IE Test Center updates

It’s great to see that the web community and browser vendors are getting value out of the test cases on the IE Testing Center. People are discussing these in blog posts, email, and the W3C mailing lists, which is excellent. We want to make sure these tests are valuable and conform to the various specifications they test.

We received some great feedback over the last few weeks on a number of the test cases we posted on May 5th. I want to thank everyone who provided actionable feedback on the particular test cases. As a result, we updated 15 test cases on the IE Testing Center, submitted those updates to the W3C, and updated the results tables for the same set of browsers we listed in May. Here is the breakdown of the changes:

Thanks to everyone who provided feedback on the test cases in the W3C mailing lists.  If you have additional feedback on the test cases, please post it on the appropriate mailing list.

Jason Upton – Test Manager, Internet Explorer

Comments (37)

  1. ooxx says:

    you should renew some information(testing result) about other browsers of ie testing center. they mostly released new version(include beta/pre version like ie). it is fair that testing the browsers which version are newest!

  2. wai says:

    the testcenter page contains few funny error, hope it can be fixed?

  3. ao says:


    I assume all browsers on the testpage were tested at the same time. And they used the latest available at that time.. Seems fair to me 🙂

  4. Ms2ger says:

    I applaud your efforts, but you don't seem to have submitted those new tests to the W3C yet. At least the HTML5 tests have not been updated in the repository (…/foreigncontent). AFAICT, the CSS3 tests haven't been submitted at all;…/submitted seems to contain only CSS2.1 tests, and I didn't see any sign of submission on A real submission would be useful, if only to ensure that the discussion of your tests in on topic for these "appropriate mailing lists".

  5. anonymous says:

    IE team, I used to love IE. But when you dropped XP support in spite of it being the most popular OS, I have started hating your browser and you. Apple Safari 5 shipped with hardware acceleration for Windows XP. Shame on you for using Direct2D and not open standards like OpenGL so you could find an excuse to drop XP support. From now on, I will use only Safari 5 and prompt everyone I know who uses IE to switch to Safari 5 or Chrome.

  6. Browser says:

    Way to epic fail by using outdated browsers in the comparison. Safari 4.0.5? Chrome 4.1?…/stable-channel-update.html

    "Google Chrome 5.0.375.70 has been released to the Stable channel"

    "Introducing Safari 5"

  7. HTML5 says:…/html5-test-updated-how-well-does-your-browser-support-html5-now.html

    "Microsoft even released their own HTML5 test suite in which they score 100% and all other browser score less. Of course they only test the things they actually implemented: Text selection, Foreign content and getElementsByClassName and forget about all the things they haven’t implemented."

    "Internet Explorer 9 Platform Preview 2 scores a meagre 32 points. Let’s hope they manage to improve on this score."

    Microsoft, dishonest, FUD, liars who can't even implement Canvas support yet makes grandiose claims.

  8. Matt says:

    Yawn, the same whining from the same anonymous trolls. Comments are such a bore.

  9. MacGyver says:

    @anonymous: good luck with it. I'm sure you're also still using Windows 3.11? I can understand your argument but for crying out loud XP is 10 years old! You want Microsoft to innovate right? Well they're finally doing what they should do more; favour innovation and embrace the newest technology and if that means they have to drop support for an older platform, well good. In the past they have all too often favoured compatiblity over creating the absolutely best software on the newest platform(s).

    @Ms2ger: I'm sure they're waiting to get feedback like this to correct any errors before they submit them.

    @Browser: You're blaming Microsoft for not having tested browsers that were not available at that time? Microsoft has a lot of resources but I'm sure they don't have enough to build a time travelling device yet.

    Stop with all the pointless whining and start giving valuable feedback.

    OT: As an end user; thank you everyone for this feedback.

  10. anonymous says:

    @MacGyver, XP is not even 9 years old so stop lying. When Vista released, XP was 6 years old. And if Apple can get hardware acceleration working on XP (which is used by 65% of people even today), I think Microsoft and Windows 7 fanatics have a vested interest in pushing the newest platform while developing IE. Standards support is much more important than hardware acceleration. Just when Microsoft was catching up with standards support, why can't they deliver this very important development to Windows XP users? Just because something is old doesn't make it inferior. Of course a Windows 7 fanboy won't get it because obviously you compare XP to Windows 3.1.

  11. XP says:

    XP SP3 was released in 2008. It's not even 3 years old at this time. Microsoft and the Windows 7 fanboys are arrogant, pompous liars who think their bloatware OS which has been proven to be slower than XP SP3 is any good.…/ati-2d-performance-radeon-hd-5000,2635-6.html

    "Despite significant improvements made by the ATI driver developers and Nvidia, the two graphics manufacturers are not exactly soiling themselves with glory. The performance level that Windows XP sported in 2D is still very much missing."

