• IE9 Public Preview and Statistics! (Faster than Firefox!)
    135 replies, posted
.... [url]http://ie.microsoft.com/testdrive/Graphics/_AreaChart/Default.xhtml[/url]
So what? The rendering speed has come to be near unnoticeable if you're running a decent computer. JS however is run in bigger amounts and asynchronous.
Not really, some big pages can really stall on the layout.
[QUOTE=BmB;20795276](Because javascript is everything in speed)[/QUOTE] Considering we're claiming IE is faster based on "WebKit SunSpider [B]JavaScript[/B] Benchmark Results", yes, it's everything in speed right now. Not to mention that modern webpages rely a lot on Javascript for dynamic content (just look at Gmail, etc), it's very important to have a good JavaScript engine. Why do you think Google made their own browser and JS engine?
I'll be happy if it supports CSS3 Which I think from the picture in the OP, it does Finally....
I'll stick with Chrome.
[IMG]http://i42.tinypic.com/opmfjo.png[/IMG] I have a feeling it's optimized for IE9. :v:
[QUOTE=Robber;20795891][IMG]http://i42.tinypic.com/opmfjo.png[/IMG] I have a feeling it's optimized for IE9. :v:[/QUOTE] Not necessarily: [img]http://filesmelt.com/dl/ag72g.png[/img]
lol but look what they did to Google. Man Microsoft hates google. lol
[QUOTE=Kidd;20796719]lol but look what they did to Google. Man Microsoft hates google. lol[/QUOTE] Microsoft doesn't hate Google. They just compete. Now Apple, (specifically Jobs), he really hates Google.
IE9 looks exciting (compared to the last versions) and I like the gpu acceleration stuff. I think this is going to be a "hit or miss" for Microsoft, and to succeed they really have to put some effort into this one. So far it looks good... compared to previous results.
Actually looking at that I think the reason it runs bad in Chrome is that the images are very nicely anti aliased in Chrome, and in Opera where it runs better they look the worst.
[QUOTE=BmB;20803217]Actually looking at that I think the reason it runs bad in Chrome is that the images are very nicely anti aliased in Chrome, and in Opera where it runs better they look the worst.[/QUOTE] Very true.
[QUOTE=BmB;20803217]Actually looking at that I think the reason it runs bad in Chrome is that the images are very nicely anti aliased in Chrome, and in Opera where it runs better they look the worst.[/QUOTE] Well it looks anti-aliased in IE9 in Roast Beast's post yet not in Robber's.
[QUOTE=BmB;20803217]Actually looking at that I think the reason it runs bad in Chrome is that the images are very nicely anti aliased in Chrome, and in Opera where it runs better they look the worst.[/QUOTE] You're right, actually that's a win for IE since it applies some nice AA compared to Opera with only a small drop in performance. [img]http://filesmelt.com/dl/af56283.png[/img] Also the animation was much smoother in IE when viewing the animation head on. [editline]05:45PM[/editline] [QUOTE=Panda X;20803655]Well it looks anti-aliased in IE9 in Roast Beast's post yet not in Robber's.[/QUOTE] The AA gets worse the more you zoom out, I probably just managed to get a lucky angle where the AA was good. But the performance stays pretty much the same regardless of zoom.
[QUOTE=KmartSqrl;20782432]Too bad if you're still designing in any remotely professional capacity you'll still be designing sites to run under IE6 for at [B]least[/B] a few more years, not to mention 7 and 8. A new browser version doesn't mean the old ones suddenly disappear.[/QUOTE] I agree with you, but I've been doing just like Google has been doing. And it makes perfect sense. Start dropping old browsers... why? It is the only way to force the internet to keep progressing and getting better. If you are still using IE6-7, than seriously, what the fuck is going on? [url]http://www.w3counter.com/globalstats.php[/url] This shows that almost 10% of browser views are with IE6, that is sad. I've given up on IE6, when I build a website, and I think of something cool, I just do it. Some people might say well, I guess IE6 won't support it, so I won't implement it. I say fuck that, sure I might have an alternative, but I usually don't. If 50% of the web was inaccessible to IE6, that might force atleast some of those users to upgrade.
.
If I were to design a website I would certainly adopt a lowest common denominator approach to ensure compatibility, but I certainly wouldn't count IE6 in that. Nor even IE7 for that matter. Latest or nothing plox.
