Browsing Without Plug-ins


Because more and more browsing takes place on an ever wider variety of devices, and browsers on them, more and more consumers are browsing without plug-ins. Delivering a great site experience to consumers who browse the Web plug-in free is important work that sites must do to reach the widest audience. With HTML5, modern browsers and sites can deliver a great consumer experience even without plug-ins.

“Plug-in” refers broadly to browser extensions that run native client code using low-level browser interfaces.  For example, here is a basic description of Webkit’s approach; the IE equivalents are ActiveX controls and Browser Helper Objects. Web sites use a wide variety of plug-ins; Adobe Flash is one of the most common.

More and more common

Lots of Web browsing today happens on devices that simply don’t support plug-ins. Browsers that do support plug-ins offer many ways to run plug-in free.  IE9, for example, includes ActiveX Filtering. Other browsers offer add-ins to control plug-ins, like this one or this one. While plug-ins can be compiled to run inside 64-bit browsers, many developers only release versions that run inside 32-bit browsers; running a 64-bit browser is another way that running plug-in free is becoming more common:

64-Bit Windows includes both 32-Bit and 64-Bit Internet Explorer.
64-Bit Windows includes both 32-Bit and 64-Bit Internet Explorer.

Better and better experiences

Many sites today already offer a good experience when plug-ins are not available. For example, visiting Hotmail in IE9 with plug-ins unavailable (not installed, for example with the 64-bit browser, or disabled through ActiveX Filtering) works just fine:

Hotmail Inbox without plug-ins in IE9.
Hotmail Inbox without plug-ins in IE9.

Some sites require some consumer action before they work plug-in free. For example, YouTube without plug-ins works after visiting http://www.youtube.com/html5 and clicking “Join the HTML5 Trial”:

YouTube without plug-ins in IE9. On the left before, and on the right after, joining the HTML5 Trial. The context menu on the right shows that the video playing uses HTML5.
YouTube without plug-ins in IE9. On the left before, and on the right after, joining the HTML5 Trial. The context menu on the right shows that the video playing uses HTML5.

Other sites block some or all functionality with plug-ins disabled. For example, MSNBC.com and CNN.com work except for the videos; Gmail currently blocks IE9 with plug-ins disabled because it checks for the XHR ActiveX object rather than using the Web standard XHR that’s been available since IE7. The Web has evolved quite a bit since IE7 and so sites will want to go back and revisit code that is specific to older browsers or old versions of standards.

Showing how some sites disable some or all functionality without plug-ins.
Some sites disable some or all functionality without plug-ins.

Feature Detection: How site developers can make this even better

Many sites already offer great experiences when browser plug-ins aren’t available. There is a problem for consumers when sites do this based on the particular device or browser in use. For example, MSNBC.com videos work without plug-ins in a browser on a PC sending the User-Agent string of a device, but not in the same browser on the same PC sending a different User-Agent string:

MSNBC.com videos don't work in Apple Safari without Flash installed, and work fine on the same browser identifying itself as the iPad.
MSNBC.com in Apple Safari without Flash installed, and on the same browser identifying itself as the iPad.

Consumers are better off when developers use feature detection and fallback rather than hard-coding a site to specific browsers and configurations. For example, detecting and using HTML5 video in the absence of plug-ins gives the consumer a better experience. Many sites already perform the equivalent of this fallback when serving ads in the absence of plug-ins, showing that this approach is a practical and scalable solution.

The consumer experience is better when sites follow best practices to test for the standards-based feature first and fall back to plug-ins only if necessary. For example, here are good and bad patterns for feature detection of XMLHttpRequest:

// BAD PATTERN: Don’t do this!

var xhr = window.ActiveXObject

? new ActiveXObject(“Microsoft.XMLHTTP”)

: new XMLHttpRequest();

 

// Best Practice: Use Native XHR, if available

if (window.XMLHttpRequest) {

// If IE7+, Gecko, WebKit: Use native object

var xmlHttp = new XMLHttpRequest();

}

else if (window.ActiveXObject) {

// …if not, try the ActiveX control

var xmlHttp = new ActiveXObject(“Microsoft.XMLHTTP”);

}

else {

// No XMLHTTPRequest mechanism is available.

