Microsoft Is Building Internet Explorer into Its New Chromium Edge(theverge.com)
theverge.com
Microsoft Is Building Internet Explorer into Its New Chromium Edge
https://www.theverge.com/2019/5/6/18527875/microsoft-chromium-edge-new-features-build-2019
71 comments
If the feature is in fact designed exclusively for businesses, the IE11 mode will only activate on a whitelisted list of sites pushed out via your corporate provisioning process.
I believe this is how the feature already works today in Edge anyway, it just opens a new window instead of a new tab.
I believe this is how the feature already works today in Edge anyway, it just opens a new window instead of a new tab.
The biggest offender seems to be SharePoint nowadays. Maybe Microsoft could try and make it less of a heap.
Sharepoint 2017 doesn't have this problem, Sharepoint 2007 does.
Opening a folder from SharePoint in Windows Explorer still requires IE in 2017.
>So a user might be duped into thinking they are safe when they visit a random site that forces IE mode.
IE mode doesn't mean it would have random security exploits or wont run in a sandbox, just means it will support the quirks and legacy behavior required to run legacy enterprise apps based on IE.
And of course it will obviously be totally controllable by some enterprise level settings -- what IPs/domains to be enabled on, whether it should be on or off, etc.
IE mode doesn't mean it would have random security exploits or wont run in a sandbox, just means it will support the quirks and legacy behavior required to run legacy enterprise apps based on IE.
And of course it will obviously be totally controllable by some enterprise level settings -- what IPs/domains to be enabled on, whether it should be on or off, etc.
This is off by default afaik - it can be whitelisted via group policy in an organization (like already today).
Windows environments can be managed pretty well centrally via group policies- it's actually one of the reasons Active Directory is the defacto standard.
Windows environments can be managed pretty well centrally via group policies- it's actually one of the reasons Active Directory is the defacto standard.
On one hand, it's commendable how seriously Microsoft takes backward compatibility. On the other hand, I can't help but feel that this is part of what's holding them back in their "modern browser" efforts. Edge felt like a new start but failed. Chromium Edge feels like yet another new start, but again is tied down by support for ancient IE versions from day one.
On the Edge team and I can tell you, in no way, does supporting IE, hold back our development capabilities.
If anything, it enables more companies to adopt Edge without concern of breaking support for their legacy applications.
We see that Developers are the ones held back by older versions, and we see this as a huge win for them.
If anything, it enables more companies to adopt Edge without concern of breaking support for their legacy applications.
We see that Developers are the ones held back by older versions, and we see this as a huge win for them.
We're trying to figure out on my team what the Edge Team's plan for rollout on OSes with IE11 already installed looks like; e.g., will Edge Chromium outright pull and replace Legacy Edge _and_ IE11 from Win7? And is "IE Mode" going to be an option on the non-Enterprise version of Chromium Edge?
I'd love to see more messaging around the rollout intentions; plenty of us out here still supporting IE11 (non-Government, non-Enterprise) and trying to read between the lines to a point where we can start legitimately calling the time of death.
I'd love to see more messaging around the rollout intentions; plenty of us out here still supporting IE11 (non-Government, non-Enterprise) and trying to read between the lines to a point where we can start legitimately calling the time of death.
As long as MS supports IE, we are mandated that we have to support IE. As far as I know, only IE11 is still supported by MS, but support will continues until 2025. The thought of all websites we build having to be compatible with IE11 until 2025 makes me sick. Is there any hope that rolling IE into Edge will shorten the time that IE11 is supported?
If it becomes a feature of Edge rathe than a standalone product, what is supported is now Edge (which has a feature allowing it to support legacy IE websites), not IE. That is, no one will be using a supported browser that only supports IE functionality, so while Edge users can access IE websites, there's no reason for anyone else to support IE in order to cater to those users, since they will actually be using a modern browser, not IE.
