Internet Explorer is Hiring


The information published in this post is now out-of-date.

—IEBlog Editor, 21 August 2012

The Internet Explorer team has a number of positions open that we are working to fill with exceptional people.

Our newest open position is for a
Programming Writer
position for work on the SDK documentation for IE7. If you search on the Microsoft Careers page, you can find out about our other open positions, which include Developers, Software Testers, Builders, even an Evangelist position. Come work on the most popular browser in the world and make a difference!

Comments (49)

  1. Anonymous says:

    So… why do you need an Evangelist when your browser is forced upon all users of your OS unconditionally?

  2. Anonymous says:

    Dear Mr Hachamovitch and other managers

    I recommend you read a book reputedly popular amongst software managers.

    It is called ‘The Mythical Man Month’.

  3. Anonymous says:

    I wouldn’t touch that with a 10 foot pole.

  4. Anonymous says:

    DO you have any openings for:

    <strong>CSS Evangelist</strong>?

    Someone to go in there and show you how to correctly interpret the W3C Standards.

    If so, where do I sign?

  5. Anonymous says:

    "Make a difference" eh? How about just basing it off of Mozilla or KHTML to make it more compatibile from the beginning. Heh… it would also force you to make the browser free as in freedom!

  6. Anonymous says:

    have you tried hiring an "evangelista"?

    WHAT ABOUT IDN’S??????

    wake up Microsoft!

  7. Anonymous says:

    Don’t you guys have something better than sit here waiting for IE news just to say something negative. Go troll somewhere else, you are not wanted here!

  8. Anonymous says:

    Popular with whom? Developers? No. Users? Don’t think so — mostly they just use it because they don’t realise they have a choice. Sysadmins? No — too many security problems. Ahem.

  9. PatriotB says:

    Could I suggest that each IE blog entry say who is doing the posting (Dean, Dave, etc.)? Thanks :)

  10. Anonymous says:

    Hey,

    You guys who keep ripping on W3C and CSS as being the next "wheel." (or greater than the wheel depending on who you talk to)

    Get a clue, W3C has some serious issues and contradictions. It, as all things, is not perfect. If you ask me CSS-P needs more than an evangelist, it needs an adjustment. Web Standards are (contrary to their name) not cross platform compatible. I know, ive been developing for ten years now and its a pain in the rump to program for (when you do, though, there are lots of rewards).

    I know we would like code to be cross platform compatible. That said, the W3C sits there and thumbs its nose at M$ and IE and in many cases develops code which intentially breaks IE.

    I hope to see the minheight and code like that applied in IE7 but there are elements which do not make sense in present day .CSS. A prime example is putting in the command to make a back ground element fixed. If you do this in a Mozilla based browser guess what, the background image centers to the page, NOT the div tag you are assigning it.

    Likewise, I like how IE expands like a table when I assign a table a height. For Mozilla you need to use the minheight which is not supported in IE. If the minheight function does become supported, that will be a breakthrough.

    It would be great for the W3C to admit some of its short comings and change some of its problems, but I dont see that happening any time soon.

  11. Anonymous says:

    [It’s a shame people have nothing better to do than come over here and be rude. Hint: you are more likely to get what you want if you ask nicely.]

    Just to give potential applicants the widest possible choice, I should mention that the Mozilla Foundation is also hiring :-)

    http://www.mozilla.org/foundation/careers.html

  12. Anonymous says:

    It’s a good time to be a browser developer. Everyone’s hiring. In alphabetical order: Microsoft Mozilla Foundation Opera I suspect AOL/Netscape are hiring too, but I can’t find a jobs page for them. Apple may well be hiring, but Googling for &quot;Safari Jobs&quot; just brings up a load of WWDC keynotes… And I’m sure Konqueror can always use more volunteers :-)….

  13. Anonymous says:

    I’m disgusted how people are using this blog. The employees at Microsoft make a simple announcement about one topic, and immediately everyone jumps in and starts screaming, "CSS! Standards!" For everyone’s sake, could you all mature, and post comments that are relevant to the topic?

  14. Anonymous says:

    <i>I’m disgusted how people are using this blog. The employees at Microsoft make a simple announcement about one topic, and immediately everyone jumps in and starts screaming, "CSS! Standards!" For everyone’s sake, could you all mature, and post comments that are relevant to the topic?</i>

    Those are the things we want to have addressed and Microsoft is ignoring us.