}

Falling back gracefully to other content is important to avoid consumer frustration. For example, Gmail video chat degrades gracefully in the absence of Adobe Flash. Some sites provide fallback only for specific devices based on the user agent string or other browser-specific properties. This short-term solution doesn’t account for changes in browsers and how consumers browse.  Building an app is another approach that some sites (for example, IMDB.com) take for browsers on devices that don’t support plug-ins. User agent strings have not been a reliable or robust way to determine the specific HTML and script to serve for quite some time.

HTML5 capabilities make it possible for consumers to experience the Web today on more devices and in more configurations than ever before.  For Web developers, this means more opportunity for people to visit their sites, and more motivation to make their sites work even if plug-ins are not available.

—John Hrvatin, Program Manager, Internet Explorer

Comments (70)

  1. jaycee says:

    Definitely…. an Adobe Flash killer! FTW!!

  2. DanglingPointer says:

    Nice tips! Here is another situation: I am using WindOS7x64. For couple of weeks, I am having problem of CPU-usage reaching 100% while surfing flash based video websites like dailymotion on FF (once the problem is exploited with FF, every other browser IE9, IE10pp2, GC and Safari cause this problem if flash video is player unless the computer is restarted.. I’m not really sure if this is the only way to reproduce this bug). It seems like there is some kind of plugin triggered once the flash plugin is activated in FF. Then, the more pages you visit bulked with swfs, the more quickly you can get the aforementioned situation.

    Having said that, HTML5 video is a great alternate to flash video. IMO, besides worrying about the flv fallback, for the HTML5 supporting browsers, there should be a plugin which should render the flv movie as HTML5 video on user demand (essentially, if the website is not updated with HTML5 version). I know it’s not an easy job to encode flv stream being transmitted over network stream to h.264 vid stream. But it makes sense to ignore flash when it comes to video streaming to enjoy the next-generation web experience.

  3. User Ed says:

    This is very cool. What about that "disable your plugins" message?

  4. Mitch says:

    Can anyone explian me for what possible reason, IE9 does not display the video when we click the button "Edit and Click Me" (whether we change anything or not…) at; http://www.w3schools.com/…/tryit.asp ??? Even if we open the embedded iframe (http://www.w3schools.com/…/tryit_view.asp) seperately, IE9 is unable to launch the video…

  5. Peter_Pan says:

    IE 9 sounds really great – I would like to try it sometime, on my 3 month old top-of-the-line PC.

    I am still using IE 8, because every time I update to IE 9 I get fuzzy / blurry fonts in IE9.

    And then I spend several hours searching for workarounds which doesnt help.

    Then I downgrade to IE8 again.

    Microsoft: Please fix IE 9 – it is a broken app.

  6. Cyril says:

    Ive been using a HTML5 plugin for Safari for the last year or so to watch Youtube. Its a hell lot better than flash and it'd be about time Microsoft implemented it.

  7. Mitch says:

    - Resolution for the error reported in my prior comment -

    For http://www.w3schools.com/…/tryit_view.asp, try refreshing page couple of times then it displays the video.

    For http://www.w3schools.com/…/tryit.asp, (after updating the code and clicking the button and getting the redcross) right click the screen near the video area and click refresh (to refresh that specific frame) and the updated video shall be displayed.

    This isn’t cool, but it works this way.

    I am trying to confirm the support for "media" attribute of HTML5's source tag in IE9. Can anyone confirm if the source tag's media attribute works fine for IE9? Any reference or testbed to confirm it’s support? The best source I get is MSDN library msdn.microsoft.com/…/ff974686(v=VS.85).aspx. But it doesn’t tell if the browser under consideration support *all* aspects of this attribute listed here http://www.w3schools.com/…/att_source_media.asp

  8. Lex Mitchell says:

    @Peter_Pan There is a Recommended Windows Update to address blurry fonts in IE9 (and other applications) using DirectWrite. Eric Lawrence wrote an article on it here:

    blogs.msdn.com/…/ie9-cleartype-improved-clarity-for-tahoma-verdana-and-arial-fonts-fuzzy-blurry.aspx

    You can download the update manually here: support.microsoft.com/…/2545698

  9. Lars says:

    I like the cross browser philosophy but when is the IE Blog going to implement it on this site? None of the videos posted on the blog work in Firefox without plugins as there are never any WebM versions of the video. On the IE Testdrive site the Santa's Workshop, HTML5 Blizzard, and Preschool demos have audio but not in formats supported by Firefox. Strangely, the HTML5 Blizzard and Preschool demos refer to Ogg Vorbis and wav audio respectively in the page source but the files don't exist on the server. Follow John Hrvatin's example and make cross browser browsing a reality on these sites.

