Language Selection

English French German Italian Portuguese Spanish

M$ Needs More than Tabbed Browsing for IE

Filed under
Microsoft

Microsoft's Internet Explorer Product Unit Manager Dean Hachamovitch recently confirmed in his weblog that Internet Explorer 7.0 would have tabbed browsing integration, a feature that's also available in Mozilla's Firefox browser. One of the many reasons Firefox has become popular is due to tabbed browsing. It was a different concept that let users open numerous windows in a single parent window. It's useful, it's popular, and it works. But I don't see how this is a major feature in need of promotion. While Hachamovitch didn't intentionally promote it himself, he did confirm it as if this is the next thing in browsers.

I am not saying that Microsoft is wrong in porting over features that have made other browsers a success, but what I really want to see in Internet Explorer is security and Microsoft's determination to continue to update Internet Explorer even if there's no "real" competition. Sure, having additional features in Internet Explorer will help tremendously, but what made Firefox a huge success is its correct code structure, a set industry standard that it follows and the foundation's rapid response when it comes to fixing security holes. Microsoft needs to do the exact same thing if it wants to gain back its lost market share.

Since Microsoft already has a dire reputation of ignoring certain security vulnerabilities and never releasing a patch in a timely manner, if at all, it needs to regain trust of its users. In today's times where security is a key to any successful product, especially that's used by millions of computer users throughout the world; Microsoft must pay attention to even the minute details when it comes to securing nine out of ten computers with Windows operating system.

In addition to that, Microsoft has a tendency to ignore products once the company has eliminated its competition. Its Internet Explorer is a fine example of that. Until Firefox came along, none of the other browsers had challenged Internet Explorer much; therefore, Microsoft never paid close attention to its security or tried to add useful features to it. They pretty much ignored it. After Firefox came along, that all changed. Not only did people start reporting more security issues with Internet Explorer, Microsoft also dedicated a team to focus on its browser. It was only after Firefox threatened Internet Explorer's market share did Microsoft made the announcement of an upcoming version that would fix a majority of such issues and would be updated to meet industry standards for browsers. This version will be the upcoming Internet Explorer 7.0.

After Microsoft has gained the trust with the browser's security, features and a promise to continually update Internet Explorer, it needs to make sure that Internet Explorer is well maintained structurally. Since Internet Explorer has been the most popular browser in the world, many webmasters practically designed their website solely for this particular browser. And since Internet Explorer was lenient on its coding style, it led web developers to be relaxed about the way they constructed websites, which resulted in numerous "broken" sites in Firefox and other browsers. Microsoft has the ability to define industry standards in a correct way, so why don't they do it?

There are numerous other things that Microsoft can do to make Internet Explorer a competitive browser functionally and feature wise. What really intrigues me is that Microsoft only seems interested in eliminating competition, and not catering to its users. Microsoft clearly has the resources to define the software industry, but they choose not to do that. I am all for the goal of eliminating competition, but they need do that with better products and continued support to their customers. Microsoft can learn a lot from Firefox and the things that have made it a success. The company will certainly need more than tabbed browsing in 7.0 to get knowledgeable users to switch back over to Internet Explorer.

Source.

More in Tux Machines

LWN on Kernel (Paywall Lapsed): Linux 5.6, better tools for kernel developers, and kernel operations structures in BPF

  • The rest of the 5.6 merge window

    Linus Torvalds released the 5.6-rc1 prepatch and closed the merge window on February 9; at that point, 10,780 non-merge changesets had been pulled into the mainline repository for 5.6. That is substantially less than recent development cycles (14,350 for 5.5, 14,619 for 5.4), but is similar to what was going on at this time last year (10,843 for 5.0-rc1 in January 2019). About 6,000 of those changes were pulled since the first 5.6 merge-window article was written; read on for what was included in those changes.

  • Better tools for kernel developers

    By many accounts, the kernel project uses outdated tooling, far behind the state of the art that Kids Today tend to favor. The kernel's workflow has worked well (enough) for years, but there are signs that it may not be sustainable indefinitely. As a result, there has been an ongoing conversation about improving the kernel's workflow, but little has changed so far. The posting of a simple tool called get-lore-mbox is a sign that the rate of change may be about to increase. The kernel project's reliance on email strikes many as quaint and antiquated. It may indeed partly be a natural outcome of the aging nature of the kernel community; many of the developers there, especially in the important maintainer positions, got started well before tools like web-based Git forges existed. Indeed, some of them got started using punch cards and may still be unconvinced of the virtues of, say, text editors. But the truth of the matter is that there are a number of good reasons for the kernel community's continued reliance on email; there is little else that can handle a community of that size and diversity. So, while it seems that the future of email (as opposed to, say, proprietary services like Gmail) is uncertain at best, the path toward a replacement in the kernel community is unclear. Developers will have to be convinced that any new tools will make their lives better, not worse; busy maintainers have little patience for "improvements" that slow things down.

