HTML5 Parsing in IE10
The Web is better when developers can use the same markup and same code across different browsers with the same results. The second platform preview of IE10 makes progress in this area by fully supporting the HTML5 parsing algorithm.
This continues work we started in previous releases to improve IE’s HTML parser to make more HTML “just work” in the same way across browsers. Some key examples include supporting SVG-in-HTML, supporting HTML5 semantic elements, preserving the structure of unknown elements, and improving whitespace handling. As a result of this work, most HTML parses the same across IE9 and other browsers.
Getting the right behavior
The goal of this work is to ensure all HTML parses the same across modern browsers. This is possible because HTML5 is the first version of HTML to fully define HTML parsing rules, down to the last edge case and error condition. Even if your markup is invalid, HTML5 still defines how to parse it and IE10 follows these rules. The examples below illustrate some cases fixed as part of these improvements.
| HTML | DOM ( HTML5 + IE10 ) | DOM ( IE9 ) |
|---|---|---|
| <b>1<i>2</b> | |- <b> |- "1" |- <i> |- "2" | |- <b> |- "1" |- <i> |- "2" |- <i> |
| <p>Test 1 <object> <p>Test 2 </object> | |- <p> |- "Test 1\n" |- <object> |- "\n " |- <p> |- "Test 2\n" | |- <p> |- "Test 1\n" |- <object> |- "\n " |- <p> |- "Test 2\n" |
Interoperable innerHTML
These improvements apply to innerHTML too. Code patterns like these now work as you’d expect in IE10:
var select = document.createElement("select");
select.innerHTML = "<option>one</option><option>two</option>";
var table = document.createElement("table");
table.innerHTML = "<tr><td>one</td><td>two</td></tr>";
Better error reporting for developers
HTML5 ensures markup will parse consistently. It’s still a good idea for developers to avoid writing invalid markup to begin with. Writing valid markup helps your site work the way you expect and is more compatible with older browsers.
To help developers with this, IE10 now reports HTML parsing errors via the F12 developer tools.
Removing legacy features
Because some features in earlier versions of IE aren’t compatible with HTML5 parsing, we’ve removed them from IE10 mode. Sites that rely on these legacy features will still work when running in legacy modes. This way, sites that work today will continue to work with IE10 even if the developers of the site don’t have the time to update them.
Conditional Comments
<!--[if IE]>
This content is ignored in IE10 and other browsers.
In older versions of IE it renders as part of the page.
<![endif]-->
This means conditional comments can still be used, but will only target older versions of IE. If you need to distinguish between more recent browsers, use feature detection instead .
Element Behaviors
<html xmlns:my>
<?import namespace="my" implementation="my.htc">
<my:element>
This parses as an unknown element in IE10 and other browsers.
In older versions of IE it binds to "my.htc".
</my:element>
</html>
XML Data Islands
<xml>
This parses as <b>HTML</b> in IE10 and other browsers.
In older versions of IE it parses as XML.
</xml>
Your feedback welcome
We welcome your feedback making sure that all HTML parses consistently across browsers (including via innerHTML). Download the second platform preview of IE10, use it, and please report any bugs you find via Connect.
