Windows 10 IE With Spartan Engine Performance Vs. Chrome and Firefox 181
MojoKid writes: In Microsoft's latest Windows 10 preview build released last week, Cortana made an entrance, but the much-anticipated Spartan browser did not. However, little did we realize that some of Spartan made the cut, in the form of an experimental rendering engine hidden under IE's hood. Microsoft has separated its Trident rendering engine into two separate versions: one is for Spartan, called EdgeHTML, while the other remains under its legacy naming with Internet Explorer. The reason Microsoft doesn't simply forego the older version is due to compatibility concerns. If you're running the Windows 10 9926 build, chances are good that you're automatically taking advantage of the new EdgeHTML engine in IE. To check, you can type 'about:flags' into the address bar. "Automatic" means that the non-Spartan Trident engine will be called-upon only if needed. In all other cases, you'll be taking advantage of the future Spartan web rendering engine. Performance-wise, the results with IE are like night and day in certain spots. Some of the improvements are significant. IE's Sunspider result already outperforms the competition, but it has been further improved. And with Kraken, the latency with the Spartan-powered Trident engine dropped 40%. Similar results are seen with a boost in the Octane web browser test as well.
Browser performance (Score:3, Insightful)
I am sure Chrome and Firefox are well ahead on "new versions per month" stats
Still I wouldn't touch IE with the proverbial 3 metre citizen of Warsaw
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
You might want to think again. I tested the current IE (11) and its JS performance is already better than Chrome's and on par with Safari 8, and the HTML implementation seems pretty standard compliant. I didn't care much for the clumsy dialogs that showed up in some places, but in all, it's a much better browser than IE9 and anything before that.
Re: (Score:2)
Still has a broken flexbox implementation [stackoverflow.com].
And its devtools suck ass. Just my opinion.
Re: (Score:2)
Ok, one thing broken. But I thought the dev tools were decent. The profiler seemed unreliable, but the rest was Chrome like.
Performance? (Score:2, Insightful)
The last time I thought my browser "felt" slow was probably in the 90s.
The areas of web browsing I care more about are the rendering of web pages as designed preferably without artefacts, usability such as the "right" popups at the right, being able to browse without being assaulted by unwanted content (*), having the ability to perform my important tasks like internet banking, having the ability to play movies without flash.
Browsers that have the ability to do such things (probably most of them now) are wh
Edge == Trident (Score:2)
We shouldn't let MS get away with trying to portray Edge as a completely new rendering engine. It's not... cutting a branch and cleaning it up does not create a new codebase.
Until the Edge branch receives significant rewrites, edge == trident.
Re:Edge == Trident (Score:5, Informative)
It is receiving significant rewrites including a huge amount of code being flat out dropped, including all the compatibility\legacy layers for ie5.5,6,7,8,9,10.
But hey don't believe me listen one of the engineers responsible.
http://www.smashingmagazine.com/2015/01/26/inside-microsofts-new-rendering-engine-project-spartan/
"...In the coming months, swathes of IE legacy were deleted from the new engine. Gone were document modes. Removed was the subsystem responsible for emulating IE8 layout quirks. VBScript eliminated. Remnants like attachEvent, X-UA-Compatible, currentStyle were all purged from the new engine. The codebase looks little like Trident anymore.
What remained was a clean slate. A modern web platform built with interoperability and standards at its core. From there, we began a major investment in interoperability with other modern browsers to ensure that developers don’t have to deal with cross-browser inconsistencies. To date, we’ve fixed over 3000 interoperability issues (some dating back to code written in the 90’s) on top of the over 40 new web standards we’re working on. For example, longstanding innerHTML issues are now fixed. Even recent standards, like Flexbox, are getting renewed love so that the new engine matches the latest spec (this will show up in a future Windows 10 preview build)."
Re: (Score:3)
It is receiving significant rewrites.
Re: (Score:2)
Netscape was worse than IE 6 due to even more bugs and CSS work arounds if you can believe that.
Firefox == netscape rendering engine whether it is cleaned up or not.
Therefore IE 11 is better than Firefox
Re: (Score:2)
It's more about how far Firefox has fallen opposed to how much IE has improved. Palemoon is a good browser, so the rendering engine is fundamentally sound. Firefox's problems are elsewhere.