Will it be possible to 'remove' IE from Windows 10 (for example, via: Disable-WindowsOptionalFeature –Online -FeatureName Internet-Explorer-Optional-amd64) and then only allow users to access IE through the new Edge?
This is basically just a compatibility mode where you switch the IE renderer in the tab within the same Edge application "shell."
Seems like a no-brainer.
Seems like a no-brainer.
So implementing this took zero work? Probably not. Do you think it will cost nothing to maintain? Probably neither. So I don't see how "in no way" could be true.
I never said there wasn't a cost. Every technical decision comes with trade-offs.
But costs don't hold us back from developing amazing new features [for developers and consumers] for the future. <3
But costs don't hold us back from developing amazing new features [for developers and consumers] for the future. <3
Best of luck! I do hope new Edge finds success :)
I work on the Edge team as well.
-- This is largely work that already existed in the older Edge instance, just made more seamless and with a proper allow-list to make it more secure.
It didn't take zero work but it didn't need an overhaul of the DOM or anything like that.
-- This is largely work that already existed in the older Edge instance, just made more seamless and with a proper allow-list to make it more secure.
It didn't take zero work but it didn't need an overhaul of the DOM or anything like that.
Zero and insignificant are not the same, but quite close. It doesn't have to take "zero" work to not hold them back.
Nor does it have to be the same team/people working on both.
Nor does it have to be the same team/people working on both.
I have no idea why would I want to use Edge now. I used it for a few months and it was very nice. I liked the idea that they rolled their own engine, I wanted to support their courage just for that. I finally switched to Chrome because 1Password Edge extension was really buggy and crashed too often, while Chrome one works flawlessly (not Edge fault, of course), but I would definitely try it again in the future.
Now I can use Google Chrome or I can use Microsoft-branded Google Chrome. That's how I see it. If they would make worthy improvements, Google will adopt them. Otherwise Google is really company focused on browser, so I have no reason to choose Edge over Chrome now. IMO their decision to drop their own engine was very short-sighted. What next? Drop Windows kernel and adopt Linux with wine as a compatibility layer? Web need more diversity to keep open.
Probably gotta try Firefox once more, if I figure out how to sync it with iOS Safari...
Now I can use Google Chrome or I can use Microsoft-branded Google Chrome. That's how I see it. If they would make worthy improvements, Google will adopt them. Otherwise Google is really company focused on browser, so I have no reason to choose Edge over Chrome now. IMO their decision to drop their own engine was very short-sighted. What next? Drop Windows kernel and adopt Linux with wine as a compatibility layer? Web need more diversity to keep open.
Probably gotta try Firefox once more, if I figure out how to sync it with iOS Safari...
This could be the feature that finally kills off IE11. A bunch of businesses mandate IE11 to ensure compatibility with unmaintained internal systems; if they can use Edge in IE11 mode, there's no reason to use the IE11 app.
(This really makes me wish IE11 mode had been a feature of Edge from the very beginning. Think of how much time we've lost!)
(This really makes me wish IE11 mode had been a feature of Edge from the very beginning. Think of how much time we've lost!)
I'm not sure how much it would have mattered to have IE mode before, since Edge only ran on Windows > 8.1
IE mode is really killer when combined with the fact that the new Edge will run on Windows 7.
IE mode is really killer when combined with the fact that the new Edge will run on Windows 7.
IE mode will not make the new Edge kill Chrome in market share.
The relationship is the other way around: the lack of Windows 7 support is what killed Edge in the real world.
Anyway, Microsoft is learning from its mistakes.
The relationship is the other way around: the lack of Windows 7 support is what killed Edge in the real world.
Anyway, Microsoft is learning from its mistakes.
The implied victim seemed to be IE, not Chrome...
In that case, it was already dead, for all practical purposes.
For example https://lichess.org/blog/XMvcJSwAADkA0hPE/lichess-v2-is-here
For example https://lichess.org/blog/XMvcJSwAADkA0hPE/lichess-v2-is-here
Windows 7 isn't my biggest concern, though I agree that IE mode on Edge for Win7 will strike a killing blow.