—Tony Ross, Program Manager, Internet Explorer
Comments
Anonymous
July 06, 2011
So. Flippin. Cool.Anonymous
July 06, 2011
This is great news. Conditional comments, rest in peace.Anonymous
July 06, 2011
Thank you! IE 10 is shaping up real well!Anonymous
July 06, 2011
Awful backwards compat support for conditional comments. Did MS finally find out that developing their own standards for the web is a bad idea? Use Gecko already.Anonymous
July 06, 2011
How do we deal with ie10 specific incompatibilities that will undoubtedly exist? Don't tell me javascript either, tell me what to do when I will NEED <!--[if IE 10]>?Anonymous
July 06, 2011
Isaac, if you're using browser detection instead of feature detection you're shooting yourself in the foot and deserve to suffer.Anonymous
July 06, 2011
Agree with CompatMan -- don't get rid of conditional comments -- they are very useful. Just keep innovating...Some of us just want to make good websites and don't really care about standards. Having a few branch statements is not a problem...we will have to do that anyway to use functions like requestAnimationFrame.Anonymous
July 06, 2011
@Isaac: Use feature detection. It's right in the article with a link to more info on the practice.Anonymous
July 06, 2011
I'm skeptical about IE10, since IE has never followed the standard by 100%, but its good to read that a good effort is being done :)Anonymous
July 06, 2011
@Roman and @Sami: that's not an answer ! How do we use features detection if we just want to use a CSS file only for IE9 and 10 ? And don't tell me to load it by javascript, it's ugly ! Our websites works the same in every browsers (IE7,IE8,FF x,Chrome x,Safari x,Opera x and even IE6 with some limitations) and strangely, stuff doesn't appears the same in IE9 and 10. There are some texts which appears bigger, some elements aren't placed correctly.Anonymous
July 06, 2011
@Olivier, using proper feature detection is ugly, but having a separate CSS file for each version of IE is pretty? Ummm, no.Anonymous
July 06, 2011
The comment has been removedAnonymous
July 06, 2011
@Olivier: What do you do if you want to use a stylesheet for any other specific version of a specific browser? Whatever that is, that's what you'll do for IE10 now. Doesn't that sound good to you? IE10 wants to be on par with the big boys, the other real browsers. If the IE team succeeds this will be a non-issue just like it is for every other major browser.Anonymous
July 06, 2011
Here's to consistency!Anonymous
July 06, 2011
@Sami To this day, IE is the only browser that I've had to write conditional tests to load CSS for. If they remove that feature and the browser still has some quirks, then the situation will be worse than if they didn't remove them.Anonymous
July 06, 2011
The comment has been removedAnonymous
July 06, 2011
I cringe every-time there is another IE version to support. If Windows did a better job including it with auto-updates, and you could install newer versions on older Windows, then I'd love it. But Windows XP is still a dominant OS, and the only way to have a decent browser is by NOT using IE, sigh.Anonymous
July 06, 2011
No conditional comments? Use feature detection? This is a great idea, especially if javascript is turned off. As long as IE is three years behind firefox/chrome and opera you should have kept them.Anonymous
July 06, 2011
The comment has been removedAnonymous
July 06, 2011
about time.Anonymous
July 06, 2011
IE10 will one day be a legacy browser. 10 Years from now this article will be cursed by all web developers. Your image will be burned in effigy again. Please, PLEASE DON'T DO THIS. Conditional comments are implemented for FORWARDS compatibility, not backwards compatibility. Chrome 10 and Firefox 3.4 are dead already, but you and I know that IE10 will still be deployed in 2020. I was so enjoying the fact that the IE team was actually being competitive, but yet again - Microsoft is shooting itself in the foot.Anonymous
July 06, 2011
IE, please do not remove conditional comment support for IE10. While I know you have improvements to your interoperability, and your interest making 'same markup' across multiple browsers, the fact remains that any browser will have bugs. Conditional comments were a great way to work around those bugs. When detecting whether a feature is present or not, feature detection is the way to go, and educating web devs is the right thing to do. But for working around bugs, conditional comments are the way to go, and I would be very grateful if the IE team left us that option.Anonymous
