IE 11 Breaks Rendering For Google Products, and Outlook Too 231
An anonymous reader writes with this excerpt from The Register: "The Windows 8.1 rollout has hit more hurdles: the new version 11 of Internet Explorer that ships with the operating system does not render Google products well and is also making life difficult for users of Microsoft's own Outlook Web Access webmail product. The latter issue is well known: Microsoft popped out some advice about the fact that only the most basic interface to the webmail tool will work back in July. It seems not every sysadmin got the memo and implemented Redmond's preferred workarounds, but there are only scattered complaints out there, likely because few organisations have bothered implementing Windows 8.1 yet."
Also from the article: "Numerous reports suggest that IE 11 users can once again enjoy access to all things Google if they un-tick the IE 11 option to 'Use Microsoft Compatibility lists.'" And here's Microsoft KB work around.
Hmm... (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Hmm... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Hmm... (Score:5, Funny)
Can we finally get a Mod total score above 5 yet on /.? This one would go to 11!
No. (Score:5, Funny)
/. just doesn't go to 11. IE does, and it shows.
Re: No. (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: No. (Score:4, Funny)
Microsoft is showing restraint with version numbers. I've lost track of what versions Chrome and Firefox are at now.
That's easy. Firefox is on version "1.298799e+11" and Chrome is on version "Numeric Overflow"
Re: (Score:2)
Funny thing is IE11 is the most standardscompliant version of IE ever made. It actually works very much like other browsers.
There will be many websites that IE-workarounds that should not apply to IE11, but they might be used because IE11 is detected as IE.
They actually try to look more like non-IE-browsers so IE11 can finally be a non-workaround browser like all others:
http://www.nczonline.net/blog/2013/07/02/internet-explorer-11-dont-call-me-ie/ [nczonline.net]
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Hmm... (Score:5, Insightful)
Adding custom extensions, like using -webkit-, -moz- or -ms- (note the last one) for CSS and similar for JS APIs, is not how you break compatibility.
Making your implementation behave wildly unlike any other - what IE did - is how you break compatibility.
Re: (Score:2)
no, making a broken "compatibility" mode is what breaks things.
extra work for less stuff working.
Re: (Score:3)
Google products work bizarre in many browsers.. (Score:5, Interesting)
Can you do better? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Can you do better? (Score:5, Interesting)
Have you tried FastMail? We updated the web UI today to make it work more efficiently on small screens (phones and the like), and it has a fairly complete keyboard shortcut set.
http://blog.fastmail.fm/2013/10/21/faster-than-native-introducing-fastmails-new-mobile-web-interface/ [fastmail.fm]
Free trial, but definitely paid. You're the customer with us, not the product.
Re: (Score:2)
I switched to fastmail after hosting my own mail server for 10+ years. I got tired of the spam fighting race. I use my own domain, IMAPS + Thunderbird for 2 years now and I've been very happy. Their webmail interface is very slick and faster than Thunderbird for some operations such as massive deletes.
Re: (Score:2)
Overall I think Google's various interfaces are very clean and generally work very well.
However, I have consistently found that when I log-into Google AdWords via Firefox, the cursor will jump from the password field to the email field while I'm still entering the password. I've never encountered this in Chrome. Strange.
Re:Google products work bizarre in many browsers.. (Score:4, Interesting)
Gmail has been constantly giving me javascript errors for months now. In Chrome, always latest build. So having a Google product yield errors isn't that unexpected.
"SyntaxError: Unexpected token https://mail.google.com/mail/ca/u/0/#inbox:1"
Re: (Score:2)
Extensions, corrupt profile, or buggy google labs addins?
The fact that 99% of other users dont get this problem would seem to indicate its something with your setup.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Known workaround (Score:5, Insightful)
Use IE to download your browser of choice.
Re:Known workaround (Score:4, Interesting)
"Numerous reports suggest that IE 11 users can once again enjoy access to all things Google if they un-tick the IE 11 option to âoeUse Microsoft Compatibility lists." ...what kind of shit is this? they put googles sites on compatibility list that's a break-the-sites list??
