Duke999R, on 03/06/2008, -0/+1Dugg for username.
  • WhatsUpWithJack, on 03/06/2008, -25/+132IE is for people who want to Explore the Internets.
    Firefox is literally just that, a fox set ablaze.
    Safari is an African adventure
    Opera is a musical play.
    • holymrack, on 03/06/2008, -5/+17Camino is a car/truck!
    • RyeBrye, on 03/06/2008, -1/+8Lynx is a cat
      elinks is... well... hmm
    • Dipster, on 03/06/2008, -1/+21Firefox is a jet. Stolen by Clint Eastwood. :)
      • ThreeDee912, on 03/06/2008, -0/+1Dugg for Firefox (the movie) reference.
    • thailand1972, on 03/06/2008, -1/+14IE ("i.e.") is an abbreviation for the Latin phrase id est. It can be used to restate an idea more clearly or expand upon it.
    • inferno10, on 03/06/2008, -5/+9Netscape Navigator is for people that want to navigate the netscape???
      AOL ruined it before I could make my lame joke.
    • jabberwolf, on 03/06/2008, -2/+10Where is a bucket of water? Someone should put out that poor fox on fire!
    • gamerzworld, on 03/06/2008, -0/+4Free Cool Browser XXX is....?
    • ed3r, on 03/06/2008, -1/+1If an opera was a musical play, why are musicals and operas different?
    • noahgelman, on 03/06/2008, -0/+4Dugg for the good humor and using the word ablaze
  • speakerfordead, on 03/06/2008, -25/+11Windoze sucks!
  • darrenism, on 03/06/2008, -41/+34You can polish a turd all you want but its still a turd.
    • jgtg32a, on 03/06/2008, -7/+4Wow, I dugg you down you went from 5 to -2
      • blazes816, on 03/06/2008, -0/+7You must have pressed really hard.
    • Zipp425, on 03/06/2008, -8/+4A lot of people like turds. like 80% of the internet.
      • LightSpeed4, on 03/06/2008, -3/+480% doesnt use firefox, so thats wrong.
    • chesscat, on 03/06/2008, -8/+3I got your back dude, just undugg you down.
    • gcnaddict, on 03/06/2008, -0/+5You can polish a turd, sure. However, when you replace the turd with a lump of gold and work to polish it, the circumstances change.(Most of the rendering engine was redone from scratch)
      • iMike360, on 03/06/2008, -8/+1Its still looks like a turd ugliest browser out there.
    • HigherLogic, on 03/06/2008, -2/+5So you've thoroughly tested out IE8, even though it's beta? Interesting. Don't be so biased.
  • banido, on 03/06/2008, -12/+129I just downloaded it, and I feel like I cheated on my wife...my furry ginger wife.
    • sab0tage, on 03/06/2008, -0/+14You sick, sick man.
    • Buddhist, on 03/06/2008, -0/+15Hey everybody, this guy's a furry!
    • badassninja, on 03/06/2008, -0/+11That's because you did bitch. The old whore down the street gets a new out fit and you come a running. Enjoy your STD's.