Print 85 comment(s) - last by gunzac21.. on Mar 18 at 5:37 PM

However, IE9 isn't quite up to par with other consumer internet browsers on the market

Microsoft's Internet Explorer 9, Microsoft Corp.'s latest and greatest browser released today in finalized form.  So why should we care?

Well two stories dominated when it comes to IE9.  The first the media will be sure to talk about; the other you'll probably hear little talk of.

I. IE9 as a Consumer Browser -- Not Worth It

First the more obvious story -- Microsoft is improving, but arguably not fast enough.  IE9 looks and feels like a modern browser.  

It also looks and feels noticeably slower than ChromeOpera, or even Firefox.  While the gap is not as wide as in past versions (e.g. IE8, or esp. IE 7) it is visibly apparent.  Open a page on DailyTech in Chrome, and you see text literally seconds a second or two later.  Open the same page in IE 9 and you get a distinct pause as several seconds pass, before article text loads.

This qualitative example is indicative of our test drives of IE9 as a whole.  While the speed isn't horrible, if you've been using a modern browser like Chrome or Opera, you'll definitely get frustrated at the ever-present delay.

Standards support is a remarkably similar story. Microsoft has gained ground by implementing parts of the HTML5 and CSS3 standards, but the percentage of support for these standards is far lower than rival browsers.

We're still in the process of testing the beast, but it looks to support only about a quarter of the HTML5 standard, according to the test The HTML5 Test.  Microsoft would argue that's because the standard isn't fully defined.  But that seems a weak excuse -- that hasn't stopped Opera, Google, and Mozilla from not only taking an active part in the standard, but also support it more fully.

Microsoft finds itself in a familiar role of publicly arguing why it shouldn't have to fully standards -- but in an interesting twist it's now committing itself to a bipolar effort of quietly trying to catch up in these same standards, as well.  The results, as one might imagine, are mixed.

Aside from speed and standards, Microsoft's browser has a clean look to it.  Its sharp defined lines bring to mind Microsoft's Metro GUI style, which the company used extensively on the defunct Zune and the active Windows Phone 7.

The browser lacks, though, cutting edge features being implemented elsewhere like tab stacking/grouping.  And while ostensibly it offers "add-ons"/"extensions", its catalog is anemic to say the least.  Firefox, Opera, and Chrome users will wince at the lack of ad/JavaScript blocking. 

Yet another place where Microsoft falls behind is in the installation process.  IE 9 requires a number of Windows Updates in order be able to install.  For us, one of these updates had been failing several times in Windows Update, so this was a rather painful process.  If Google, Mozilla, and Opera can make stand-alone installers, it's inexcusable that Microsoft, the world's largest software company, can't.

II. IE9 as a Work Browser -- Not so Shabby

So, the other story here is how IE 9 fares in the business setting.  While it languished in the world of home users, Microsoft remains strong in the workplace.  

Overall Firefox and Chrome can be managed, but require a lot more IT effort than IE 9.  Internet Explorer remains the king of business browsers in terms of manageability, security, and reliability.  When you factor in that many business have built their portals' web code to run optimally in Internet Explorer, IE 9 gains yet more of an advantage -- though perhaps a bit unfair one.

At the end of the day, IE 9's improvements will really start to shine for business users.  While IE 9 may seem dated and tardy as a consumer browser, in an IT setting we're used to getting less.  If you were stuck with IE 8 before, IT department willing, you'll get a huge boost with IE 9.

Most in the media, in their rush to note IE 9's insufficiencies from a home user perspective, won't stop to recognize that it is an excellent browser from a business perspective.  We feel this is an equally compelling story and definitely worth noting.

III. Conclusions

Microsoft has two key strengths when it comes to browsers -- its strong business reputation and the fact that, for better or worse, in the U.S. it can still bundle its browser as the exclusive pre-installed browser in Windows.

The company currently owns between 55 and 65 percent of the browser market, depending on whose numbers you trust.  This dominant positions in underpinned by those aforementioned strengths.  