What comes around, works around (Score:3, Interesting)
They did that with Opera previously on Microsoft.Com webpages. Totally broken rendering with frames sticking out and so on. If you changed Opera's browser identification string to Explorer, Opera rendered the pages intended for Explorer just fine.
So it looks like this time they are fucking up rendering gratuitously from the other side. Instead of maliciously delivering garbage HTML to browsers they don't like, they display garbage in their browser from websites they don't like.
Business as usual.
Re: (Score:2)
Not an option on Win8.x tablets, unfortunately - IE is, surpringly enough, the only usable touch browser right now. Firefox and Chrome kinda suck balls in Metro mode...
Re:Known workaround (Score:5, Funny)
Not an option on Win8.x tablets, unfortunately
What, all three of them?
Re: (Score:3)
Two more than the number of linux desktops out there.
Re: (Score:3)
Not an option on Win8.x tablets, unfortunately - IE is, surpringly enough, the only usable touch browser right now. Firefox and Chrome kinda suck balls in Metro mode...
Just like every other app not built for a touch interface, so pretty much all apps on a windows tablet except IE of course.
Re: (Score:2)
Come on Microsoft (Score:5, Insightful)
Come on Microsoft, it is year 2013, 2014 almost. We are not in 2000 anymore, you can't just tell everybody to go screw themselves anymore and act like you are some kind of god. I don't think it is going to work as well as it used to...
http://slashdot.org/story/07/02/03/1524250/confidential-microsoft-emails-posted-online [slashdot.org]
http://www.javalobby.org/java/forums/t90205.html [javalobby.org]
GM, Ford and Chrysler (Score:2)
Even GM, Ford and Chrysler woke up after a while and decided to modify the way they do business. Quite late according to some, they virtually went bankrupted before waking up. How long is it going to take for Microsoft to wake up and modify their way to do business?
Re:Come on Microsoft (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
But the button just throws you back to metro they purposely neglected to restore the start menu.
Re: (Score:2)
What changed? (Score:3)
It looks like the OWA thing is because exchange is doing UA sniffing and IE 11 no longer sends the MSIE string.
Re:What changed? (Score:5, Informative)
The Microsoft KB says that all they changed was the user-agent string, taking out the "MSIE". Changing it back supposedly makes Google work. This implies Google has special-case code for Internet Explorer. I thought that went out with IE 6.
Re: What changed? (Score:2, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3)
The Microsoft KB says that all they changed was the user-agent string, taking out the "MSIE". Changing it back supposedly makes Google work. This implies Google has special-case code for Internet Explorer. I thought that went out with IE 6.
Google needed special code both for Internet Explorer and for Safari to get around users' privacy settings.
Re:What changed? (Score:5, Interesting)
Microsoft's own Dreamspark site (which is relatively simple) didn't work for me in IE11 the other day either. It was just things that should be straightforward in any browser, like clicking a button and having something download, or submit a form when I tried to update my user details, but no, in IE11, clicking said buttons just did nothing.
I had to use Firefox to download Microsoft's server OS and development tools.
That strikes me as a rather glaring problem.
I'm not sure I blame IE11 though, I can't fathom the kind of idiocy that results in creation of buttons on a webpage that do something so fancy in the background that it can actually not perform a simple action like submit a form or trigger a download. I'd expect any software company nowadays especially Microsoft to have at least some basic competence in web development including an understanding of making things like browser buttons work in a simple cross-browser compatible manner, but it seems not.
Re:What changed? (Score:4, Interesting)
a simple cross-browser compatible manner
Ah, well you see, I write cross browser code, that doesn't run in IE.
I specifically code some of my HTML5 heavy stuff to not work on certain versions of IE. It's as easy as just not ever checking if the code will run in IE. I do the same thing for Chrome and Firefox and Safari and Opera -- all other browsers; Not checking but in a single browser. That's all it takes to make sure it runs in everything, no problem... Except IE. If folks want to use my stuff they get to use a different browser, IE is dead to me. I really can't hold it against even Microsofties themselves for taking revenge on their own software after IE6.