July 06, 2011
New levels of stupidity. Conditional comments are needed because YOUR browser has historically been the WORST out of ALL BROWSERS. IE10 is unlikely to change that. I genuinely despair.Anonymous
July 06, 2011
Great news guys, great news! Special thanks for adding html parsing warnings and for having courage to leave conditional comments behind.Anonymous
July 06, 2011
Great decision to remove the conditional comments. Just like enforing UAC was in Windows Vista, this will break bad coding patterns by force, with a load of cursing from the developers, who will be scrambling to adapt to the new landscape. But it is very much needed step forward towards a unified web across all browers. We have all been waiting for the day that IE is up to par with the other browsers (congrats IEteam, BTW), and now that that day has come we much take up the challenge and do write cross-browser, without falling back on old crutches.Anonymous
July 06, 2011
Welcome back to browser sniffing in order to have css classes like .ie6 ... If you want to really change get ie10 working on XP and able to render ie6 specific sites from corporations... This way ie6 to 9 will be able to rest in peace and i will not have to test my developments for all ie versions...Anonymous
July 06, 2011
This is great and everything... but I'll say it again... if you concentrated on fixing the trail of mess that is IE6/7/8 and 9 we would never have had to use conditional comments in the first placeAnonymous
July 06, 2011
What score does IE10 get on html5test.com URL?Anonymous
July 06, 2011
@Oliver - If the user has disabled JS, he/she already prefers he/she would probably be unable to use most of the HTML5 features, except for semantic tags, anyways. Thus falling back to a consistent basic interface should be more than sufficient.Anonymous
July 06, 2011
But what if we have problems with IE10, in previous versions of IE the conditional stylesheets were our saviorAnonymous
July 06, 2011
The comment has been removedAnonymous
July 06, 2011
How should I detect new possibilities in CSS? Such as Grid layout, etc. JavaScript detection doesn't fit, since we need to support users even without JS turned on. CC allowed to link to different CSS files to serve different browsers.Anonymous
July 06, 2011
Fantastic news!Anonymous
July 06, 2011
"The Web is better when developers can use the same markup and same code across different browsers with the same results." Strong evidence that this blog has been hacked.Anonymous
July 06, 2011
The comment has been removedAnonymous
July 06, 2011
Not often I'll say this but +1 to MicrosoftAnonymous
July 06, 2011
Wow! Microsoft, you started to do a good browser!Anonymous
July 06, 2011
Hey - I got an idea... how about boycotting IE? I've already started using XHTML, so IE <= 8 can't view anymore. Genius, I know.Anonymous
July 06, 2011
I develop in Firefox and then fix IE with conditional stylesheets. These stylesheets are getting shorter with newer versions. I even had a few projects where stylesheets >= IE8 were not needed at all. But as long as IE is using Trident, conditional stylesheets are useful, and in some cases, mission critical. Please leave conditionals as they are now. Thank you.Anonymous
July 06, 2011
Leaving out conditional comments is a clear indication that IE10 will not need it. So that should make us all happy.Anonymous
July 06, 2011
Bold move, I hope the future proves that IE10's standards-compliance is solid enough that the conditional code is no longer needed.Anonymous
July 06, 2011
The comment has been removedAnonymous
July 06, 2011
As for me, removing conditional comments matters not. Im setting on load body classes ".msie.vers_x_x" with javascript. But for those, that can't use js-based browser detection this promises a lot of pain. May be you should better let conditional comments stay? How should webdevs then write alternative CSS and, sometimes, DOM, to support IE?Anonymous
July 06, 2011
Dropping support for conditional comments is probably the worst idea ever. Why force developers to use an additional tool instead of letting them continue to use the existing paradigm for coding around your terrible browsers? As usual, Microsoft invents it's own way to do something different than everybody else. Thanks for taking a dump on my profession yet again. I would love to eat my own words and have IE10 play nice like Gecko/Webkit browsers... but as long as Microsoft has products in the market I'll have extra work to do to support your half baked broken implementations of the web browser. I still have to deal with IE6 and 7. What will I be complaining about with IE10 in 2 years?Anonymous