Re: (Score:2)
it has undergone significant rewrites, if you think just ignoring version checking, compat checks etc would achieve those sort of performance increases you are kidding yourself. their is only so much that can be done by ditching cruft. BUT ditching cruft allows a lot more flexibility in what you can rewrite including the structure as you no longer need to maintain support, this seems to have been what has taken place here.
The problem is the interface (Score:3, Interesting)
I can't stand Chrome and IE, and Spartan seems to have the same problem: they all have non-standard interfaces, and that's infuriating.
Compare these pictures: GOOD [qupzilla.com] versus SHIT. [susegeek.com] See the difference? One has proper title and menu bars. It follows the system's standards. It has good usability. It looks like all programs are supposed to look. The other uses its own blue alien interface that doesn't match anything else in the system.
Fuck Chrome, fuck IE, fuck Spartan, and fuck every developer who doesn't obey the system's HIG. [wikipedia.org]
Re:The problem is the interface (Score:5, Insightful)
Just because pull-down menus are a great idea for Turbotax, doesn't make them the best idea for a webbrowser. The "good" one wastes screen space on stupid pull-down menus that will never get used. For a program used on occasion, yes it is a very good idea to follow standards strictly. But plenty of people do basically nothing on their computers but use the web-browser and Office. I think it's best to optimize these programs interfaces to actual use, irrespective of general standards.
I just spent 2 seconds to turn on the pull-down menus to my browser...and a File menu? WTF? How often do you need that?
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
You wrong, he right. Sometimes things are put where they are simply for reassurance, and so you know on the rare occasions you want to use them, you know where they are. Firefox is just as bad though, why do they make it so hard to open your bookmarks? I won't get started on the inability to sort them how you like. YOU WILL SEARCH OR DIE!
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Not sure what the problem you have with firefox bookmarks. To use them, just click it. Arranging them, just drag them into the order you want them, or drag them (in the order you want) in your bookmarks toolbar.
Re: (Score:2)
In my Firefox install, I have the best of both worlds, assuming you know much about computers. I press the Alt key, all my pull-down menus appear. A couple clicks to do whatever I want. Which just happens to be what Windows Explorer does, as well. Consistent interface, no wasted space, and even the useless stuff is an instant away.
Sure, when you're browsing the web, more screen being used for the pages is good. But don't waste my time by forcing me to use your special interface. I'll lose far more hav
Re: (Score:2)
How do you close all Firefox windows in one action on Windows? Alt+F4 closes just the current window. File->Exit is the only way I know of.
Re: (Score:2)
Right click on the Firefox tab in the task bar and close all windows. Using keys only - I have no idea.
Re: (Score:2)
The "good" one wastes screen space
and whatever you use is wasting space on bits of chrome - unless you run it in full-screen kiosk mode.
There's a reason you have things like title bars and menus even if you don't use them all the time. Its because they do get used. The best UI is the one that fits with what the OS says is the primary design. Consistency is key.
Besides, Microsoft did optimise Office's UI for actual use, based on metrics from their UI labs and people actually using menu items. This resulted
Re: (Score:2)
Chrome has proper aero interface on Win7. You posted a screenshot of qupzilla on win7 and chrome on win xp.
Re: (Score:2)
This? [arabiangazette.com] It's still not standard.
Re: The problem is the interface (Score:2)
What is not standard in it? Windows has always been chaotic in interfaces. What do you want chrome to do? Bring in the ribbon menu?
Re: (Score:2)
What is not standard in it?
It lacks TITLE BAR and MENU BAR. Look at the pic of QupZilla again.
Re: (Score:3)
Why is having a menu bar and title bar standard? Even Microsoft's own programs do not have title bar (Internet Explorer) or menu bar (Office) sometimes.
Re: (Score:3)
Title bar includes the full length web page's title, missing it is a usability issue for me. I'm disappointed that even Firefox doesn't include it when it's run on Windows (haven't investigated where is the option to turn it back on) though on linux it seems to always have it.
It is also consistent that a window gets to keep what I call the "Windows 3.1 menu" on the top left. That sort of consistency worked well for the past 25 years on Windows, Unix and linux.