IE is purposefully a waste of time, unlike every other browser on the planet. I'm done wasting my time with that shit, it takes so much less time for folks to actually use a different browser vs me break my shit for multiple versions of IE that it doesn't make sense for me to do that -- It's bad for everyone involved, just makes the problem worse. I'm excluding some Market share? Fine. I can put out THREE TIMES the content for what it takes to make shit work with IE.
Additionally, if I make my stuff work with IE, then I'll also have to deal with the kind of folks who still use IE... Nope!
Re: (Score:2)
Ah, well you see, I write cross browser code, that doesn't run in IE.
I write cross-browser code as well, and other than the generally broken JavaScript engine in IE (that raises an exception for things that no other browser does), I find that for CSS, things generally work better in IE than Safari. Safari is rapidly becoming the IE 6 of the modern era. So many bugs in Safari that just never get fixed. Table styling in particular with col-spans are just broken and have been for 5 years.
Of course IE 6 and even 7 aren't useful ad browsers, 9 and 10 aren't too bad.
Re: (Score:2)
You must not write very much. I've had more issues with non-IE browsers doing silly things than IE (9+) in the past few years.
Such as:
Firefox not supporting overflow (or lack thereof) on framesets.
Chrome/Safari doing incorrect sub-pixel interpretation on images by default -- requiring webkit prefixed styles to get them to behave.
Chrome incorrectly sizing absolutely positioned items that have padding.
Firefox has really bad CSS3 animations that are jerky, and sometimes don't complete (99% doesn't count).
Chom
Great article explaining what has changed (Score:4, Informative)
See this article [nczonline.net] for how the IE11 User Agent string has changed, and how MS has removed a lot of the old non-standard IE ways of doing things.
Re:Great article explaining what has changed (Score:4, Insightful)
And according to the knowledge base, since the problem is the user agent string, it seems to me the REAL fix is on the server side. As the web has gone back to standards compliance, servers which attempt to discriminate against browsers need to discriminate less. Once they stop that, a lot of problems disappear.
Re:Great article explaining what has changed (Score:4, Informative)
Yeah, that's great, except that in the real world apps like Gmail have to support all kinds of wacky browsers, including old ones that get kicked to "legacy" UIs, mobile browsers, browsers that are technically standards compliant but are much faster or slower than other browsers and so on.
I used to work on a server that vended browser specific code based on the user-agent (for a variety of reasons it had to be browser specific choices on the server side). It was a server that vended some self contained code that got embedded into lots of different web sites and properties. Anyway, the most painful browser to support was by far Internet Explorer. It blew my mind how badly they managed to screw this up. It's not that modern IE's are bad browsers, you see, they aren't really - after letting the web rot for years they finally reacted to their retreating market share by staffing up the IE team again, and nowadays it can render things nice and fast. The problem is their totally broken compatibility architecture.
Modern Internet Explorers are not a single browser. They're actually a wrapper around multiple different versions of the IE rendering engine, along with a horrific pile of heuristics, hacks and magical downloaded lists to try and select the right one. There's actually a giant flow chart [microsoft.com] that tries to describe what combination of bugs IE will try to emulate in any given situation, although that dates from 2010. Undoubtably it's now even more complicated. This is a total disaster. Firstly, IE isn't capable of always doing the right thing - a notorious example being the case where a top level document requests one kind of "document mode" (i.e. Trident version) and then an iframe requests a different kind, well, Trident can't recursively embed old versions of itself, so the iframe'd document just doesn't get the docmode it requested. If your code is run inside an iframe the only way to find out what docmode you're actually running in is to test it on the client side using JavaScript! If you then discover you have the wrong version of your JS loaded because IE lied to you, well, tough luck. Time to go reload it.