  10. Lars says:

    And the Fireflies demo on the IE Testdrive site has the same problem as the other demos: no video compatible with Firefox or Opera. It's really easy to fix and, after all, "[d]elivering a great site experience to consumers who browse the Web plug-in free is important work that sites must do to reach the widest audience." And we mustn't forget that "[f]or Web developers, this means more opportunity for people to visit their sites, and more motivation to make their sites work even if plug-ins are not available." You talk the talk, but can you walk the walk?

  11. Ian says:

    Can we have a built in PDF reader, and Word (doc + docx) reader, so we can access most web content without the need for plug-ins or apps.

  12. Tim says:

    Glad to hear that the IE9 blurry fonts problem was (A) Admitted to (There were dozens of MS fanboys that swore there was no issue) and (B) A fix was provided support.microsoft.com/…/2545698

    I don't understand why news like this wasn't an article post right here on the IE Blog?! unless it points back to item (A) above, that MSFT only wants to admit this quietly.

    As for the whole rendering without plugins I think the notes are well made. My iPhone and my iPad certainly don't run flash (or any other plugin) and if I was foolish enough to by a Windose Fone 7 it wouldn't support… well, it wouldn't support much of anything cause that browser is an abused version of IE6 – which is officially dead.

    I don't think its fair for Microsoft to tout "Go HTML5" for video and audio solutions outside of flash though – unless Microsoft is willing to step forward and natively (without any plugins!!) support WebM/Ogg Video & Audio.  The #1 reason why HTML5 Video/Audio adoption across the Web is slow is that Microsoft won't natively support open/non-DRM crippled formats that other browsers support.  Its been discussed here quite vocally that these 2 technologies will only ever succeed if there is a common format/encoding used across all browsers.  Site developers have no interest in hosting 3 different versions of their media files when they can use 1 or wrap it in Flash just so that IE can be supported.

    As a long time (10+ years) web developer I was so excited about HTML5 Video and Audio when I heard about it… and daily my interest diminished as I read more and more about how MSFT had no intentions of fully supporting the Open Web.

    The saddest day was when IE9 was released without open HTML5 Video/Audio support – It held back the Web for at least another 5 years due to IE's software-life policies.  A truly sad day.

    PS To the owner of this blog. Please for the love of God fix the broken comment system! It is painful to lose every single comment on the 1st submission – and have to know that you *MUST* save a copy of your comment before submitting.  If you can't fix the comment system, at least warn users just above the comment box that they should save a copy of their comment before posting!  Better yet, get the @#!!#$%!@$% off Community sever (sic)

  13. Mario says:

    Hey IE team can you add support for text shadows? also do like you did with IE9 to IE10 add a whole lot of html support that Firefox and chrome doesn't even support yet.. Take your time to release IE10 its not a fight of browsers you know..

  14. Mario says:

    Also IE team get IE10 to get a 100/100 on the acid3 test! Don't release IE10 into final release till you guys get it to 100/100. please!

  15. @Tim says:

    certainly you are just another hatter… let me prove it to the audience

    Do you have any idea whats the difference between Safari, FF, GC and IE in terms of HTML5 video support ?

    GC is (completely) dropping the support for H.264 soon (blog.chromium.org/…/html-video-codec-support-in-chrome.html) and will continue support for OGG Theora and WebM VP8.

    FF is not supporting H.264 (at all) but the other two as GC.

    Safari is supporting H.264 and other two via manual install just like IE.

    None of the browser is giving you leeway to enjoy all/any kind of HTML5 video format.  