According to my site's analytics, 41% of our IE11 users are on Windows 10, plus another 5.63% on Windows 8. (Windows 7 reaches End of Life in January 2020.)
According to my site's analytics, 41% of our IE11 users are on Windows 10, plus another 5.63% on Windows 8. (Windows 7 reaches End of Life in January 2020.)
So then ~53% of your IE11 users are still on Windows 7? That certainly sounds like something you should still care about.
I do care, (and of course we still support IE11 on any OS version) but Win7/IE11 users are gradually upgrading on their own.
I was afraid that IE11 would literally never go away. Microsoft has said that they'll support IE11 until Windows 10 reached End of Life. But they've also said that Windows 10 is the "last version" of Windows, that they'll continue shipping new updates for Windows 10 in perpetuity.
Now, I have hope.
I was afraid that IE11 would literally never go away. Microsoft has said that they'll support IE11 until Windows 10 reached End of Life. But they've also said that Windows 10 is the "last version" of Windows, that they'll continue shipping new updates for Windows 10 in perpetuity.
Now, I have hope.
[deleted]
[deleted]
Oh great. So we’re back to “is it running in quirks mode” level crap now?
Just like it seemed like a great idea that would be “seamless” last time around, it will again...
Just like it seemed like a great idea that would be “seamless” last time around, it will again...
To me it sounds like this is something you have to manually enable when opening a new tab, and perhaps it's triggerable by adding a header or meta tag to your site. So hopefully no quirks mode 2.0
Hopefully web developers can be given a tool to force their site to never run in "quirks mode". Like having a meta tag or something.
That seems worse? If anything it should be opt-in.
It appears to be opt-in via group policy. This isn't something you'll run into on the web at large.
I suppose the issue with it being opt-in is that legacy, unmaintained internal tools won't have the opt-in mechanism
This is important. There is a Government website that I use that only works in IE. They built it years ago through contractors using .Net and I bet they don't have any ability to change it. I wonder if they even have the original source code.
At some point, the government is going to have to realize that the internet has long passed the days of moving slow.
Putting unrealistic restrictions (only works in IE, can only use .Net) is going to hinder the progress of its development.
There are times where vetting and change management make sense. But then we have applications that were built before 2008 and realize that in the long run, with the tools of today, it would be easier to use the tools of today than adding another feature to this bloated mess.
Putting unrealistic restrictions (only works in IE, can only use .Net) is going to hinder the progress of its development.
There are times where vetting and change management make sense. But then we have applications that were built before 2008 and realize that in the long run, with the tools of today, it would be easier to use the tools of today than adding another feature to this bloated mess.
That is unrealistic (I work for gov ATM). There is no such thing as incentive in gov, stuff is mandated by low. You don't want to use IE ? Your problem, you can explain it to the judge. That is how majority of gov services work (not only IE, multiple domains).
We had services from ALL major IT companies in the world that still need IE (or Firefox, or Chrome, exclusively) , so this is even not strictly in gov or IE domain only.
Some gov companies are lucky to have somebody that lives in 21st century that is on such position that can change some of it but that is merely a fluke.
We had services from ALL major IT companies in the world that still need IE (or Firefox, or Chrome, exclusively) , so this is even not strictly in gov or IE domain only.
Some gov companies are lucky to have somebody that lives in 21st century that is on such position that can change some of it but that is merely a fluke.
I would be also interested in what country it is.
We had similar case - few years ago, the tax office switched to electronic VAT tax returns, which was Windows-only. There was a company that continued to fill their returns using the old-fasioned way (paper). In the court, they won, because the filing system was Windows-only, and the state cannot force you to purchase your software from a specific supplier.
We had similar case - few years ago, the tax office switched to electronic VAT tax returns, which was Windows-only. There was a company that continued to fill their returns using the old-fasioned way (paper). In the court, they won, because the filing system was Windows-only, and the state cannot force you to purchase your software from a specific supplier.