  15. Anonymous says:

    Dont use this blog post to out your IE frustrations boys & girls. I appreciate the openess that the IE team is starting to show so dont wast this effort.

    Have some confidence in the IE team. I think they will surprise us with IE7 even without these rude comments. Save your energy and be constructive pls…

  16. Anonymous says:

    > That said, the W3C sits there and thumbs its nose at M$ and IE and in many cases develops code which intentially breaks IE.

    So Microsoft are intentionally breaking their own browser? Several of the W3C CSS WG members are also Microsoft employees.

  17. Anonymous says:

    "Come work on the most popular browser in the world and make a difference!"

    Why do you think it’s the most popular browser for? Is it because you don’t let people remove it? Or is it because it’s the easiest to exploit?

    Maybe you mean "popular" as in "forced down users throats to kill Netscape"

  18. Anonymous says:

    He said the new version will be built on the work they did in SP2, and other things. Gates mentioned they will go further to defend IE users from phishing and other deceptive software.

  19. Anonymous says:

    I’m confused by all those who feel that working for IE would be unheard of. Is it because you feel it is a bad browser? Would the volunteers never have worked on Mozilla once N4 went down the tubes (oh that was a hideous beast of a browser). Too easy to jump on the bandwagon, I imagine. I, personally, would like to be inside the company being able to have more influence over the product and its development and making it a formidable product than trying to simply stand on the sidelines complaining that others aren’t doing enough to make me happy.

  20. ieblog says:

    PatriotB said:

    "Could I suggest that each IE blog entry say who is doing the posting (Dean, Dave, etc.)? Thanks :)"

    That’s a good point and we should adhere to it.

    I posted this entry. I’ve posted once before but not often.

    Al Billings [MSFT]

  21. ieblog says:

    Polls:

    On another note, if you wish to conduct third party polls, please do so via your own blogs. Asking users to cut and paste poll responses into this blog isn’t what the comments area is best used for here.

    If you wish to do a poll, post it in your own blog and do a trackback to the post here. Your trackback will show up in the comments but the poll content(and following comments) will be in your own blog.

    Al Billings [MSFT]

  22. Anonymous says:

    > If you ask me CSS-P needs more than an evangelist,

    > it needs an adjustment. Web Standards are (contrary

    > to their name) not cross platform compatible.

    > I know, ive been developing for ten years now and its

    > a pain in the rump to program for (when you do,

    > though, there are lots of rewards).

    W3C standards are by far not perfect (and you should see the flames over HTML5 and XHTML2 working drafts…), but they’re still so much better, simpler and efficient than what we currently have, and that the way IE implements them. HTML4.01 and CSS 2.1 are good. They could probably be perfected (and have been, CSS 2.1 is a fix of the CSS2.0 issues) but they’re not quite as bad as you try to make them look.

    And I fail to see how they’re "not platform compatible", there are bug on some browsers but the only "platform" that’s so incompatible it hurts right now is IE/Win…

    > That said, the W3C sits there and thumbs its nose

    > at M$ and IE and in many cases develops code which

    > intentially breaks IE.

    Uh, no, the guys there try to think and create new standards, the fact that IE doesn’t implement said standard is another problem and not the fault of W3C

    > A prime example is putting in the command to make

    > a back ground element fixed. If you do this in a

    > Mozilla based browser guess what, the background

    > image centers to the page, NOT the div tag you are

    > assigning it.

    Uh, your point?

    That’s how the specs define it, and that’s how devs like it, ever gone to CSS/Edge? You should check Meyer’s demos of background-position:fixed (http://www.meyerweb.com/eric/css/edge/complexspiral/glassy.html), they may enlighten you on the usage and quality of the current fixed.

    On top of that, background-position: fixed as it currently is is coherent with the definition of position: fixed (the one that IE doesn’t implement)

    Yes, background-position: fixed fixes your background to the viewpoint, not the element, and no that’s not an issue, in fact it’s much more like a solution, because it prevents the dev from having any damn problem with pixel imperfection

  23. Anonymous says:

    >>> That said, the W3C sits there and thumbs its nose

    >>> at M$ and IE and in many cases develops code which

    >>> intentially breaks IE.