Combine this with trying to run code iframed into sites like Blogger where users are allowed to control their own toplevel HTML, and you can just forget about anything sane happening. But it gets even more confusing, because new versions of the rendering engine still have "quirks mode". You pretty quickly find yourself having to draw up giant matrices of how IE might behave in any given scenario.
What's worse, there are lots of different ways to ask IE for a specific mode. There are META tags, magic HTTP headers, DOCTYPE tags, and this Microsoft compatibility list which can override those in various situations, except that it works on a per domain basis and sites like google.com have tons of different apps hanging off different endpoints, some of which might no longer be really maintained, requiring a "flag day" where everyone co-ordinates to prepare for changes in the compatibility list. Oh yes, and users can and do modify their browser settings (as we see in this story), resulting in yet another column in the compatibility matrix.
Chrome, Firefox, Safari, Opera ... none of these browsers were such a nightmarish acid trip. Microsoft managed a seemingly impossible feat - dramatically improving the quality of their core rendering engine and yet STILL being the most horrible browser for web devs in existence! They snatched defeat from the claws of victory!
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Chrome and Safari claim to be "Mozilla/5.0" also. There's a reason for this that is probably older than you are. I suggest reading the history about user-agent stings and the earliest browser wars and how this predates Internet Explorer.
I'd worry about this (Score:4, Interesting)
I'd be happy if the update had left my wife's laptop usable at all. I can't complain about how IE renders sites in 8.1 because we can't get into the machine at all since we tried. I'm off to the Samsung service center tomorrow as there's no way I can find to get the system to boot without voiding the warranty.
Re:I'd worry about this (Score:5, Informative)
I have a Samsung laptop and upgraded it to Windows 8.1 too.
The short answer is you're fucked. The laptop will not work with Windows 8.1.
The longer answer is that as part of the upgrade, Windows 8.1 installs broken display drivers. You need to disable the AMD graphics device in order to restore functionality. Unfortunately working drivers are flat-out not available on Samsung's site, and it's no longer possible to enter Safe Mode in Windows 8/8.1 by pressing F8 while it starts.
Instead, start it booting and then IMMEDIATELY hold down the power button. The idea is to get it to power off while Windows is starting, forcing it to allow you to choose to enter Safe Mode. Once you do that, you can go to the Device Manager and disable your AMD graphics.
At this point you'll have a working laptop that runs really, really badly. Anything you used to use accelerated graphics for is fucked.
But, hey, working. Sort of.
Re: (Score:2)
I've tried all the functions keys - various power button antics - every single thing I can think of. I can't get it out of this startup loop [youtu.be] no matter what I do.
It wont boot to sd or usb cd drive - I'm going to try a usb thumb drive.
If the Samsung service place gives me any grief about fixing it I'm just going to pull it apart, wipe the drive and then return it to the retailer. This is a bit of a pain in the neck but after a couple phones and now this laptop I'm starting to realize that Samsung has absolute
Re:I'd worry about this (Score:5, Informative)
Aw man, you're fucked. And just because it's hilarious, here's the official way to enter Safe Mode in Windows 8 and 8.1:
From the Power menu, hold down Shift while selecting Restart.
Those who know Windows 8/8.1 you will realize that the "power menu" is the menu available either via the power button in the login screen or the power button in the Settings charm in the charm bar.
And that you need to have already booted Windows successfully in order to use it.
Meaning that the only way to force Windows 8/8.1 to boot into Safe Mode is to first boot successfully, thereby not needing Safe Mode in the first place.
The way I got my ATIV Book 6 "working" was because it spent enough time at the boot screen that turning it off during that was able to force it into "recovery mode" that let me choose to boot into Safe Mode.
Also, the BIOS key on the ATIV Book 6 is F10, so you might try mashing that while pressing the power button to see if that works. It won't help you get into Safe Mode to actually fix anything, of course, but might let you boot from other devices.
Re: (Score:3)
Here is what ended up getting me out of this mess.
I opened it up, pulled the hard drive and then started it. This got me to a screen where I could hit F4 for recovery. I then popped the SSD back in and hit F4. That put me into a Samsung recovery program.