    So your "iPhone" and "iPad" runs Safari which has the same combination of support as IE does. Again, you are just another hatter with poor homework done for bashing the product you will never like whatsoever.

    Now, may be you are the neutral guy. Did you extend the same sort of comment on Safari blog/forum? No you didn't .. because hatter will remain the hatter whatsoever.

  16. Peter_Pan says:

    @ Lex Mitchell

    Thx for trying to help me.

    But the update you suggested (kb2545698) has no effect – I still get blurry fonts in IE9. (Software rendering turned on or off)

    IE8 screenshots (zoom in):

    imageshack.us/…/ie8x.jpg

    imageshack.us/…/ie8b.jpg

    IE9 screenshots (not as blurry as I remember them, but still not good) (zoom in):

    imageshack.us/…/ie9c.jpg

    imageshack.us/…/ie9b.jpg

    Still no luck.

    Back to IE8 again :(

  17. Prior Semblance says:

    I've been using 64bit IE for a while and the only plugin I'm really missing out on is Silverlight which I only see used on microsoft sites anyway.  I've had flash and java for a long time.

  18. Steven says:

    @Peter_Pan That doesn't look like the blurry font issue people had, but more the fact that IE9 forces ClearType on. For most people, ClearType is a notable improvement, though you may want to run the ClearType tuner for your system, as it may look blurry depending on the pixel layout of your monitor. If you're one of the few people who want to turn ClearType in IE off altogether, you have to resort to a hack, which is easily found using the search engine of your choice.

  19. Mohan says:

    Even I am of the same opinion that the message saying 'Disable your plugins' should be around :) Good to see HTML5 gathering steam and taking care of all users from the world of plugins! But any <a href="http://www.mohanbn.com/…/">solutions to get rid of Ads?</a>

  20. Peter_Pan says:

    @ Steven

    Found a ninja hack and it worked – thx! :)

  21. Peter_Pan says:

    I take that back. I found 2 websites where the font was OK.

    I give up – back to IE8 again. 3 hours wasted.

    (Sorry for my off-topic postings)

  22. Klimax says:

    @Peter_Pan: You might want to check graphic card's drivers – nothing is bug-free…

    (Must note that was generally unable to reproduce those issues.)

  23. Andrew says:

    My wishlist, from a user's point of view, for IE10:

    - An "Open image in another tab" command when right-clicking on an image in a webpage

    - A "Past and Go" command when right-clicking on the address bar

    - A built-in PDF reader

    - A more obvious way (ie. a checkbox in the settings window's privacy tab) to enable the "Do Not Track HTTP Header"

    The first two features should be really easy to implement and would be great for usability. Every other major browser has them and I happen to use them all the time; I really miss them when running IE9.

    Also, I don't know if it is a bug or just the way it is implemented, but in IE9 the arrow-shaped mouse cursor keeps blinking when typing in the address bar. This has never happened in any other application and it is a little bit annoying. Please fix this in IE10.

    Thank you.

  24. @IEBLOG says:

    more to Andrew's wishlist:

    Ctrl+Click_Back_Button should open the previous page in new tab (same goes to forward button)… many browsers support this shortcut.. would be great if IE10 enable this shortcut..

    Also the CTRL+V & CTRL+Shift+V on IE's download-manager to create a single and multiple-downloads entries, respectively, from the clipboard: connect.microsoft.com/…/create-download-in-ie-download-manager

  25. Morten says:

    You're forgetting that Silverlight 5 today released a 64bit version of their plugin.

  26. Mark Feetham [Microsoft] says:

    @Peter_Pan. Could you please contact me via email.the alias is IE9PQ and the domain Microsoft.com

  27. @IEBlog2 says:

    .. i wonder if we ever have smooth webpage scrolling in IE, like the one recently introduced for SL4 for WP7… connect.microsoft.com/…/ie-10-ui-smooth-scrolling-and-better-tab-management

    Same goes for Windows Explorer…

  28. Fleet Command says:

    Browsing without plug-ins, Microsoft says! I wonder, now. That is of course because plug-ins for Internet Explorer are impediments instead of bless. However, if you must look at the competition, add-ons in Mozilla Firefox are one of the primary sources of its popularity.