Serbia.
Perhaps you can win on court. But what about time and energy you will lose. Nobody wants that. They got sued, thats what I am talking about.
Perhaps you can win on court. But what about time and energy you will lose. Nobody wants that. They got sued, thats what I am talking about.
Sure, they certainly had some dreamless nights, but I'm glad they stood by their principles. We are all benefiting. Since then, all state-financed projects have to be accessible cross-platform, using open formats and protocols.
Yeah, no reason to do otherwise, even if there are 10 users IMO.
And according to my Kibana presentation on IIS logs there are actually ~100 linux users in entire country (not counting mobile users on Linux of which there are a lot due to Android). This might be related to concrete gov domain (accounting and VAT) tho.
Its principles 100% for me.
And according to my Kibana presentation on IIS logs there are actually ~100 linux users in entire country (not counting mobile users on Linux of which there are a lot due to Android). This might be related to concrete gov domain (accounting and VAT) tho.
Its principles 100% for me.
Out of interest, which country are you referring to here? GDS in the UK fully support Chrome, Safari, IE and Firefox [1].
[1] https://gds.blog.gov.uk/2012/10/11/what-devices-are-we-suppo...
[1] https://gds.blog.gov.uk/2012/10/11/what-devices-are-we-suppo...
Gov.UK is not really representative. Its outlier.
I was at their Velocity conf presentation and immediately took them as show case on how gov stuff should be done.
I was at their Velocity conf presentation and immediately took them as show case on how gov stuff should be done.
I'm working under the GOV.UK umbrella at the moment. The browser compatibility is mainly achieved by using JavaScript very sparingly and trying not to deviate from the Design System[0]. Accessibility is really important and we can't take sites/apps 'live' without undergoing a full assessment.
[0] https://design-system.service.gov.uk
[0] https://design-system.service.gov.uk
Something like that might be a solution for UI limited sites such as GOV.UK (the reason why I like it, gov sites should look like that, be clean, informative and no distractions).
We use Vue.js for frontends so 'using JavaScript very sparingly' doesn't even compute to me. Switched from Angular and I totally understand what you mean (given its more JS hardcore and more problems).
We use Vue.js for frontends so 'using JavaScript very sparingly' doesn't even compute to me. Switched from Angular and I totally understand what you mean (given its more JS hardcore and more problems).
Yeah, we've got more than enough history to look at to draw conclusions from re: "web" and "internet" software/services.
Any new projects should have a "migration" or "upgrade" metric associated - how long will it take to upgrade to the next major version of the employed platform? how long will it take to migrate to a different platform? no doubt there are not always simple answers, but it's something which needs to at least be considered. And there are sometimes really "single source" options with no viable competition, but those are possibly more rare than we'd think, and even if not, the risk needs to be called out even more in those project/contracts then.
Any new projects should have a "migration" or "upgrade" metric associated - how long will it take to upgrade to the next major version of the employed platform? how long will it take to migrate to a different platform? no doubt there are not always simple answers, but it's something which needs to at least be considered. And there are sometimes really "single source" options with no viable competition, but those are possibly more rare than we'd think, and even if not, the risk needs to be called out even more in those project/contracts then.
I called tech support for Ameren UE the other day to complain that their payment page is down. The rep asked me why I wasn't using IE. I said the page had worked for at least six months in chrome, and she got mad at me. So, a regression to IE-only, at this modern date. Monopolies are at least as pathetic as government agencies.
"IE was replaced by Microsoft nearly 6 years ago, and doesn't meet current security requirements."
This could be said about literally any technology, like HTML 2.0, tn3270, floppy disks, or fax machines. Thankfully, we don't push for all new PCs to have built-in floppy drives and fax modems, just because there's still some legacy users. And specialty software is even easier to install in a computer than hardware interfaces.
...another point in the favor of legally forcing governments and public institutions to use open-source software and open data formats.