    >Uh, no, the guys there try to think and

    >create new standards, the fact that IE

    >doesn’t implement said standard is another

    >problem and not the fault of W3C

    I love people that do not even know of which they speak. The W3C does not sit around and try to think of new standards. Anybody can submit standards to them, if you are willing to buy the right to do so (yes, cold hard cash – and you to can submit standards).

    The W3C board is a who’s who of big business, and thats about it.

  24. Anonymous says:

    We made a post about hiring yesterday over on the IE team blog&amp;nbsp;There were some&amp;nbsp;less than complimentary&amp;nbsp;comments…

  25. Anonymous says:

    You are hiring an IE "Evangelist"?

    LOL, I love it!

    But shouldn’t you hire hundreds of those to combat the Firefox/Mozilla hords? ;)

    PS: Please keep posting and do try to ignore the rude comments of others.

  26. Anonymous says:

    It’s been fun to see what possible negative comments could be spun out of this post. I could understand why "Active X is great" or "CSS is a bit stupid" or "We’ve just put a hamster in a microwave" would generate some negativity, but hiring? That’s quite hard to object to!

  27. Anonymous says:

    heh heh, indeed. I can see the headlines now:

    Microsoft steals Open Source developers:

    Evil corpororation, Microsoft, have today begun a campaign to end plucky upstart browser Firefox. Under the codename "hiring", Microsoft are offering to pay potential Firefox developers to work on their competeting, but evil, product Internet Explorer instead. The FOSS community are up in arms over this method of influencing browser development, calling it underhand and anti-competetive.

    Microsoft have yet to comment.

  28. Anonymous says:

    Microsoft put itself in a nasty position. As a founding W3C member it has been committed to standards and programming the right way. It was the first i believe to fully support CSS1 and other technologies. Unfortunatly, they have also jumped the gun and coded on provisions in working drafts which changed before final release. They have tried to "force" adoption of HTML tags, DOM properties, and other things as "standard" and the working group as a whole overrode them. In IE6 they finally accepted their interpetation of the box model is wrong. But now they are forced to continue supporting "broken" code in the name of backwards compatibility.

    Microsoft and the developer community is forcing the IE team to make essentually 2 seperate rendering emgines, a microsoft legacy one and a W3C one.

    Now that they no longer worry about being first to market with the latest standards, they can finally commit to being following the standards they helped to make (along with Mozilla i must add) if they only could let go of the rock of legacy webpages.

  29. Anonymous says:

    Why does this blog post make me think of the film AntiTrust ( http://imdb.com/title/tt0218817/ ) ?

  30. Anonymous says:

    "It was the first i believe to fully support CSS1"

    IE6 still doesn’t fully support CSS1…

  31. Anonymous says:

    A bit redundant with David Naylor’s post but…

    > Michael wrote:

    > It was the first i believe to fully support CSS1 and other technologies.

    IE6 still doesn’t fully support CSS1. It merely supports CSS1-core (which is only part of the CSS1 specs) and has more bugs than you would believe in said support.<br>

    Check Eric Meyer’s ComplexSpiral (http://www.meyerweb.com/eric/css/edge/complexspiral/glassy.html) for informations about ONE of the CSS1 parts that are not supported.

    It doesn’t understand :first-line and :first-letter either.

    And the support of CSS2.1 pseudo classes (:active, :focus and :hover) is either inexistant (no :focus) or awfully incomplete (:hover only avaible on links for no reason).

    For IE CSS bugs, check Position is Everything (http://www.positioniseverything.net/explorer.html), they have fairly good informations.

  32. Anonymous says:

    RE: This is downright rude….

    "PS: who are you to be judging them…. what have you ever done to be special…?"

    Well in answer to that I am a person who has purchased their product. That gives me the right to judge and rant if I may.

    I’m also an "Open Source" Programmer who has contributed more lines of "free" code and documentation in one month than most"End Users" read in their e-mail in a year."Nuff Said"

    * OFF TOPIC BELOW THIS LINE *

    RE:Bob said

    "I also teach an xhtml and css class. Even in its full glory, CSS is NOT fully supported across all platforms or browsers and is very, very hard to learn all the secrets because of the inconsistencies.

    "Am I saying that it should be done away with? No. I am saying that many all but worship "web standards" (and again, these are NOT web standards – there needs to be given another TRULY reflective name) when the reality is that like any other programming language it is flawed and needs serious fixing."