Even "cut/copy/paste" in the "Edit" menu can be
Re: (Score:2)
It feels like the 90s again. I love that!
Re: (Score:2)
No. Chrome's style only saves a pittance of screen space, and in exchange it makes the menu's functions insanely clumsy to use.
Re: (Score:3)
WTF is an Oort Online? (Score:2)
IE was well optimized for Sunspider already, so there is not much of a change there. Google Octane 2.0 however has always been terrible in IE, and now it comes in roughly the same as Chrome, for a massive 81.8% increase over the old rendering engine. Kraken continues this with a 45% jump in performance. It is a big change, and a welcome one too.
It would help if they mentioned what the hell these benchmarks are supposed to measure. Out of Sunspider, Octane 2.0, Kraken 1.1, WebXPRT, Oort Online, and HTML5Test, only HTML5Test has a name that means anything to me. Most of them are easy enough to google, but I didn't find anything searching for oort online benchmark. Isn't this supposed to be the author's job?
Re: (Score:3)
The funny part is, I bet HTML5Test doesn't measure what you thinks it measures...
Re: (Score:2)
Attack surface (Score:5, Insightful)
More speed is great, I'm sure users will be happy.
The dual rendering engine, less so. I know backwards compatibility is pretty important to Microsoft, but now they have twice as much web-facing code to maintain - all the legacy IE MSHTML stuff as well as the new EdgeHTML code - and thus twice the zero-days to cope with. Perhaps this is the lesser of two evils, but it's certainly not ideal.
Compatibility with what? (Score:2)
hijackers, malware, viruses, NSA eavesdropping...
its a good thing (Score:2, Insightful)
I think the hate toward microsoft JUST BECAUSE its microsoft is completely unjustified and misguided at this point.
Companies like Google have been FAR WORSE yet are still praised (but probably wont in 10 years from now).
Windows is actually a freaking good and productive OS, when you become expert with Linux, MacOSX and Windows - arguably the top 3 - you'll find that Windows is damn good at being productive on the desktop/as a workstation. Of course, very few have such proficiency, so I'll give an example. H
Re: (Score:2)
And almost noone that was working there in the 90s is still there. There is hardly anything the same in Microsoft as it was back then, except the name of course.
IE Touch/Metro (Score:2)
So will this get me better performance in IE's metro version on my Win8.1 tablet (if/when I upgrade that to Windows 10)?
Spartan! Kraken! ... Gotta love those codenames. (Score:3)
Spartan! Kraken! ... Gotta love those codenames. You get a pretty good impression of what kind [wikipedia.org] of movies [wikipedia.org] the crew at microsoft has been watching lately. :-)
I'm sure (Score:2)
some project manager just wanted to say "RELEASE THE KRAKEN!" when production was ready...
As for Spartan, that is probably alluding to less feature bloat... Actually a perfect name for a lightweight no nonsense browser. If it actually is or not is another matter.
Re: But does it matter any more? (Score:3, Informative)
To play games, yes.
To do work in most office settings, yes.
Looking from another angle ... (Score:2, Insightful)
TFA is saying that the new 'spartan' has improved IE's performance, to the point that now its performances match and/or exceed that of FF and Chrome
But, if we look at the whole thing from another angle we would know that it isn't that the 'spartan' improves IE, rather, indicating a SERIOUS REGRESSION of both FF and Chrome
I still remember how fast and light FF was when it came out. I was among one of the first who dare to fire up FF when everyone was still sticking with IE, and FF now ? [shaking head and sig
Re: Looking from another angle ... (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
This was classic, thank you for the laugh. Side note, I agree.
Re:But does it matter any more? (Score:4, Funny)
Is Windows really relevant anymore?
Of course Windows is still relevent, it remains the authoritative source of Windows reboot sounds.
Re: (Score:3)
Is Windows really relevant anymore?
Of course Windows is still relevent, it remains the authoritative source of Windows reboot sounds.
Without Windows, Linux desktop development would stagnate. Yes, MS is development and so will W10, when it is released.
Re:But does it matter any more? (Score:5, Insightful)
Windows is unfortunately relevant. The question is whether the built in browser is relevant. I'm going to install firefox and/or chrome and use those exclusively anyway because i've been burnt too many times with MS's attempts to "add value" with IE to ever trust their browsers again.