It took a couple tries but finally I got it to recover to the initial state it shipped in. Now I'm uninstalling all the junk that shipped with it and getting it back to how it was when I bought it.
Re: (Score:2)
If it was for my use - it would run Linux.
But it's not and so it doesn't. But thanks for the offer.
Re: (Score:3)
Shift+F8 is a possibility, although the window for being able to press it can be prohibitively short:
"The trick is to hold the Shift button and mash the F8 key, this will sometimes boot you into the new advanced “recovery mode”, where you can choose to see advanced repair options." ( http://www.howtogeek.com/107511/ [howtogeek.com] )
Re: (Score:2)
I've tried F8 with and without shift as I've seen different people say one or the other - but it doesn't matter.
I've actually tried shift, ctrl and so on with every F key. With lots of mashing, holding, etc. you name it. Whatever is happening - it doesn't allow for input from the keyboard to get their in time. I did stop the video and I see that it says something about an acpi bios problem, but I can't get to the bios to do anything about it.
I view the entire process as a lesson learned. I doubt I'll buy fr
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
I wonder if any of this has anything to do with that ridiculous "security" Microsoft created for PCs to prevent them from running Linux?
Re: (Score:2)
I'm sure you are absolutely right.
uninstalled (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
classic shell fixes it to be mostly like 7.
the most annoying thing left is having to boot everytime wanting to install some unsigned drivers.
thing is, the only sw you really need 8 for are from MS. like wp8 sdk.
Re: uninstalled (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
People like you just wine, considering I have a [...]
FTFY. Wine has come a long way and I have to admit, between Wine, Vmware and steam for linux, I can actually see myself ditching windows almost completely eventually..
Re: (Score:3)
just go into desktop mode and get a startmenu and you are set
so windows 8 is great as long as you use a work around to avoid one of its core features...
Heh. (Score:5, Funny)
IE 11 ain't done until Google won't run.
Has a vaguely familiar ring...
Not surprised after IE10 (Score:2, Interesting)
After the state of IE10, I'm not surprised. I'm locked on IE9 because 10 isn't compatible with any of the webapps I need to access at work, ditto the Cisco SSL VPN software (I don't like browser-based VPNs, but I don't get to pick which VPN the company uses). At this point I can't afford to waste time experimenting with upgrading beyond 9, the compatibility issues are just too great for no perceptible gain (the best they could manage is to render Web pages as acceptably as 9 does, explain to me again why I'
Severity (Score:4, Insightful)
The Windows 8.1 rollout has hit more hurdles...
... Which affect the 5 people who are actually using Windows 8. The entire interface is an unmitigated disaster. DOSSHELL looked prettier and was more functional than Windows 8. The OS has multiple personality disorder and the interface looks like it was gang-banged by Crayola. Nobody wants to touch it even with a 10 foot pole. :/
Did you notice how this wasn't on the front page of any tech section of any major news site on the internet (Slashdot doesn't count -- it doesn't have a tech section, it is a tech section)? It's because nobody uses it. I mean, look at the market share numbers [statcounter.com] for Windows 8 currently. Windows XP is stomping it. It only just this month beat out MacOS by a tiny margin. Its month over month growth is stagnant.
This is just another story to add to the growing funeral pyre we're building to honor monkey boy's first major OS released without any input or direction from former CEO Bill Gates. In a few years, I'll be opening specially marked boxes of cereal and finding copies of Windows 8 in it... just like they used to distribute AOL disks in the days of old. Actually... now that I think about it... that may have been where the Metro interface's inspiration came from. Sweet mother of god....
Re:Severity (Score:4, Interesting)
Actually if you simply remove metro, Windows 8 is quite a marked improvement over 7 (mainly backend changes, but also some nifty things like being able to open an administrative shell to the current directory in explorer without the need for adding registry tweaks, in addition to the copy dialog box being probably the best of any OS I've seen to date in how it shows progress.) Fortunately you can do exactly that, though MS doesn't approve.