July 06, 2011
Wouldn't need all of this if IE would make a decent browser to begin with. It's only IE that needs conditionals or feature detection. Seem silly to me that they can't. I only ever have problems with IE, even as I develop specifically in IE. FF, Safari, Chrome, Gecko, and don't seem to have the nagging and persistent issues. Why can't MS hold off till they actually have a good offering and leave it at that.Anonymous
July 06, 2011
i've never used conditional nor browser sniffing nor feature detection. seem to get by pretty well.... the only times i the browsers work differently are when i goofed (missing/extra end tags, missing semi-colons, extra commas etc). Chrome and FF seem rather forgiving of mistakes, which made me complacent....Anonymous
July 06, 2011
The comment has been removedAnonymous
July 06, 2011
Great work on this IE team. I've used conditional comments extensively over the past decade, but I'm happy to see them go. The people complaining about conditional comment support being dropped are stuck in the past - it's time to update your way of thinking.Anonymous
July 07, 2011
Why is this a problem? IE9 is incredibly standard compliant, and IE10 is even more. IE9/10 works perfectly with any website which can be viewed by Chrome, Opera etc. On the other hand NOBODY uses IE6/7 anymore (maybe around 5%). They can be safely ignored. On the other hand, IE9 is used by 12% of users within a few months of release. All in all this is a great move by Microsoft.Anonymous
July 07, 2011
The comment has been removedAnonymous
July 07, 2011
if conditional comments are gone in IE10 mode, does that mean setting the DOCTYPE to a legacy mode would make them still function in IE10 if a dev doesn't want to update a site?Anonymous
July 07, 2011
As you are catching up your CSS support, the other browsers aren't standing still. We'll still need conditional comments unless you can guarantee that IE10 will be on par with the AUTO-UPDATING browsers it'll be competing with in several years. @Jswim: That's not what "standards" means. One company in control has never been good. Get a few more years of development under your belt and you'll see what the difference between the browsers is!Anonymous
July 07, 2011
Tony, I wholeheartedly congratulate you on IE10, Preview 2. The HTML5 parser, the many cut offs of ancient limitations and cruft as well as a steady progress in standards support are making IE10 already a great browser. There are still some issues in parsing, DOM, CSS and other, see www.freewebs.com/.../iepp1 but it's really great to see so much progress. I'd also like to know if the proprietary -ms-behaviour CSS property will still exist in IE10. I'd prefer if it didn't exist there either, because the current level of HTML, DOM and CSS support eliminates their reason for existence. I hope you can focus on improving support of partially supported features in IE10 as well (Ruby, CSS inherit, all viewable on my list of tests). @GreLI: You do not detect new CSS features, you make your content fall back gracefully. @Mat Gilbert: CCs were the additional tool you speak of, IE10 can be handled like any other browser. @Anyone who would make MS use WebKit: Apparently you're shouting your critics at the wrong corporation. For a while, Apple's WebKit has been the worst out of the big four engines. They pass less than 90% of the CSS Test Suite (ok, maybe the crossed the 90% mark in the last few months), while other engines passed at least 95%. Take my list of testcases above, WebKit fails some tests other engines never had problems with in the first case. Also note that Safari 5 is currently the oldest browser labled the latest release of the big five. Go criticise Apply please, those people deserve it at least. @FremyCompany: Maybe XBL 2.0 can help you instead? And yes, comments evaluation seem to be very restrictive at the moment.Anonymous
July 07, 2011
I have to congratulate MS for final getting on board with the 21 century. I hope this means the end of MS proprietor codes.Anonymous
July 07, 2011