Re: (Score:2)
As opposed to Firefox's attempts to add value which continually make it worse?
Re: (Score:3)
One of the advantages of Chrome and Firefox is that the experience is close on any platform (mobile, linux, windows) plus the syncing allows you to carry your data (bookmarks, logins, etc) over to each device.
I doubt that Microsoft will be porting their new browser to Android and we know they won't be porting it to linux.
Re: (Score:2)
I wouldn't put it past Microsoft anymore with the idea of Windows everywhere... they put Office on Ipads, they could decide to do other things as well.
Re: (Score:2)
What browser can't an employer control to do a MitM attack? You can turn off cert pinning in both Chrome and Firefox, as well as add your own cert...
Re: (Score:2)
What browser can't an employer control to do a MitM attack? You can turn off cert pinning in both Chrome and Firefox, as well as add your own cert...
I am hoping this would require more access to my machine than they have got, but I may be wrong. Fortunately the IT department is at least physically located in another country ;-)
Re: But does it matter any more? (Score:2)
First and foremost, compliance is a thing. As a personal user you may not have to care, but as a business the organization has to take special care when handling certain types of information. So we need to be able to see where that information is going.
Another reason is for IPS. Many attacks, like spam, change the locations from which they come from. But a
Re: (Score:2)
There are real, legitimate concerns and reasons to MITM. If you don't like it, don't do non-company things on company Internet and equipment.
All this somehow loses importance if I am allowed and expected to take my laptop to home half of the time and doing company things using my home internet and equipment. Well, I am basically forced to do that because their MITM software does not work properly with the dropbox software of some customers. So I have to download and upload those 200 MB files over my home connection, just to do my work.
If I really wanted to send over some sensitive information to somebody, you can be sure I would find a way to
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Because it was a dumb question, Asking if the dominant market leader with over 90% of desktop market share (much much higher in enterprises) as well as very high server market share and you expect to get marked as something other than troll or flamebait? get real.
Re:But does it matter any more? (Score:5, Interesting)
Sure, Windows isn't all over mobile, but most people still have PCs. Including the one I am typing on right now. It is still quite relevant. Until you end the PC, somehow, it will continue to be, if nothing else changes.
It is still by far, the best OS for business workstation use. And I say this as a UNIX admin who has been waiting for a Linux desktop worth using for the last decade. And its not half bad for personal use either.
Windows has come a long way, although not without its share of missteps. I'm actually okay with it now. I might not switch to a Mac even if someone gave me one. Although that says more about what I think of Macs these days than it does of Windows. And mind you, my first three computers were Macs.
Re: (Score:2)
...most people still have PCs. Including the one I am typing on right now.
I too am typing on a PC, but it is not running Windows.
Re:But does it matter any more? (Score:5, Insightful)
Yes, but that's just a dodge. There are 1.5B people running Windows. Tablets are great (I like mine) but it now seems clear that they aren't going to replace PCs on a grand scale any time soon. So PCs are still relevant, including yours. Since that's a fact it follows that the most popular PC OS would also be relevant.
People scoff at Win8 and call it a failure but that's only compared to Win7 and WinXP. It's been more successful than either OSX or Linux as far as PC OSs go.
And Win10 looks pretty nice already with about a year of dev time to go. Anyone who says it doesn't mater is just whistling past the graveyard.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
it follows that the most popular PC OS would also be relevant
Only if the DoJ continues to look the other way in the face of continuing flagrant Sherman act violations in the form of secret exclusionary agreements with OEMS and the like. Microsoft never made it on merit...
Speaking of which, it's about time for another massive fine from the Eurocrat direction, wouldn't you say?
Re: (Score:3)
If you're a fan of any current computing tech, either mobile or on the desktop, you really don't want to be bringing up Sherman Act violations.
I can't think of a single major manufacturer of PCs, mobiles, or commercial operating systems for PCs or mobiles that isn't guilty of anti-trust violations.
Re:But does it matter any more? (Score:4, Insightful)
Nah, MS is off the hook for that. The OEMs can fight back now by refusing to go along (WinRT) or threaten to ship more chrombooks. That's enough competition to keep the feds happy, plus tablets really are computers so it's not the same situation at all. And the EU seems to have its sights on Google lately anyway.