    IMHO:)I agree XHTML and CSS aren’t the web standard.But what does "XHTML" have to do with accessibility standards anyway?(NOTHING)

    XHTML is curently in a serious state of flux not to mention the next version will be totally incompatible with the current version.

    That being said I ponder out of curiosity?(not intended to poke)while teaching XHTML, what are you teaching concerning the changes to the codebase that will be taking place and how it will effect useability ?

    I hope you aren’t telling them by chance that XHTML meets accessibility guidelines? Emphatically thats not the case.

    It is however a fact that XHTML is "not" required to meet any known accessibility guideline. But since simple statements of fact seem to get whittled in newsgroups, best to read the Section 508 and WAI guidelines yourselves to eliminate any confusion.

    Have a good day.

  33. ieblog says:

    Please remember, folks, that swearing at people, directly insulting people posting comments or IE team member or similar will cause you comments to be deleted.

    Al Billings [MSFT]

  34. Anonymous says:

    Making stupid comments about using KHTML on a blog post about hiring is very immature.

    That said, potential applicants should be aware of the strenth of feeling out there about Internet Explorer, and the reasons behind it. One of the main qualities you need for IE hires – and this isn’t advertised – is tough skin.

    Applicants should be aware that it may be by far the most popular browser out there but it is also by far the most unpopular browser out there as well.

    Of course anyone you hire will be intelligent to know this anyway. But it’s still better to get an idea of what the external experience will be like.

  35. Anonymous says:

    "Uh, your point?

    That’s how the specs define it, and that’s how devs like it, ever gone to CSS/Edge? You should check Meyer’s demos of background-position:fixed (http://www.meyerweb.com/eric/css/edge/complexspiral/glassy.html), they may enlighten you on the usage and quality of the current fixed.

    On top of that, background-position: fixed as it currently is is coherent with the definition of position: fixed (the one that IE doesn’t implement) "

    —-

    Thank you for proving my point. The arrogance of your answers is at the very core of why, to be frank, I believe W3C is flawed and those who are writing it are not writing it in the best interest of developers or people using browsers.

    I am a developer of 10 years and can tell you that unless you know all the little hacks and hand shakes for all the various browsers, its a pain the rear to program for. I find it laughable that I spend a good chunk of my time programming and developing hacks for those browsers that take up, say 1% of my target audience (mostly due to obscure hacks and code which is found in the bowels of a google search as a pose to common sense programming).

    I also teach an xhtml and css class. Even in its full glory, CSS is NOT fully supported across all platforms or browsers and is very, very hard to learn all the secrets because of the inconsistencies.

    Am I saying that it should be done away with? No. I am saying that many all but worship "web standards" (and again, these are NOT web standards – there needs to be given another TRULY reflective name) when the reality is that like any other programming language it is flawed and needs serious fixing.

    Regarding the example I provided – common sense says that if i am assigning a background image within that tag, the background: fixed properties (and image) should be aligned within that tag, NOT within the center of the viewable arear (browser window). It just makes no sense at all.

    I do hope that Microsoft does bring IE up to date in many areas – but I have got to tell you that in many cases I get the desired CSS command in a more easy/logical fashion programming for IE than I do Mozilla based browsers.

    Just because somthing "abides by the rules exactly" does not mean that the rule is correct in the first place. I guess that is my point.

  36. Anonymous says:

    > Regarding the example I provided – common sense says

    > that if i am assigning a background image within

    > that tag, the background: fixed properties (and image)

    > should be aligned within that tag, NOT within the

    > center of the viewable arear (browser window).

    > It just makes no sense at all.

    Looks like you didn’t check the provided link, so i’ll phrase it explicitely for you:

    Fixed background relative to element instead of viewpoint wouldn’t bring anything interresting, and that’s why it’s useless. It doesn’t allow any kind of pixel perfection or cross-element regularities that would be cross browser or that’d handle resizes.

    This is why fixed is speced as relative to the viewpoint and not the element. Because while the later is slightly more intuitive it’s completely useless, while the former, even though it’s a slight bit counter-intuitive if you don’t understand the specs, is much more useful and interresting as far as design goes.

    I’ll also re-write another part that you seem to have missed: the current background-position: fixed behaviour as defined by the specs is coherent with the current position: fixed as defined by the spec. I find it quite important to have some sort of coherence there, don’t you?