@anyone who thinks feature detection fills the bill 100% of the time, you are not a professional designer, pure and simple. You may be a fine developer, but you don't test for design. @sukru-t, the idea that turning off JS means you don't want a properly styled page is ignorant. When a browser (this is not just IE, but Gecko and WK as well) "supports" a CSS feature, but renders it incorrectly, there is no way that feature detection helps you. Generated content, hover states, rounded corners (to name a few) have all been "supported" by recent browsers, but the implementation botched so hard that they have to be turned off in initial "supporting" versions. This will inevitably happen again. CC made it easier to deal with in IE than elsewhere. Now it's back to U-A guesswork for all browsers. (Perhaps that centralization on U-A parsing could be considered a good thing so that CC can be revived in a standard at some point, but that's a reach.)Anonymous
July 07, 2011
Conditional comments are a great way to support multiple versions of Internet Explorer with the same codebase. For Firefox, Chrome, etc. it's feasable to say "upgrade to the latest version", but with IE you know that's not the case. Please keep conditional comments for when we will be supporting IE versions 10, 11, and 12 simultaneously. If they end up being a feature that nobody uses because nobody needs it anymore, then you can get rid of it.Anonymous
July 07, 2011
@AntiLuddite, it's telling that you left a li'l fella called IE8 out of your optimistic old days/new days conclusion! I too have no great worries about IE 6 and 7 anymore, as those were the really bad old days (in terms of the sheer number of rendering issues, not necessarily the importance of each). But that's not the point. The point is that all modern browsers (not just Trident-based) still introduce so-called "support" for new standards that is in fact broken and unuseable. DOMImpl reflection is not going to tell you "Oh yeah, I support that nutty new <style/pseudo>. I render it totally <offscreen/jaggy/offset/otherwise wrong>, so don't use it, though." So if you want to use styles only where they actually render correctly, you have to be prepared to do browser detection, either server-side or client-side. This means guessing based on the U-A (people who change their U-A to something "l33t" can have a ball with that, whatever). Although I think CCs' ability to do non-JS client-side detection was a cool thing, I'm largely okay with EOL'ing conditional comments. Just as long as people stop spreading this FUD that feature detection takes its place. It doesn't. It means we have to do more work in script/backend to get styles right. Experienced designers already know this: even if it "felt wrong" to browser-detect a broken version of Safari, so you changed the design instead, you know the only way you could have made it work was by checking for version "A.Broken" and styling/destyling accordingly. (Luckily, I control my servers as well, so I can avoid relying on JS, but I feel worse for people who only do UI.)Anonymous
July 07, 2011
The comment has been removedAnonymous
July 07, 2011
@Evan IE is currently much more conforming to standards than other browsers. CSS 2.1 : test.csswg.org/.../results.html Javascript: http://test262.ecmascript.org/Anonymous
July 07, 2011
Good Lord!!! Why does nobody see that the release-cycle of ie switched from "when we feel like it" to, "every year with major accomplishments" there will be no cc anymore - why? cause there not useful anymore.because the basic support of HTML5 and especially CSS3 will be done with this iteration. So stop you f*ckin whining! Think before you talk/type.Anonymous
July 07, 2011
The comment has been removedAnonymous
July 07, 2011
Removing support for conditional comments is a good thing, inasmuch as it ensures that websites coded using [if IE] don't load fixes that don't apply in Strict mode : I guess that this isn't so much about CSS, but more about people loading some scripts for all browsers, and then adding a compatibility layer for IE only. For those that didn't follow: conditional comments are NOT disabled altogether, they're just not supported for versions 10 and above. In IE9's case, stuff like text-shadow meant that you could still need an alternate stylesheet even with a valid Strict mode webpage, but if IE10 includes ALL CSS 2.1 (after all, it IS now final) and implements all CSS 3 proposals, then CCs are not needed for CSS anymore; that leaves script, and in that area, I think that finally including a proper DOM model, a proper parser and a compliant event model will solve pretty much all these problems. @IE team: please ensure that convoluted syntaxes that allow CCs to EXCLUDE IE are properly parsed.Anonymous
July 07, 2011
The comment has been removedAnonymous
July 07, 2011