Point is, Win10 is going to be solid. It may take a while to overtake Win7 since that was such a good OS but it will take off better than Win8 for sure and that didn't really do that bad compared to non-MS OSs.
Re: (Score:2)
The oems can fight back, but are they? All of them? If the answer is no, even for some of them, there are still Sherman act violations. FYI, the touchstone test for Sherman act: "is market power being exercised?"
Re: (Score:2)
You bet market power is being exercised. The OEMs all started rolling out low cost devices with free chrome OS which forced MS to cut the price of its low end sku to $0.00. And it's not a secret. They laid out in plain English what the specs were for a device to qualify.
So not only are they now responding to market pressure, they are doing so in a very transparent way. This is no longer the MS you love to hate.
Re: (Score:2)
You are glossing over the fact that Microsoft still plays hardball over Windows license price and associated kickbacks with each individual OEM.
Re: (Score:3)
You mean the "exclusionary" agreements that don't allow companies like Dell and HP to sell hardware running Android and ChromeOS? Have you been to either of their websites lately?
Re: (Score:2)
Show me the PCs running anything but Windows, and I won't call your post a straw man. Microsoft continues to exercise and abuse market power in the PC market, please stick to the issue.
Re: (Score:2)
http://pilot.search.dell.com/c... [dell.com]
http://pilot.search.dell.com/l... [dell.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Sorry, you didn't show me PCs running non-Windows, you showed me Chromeboxes. Are you dense?
Re: But does it matter any more? (Score:2)
So a chrome book is not a PC?
Re: (Score:2)
No. Duh.
If a Chromebook is a PC then show me one running Windows.
Re: But does it matter any more? (Score:2)
So you ask for a PC "not running Windows" but any personal computer not running windows is not a PC? What do you think a PC is?
Re: (Score:2)
The commonly accepted definition of "a PC" is "able to run Windows." Hence the MAC vs PC commercials. Are you really that stupid. Yes you are. I bet you are wearing your woolen M$ underwear right now.
Re: But does it matter any more? (Score:2)
How can you show "a PC running non-Windows" if you define a PC as a computer running Windows?
"Words Mean Things". Slashdot is supposedly a technical website. I would expect a poster to know that PC is a "personal computer".
Re: (Score:2)
The term "PC" is short for "IBM-Compatible Personal Computer" where the defining characteristic is the BIOS. The thing that Compaq reverse-engineered to build the first "IBM Compatible" back in the 80's. If you think that a Mac is a "PC" then try booting DOS on it. Doesn't work, huh? Even booting a PC Linux ntaively on Macs isn't always easy unless it also supports Apple's EFI implementation. Macs are not PCs. Chromebooks aren't PCs either.
Re: (Score:2)
I said "able to run Windows" asshole.
Re: But does it matter any more? (Score:2)
This is your entire a quote.....
"Show me the PCs running anything but Windows, and I won't call your post a straw man. Microsoft continues to exercise and abuse market power in the PC market, please stick to the issue."
"Able" was nowhere in that quote.
Re: But does it matter any more? (Score:2)
Oh and btw, here is how you put Windows on a ChromeBook.
http://www.howtogeek.com/173353/how-to-run-windows-software-on-a-chromebook/
Re: (Score:2)
Quote>>> The commonly accepted definition of "a PC" is "able to run Windows."
Asshole.
Re: (Score:2)
Good, now show us one for sale like that. Oh you can't?
Re: But does it matter any more? (Score:2)
So in that case you bringing up the Mac vs. PC commercials as evidence made no sense since a Mac has been "able" to have Windows installed since 2006. When Apple stopped supporting my 2006 Mac Mini, all I had to do was reformat the hard drive and stick a Windows 7
disk in and it worked perfectedly.
So by your definition a Mac is a PC.
Re: (Score:2)
BTW, I only see PCs on Dell's front page [dell.com]. So much for believing a Microsoft apologist.
Re: (Score:2)
There are these things called links....
http://www.dell.com/us/p/chrom... [dell.com]
http://pilot.search.dell.com/a... [dell.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Once again, I said PCs, not Chromeboxes. Well, I understand by the prevarication that is going on thick and fast that you do indeed know that Microsoft is still a flagrant lawbreaker. Firmed up my opiinion on that.