    Microsoft should take plug-ins more seriously. A lot more seriously…

  29. ieblog says:

    Folks eager to learn more about the next release of Internet Explorer will be happy on September 13 when the //BUILD/ Windows conference (http://www.buildwindows.com/) commences in Anaheim, CA.

  30. Prior Semblance says:

    @Morten

    Was it the plugin or just the SDK RC?  I haven't managed to find the actual plugin.

  31. Rodawg says:

    ^ What a knob :|

    anyhow, does anyone know what plugin was used that gives you the option of selecting the browser agent, eg. IE, iPad, Chrome.. etc.. (as used in the screenshots)

  32. Andrija says:

    Fixed:

    if (window.ActiveXObject) alert('Upgrade your browser please, thanks');

  33. Steve says:

    Testing to see if I can figure out why commenting on the IE Blog is broken (not the spam above) as many attempts to post are completely ignored.

  34. Steve says:

    Just testing again, noticing some odd parameters past in the post back as undefined.

  35. Stop the spam says:

    what is with the Spam….what microsoft can't afford spam filters on the Internet Explorer blog or something?

  36. hAl says:

    @Steve

    Did you have a link in the posts that were lost in posting ?

  37. Steve says:

    Test #5 – I think I've figured it out, there's something that is checking the time between the page load and the page submit.  If you spend "too long" reading the page it automatically ignores your posted comment.

    Whatever this value is – the check for it should be completely removed (or the logic reversed)… e.g. if the submission time is within 5 seconds of the page load, then yeah, likely a spam bot.

  38. Steve says:

    @hAl – comment tests #3 and #4 were both lost… this one is #6.  I can't post a link to the comments that were lost (e.g. they weren't lost after being successfully added – they were never accepted/received by the system)

    The comments were all "normal" comments without any spam type references, link dumping etc.

  39. Steve says:

    Test #7 – Waiting 5min between loading and posting a comment.

  40. Steve says:

    Test #8 waiting 20min between loading and posting a comment

  41. DanglingPointer says:

    Steve… keep up the good work for the betterment of humanity… but I doubt if MS guys are even willing to spend a minute to fix this *bug* ever. Its being years people complaining about this issue.. i guess some old guy from MS logs into his system and publish the comment, that was previously authored in MS Word or WL Writer, and logs out… That’s the only experience MS has with these rusted, abandoned and orphaned blogging systems..

    To the guy disguising as ieblog, if you are really giving some attention or "following up" with the comments, I have a question for you; will you guys fix this issue:

    connect.microsoft.com/…/a-dom-manipulation-test-ie-performance

    when/ETA??

  42. Friendlys says:

    Microsoft: you guys to Listen to the users of Internet Explorer.. without them there might not be an Internet explorer.

  43. Steve says:

    Test # 10

    I waited more than 30 minutes on test #9 before posting. and it failed miserably.

    Again, I'm not sure where the exact threshold is, but please remove it – it is massively frustrating!

  44. Your Daddy says:

    MS fellas, your blogging system sucks !!

    If you want, I can make you the similar Blogging System in ASP.NET4 MVC3.0, so you can dump this old.nEt-POSTBACK-based crap-app… Well, I can guarantee, (obviously) my app won’t have this bug and shall incorporate an average spam checker!

    Be it my holiday task, I will never demand *anything* from you in return.

    You can reply me here in order to proceed..

  45. hAl says:

    @Danglingpointer

    The DOM manipulation test makes so many DOM manipulations that it is not a realistic real world scenario. So why would IE optimise to support that weird scenario.

  46. DanglingPointer says:

    @hal, one the other blog, where they are introducing Windows8 and talking about the programming paradigm for desktop-based win8 apps would be supporting HTML5+CSS3 for the enterprise/commercial apps… most of the people would agree that DOM manipulation is one thing which should "atleast" be as efficient as other browsers (and which should NOT be "240 times" slower than safari), because when it comes to commercial apps, user requirements are considered subjective and the "non-real-world" scenarios you are inkling upon, can be the very requirement of the potential client — Exactly that’s why!