Are people really to lazy to go out and download a third party browser?  In many cases the answer is "yes" (though obviously not for most of our readers).  Thus IE 9 will eventually roll out to these users through the Windows Update process and Microsoft will hang on to its lead.

On the other hand, Microsoft likely recognizes the writing on the wall.  Home users are becoming increasingly educated with each passing decade, and it can't hope to keep relying on its pre-packaged approach to be able to push a sub-par product indefinitely.

In that regard IE 9 is perhaps a sign that Microsoft is getting serious about performance and standards.  And while it’s still far behind in these categories, its large market share arguably buys it the time it needs to catch up.

Comments     Threshold

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

RE: IE9 installer is a piece of sh1t
By omnicronx on 3/15/2011 4:02:23 PM , Rating: 2
The only 'FAILSAUCE' here is pretending as though any company should support a pre release OS.

They put in validations so that people like you cannot complain about the install not working because they are not running release software. The install itself hardly failed, you immediately failed the system installation requirement validation and as such the install would no continue.

Thats why the RC works perfectly fine, its a completely unsupported release. Production releases require support, and its not something MS should be wasting their time on because you are too cheap to buy the software, or too lazy to pirate a real version. (which you are basically doing anyway by running pre release software a year+ after its release)

P.S I immediately pictured a child talking when I read your little 'failsauce' statement. Grow the heck up..

RE: IE9 installer is a piece of sh1t
By Pirks on 3/15/2011 4:11:17 PM , Rating: 2
Both myself and zero2dash run release version of Windows, I guess you should vent in another direction then? Just a friendly advice.

RE: IE9 installer is a piece of sh1t
By omnicronx on 3/15/2011 5:09:47 PM , Rating: 2
Was I commenting on your situation?

I will if you would like..

I've done 5 installations today, 2 Vista, 3 Windows 7.

Not problem on my end, so its clearly not widespread.

I've had updates fail on every single platform, so please do not make it out as though this is something limited to Windows. I've had to perform FULL OSX updates (i.e downloading the full combo update package) instead of doing the incremental updates many times, and they do not have the excuse of having millions of hardware and thousands of configurations to support.

Furthermore, can we assume you are upgrading from an RC release?

RE: IE9 installer is a piece of sh1t
By Pirks on 3/15/2011 5:24:58 PM , Rating: 2
I haven's got any RC installed ever before, this is the first time I tried to install IE9 and I never had any betas or RCs of Windows ever. zero2dash didn't have a "pre release OS" of yours either. Hence this:

By omnicronx on 3/15/2011 5:30:25 PM , Rating: 2
Was just wondering bud ;)

Still does not change the fact that stuff happens, and MS cannot control everything you do to your machine..

For the most part their update process works great.. One of my Vista machines was an RC update, the other was a full install.. Once again no problem.

I already searched the web, I don't see any sites/forum postings etc complaining about the issue, so it must be few and far between. So please stop trying to claim otherwise until you have something to show for it.

By zero2dash on 3/15/2011 8:17:59 PM , Rating: 2
They put in validations so that people like you cannot complain about the install not working because they are not running release software. The install itself hardly failed, you immediately failed the system installation requirement validation and as such the install would no continue.

I'm not running an unreleased/hacked copy. If I was, I'm pretty sure a) I wouldn't be able to grab every update (including SP1) and b) I would notice a warning about "not being genuine" and I wouldn't have a "Windows is activated" prompt in my system properties window.

"Let's face it, we're not changing the world. We're building a product that helps people buy more crap - and watch porn." -- Seagate CEO Bill Watkins

Most Popular Articles5 Cases for iPhone 7 and 7 iPhone Plus
September 18, 2016, 10:08 AM
No More Turtlenecks - Try Snakables
September 19, 2016, 7:44 AM
ADHD Diagnosis and Treatment in Children: Problem or Paranoia?
September 19, 2016, 5:30 AM
Walmart may get "Robot Shopping Carts?"
September 17, 2016, 6:01 AM
Automaker Porsche may expand range of Panamera Coupe design.
September 18, 2016, 11:00 AM

Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki