Transcript Internet Explorer 7

Pete LePage
Product Manager
Internet Explorer Team

Standards are a means to an end
 Interoperability


Standards are sometimes ambiguous
Standards are evolutionary
 CSS 2.0 became CSS 2.1



Internet Explorer 6 shipped in 2001
“Ship or wait for the committee”
Standards can be formalized after you’ve
created your implementation





Implementing standards is complex
There are many ways to solve a problem
Differences in coding styles can lead to
rendering difference
Different priorities often leads to rendering
differences
First implementation often becomes the
“standard”

ACID2
 An attempt to force similar priorities

All browsers try to differentiate themselves
 Widgets in Opera
 XUL in Mozilla
 ActiveX in Internet Explorer

Ship cycles and Standards don’t always mesh
 Ship now, or ship when the standard is baked?
 What to do when the standard changes?

Then why not ship more often?
 Every standard change, and every bug fix?
 Multiple standards to track
 Increased website updates


History of involvement in standards bodies
Version over version compatibility


Microsoft DOES care about standards
Active participant in several standards bodies
 Cascading Style Sheets WG, Web API WG, Web
Application Formats WG


Every major change to IE run the risk of
breaking existing sites
The Compatibility Conundrum
 How do we move forward with standards while
still pushing the envelope of web technologies?
 Example: increasing the number of XMLHTTP
connections allowed by the browser

Hard to change implementation after you’ve
gone live

“I’m really concerned that we’re breaking
stuff in the name of goodness and that all
users and developers will walk away with is
‘stuff broke’”
Dean Hachamovitch
General Manager, Internet Explorer Team


In place compatibility
The committee’s finished, you should change
your behavior



Need to balance Standards Compliance with
Site Compatibility
Doesn’t Mean Don’t Improve
We need to be careful



Compatibility is a critical adoption factor
IE7 “Quirks Mode” mostly didn’t change
Standards mode is increasingly popular
 2006: 40% of top 200 sites use standards mode
 2003: 0.5% of top 200 sites use standards mode

A dedicated compatibility team focused on
working with external sites


Internet Explorer 7 has shipped
Easing the lives of Developers







Web Design Tool Bar
IE6 VPC – Highly requested!
Samples, Starter Kits, and Tutorials
IE Dev Center http://msdn.com/ie
IE Blog
Evangelizing IE7’s better standards support
Explaining the new security features of IE7
Internet Explorer 7
Internet Explorer 6 VPC




Has hit critical mass
Being delivered via AU and WU
15 languages are available today
Many customized versions
 Yahoo!
 USA Today
 Google

US Browser Market Share for 12/7/06-12/11/06
Browser
Market Share (PC’s only)
Internet Explorer
87.12%
Fire Fox
11.80%
Browser
Market Share (PC’s only)
Internet Explorer 7
18.87%
Fire Fox 2
3.45%
 Data from Web Side Story, an independent 3rd party web analytics company

Internet Explorer has a future
 Improve the web application platform
 Provide the best web user experience




We are committed to improving our standards
support
We are committed to not breaking the web
Versioning and opting in will play a major role
IE.Next
 It won’t be everything you want
 It will be another big step in the right direction



Prioritizing the bugs and features for IE.Next
Listening to your feedback
Symbiotic Relationship
 Unless you don’t think improving standards for
87% of web users is important!

Test your pages with IE7
 Standards improvements may have changed how
your site displays

Check your IE components
 ActiveX, BHO’s and Toolbars need to be prepared
for Opt-In and Protected Mode



Add RSS to your site
Create an OpenSearch provider
Give us your feedback, help us prioritize for
IE.Next
Internet Explorer 7: The Route To Standards Compliance
Pete LePage
Product Manager
Internet Explorer Team
[email protected]
http://Blogs.MSDN.com/PeteL
© 2006 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved. Microsoft, Windows, Windows Vista and other product names are or may be registered trademarks and/or trademarks in the U.S. and/or other countries.
The information herein is for informational purposes only and represents the current view of Microsoft Corporation as of the date of this presentation. Because Microsoft must respond to changing market conditions, it should not be
interpreted to be a commitment on the part of Microsoft, and Microsoft cannot guarantee the accuracy of any information provi ded after the date of this presentation.
MICROSOFT MAKES NO WARRANTIES, EXPRESS, IMPLIED OR STATUTORY, AS TO THE INFORMATION IN THIS PRESENTATION.