    > I find it laughable that I spend a good chunk of my

    > time programming and developing hacks for those

    > browsers that take up, say 1% of my target audience

    Funny how most people I know of see exactly the opposite behaviour, aka easy and streamlined developpment at first, and then twice that development time spent on fixing all the quirks&shits IE throws in the interpretation of the CSS, the DOM scripting and whatever else you may think about…

  37. Anonymous says:

    I would like to apply for your CSS programmer position. I don’t have any experience as a C, C++, or C# programmer. But since you don’t seem to be interested in improving your CSS support, my lack of experience shouldn’t be a problem.

  38. Anonymous says:

    This is funny, thanks for the laughs.

    And the point of this thread, and others here, is for so long microsoft has ignored it’s customers, now people are venting, and rightful so, their anger of how microsoft has treated them.

    I would say that is changing, i would, ifI could, but it is obvious from these threads that the arogance of microsoft continues, and simply questions that have been asked and should be answered, go on ignored. But what else do you expect from Americans. If this company was based in another first world country, you’d get better customer service, and a company that would most likely listen, but being based in america, you get their typical arrogance that makes the world sick of them

  39. Anonymous says:

    This is downright rude….

    Hey, developers or owners of this blog, why don’t you install a moderate comment feature?

    I wonder if they check here… anyways this is just wrong…

    PS: who are you to be judging them…. what have you ever done to be special…?

  40. Anonymous says:

    Bob said :

    "Thank you for proving my point. The arrogance of your answers is at the very core of why, to be frank, I believe W3C is flawed and those who are writing it are not writing it in the best interest of developers or people using browsers."

    See CSS 2.1 : one of the authors (Tantek Çelik) was a Microsoft employee who worked for IE Mac… An other one worked for Opera… So don’t say that it’s not in the best interest of developers or people using browsers…

  41. Anonymous says:

    Bob: "I do hope that Microsoft does bring IE up to date in many areas – but I have got to tell you that in many cases I get the desired CSS command in a more easy/logical fashion programming for IE than I do Mozilla based browsers."

    I completely agree with Bob. In particular I find the W3C box model (vs the original MS box model) to be counter-intuitive. In my mind, padding should be the space between the limits of an element and the contents of an element. The width of the element should _not_ be changed depending on the amount of padding within it.

    As a web developer, I’m fed up with having to cater for the various <10% share browsers. I’m sick to death of militant ‘standards evangelism.’ If the standards were complete, coherent, unambigous, non-contradictory and useful, then I’d expect MS to implement them. However, given the mess that the W3C has made of CSS specs, I’m glad that MS has implemented certain elements of stylesheets in its own syntax.

  42. Anonymous says:

    Fiery Kitsune says: "Those are the things we want to have addressed and Microsoft is ignoring us."

    Who the hell do you think you are? And what are you expecting from Microsoft, a blog entry that begins "Dear Fiery Kitsune…"?

    If I worked for MS I’d be inclined to ignore the rabble that clamour for support for open standards. Most of you guys are offensive, narrow-minded and non-constructive, judging by your response to this blog.

    As it happens, the IE team is NOT ignoring your demands, and have written to such effect throughout this website.

  43. Anonymous says:

    Chris Beach said :

    > "In particular I find the W3C box model (vs the original MS box model) to be counter-intuitive."

    For this one, I agree with you. Microsoft’s box model is better… That’s why

    we have a box-sizing property in CSS3 which lets you choose which box model you

    want, hehehe….

    > "As a web developer, I’m fed up with having to cater for the various <10% share browsers."

    Welcome to the real world, Chris : people want to be able to choose which browser they want… And remember that some people are not running the Windows

    plateform, that HTML is a publishing language, which means it runs on several

    devices…

    > "I’m sick to death of militant ‘standards evangelism.’ If the standards were complete, coherent, unambigous, non-contradictory and useful, then I’d expect MS to implement them."

    And I’m sick of person who think that there should be only one browser, one OS,

    one Car, one Cola brand… Monopoly is not good. And standards are here to help

    us to make website that run on everything… And I still want you to show us why

    standards are so incoherent…

    And don’t worry, FireFox’s market share is still rising… In a few years, you’ll have to write you site for FF, and cater with IE’s problems and its 10%

    share ;)

  44. Anonymous says:

    FlorentG: "In a few years, you’ll have to write you site for FF, and cater with IE’s problems and its 10% share"

    Ah, at least you’ve got a sense of humour.

  45. Anonymous says:

    Hehehe ;)