Re: (Score:2)
How do you "remove metro"? It keeps rearing its ugly head, and some functionality seems to have migrated to it.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
How do you "remove metro"? It keeps rearing its ugly head, and some functionality seems to have migrated to it.
He means that you should spend money on the expensive Operating System you already wasted a bunch of money by buying Stardock's ModernMix [stardock.com] product.
ModernMix replaces the Metro shell and hosts all the craptastic Metro programs in normal windows on the normal desktop.
The fact that you have to buy third party software to get something which should have been the default Out of the Box Experience is one of the many reasons not to use Win8 ever.
Hopefully Balmers replacement will either backtrack on this and remove
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Hopefully Balmer's replacement will either backtrack on this and remove the Metro UI from the desktop or they'll just run Microsoft into the ground of irrelevancy. Either way works for me.
Hopefully, yes. For sure Metro has backfired, but their reasons for going that route are: 1) Be seen as innovators again. 2) Stem the (potential) flow of web/e-mail/cat-video users from Windows to tablets. Obviously (1) was a total miss-fire but Metro could have worked for (2). The problem, of course, is that they are perceived to have converted Windows to a cat-video OS without the option of leaving things as they were for more advanced users.
The other reason for Metro is integrate the "App" experience
Re: (Score:2)
Actually if you simply remove metro, Windows 8 is quite a marked improvement over 7
Technically you can't really remove Metro that easily. Even if you avoid going to the Start Screen and use a 3rd party Start Menu, the full Metro engine will happily continue running in the background.
That being said, a hack/mod which would actually all Metro from Windows 8 would be interesting. You would have to drill quite deep into Windows system components, but maybe some guys have thought about what has to be done. After that, if you just used the NT 6.3 core to run desktop apps, most of them would pro
Use market share properly (Score:4, Informative)
That said, we can all agree win8 UI is a piece of crap for desktop.
Re: (Score:2)
Saying that, I have recently bought Win8 Pro licenses for my workplace, sans installation media.
Re: (Score:2)
But the real statistic is when you show the last 12 month.
Nope, the real statistic is when you shown the last 5 years. Then you see that after Win8 was released, WinXP usage has gone from "declining" to "stabilizing". That, I think, is saying something.
Re: (Score:2)
Take your link and change 2013-09 to 2013-01
That shows Win8 has over taken MacOSX, iOS and Windows Vista.
It's the only OS that has gained anything in that time, all others have stayed still or lost market share.
XP lost the most, followed by Win 7. Win 8 gained that share and all other stayed still.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2, Troll)
I can't speak for "everyone" who is not using Windows 8, but I'll tell you about my experience this weekend after upgrading from 8 to 8.1: I am wishing more applications are re-written for Metro. That's how I see that "personality disorder" conversation going away. The UI needs to be experienced for people to accept or reject it on its own merits. First of all, the thing feels faster than before the upgrade. Applications launch faster and switching back and forth does not slow things down, no matter if ther
need Metro sideloading and selling apps out side o (Score:2)
need Metro side loading and selling apps out side of the MS store.
Unmitigated disaster? (Score:2)
You clearly haven't had to support non-technical users who accidentally switched to iOS7. Talk about fucked up and backwards (not to mention the Crayola enema it got).
Re: (Score:2)
Under Ballmer Microsoft released a variety of OSes and had an explosion in sales of their enterprise products. Ballmer focused on enterprise not consumers during most of his time as CEO which is why people here think he couldn't do anything.