interesting... links in IE10 that open in a new window open in my default browser (Chrome). On the one hand (+1) for actually following my settings, but if I'm in IE10 to test - wouldn't I want to open the window in an IE10 frame?Anonymous
July 07, 2011
The comment has been removedAnonymous
July 07, 2011
@the_dees : Sorry, it seems XBL actually supports Shadow DOM. The specification is quite complex but I must agree it fulfills my needs. The problem I have is that I don't see this implemented in IE10, sadly...Anonymous
July 07, 2011
I cannot stop to be amazed on how IE destroys web development. As usual IE10 will be released will have enough bugs, will have incomplete support or not at all for some feature and by removing conditional for IE then we will add overload for real browsers. So "IE10 may live" will become soon "IE10 must die".Anonymous
July 07, 2011
"The Web is better when developers can use the same markup and same code across different browsers with the same results." Maybe the developers of the IE10 team can help achieve the above goal by supporting CSS3 properties such as text-shadow? Just a thought.Anonymous
July 07, 2011
IE10 .jxr(JPEGXR) image file support.Anonymous
July 07, 2011
The comment has been removedAnonymous
July 07, 2011
I would still like to have a command like <!--[if IE]> or <!--[if IE10]> We could use the userAgent by searching for "MSIE 10.0;" but only if Java Script is enabled. :o( PS. You can't post messages with this form using IE9 or IE 10.Anonymous
July 07, 2011
Just an idea around the HTML error reporting in the F12 developer tool: It's great that this is here. But would it be possible to expose as an API so that other dev tools can also integrate this error reporting?Anonymous
July 07, 2011
The comment has been removedAnonymous
July 07, 2011
Too late. Do you know how many developers have already died before seeing this? And even this is just a vaporware claim, one we've heard before. 30 years of pathetic security, more than enough billions to just fix it, spend more on marketing lies than SEs, should tell you something.Anonymous
July 08, 2011
Best Post EverAnonymous
July 08, 2011
The comment has been removedAnonymous
July 08, 2011
The comment has been removedAnonymous
July 08, 2011
Please, follow Netscape and just stop trying already. Your browser is so far behind everyone else and let's not talk about security...Anonymous
July 08, 2011
The comment has been removedAnonymous
July 08, 2011
@jader3rd Testing. Posted this using IE9. Tested using an Internet Explorer 9 clone browser (AOL using IE9) and it didn't work with Windows 7 Tested with IE10 Platform Preview 2 (10.0.1008.16421) and it didn't post. Tested with Internet Explorer 9, OK Surprised that the msdn.com blog dosen't support Internet Explorer.Anonymous
July 08, 2011
Let's see if removing CC will cause people to sniff using JS before and dynamically inserting CSS, I hope not, but "web devs" often seem to have a kind-of "whatever works" atidute.Anonymous
July 08, 2011
I find it funny that, even though Microsoft does not support browser dectection (which is obvious through a few blog posts here - this one and another one regarding cross-browser feature detection) they still use it themselves. I visited the new Hotmail today in SeaMonkey and I got an XML error. However, it worked fine in IE9. So, obviously IE9 is either not parsing the XML properly and letting the errors through, or Hotmail is serving IE9 HTML (and not XML). If Microsoft is dropping browser detection through markup in Internet Explorer 10 then I would at least like to see them stop using browser detection throughout their services, such as Hotmail. Otherwise this proves the need for browser detection.Anonymous
July 09, 2011
Yay!Anonymous
July 09, 2011
The following from the MSDN page on XML Data Islands made me giggle: "The W3C expects to evolve the HTML specification to include the capability of embedding XML in HTML documents." Oh boy…Anonymous
July 11, 2011
@Björn: In case you didn't notice. That expectation is as old as the XML Data Islands feature itself (1998) and has since been ignored and obsoleted by HTML 5.0 :-)Anonymous
July 11, 2011
The comment has been removedAnonymous
July 11, 2011
The comment has been removedAnonymous
July 11, 2011
your comment form is almost as bad as your SelectElement.innerHTML implementation. You set the innerHTML... and not only does it not add the options you wanted, but it erases the ones you had! while you are fixing this bug for real, please also fix the bug with SelectElement whereby you can't modify the contents of the Select (using any technique) in a click or focus event on the select (e.g. lazy loading) because IE also has a bug that the select element auto-closes if you attempt to change any of the sub-content.Anonymous