  12. Chuck Norris says:

    The updated test-cases still don't cover HTML5 very well.

    Why is there no test for HTML5 canvas in your Test Center?

    Also, the test cases at indicate that IE9 performs very poorly in respect to HTML5.

  13. @anonymous

    the reason other companies will use OpenGL is because they need their browser to work on different platforms so a cross platform library, like OpenGL is perfect for them, but since Microsoft is making IE9 only for Windows they can use something that is ment for the Windows platform and therefore will use it to it's fullest!

  14. Robert says:

    I championed IE for years… I tried to keep supporting their efforts… but it is a failure of a product… and referring to market share is meaningless when most users do not understand what a browser is and use IE because it is already installed.

    Microsoft and IE are basically hindering the Internet from realising it full potential.

    It is disgraceful.

  15. Klimax says:



    (My guess would be probably js and DOM model)

  16. Stu says:

    The progress is all good, with all the attention the code is getting, does it feel like the codebase is getting nicer and more solid as time goes on ?

  17. quince says:


    Either the "old" trident engine wasn't as bad as most people thought, or it has been rewritten from top to bottom, and the *only* thing in common with the IE9-engine is its name.

    BTW: I think that is a process that already started with IE7.

  18. Jon says:

    You're not publishing results for comprehensive test suites, and you're not using the latest versions of competing browsers.

  19. Sam says:

    All the people who still use Windows XP need to move on. Whether its 9 or 10 years, its almost a decade old OS. Service Pack 3 is like drugs trying to hold it on life support as long as possible. Windows 7 is by far more superior in all aspects technically (security, performance, stability) and in terms of user experience. Why do you want to risk your own security by sticking with an ancient technology? If Apple chooses to provide Safari for XP with full blown features its their choice and its probably their ploy to keep you hooked to an old technology (thereby you suffer when it comes to security and efficiently getting your work done). Besides, Apple has shutup since the release of Windows 7 as they hold little or no advantage with their latest OS X against Windows 7. Microsoft is doing great with efforts of IE 9. Keep up the good work (and innovation) guys and ignore the ignorants!

  20. TheCycoONE says:

    I think this story is about how Microsoft is correcting test cases they sent to the W3C based on feedback from the community.  This is a good thing; the W3C desperately needs test cases in order to advance standards to Recommendation status.  It makes sense that Microsoft is producing tests that verify behaviour that they've implemented – it's behaviour they consider important, and behaviour they've already taken the time to study in great enough detail to write a good test for.

    These cases are not meant to stand on their own, so while it seems to disproportionately highlight IE's capabilities, as part of the entire test suite for the individual standards it improves the clarity with which we can see how current and future rendering engines accurately render standards.

    The page they show with the results for their own test absent from the others is expected meaningless marketing spin which can be safely ignored.  No one capable of understanding the results will be fooled by it into believing IE is the most standard compliant browser.

  21. Moshe says:

    Why in the comparison table you do not compare the data to Chrome 5?

  22. Sam says:

    Google is already bringing Chrome 6 into the picture. It seems their new versions come out everyday – and they don't seem to have a stable version that they can confidently keep for a while. So, whats the point of comparing with Chrome 5 now? No point.

  23. jabcreations says:

    The test page should validate, really that's just common-sense.

    To get the script error fixed add the second and fourth line (ode goes in between on the third, obviously)…

    1 <script type="text/javascript">

    2 //<![CDATA[


    4 //]]>

    5 </script>

    Also while technically valid putting script elements inside of the body element instead of the head element opens the door to bad practices including junk like document.write and innerHTML.

    Why not serve all of the test cases and the test center index itself as XHTML or at least do content negotiation? XHTML when done correctly is so much cleaner then regular HTML because engines (well Gecko and Presto but not WebKit) don't allow the page to render with errors.

    This is not to say I don't enjoy the test cases and they do emphasize some nice things that can be done with IE9 but come-on, you guys just know we're going to validate any examples you give us.

  24. Aethec says:

    I wonder how the IE team manages to read all the feedback without becoming mad because of all the idiot fanboys that hate MS because of IE6 and will never accept IE9 will be good.

  25. AntiLuddite says:

    Thank you Microsoft for dropping support for the highly insecure and ancient XP OS. Windows 7 rocks, and so will IE9. Keep up the good work. Let the Luddites be left behind from all the fun.

  26. XP says:

    AntiLuddite is such an ignorant person. All the other browsers supports HTML5 much better than IE9 and will be available on XP, do you think XP users would even care about not having IE9 which doesn't even support Canvas?