Windows 8 will be fine. It never really should have been run on Windows 7 hardware. It works well on the right hardware, and the hardware basis needs to change. The purpose of Windows 8 is to provide an operating system that makes use of next generation hardware. E
Re:Severity (Score:4, Interesting)
... Which affect the 5 people who are actually using Windows 8. The entire interface is an unmitigated disaster. DOSSHELL looked prettier and was more functional than Windows 8. The OS has multiple personality disorder and the interface looks like it was gang-banged by Crayola. Nobody wants to touch it even with a 10 foot pole. :/
Yesterday, I had the "pleasure" of trying to help some people who were using Windows 8 and hated, hated, hated it. After about ten seconds I knew why. So far everybody getting hold of my MacBook has just used it. Windows 8 hides the UI. You can't do things unless you know how to. You can't figure out how to do things. It's just impossible. The bloody start page with its tiles just want sit still for a second. All the time things are changing, so it's impossible to concentrate on anything. Their most pressing question was how to have two different windows in the browser so you can look at two different things (nobody knew which browser it was and I couldn't find out). Took me ages and a web search to find out how to get at browser tabs. Two reasonably intelligent people who are not computer geeks just couldn't figure it out. From the UI, I wouldn't have figured it out.
And again, so far _everybody_ has been able to use my MacBook with Safari without any problems. Including four year olds and some people who are usually quite clueless.
My god...it's full of fail (Score:2)
Second, the Outlook service is an enormous source of spam. (Citation? Run a major email site, one wit
Re: (Score:2)
Pay attention to what arrives on port 25 from Outlook
Wait a minute, you believe the spammers when they say they're using Outlook? Do you also believe they are Nigerian prices who just need funds to release their fortune?
Buffer Overflows (Score:2)
Microsoft hasn't figured those out yet either.
outlook.com also annoying on IE10 (Score:2)
That isn't the only problem with outlook.com, loading it on IE10 (windows 7 x64, no additions except tracking protection enabled), it will reload itself after a few seconds, very annoying if you are just typing a message... How hard can it be to f-ing make sure it works.. that's why I hate browser based 'applications', pressing a reload button or accidental 'back' will fubar your current edit..
Outlook Web Access better in Firefox (Score:2)
In my experience, Outlook Web Access has always worked better in Firefox than it has in IE.
IE ? don't bother (Score:4, Interesting)
It seems not every sysadmin got the memo and implemented Redmond's preferred workarounds
I stopped bothering with IE-specific quirks many years ago. If it can't render a standard-compliant page, then use a different browser for all I care. In fact, one of may sites catches IE users and tells them that much. And lo and behold, it works, on that site IE has dropped to #4 or #5 in the browser stats, consistently. Yes, Safari is more popular, and in good months, Opera.
Stop tolerating assholes and they just might go away, but it's a community effort.
Re:IE ? don't bother (Score:4, Insightful)
Agreed.
Was recently the subject of a blame-placing at work and was asked why we can't just use Internet Explorer (because of a single site-specific Firefox-only bug) and why we don't update INSTANTLY a major patch comes out without testing (because "Microsoft test these things", you know). It's ironic that, within a week of that, a patch is out, from Microsoft, that breaks IE's rendering of websites (including Google Apps, which we used heavily) and which should be one of the most heavily tested patches to come out of Microsoft.
There's still such a thing as choice and control. If you don't want choice and control, don't bother hiring an IT guy - just let Apple/Microsoft do what they want on your systems. If you do, hire IT people and let them worry about this and then LISTEN to their reasoning. We have testing/production, dev/stable, beta/release, etc. versioning for a reason.
And just because MS say it'll be fine and "there's workarounds" (well, a workaround is NOT a solution, as far as I'm concerned, only a way to turn stuff off that you might be using so you're not affected by the problem itself) does not mean it's not their fault. In fact, it makes it worse. "We know it's broke, but fuck you - do this to your systems or we don't give a shit" - for a web browser, which should be a separated process and application in ANY decent OS? No. Sorry.
IE was removed from my network desktops (sadly can't properly get rid it of for several reasons) many, many years ago and replaced with a standalone browser that can be updated independent of the version of the OS that's in use (or even the TYPE of OS that's in use, e.g. Linux, Mac, etc.).
As far as I'm concerned, still running IE on your desktop means you don't know any better. Notice the wording: It's not rude to home users who literally don't know any better and you don't expect them to, but it's quite damning to professionals who SHOULD know better - you can whine about ActiveX, .NET, Silverlight etc. being in your business all you want - the fact is that you should know better than to tie your company into a single third-party supplier. Even one as large as Microsoft or Apple.