  47. Marko says:

    @ieblog, with the recent w3c test submitted by Google, IE9 is exhibiting a weird behavior with HTML5 video paused event when the paused is true w3c-test.org/…/paused  (paused_true_during_pause.html). It appears to me after t.done() is called (at line:21), the video is played after passing the test. Which should not be the case because the video was explicitly paused and never played again by the script. There is some kind of mismanagement at IE9 side coz all FF6 and Chrome are keeping the video paused which is certainly a right behavior.

    On the other note, in the opposite test: paused_false_during_pause.html, paused method is called in the even handler to prevent the video from running which shouldn't be confused with the previous one.

  48. NP says:

    Reporting a bug with IE.

    When you load a site that uses Java and you do not have the Java runtime installed, IE pops-up a dialog box asking you if you want to get more information about Java and how to install it. The problem is that this dialog box appears over and over and over on the same site with no real delay between these multiple appearances. It seems that IE simply looks how many times in the HTML code the applet tag is being used and for each usage of the tag it pops-up the dialog. If this is the case, then I can't imagine any smart programmer who has his senses, coding such a "feature" in the product without at least some safeguards which would not trigger this dialog more than once on a single page or for a single IE session. I know that I can select the "Do not Show This Dialog Again" check box and have IE not show the annoying dialog again but I might want to install Java at some point in the future and not want to hide the dialog permanently, since if I select the check box, there is no way for me to bring the dialog back. The logical thing to have done was for an additional check in the code to prevent showing the dialog more than once per IE session as I said above. It is things like this that make me believe that IE developers are really sloppy. Didn't the developer coding this feature realize that showing up the dialog box every time say the applet tag was being encountered would result in an unpleasant experience. In a very very unpleasant experience.

    And by the way, commenting on your blog is a pain. I write something it and it gets lost and I have to write it over and over again. The opposite of what this annoying Java dialog is doing to me.

  49. ie lover says:

    We are waiting eagerly for the BUILD conference. We hope that WebGL support will be announced.

    We keep our fingers crossed.

  50. Mario says:

    I hope the Build conference thingy is when IE team people releases IE10 beta..

  51. blog sux says:

    i ope the fix this blog system before build

  52. hAl says:

    @Mario

    Should be IE10 beta time at the BUILD conference as it has been exactly a year by then since the IE9 beta.

  53. Spam Hater says:

    Dear Microsoft,

    There is Spam from "Anonymous" Above. I would recommend doing something about that cause, it might cause slow loading time for some viewers. By the by you can delete this comment if you want to as it is just a notice to you guys.

    Sincerely, The Spam Hater

  54. johnny says:

    we don't need plugins, but we need native code for the web, and by that I am not talking about js as an assembly… There is a reason there are so many languages out there, you can and should not try to convince all to use js for everything!

  55. May Williams says:

    @danglingpointer, I think some 3rd party development corp. can possibly develop this kind of reverse extension. Bcoz, big corp. only work on the solutions which are futuristic in nature (need of the hour). HTML5 is the future and flv fallback would be supported unless a major lot of users are not upgraded to the HTML5-supporting browsers.

  56. Mario says:

    Make the tabs in IE10 more round looking… the Tabs look in IE9 looks to square looking its getting annoying to me.. round tabs would look good on IE…. you guys had round tabs in IE9 beta but changed it in IE9 RC

  57. Andrew says:

    I agree with Mario here. Also, the selected tab (especially when there are few tabs opened) has a somewhat trapezoidal shape/lighting, which does not look that great to me, frankly; with just one tab opened, at first glance the tab's vertical edge just seems misaligned with the address bar, before actually realising that that effect was perhaps intended.

  58. Peter says:

    I wonder about screenshot 2, how I can go online, without the live-ID-login addon? And what about addons like "Send to OneNote"? And what I see if I select "All Addons" within the addon manager? More than 20 Addons from Microsoft. And Youtube, replace Flash with the HTML5 video tag? Will IE10 support all HTML5 video codecs? Yes, I can do a lot of things with HTML5, but no addons?

  59. Julian Reschke says:

    Re XHR detection: native XHR in IE7 and IE8 is restricted to certain HTTP methods, thus it's understandable if sometimes people prefer the ActiveX variant.

