RSSMicrosoft silent on whether version 8 will be the last Internet Explorer
By Scott M. Fulton, III | Published March 12, 2009, 12:43 PM
This week, elements of the blogosphere drew speculative conclusions about a Microsoft Research paper released last month in time for TechFest, which concerned a prototype Web browser constructed expressly for the purpose of testing new concepts in Web browser user authentication. Cross-site scripting has, after all, been a security plague for nearly every browser at one time or another -- the ability for a script launched by one page to intentionally take control of a page in a completely different window.
Perhaps without even reading the paper itself (PDF available here), speculators concluded that it pointed either to the architecture of the next version of Internet Explorer, or that it somehow signaled the end of the Internet Explorer product line -- that somehow Microsoft, or Microsoft in conjunction with someone else (maybe the University of Washington?), would be making Web browsers for future editions of Windows but without the IE logo. It's a far, far extrapolation of a conclusion that could not possibly have been reached through any logical process.
Late yesterday, a Microsoft Research spokesperson confirmed for Betanews that "Gazelle" -- the project name for its browser experiment, conducted with some help from the U of W -- is not in any way intended to be a prototype for a next-generation Microsoft browser.
However, in a surprising turn of events this morning, from the other side of the corporate campus, spokespersons for Microsoft's consumer products officially declined comment on whether Internet Explorer 8 would not be the company's last version of Internet Explorer. This despite every indication we've ever received privately that Microsoft engineers not related to its Research division are working on future editions of the Web browser, as part of a broad company roadmap.
While it's understandable in the midst of its defense against the European Commission's January Statement of Objections that Microsoft may not wish to offer any details about the direction its future Web browser development is taking, today's decline of comment is the first step Microsoft has taken thus far to publicly refuse to confirm or deny that any development beyond IE8 is even taking place.
As for whether Gazelle has anything to do with this, the research paper itself provides a clear answer to any questions on that topic. It actually states the test browser is a rebuilt version of IE7: "Instead of undertaking a significant effort of writing our own HTML parser, renderer, and JavaScript engine, we borrow these components from Internet Explorer 7 in a way that does not compromise security. Relying on IE's Trident renderer has a big benefit of inheriting IE's page rendering compatibility and performance. In addition, such an implementation shows that it is realistic to adapt an existing browser to use Gazelle's secure architecture."
Very interesting that Microsoft is turning down comments on whether IE will live or not from this point forward. I do know one thing, that IE is losing market share to Firefox at a very rapid pace. This says a lot since most users use Windows; essentially it means that users are ignoring IE in Windows, going out of their way and using an alternative like Firefox instead. The only reason I can logically explain this is because IE is either too unsecure, bad interface, or just too slow. Whatever the reason, it will be interesting to see how things fare out in the coming year or two. Personally, I use Firefox 3 on Fedora 10 Linux, and only trust this platform for all secure transactions that I do online. I've been burned way too many times in the past by IE so I was done with it years ago.
Time will tell if Microsoft has actually started to adhere to the standards that have already been established. They have a track record of veering off on their own path to try and persuade others to follow and accomplish their goal of vendor lock-in. I have tried Internet Explorer in the past only to be burned every time with security holes and just plain clumsy interface. Firefox is way ahead and has a much cleaner interface. I use Firefox 3 on Fedora 10 Linux, which is about the most secure and stable platform available. I don't trust IE on Windows for any sites that transmit critical information like banking, etc. I have even written my own article of why I only use Linux:
http://members.apex-internet.com/sa/windowslinux
Score: 0
|I really hope this isn't the end for IE.
How else am I going to download FF after a clean Install!
Score: 0
|IE sucks. I remember people had requested a download manager like Firefox for IE 7 when it was in beta on Microsoft connect. And there's still no download manager even in IE 8. For now Firefox is the best and Chrome seems to be promising...
Score: -2
|It's pretty funny that Microsoft has supposedly worked so diligently on IE since version 7 and yet it's still only available on Windows. If Microsoft was serious about Internet Explorer it would be offered to Mac and Linux users too.
Score: -1
|Ummm, they had IE7 (or at least 6) for OSX. Of course, the one time I used it, it locked up within thirty seconds. The screen then proceeded to act like it was being degaussed, but obviously IE was the problem because Macs never malfunction. Right?