Re: But does it matter any more? (Score:2)
So how is a Chromebook not a personal computer?
Re: (Score:2)
You are intenionally being dense. Or you are really dense. I guess both: you are acting especially dense because you are actually pretty dense at the best of times and your only superpower is acting dense so you wallow in it.
Let Wikipedia explain it to you, apparently the one person who does not know:
"PC" is an initialism for "personal computer". However, it is used in a different sense: It means a personal computers with an Intel x86-compatible processor running Microsoft Windows (sometimes called Wintel) [wikipedia.org]
O
Re: But does it matter any more? (Score:2)
Oh so since Wikipedia defines a PC as a Windows computer it must be true.....
Re: (Score:2)
It depends how you define success. Enterprise agreements hold that in order to install Win 7 you need downgrade rights, made available by purchasing Win 8 licenses.
How exactly are you defining success? Success in sales? Success in giving them a presence in mobile? Success in unifying two disparate paradigms of interface? Win 8 failed on many fronts as well.
Re: (Score:3)
Agreed. Thanks to virtualization I can still run Linux or FreeBSD as a VM.
I tend to use turnkey Linux these days as these are appliances I just turn on and I have a modified HOST file with the IP addresses of my VMs from VMware Workstation.
Windows as a host is stable, has office, Visual Studio, adobe photoshop, and of course my video games and cloud storage tools.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm well aware that PC doesn't equal Windows and nothing I said indicated I believed that. The point is that PCs still exist, and Windows still dominates them for anything but servers.
I'm a sys admin who uses Linux every day. I've had Linux desktops running on machines and in VMs for years. I have a bunch of Linux desktop VMs at the moment. Its better for development, but I much prefer Linux as the VM and not as my actual workstation.
Linux has done a lot of things well, but creating a desktop worth us
Re: (Score:2)
Nothing to do with a dying os or industry, a PC from 5 years ago can happily run any modern OS. Right up until about 2008 people needed to upgrade every 2 or 3 years to be able to run everything. That cycle is now more like 5-7 years if not more. Very few are migrating away, they simple don't need to upgrade, this isn't just a windows thing either, the same is happening to Linux and OS.X
Re:But does it matter any more? (Score:5, Interesting)
A year or so ago I would have been shocked if you told me MS would release Office on Android. Now that they've gone that far and seem to realize that they're a Software company first, I wouldn't be at all surprised if they made Spartan builds for ios/android/chrome etc.
Re: (Score:2)
Competition makes them good, and story may repeat itself. I remember using the native IE 4.x ports on Solaris and HP-UX back in the times when Netscape Navigator was THE browser (late '90). Then, once IE gained market, they disappeared at once.
See here [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, as it does to most of us who are gainfully employed.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Offtopic)
mimimi.
Now seriously, I see an Apple-related article on a daily basis. I own no Apple devices, nor would I ever. Still, I ain't complaining, just move on to the next article.
Might help you if you do the same in relation to Microsoft-related articles.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:microsoft cash (Score:4, Interesting)
I seriously felt that way until just a couple days ago, too. Wired had this piece about Satya Nadella and what's going on in Microsoft, specifically about the HoloLens project. It was the first time in a long time that I read something about Microsoft and thought "Oh wow, that is really cool," instead of "LOL."
Then today I decided to check out the Windows 10 Technical Preview and I have to say I was impressed. It is very solid.
I'm not a Microsoft person, either. I'm typing this on a MacBook Pro and I've been running Slackware on my desktop for 10+ years. Disclaimer: I use Win7 extensively for Steam but for little else.
Re: (Score:2)
I seriously felt that way until just a couple days ago, too. Wired had this piece about Satya Nadella and what's going on in Microsoft, specifically about the HoloLens project. It was the first time in a long time that I read something about Microsoft and thought "Oh wow, that is really cool," instead of "LOL."
Microsoft has a history of announcing some very cool things from their research division, but failing to follow through. I'm not getting my hopes up until they at least have a shipping date...
Re: (Score:2)
That is a very fair point. The article does explicitly state that there isn't a set date for shipping or that the product will ever ship.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)