  60. Mark says:

    @DanglinPointer, here is another test confirming IE10pp2's ability to deal with DOM is far too slower than Safari:  jsperf.com/options-add-vs-innerhtml

    innerHTML: 160 vs 16718

    &

    options.add: 34 vs 757

    IE really needs to improve in this area !!

  61. xpclient says:

    Browsing without plugins is something I will never go. Hopefully the IE team will revert to their senses and allow pinned websites to be used with plug-ins.

  62. Jacob says:

    Are we going to see a built in spellchecker in IE10? I'm an intelligent guy but I do make the odd typo (not cause I can't spell – but because my typing isn't flawless, especially at great speed).

    I can't use IE9 for my day to day use of the Internet for this reason.  I use the web for business and using IE will make me look unprofessional if I can't perform basic spell-checking.

    Since I'm also a developer, here's my list of missing/broken things in IE that I'd like to see fixed.

    1.) PNG favicon support (and no, not using some ico hack – using the SAME file, and the SAME code that I use for all other browsers, tablets, and mobile devices)

    2.) fix the favicon regression in the addressbar list (hint! its gone!)

    3.) fix the internet options dialog.  Even if you do nothing more than make it resizable!  The advanced options list, and especially the security settings sub-popup are UN-usable! due to the tiny windows you have to scroll in (PS horizontal scrolling is a waste of time… widen the box!)

    jacob

    oh and don't forget to fix this stupid blogging software! why does it delete my comments!?

  63. Mario says:

    I agree with Jacob cause most websites are starting to use png favicons more these days and firefox and google chrome supports it but Internet Explorer doesn't yet?

  64. hAl says:

    @jacob

    You can alteady download spelchecker addon like SpeckIE

    Microsoft originally created the Favicon using the .ICO image container. All browsers therefore support the original .ICO container as it is the original favicon.

    .ICO containers can hold multiple images for different icon sizes.

    .ICO containers can also contain PNG images for the icon

  65. Luigi says:

    Add shadow Drop support! IE would get a 100 easier with shadow drop support.

  66. Andrew says:

    Also, IE really needs to support things like HTML5 History API (http://www.w3.org/…/history.html), so that websites can make use of proper URL rewriting and do not have to use hashes and stuff ("/#!/") in the URLs (thus creating very long and ugly URLs, as the navigation goes by). A great example of this is Facebook: stackoverflow.com/…/how-does-facebook-rewrite-urls-in-chrome-firefox

  67. Garrett says:

    I just typed a long comment and clicked "Post" and the comment has not appeared. What happened?

  68. Garrett says:

    Yep, comment dropped. Way to go guys. And I see the "Post" button URL: javascript:WebForm_DoPostBackWithOptions(new%20WebForm_PostBackOptions("ctl00$content$ctl00$w_47041$_d66745$ctl00$ctl00$ctl00$ctl05$bpCommentForm$ctl05$btnSubmit",%20"",%20true,%20"BlogPostCommentForm-ctl00_content_ctl00_w_47041__d66745_ctl00_ctl00",%20"",%20false,%20true))

    Great job there. Why can't you let the default submit button alone? Wht foul it up with terribly-written javascript?

  69. Mark says:

    Commenting on the IE blog is STILL COMPLETELY BROKEN!!!!

    Please remove all the stupid broken JavaScript for comment submission

    And just use a regular 100% guaranteed to work submit button!!!

    Were getting really tired of this issue not getting fixed!!!!

  70. steve_web says:

    I'd like to extend an olive branch in good faith to Microsoft regarding fixing this blog once and for all.

    Is there someone at Microsoft I can talk to about fixing the comment system on here so that posts are not constantly lost.

    It is currently not presenting Microsoft in a positive light when their flagship developer blog doesn't even work!

    We realize that the majority of blame points to 3rd party blog software but there are many simple solutions to fix it.

    If you plan to fix it on your own that's fine, please indicate you plan to do so and provide a timeline for the fix.

    If instead you would rather have some assistance please specify an email address where we can contact you to discuss (free as in beer help).

    Thanks

    steve_web

    PS sorry for cross posting on multiple threads but this issue needs serious attention ASAP.