  • Kernel operations structures in BPF

    One of the more eyebrow-raising features to go into the 5.6 kernel is the ability to load TCP congestion-control algorithms as BPF programs; networking developer Toke Høiland-Jørgensen described it as a continuation of the kernel's "march towards becoming BPF runtime-powered microkernel". On its face, congestion control is a significant new functionality to hand over to BPF, taking it far beyond its existing capabilities. When one looks closer, though, one's eyebrow altitude may well increase further; the implementation of this feature breaks new ground in a couple of areas. The use case for this feature seems clear enough. There are a number of such algorithms in use, each of which is suited for a different networking environment. There may be good reasons to distribute an updated or improved version of an algorithm and for recipients to be able to make use of it without building a new kernel or even rebooting. Networking developers can certainly benefit from being able to play with congestion-control code on the fly. One could argue that congestion control is not conceptually different from other tasks, such as flow dissection or IR protocol decoding, that can be done with BPF now — but congestion control does involve a rather higher level of complexity. A look at the patch set posted by Martin KaFai Lau reveals that what has been merged for 5.6 is not just a mechanism for hooking in TCP congestion-control algorithms; it is far more general than that. To be specific, this new infrastructure can be used to allow a BPF program to replace any "operations structure" — a structure full of function pointers — in the kernel. It is, at this point, only capable of replacing the tcp_congestion_ops structure used for congestion control; experience suggests, though, that other uses will show up sooner rather than later.

Hardware: AMD "Rome", AMD Defects and Microsoft Defects

  • Google Cloud Rolls Out "N2D" VMs Built Atop AMD EPYC 7002 "Rome" CPUs

    We are seeing more cloud providers now offering AMD EPYC 7002 "Rome" series processors with the latest being Google now offering the new N2D VM family in beta for their public cloud.

  • AMD Announces EPYC 7532 + EPYC 7662 As Newest Rome Processors
  • Linux Will Finally Stop Flickering With AMD Stoney Ridge On 4K Displays

    For those still running the AMD "Stoney Ridge" mobile APUs from 2016 that were launched aside Bristol Ridge with Excavator-based CPU cores and GCN 1.2 graphics, the Linux kernel has a fix finally for flickering issues when driving a 4K display off the APU.

  • Microsoft crack habit reports: User claims Surface Laptop 3 screen fractured again after repair

    Screens on Microsoft's Surface Laptop 3 have appeared to develop a crack habit, with one of the latest complaints claiming this happened even after repair. Reports on Twitter noted whinges sprouting on Reddit and Microsoft's own support forums last week about the new hardware appearing to suffer from spontaneously cracked screens. Users have described hairline cracks on the touchscreens of the Surface Laptop 3, and have insisted that the things weren't dropped, bashed or otherwise interfered with, other than the usual stroking of the glass. A Microsoft agent in the company's forums told a customer, who had spanked the best part of a years' savings on a 13.5-inch matte black model only to find the fracture shortly after setting the thing up, that: "Physical damage do[es] not happen if there is no external force."

Software: Rav1e, Cockpit, SSH Tools and Curl

  • Rav1e 0.3.1 Is 25~40% Faster At Low Speed Levels For Rust-Based AV1 Encoding

    It was not even two full weeks ago that Rav1e 0.3 was released with speed optimizations and other AV1 encoding enhancements while released on Tuesday was Rav1e 0.3.1 with a change to boost encode speeds at lower levels. The principal change with Rav1e 0.3.1 for this Rust-written AV1 video encoder is 25~40% better performance at lower speed levels (two through five). This big speed-up is by disabling fine directional prediction and intra-block transform splitting within inter-frames. The consequence of disabling these features for the double digit percentage speed improvements is approximately 1~2% lower video quality at these levels, which the developers deemed to be an acceptable trade for the faster encode times.

  • Cockpit Project: Cockpit 213

    Cockpit is the modern Linux admin interface. We release regularly. Here are the release notes from version 213.

  • Tools for SSH key management

    I use SSH constantly. Every day I find myself logged in to multiple servers and Pis (both in the same room as me and over the internet). I have many devices I need access to, and different requirements for gaining access, so in addition to using various SSH/SCP command options, I have to maintain a config file with all the connection details.

  • Daniel Stenberg: The command line options we deserve

    A short while ago curl‘s 230th command line option was added (it was --mail-rcpt-allowfails). Two hundred and thirty command line options! A look at curl history shows that on average we’ve added more than ten new command line options per year for very long time. As we don’t see any particular slowdown, I think we can expect the number of options to eventually hit and surpass 300. Is this manageable? Can we do something about it? Let’s take a look.

today's howtos