July 12, 2011
@Shafted Again: Are you sure your test suite is running in IE10 document mode? If not, the bugs will still exist. The HTML5 parser applies to 10 standards mode only. If you share a link to the tests, we'll be happy to take a look.Anonymous
July 14, 2011
I agree with Shafted Again, if the person is not signed-in and manually entering the name and trying to post a comment, sometimes the comment gets lost and is never shown and page gets refresh while losing the comment post (that’s why I save a backup of my post in notepad before submitting a comment on msdn) I am able to reproduce this clumsy bug/error/disaster on FF5&6 and IE9.0.1. Don't you know about it? Is it really something new for you? Are you surprised by listening to this issue? I don’t think so. I have seen atleast 10 comments in various blogs post here in MSDN'sIEBlogs about the same issue. I believe you guys do it deliberately, as I cannot believe that you guys are so dumb! Consequently, I am compelled to believe this way: Like MS don't provide spellchecker in IE because they want to promote MSWord. Similarly, MS doesn't provide a decent blogging system to promote their Notepad app.Anonymous
July 15, 2011
@ieblog - I too have re-tested the .innerHTML on Select elements in IE10 in full Standards mode, IE10 document mode etc. It is MOST DEFINITELY STILL BROKEN! try creating a select with some options, read them in, append to them and set again... you will have ZERO options (all are wiped out)Anonymous
July 15, 2011
@Steve: Can you share a link to your test case? I've looked at a number of combinations along the lines of what you suggested and all of them appear to work. You can find them here if you want to run them for yourself: ieblog.members.winisp.net/.../selecttest.html Also, make sure you're using the second platform preview of IE10. The first platform preview of IE10 does not have the HTML5 parser.Anonymous
July 16, 2011
@Tony Ross [MSFT] here is the test for innerHTML performance, jsperf.com/options-add-vs-innerhtml you can see Safari is outperforming all the browsers including IE10pp2! You need to improve the index, insert and remove operations on DOM nontroppo.org/.../Hixie_DOM.html <- as it seems interlinked to the pervious test. These operations really need improvements.Anonymous
July 16, 2011
For the record in this DOM manuplation test: nontroppo.org/.../Hixie_DOM.html Time taken to accomplish this test Safari 5.0.5: 172ms, Chrome 12: 319ms IE9: 44430ms !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! IE10pp2: 41185ms !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! WHERE IS THE PERFORMANCE GOING IETEAM :( IE10pp3 should complete in 100ms that would be a significant-breakthrough for the world :)Anonymous
July 16, 2011
@Mark: The jsperf Tests performs equally well on my machine using either Firefox or IE10, Peview 2. The nontroppo tests performs worse. Can you tell me the bug number of your Connect report, please?Anonymous
July 17, 2011
@the_dees, I get similar results to Mark for IE9. IE9: 16575ms Gecko: 400ms Of course I can't test IE10 because I am running Windows Vista. ;)Anonymous
July 18, 2011
@Tony Ross[MSFT] - I'm pretty sure I have all the correct settings and am running platform 2 of IE10 Alpha. here's a screenshot of the IE10 failure on the test page you've listed. img41.imageshack.us/.../ie10pp2selectfail.png I see similar results in all my tests.Anonymous
July 18, 2011
The comment has been removedAnonymous
July 18, 2011
@Steve Thanks for the update. The build number in your screenshot, 2.10.1000.16394, indicates you are running platform preview 1. The build number for platform preview 2 is 2.10.1008.16421. I'm not sure what would be causing the installer error you're seeing. Let me know if uninstalling then re-installing works for you.Anonymous
March 15, 2015
This is why less than 5% of all people visiting my site use IE any more. They are fed up with these addings and removings of features so half the pages they visit don't work like they used to. And now it includes me. For example I add HTML5, but of the 5% of people on IE who visit my page, half of them are still on IE8. So I have to force IE9 emulation. Good bye IE developers, it was fun while it lasted. bill Gates really lost on this one and Brehmer only made it worse. Brehmer deserves to be roasted like the self-conceited obnoxious pig he is.Anonymous
April 12, 2015
The comment has been removed