    Windows 7 sucks and everyone that has used it knows it, it's much slower, bloated as hell and a total bugfest that needs a few Service Packs to even get it up to par.

  27. EricLaw [MSFT] says:

    @Aethec: It's true that there are perhaps dozens of very negative commentors here. On the other hand, we've gotten overwhelming amounts of positive feedback from reviewers, web developers, and real-world users. And we're too busy building an awesome new hardware-accelerated browser to get too down about the haters.

    We let our Platform Preview Builds and demos ( speak for themselves.

  28. Gopans says:

    We are in the process of upgrading to windows 7 OS ..major issues with IE8 (Oracle java,Microsoft IAG,Oracle Forms etc etc)

    hope all have been taken care with the IE 9 or is it only filled up with colorful fancy items….Whem MS fille up with more secuirty on the products ..let it be easy to work style for the users too…..

    Windows 7 with 2008 AD will make the environment perfect especially MS claims that 2008 will stay for long as Server OS

  29. AntiLuddite says:

    Everyone who has used Windows 7 knows it's a million times better than XP. XP and IE6 is the cause of 99% security concerns of the world. XP has a pathetic interface and can't handle 4GB of RAM. Windows 7 is THE PERFECT OS. So, XP is rightly being dumped by every sensible person on the planet.

  30. Amtiskaw says:


    But you're not letting the previews and demos speak for themselves, are you? If you were, your "Testing Centre" would include scores for testing suites covering the whole of HTML, CSS and SVG, rather than a subset of tests you wrote yourself. The former would be honest, the latter is just marketing BS. I don't believe for a second that you don't test internally against comprehensive suites, and that you don't have those results available, but you choose not to publish them.

    It's a shame, because I really do think IE9 will be a great browser, I just wish the IE team could kick its remaining bad habits.


    I've said it before, but any web developer who is clinging to XP and moaning about IE9 not supporting it, you are just the same as the IE6 holdouts who you complain about so passionately. Get a modern OS or shut up.

  31. EricLaw [MSFT] says:

    Amtiskaw: We've gotten overwhelming amounts of positive feedback from reviewers, web developers, and real-world users. And we're too busy building an awesome new hardware-accelerated browser to get too down about the haters.

  32. Amtiskaw says:


    Yeah, I got that. It was your other point, "We let our Platform Preview Builds and demos ( speak for themselves." that I was responding to.

  33. Matt says:

    Read between the lines: he's saying that he's ignoring you, hater.

  34. Mobile Device Cloud says:…/1274899297

    "The DOS/Windows PC didn't destroy IBM or its mainframe monopoly, but simply diminish its computing and informational relevance. Windows is on the same track. The mobile device-to-cloud applications stack will merely displace Windows' relevance. It's inevitable."

    "Windows is bloated and moribund compared to these lither mobile OSes pushing up into the PC market."

  35. Marcus says:

    Just a reality check: To all you telling everybody to drop XP and upgrade, there are two important facts to take into account:

    1) Upgrading a commercial & expensive OS like Windows is not always an option. Actually, it usually also means that you need to buy a new computer. This prevents enough people from upgrading to make it a serious issue for us developers. For a free OS this is not usually an issue. If you could get a Windows upgrade for, say, $20-$30, live over the Internet (similar to the Ubuntu upgrade process), we would probably see a much wider adoption.

    2) Many companies (at least here in Sweden) tend to stick very long to a Windows version, since their entire IT infrastructure, many software licenses etc are tied into that single OS version. Again, developers that want to target commercial companies need to take this into account.

    If XP support is completely out of the question for IE9, my suggestion to Microsoft would be to recommend XP users to switch to an alternative modern browser (Chrome or whatever) in order to promote new web standards.

  36. Amtiskaw says:


    Except I'm not a hater, I said in my first post that I think IE9 will be a great browser, and I do. I'm a big fan of what the IE team is doing with this release, which is why it's a disappointment when they spoil it by engaging in dumb tactics like this "Testing Centre". I'm not whining about XP support, or demanding they immediately support every standard and proposed standard known to man, or telling them to switch to Webkit, or any of the other idiotic complaints that plague this blog. I'm making what seems to me to be a valid criticism about this blog post's actual topic. If that makes me a "hater", then so be it, but I think it's entirely reasonable.

  37. Matt says:

    If you're not a troll, then you need to work on your literacy. That big block of text at the top of the testing center explains very plainly what it is:

    "several collections of new test pages that we developed in conjunction with the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) working groups."

    Nowhere does it say: "This is where we show results from other test cases." Nowhere does it say: "This is where we test every characteristic of every spec."

    Anyone who confuses "192 test pages" as a test suite for everything (you, for instance) wouldn't know how to properly interpret the results anyway.