[xradionut]

Here's a challenge:

It would be nice if Microsoft would fix the issues with IE11. Like all the sites that work with IE10, that don't work anymore with IE11. Their solution was to issue an IE11 upgrade blocker with a shitty manual install routine.

[Zelphyr]

Internet Explorer has been and continues to be hostile to the web. It easily makes my job as a web developer at least 50% more difficult which translates into costing my employer more money.

As far as I'm concerned, we as developers need to make a concerted effort to force Microsoft to either adopt WebKit or release a version of IE that is 100% standards compliant.

[AaronFriel]

Diversity of implementations on the web is vital for continued innovation. Though it's less important that IE stick with the Trident engine now that Blink and WebKit 2 have diverged, we should celebrate progress and encourage participation in the standards process - things IE has gotten a lot better about especially in the last two iterations.

> has been and continues to be hostile to the web

I'm going to have to dispute "continues to be": http://caniuse.com/#compare=ie+11,firefox+25,chrome+31

You have to scroll down quite a ways before you find feature differences between the browsers, and it's not quite clear which (except maybe Chrome) is the best. If we remove feature drafts, it's a good deal closer.

Now, regarding has been: http://caniuse.com/#compare=ie+6,ie+7,ie+8,ie+11

Well, there's no contest there. IE8 being the last supported browser on XP is a harsh reality for web developers. :(

[Zelphyr]

I agree that diversity of implementations is vital. However, Microsoft has continuously proven its inability to provide an implementation that can even remotely compete. I don't care if its WebKit, Blink, or Servo. But any one of those is better than what Microsoft has insisted on plaguing us with in Internet Explorer.

Now, with regards to IE11, you may be right. And I hope you are. I SINCERELY hope you are!

But with every subsequent release since IE7 I've heard people say something to the effect of, "Its so much better than [insert previous version of IE]" and they were right. Except that; a) the previous version was so beyond bad that fixing one bug would've been a marked improvement and b) the new version STILL paled in comparison to all the other browsers out there.

So if history is any indication, IE11 will be incrementally better but it will still make my job unnecessarily hard and it will still prove itself to be hostile to the web.

[camus2]

> things IE has gotten a lot better

no it has not. IE9/IE10/IE11 dont even render the same page the same way , dont even get me started on CSS3 support.

You want things to get better ? let Microsoft drop the version number.and update its browsers automatically all the way back to IE8...

Oh , but why should they do that , they make money by making their os obsolete ... /sarcasm.

[Zelphyr]

> IE9/IE10/IE11 dont even render the same page the same way

One could argue this is because each version is better than the previous. "Better" being relative here.

> they make money by making their os obsolete

This touches on a possible source of the problem. Their insistence on tying browser upgrades to major releases of Windows proves they care more about the revenue from the OS sales than they do about not breaking the web.

I'm encouraged that they have automatic updates now but the jury is out as to whether they'll make use of it in the way Chrome and Firefox have.

[scrabble]

Is this an issue with IE11, or an issue with sites built to work with the way IE10 handled certain things that have now been brought better in line with standards?

I know my team had to make an adjustment due to the user agent changes, initially our site loaded in IE11 by stating the user needs IE7 or greater.