Re: (Score:2)
"IE was removed from my network desktops"
"(sadly can't properly get rid it of for several reasons)"
"As far as I'm concerned, still running IE on your desktop means you don't know any better. "
Which of these doesn't belong? (Hint, the number is greater than two)
More helpful advice from the Anti-Microsoft community. With a smile.
actually a step in the right direction (Score:5, Interesting)
before you think it, i'm no MS shill, i use Linux and only Linux. that said, the MSIE team is doing it right this time with IE11.
while many people here are slamming on the basis of standards compliance, there is something you should know: it's broken because they are striving standards compliance.
as we all know, there are plenty of MSIE exclusive ways of doing things in the DOM [webplatform.org] and render hacks that have had to be done so you end up with code that has "browser detection" to apply browser specific hacks. MSIE is making a clean break from all of that. so all those IE only apps like Outlook Web App will now fail because all the IE specific stuff has been removed. they went so far as to remove "MSIE" from their user agent string to prevent any old code from detecting it as Internet Explorer.
IE10 user agent string: Mozilla/5.0 (compatible; MSIE 10.0; Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; Trident/6.0)
IE11 user agent string: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.3; Trident/7.0; rv 11.0) like Gecko
so while it seems to have growing pains, as far as IE goes, IE11 is a step in the right direction.
some nice differences:
Deprecation of file:// based Proxy configuration scripts
Deprecation of document modes
Deprecated VBScript in IE11 mode pages
navigator.plugins -- now a supported extensibility point <-- ironically chrome is removing this support
ActiveX now behaves like a navigator plugin. [microsoft.com]
Silverlight plugin is not installed by default (they got Netflix to support HTML5 [netflix.com] via Encrypted Media Extensions [w3.org] aka DRM in the HTML5 spec)
more info:
http://www.nczonline.net/blog/2013/07/02/internet-explorer-11-dont-call-me-ie/ [nczonline.net]
http://blogs.msdn.com/b/ieinternals/archive/2013/09/24/internet-explorer-11-changelist-change-log.asp [msdn.com]
OWA Workaround is Trivial (Score:3)
According to the KB article [microsoft.com], all one has to do is...
Press F10 to display the menu bar, go to the Tools menu, and then click Compatibility View settings. Add the OWA site to the list of sites to be viewed in compatibility view.
Afterward, the setting will be remembered. Not such a big deal. As far back as IE 8, I've come across the odd site that requires compatibility view to work properly. So you set it, forget it, and move on.
IE ... Really? (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Unfortunately if forces us Web devs into building, and rebuilding, and again rebuilding sites so they work with specific or various versions of IE, which in-turn makes people think IE is ok or good enough. It costs my company a lot of money to
Broken (Score:2)
ME: "My client is having such and such issue, I
However... it passes ACID 1, 2 and 3 (Score:2)
Its fun to knock IE (Score:2)
But, lately its chrome that has been causing me lots of grief. It seems speed is more important than actually rendering things properly.
Take for example the chrome rowspan 0 bug, https://www.google.com/search?q=chrome+rowspan+0 [google.com]
Still broken as of 30.0.1599.101, rowspan=0 in chrome is basically rowspan=1 which completely misses the point.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm with you...is Google even using valid HTML, or HTML5,* in the problem pages? Last I checked GOOG was great at breaking both.
*I did not repeat myself.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:How is this surprising... (Score:5, Insightful)
Ever since I started doing web design for a living in 1998, I hated this crazy situation where one has to take into account all quibbles and arguments the software industry has internally and make up for it in your code. Now we are 15 years down the road, I've moved on to greener pastures, but I see the poor sods in web development are still stuck with the tantrums of yesteryear.
Re:How is this surprising... (Score:5, Insightful)
The architecture of web applications on the client side is screwed up.
It was originally designed so non technical people could create content and now it's been pressed into service doing extremely complex things.
The web fucking sucks.