[QUOTE=wutanggrenad;20837554] It is the only way to force the internet to keep progressing and getting better. If you are still using IE6-7, than seriously, what the fuck is going on? [url]http://www.w3counter.com/globalstats.php[/url] This shows that almost 10% of browser views are with IE6, that is sad. I've given up on IE6, when I build a website, and I think of something cool, I just do it. Some people might say well, I guess IE6 won't support it, so I won't implement it. I say fuck that, sure I might have an alternative, but I usually don't. If 50% of the web was inaccessible to IE6, that might force atleast some of those users to upgrade.[/QUOTE] Many people have to use old browsers such as IE6 at their workplace because they have no sufficient rights to install anything else and a company that isn't amazingly rich won't think about an update of their systems if the software they use works just fine.
Now we just have to wait until IE14 and maybe we'll get full css2 support :D. Hells yuh.
i just hate Firefox memory leak issue. can any one help me on this?
[QUOTE=Foda;20784707]I like the lack of interface. I'm guessing that means they are still redesigning it, which is a good thing because I've always hated IE's interface.[/QUOTE] Well the whole IE-team have been replaced now for IE9 so sure it will be a different interface too
Nuu! They better keep the favorites button or I will have some impaling to do!
[QUOTE=Panda X;20797834]Microsoft doesn't hate Google. They just compete. Now Apple, (specifically Jobs), he really hates Google.[/QUOTE] Only because Ballmer has run out of chairs to throw [editline]03:58PM[/editline] [QUOTE=Ibutsu;20782971]Good to know that in its current state, it's still shit. :downs:[/QUOTE] Acid 3 isn't everything
[QUOTE=Dr Egg;20852975]Acid 3 isn't everything[/QUOTE] Actually, it is lol. That test tells us how well IE renders code compared to other browsers.
It tells you how it renders *some* code, as I understand some very *specific* and *special case* code.
[QUOTE=Sumtoxx;20853825]Actually, it is lol. That test tells us how well IE renders code compared to other browsers.[/QUOTE] Acid 3 tests for some stuff which is not yet standard(granted it is on it's way to be standard in a lot of cases, and makes sense to try it, but it isn't final), and on top of that, just because a browser passes Acid 3 doesn't mean if will render the same way as another browser that also passes Acid 3.
[QUOTE=Dr Egg;20855002]Acid 3 tests for some stuff which is not yet standard(granted it is on it's way to be standard in a lot of cases, and makes sense to try it, but it isn't final), and on top of that, just because a browser passes Acid 3 doesn't mean if will render the same way as another browser that also passes Acid 3.[/QUOTE] I am fairly certain they have the correct complete image to compare to and if it differs then even if you got 100% you fail the test. I support Opera, it may be closed source but it's updated regularly and runs quick on everything I have used it on. Opera mobile is the best mobile browser, great on Android.
[QUOTE=Sumtoxx;20853825]Actually, it is lol. That test tells us how well IE renders code compared to other browsers.[/QUOTE] That would explain how Opera gets 100 and Chrome gets 100 and yet some sites look completely different from one another.
[QUOTE=Panda X;20858565]That would explain how Opera gets 100 and Chrome gets 100 and yet some sites look completely different from one another.[/QUOTE] Can you please tell me some of these sites? I do know of some like that but it's usually caused by hacks for other browsers in my experience. The things the acid3 test cover are [quote]DOM2 Core DOM2 Events DOM2 HTML DOM2 Range DOM2 Style (getComputedStyle, …) DOM2 Traversal (NodeIterator, TreeWalker) DOM2 Views (defaultView) ECMAScript HTML4 (<object>, <iframe>, …) HTTP (Content-Type, 404, …) Media Queries Selectors (:lang, :nth-child(), combinators, dynamic changes, …) XHTML 1.0 CSS2 (@font-face) CSS2.1 (‘inline-block’, ‘pre-wrap’, parsing…) CSS3 Color (rgba(), hsla(), …) CSS3 UI (‘cursor’) data: URIs SVG (SVG Animation, SVG Fonts, …)[/quote] I don't see any of the tests checking for standards in formating etc. Sites that are made correctly should look the same on standards compliant browsers.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.