Score: -4
|@psycros:
It stopped at 5. Do your research.
Score: 0
|And it had a very nice interface. IE5 for OSX looked nicer than on Windows.
Score: 0
|It also had PNG alpha transparency (though everything else was broken), which was years ahead of IE/Win.
Score: 0
|I would hate to see Internet Explorer go. I liked Firefox more until I installed IE8. IE8 is seemingly faster than Firefox 3 and it has a lot of potential with its extensions, including automatic crash recovery. During RAM usage tests, I found IE8 to be consuming less memory than Firefox 3. Don't be surprised if Microsoft makes a comeback in the browser wars with IE8. Mozilla may be able to surpass IE6 and IE7 in market share, but will likely not catch up with IE8. When Microsoft releases the official stable version of IE8, look out Firefox users! This is shaping up to be the best version of IE ever.
Score: 0
|I decline to comment
Score: -1
|Ah yes, the good old oxymoron.
Score: 0
|LOL
Microsoft will not risk to loose the "Market share" they have "stole" so hardly.
Also don't expect IE8 to be perfect.
No software is! But IE sucks more!
Regards
Score: -4
|please get off the internet
Score: 0
|Yay, education!
Score: -3
|I guess you don't know the IE history. Where do you think the mozilla compatible idea came from?
"Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 7.0; Windows NT 6.0)"
Also you love it's memory leaks (try leave it running for some hours without using it), crashes and exploits.
You have the right to it, as i have the right to say no to its usage.
Regards
Score: 0
|You obviously also have the right to submit your uneducated ideas of course.
Microsoft licensed software from NCSA Mosaic to release their first Internet Explorer.
What memory leak bug are you mumbling about?
Score: 0
|*laughing*
Newsflash: Blog speculation about IE causes BetaNews to speculate upon that speculation. No real facts are known and no-one who might actually have a clue was contacted, because then they might have less speculation upon which to speculate and would be forced to ignore the story or report actual facts. *shudder*
Hehe... I love this site.
Score: -2
|Careful. "They don't like it up 'em"
Score: 0
|I asked this site if it loved you. It refused to comment. I speculate this is because of aforementioned unknown speculators.
Score: -3
|"I asked this site if it loved you."
You asked a website a question.... Did you expect an answer?
Here's one that'll tell you *exactly* what it thinks of you. :-)
Score: -2
|I love how "declining to comment" automatically means "no" in this case. Seriously, this is speculation based on speculation.
Score: 4
|Seriously... let's stop making a mountain out of a molehill. MS hasn't released IE8 yet, why do they need to comment on an IE9 at this point? We haven't heard about Windows 8 either, have we? Maybe because they haven't released Windows 7 yet. That doesn't imply there won't be a Windows 8. Let's stop being so irrational.
Score: 0
|i'd say "no comment" too, if i were just a spokesperson and had no clue as to why anybody would even bring up the topic =P considering IE8 is just on its way out the door...
betanews really has to get some substance back in its articles instead of climbing on the speculation bandwagon
Score: 0
|i've been using IE8 RC1 for a while.
seems released enough to me.
seems safer, more reliable and faster than others too:
http://blogs.zdnet.com/hardware/?p=3829
Score: 1
|Perhaps you need to look up the meaning of "Release Candidate".
Score: 0
|don't need to look up anything.
as i stated, ie8 rc1 seems released enough to me:
http://www.microsoft.com...-4e0c-980a-acee32ac3e1d
Score: 0
|It is not a release for the general public to go installing (without knowing what's going on).
Its release in computing terminology isn't until it's final, gold, RTM or whatever you want to call it.
Anyway, "seems" safer is amusing; it won't be because it is the most targeted browser by hackers/virus writers (though not necessarily because of the code underneath anymore). "More reliable" depends on what your definition of reliable is, as to whether you mean "doesn't crash often" or "renders most websites perfectly".
Score: 0
|last version? this is laughable.
perhaps, it would be the last version to be automatically installed/setup with the o.s.
Score: 0
|Well, credit where credits' due: I have to agree. Its becoming pretty obvious to even casual industry watchers that Microsoft is quietly planning at least a minor overhaul in the way it deals with customers, developers and partners. If it gets them back to their roots of empowering end users rather than imprisoning them, it will do HUGE things for their public image (not to mention their bottom line).
Score: -3
|