This should be as plain and simple as stating that "if there exists a fully functional open-source technology that satisfies a public institution's need, the institution should be forced to use such technology instead of any proprietary alternative, or to demand it's contractors to develop a custom open-source solution, even if it's more expensive then a proprietary alternative" (with some "sane" limit like it can be "up to but not more than 5x as expensive" - there's befits to society from funding "a bit" of os dev from public funds, but not over do it...).
"Software capitalism" and public infrastructure don't mix well. And private companies can still make tons of money developing, customizing/extending and supporting open-source software for use by gov clients.
But if it's paid from people's taxes, it should only be open-source!
This should be as plain and simple as stating that "if there exists a fully functional open-source technology that satisfies a public institution's need, the institution should be forced to use such technology instead of any proprietary alternative, or to demand it's contractors to develop a custom open-source solution, even if it's more expensive then a proprietary alternative" (with some "sane" limit like it can be "up to but not more than 5x as expensive" - there's befits to society from funding "a bit" of os dev from public funds, but not over do it...).
"Software capitalism" and public infrastructure don't mix well. And private companies can still make tons of money developing, customizing/extending and supporting open-source software for use by gov clients.
But if it's paid from people's taxes, it should only be open-source!
I wouldn't go that far to recommend non custom gov software to be open source (mainly because its far less realistic), but custom should be mandatory. There are very few countries that request that now AFAIK - Romania I think on state level, and many on city/region level.
Yes, use oracle junk instead of postgre if you want, but software MUST BE open source, its only logical given that is financed by the budget and analyzed, tested and influenced by the gov people. Otherwise, you have private companies that get rich on taxpayer money, and not only that, but monopoly, zero reuse between regional local govs, worst quality and security etc.
You wouldn't believe the resistance I have, trying to introduce this in my country.
Yes, use oracle junk instead of postgre if you want, but software MUST BE open source, its only logical given that is financed by the budget and analyzed, tested and influenced by the gov people. Otherwise, you have private companies that get rich on taxpayer money, and not only that, but monopoly, zero reuse between regional local govs, worst quality and security etc.
You wouldn't believe the resistance I have, trying to introduce this in my country.
How do you solve the issue of a tech-illiterate government throwing bundles of cash at the first company that sets the most unrealistic expectation at a cost that still seems 'valid'?
Half the stuff a government has contracted out for mils or bils could have been mostly implemented by small shops charging a few hundred K tops.
Unless you still believe a glorified CMS/ERP takes billions to write.
Half the stuff a government has contracted out for mils or bils could have been mostly implemented by small shops charging a few hundred K tops.
Unless you still believe a glorified CMS/ERP takes billions to write.
It can be solved. Gov tech people could be excluded from the laws dictating gov salaries. They must have concurrent salary.
Given that, most would stay in gov I think - the domain is fantastic for serious engineers - entire country of clients, usually all domestic companies or people must be involved, most services should work 24/7, have zero downtime etc. Its as hard as it can get without being at Google and Facebook IMO.
There are other ideas to solve this problem too, but let me not digress here.
Given that, most would stay in gov I think - the domain is fantastic for serious engineers - entire country of clients, usually all domestic companies or people must be involved, most services should work 24/7, have zero downtime etc. Its as hard as it can get without being at Google and Facebook IMO.
There are other ideas to solve this problem too, but let me not digress here.
I agree.. the issue tends to come down to...
CITY: Hey, we paid for this, but these other cities using it aren't funding (chipping in) for further development...
CITY: Hey, we paid for this, but these other cities using it aren't funding (chipping in) for further development...
I'm concerned this will actually discourage companies from updating to move away from IE11. It's a lot easier to install a new browser than it is to actually update whatever is running in it.
I'm thinking that's their problem (and Microsoft's opportunity). As long as public websites don't see traffic in IE11 mode, it doesn't affect other web developers. Hopefully.
If it supports Java Applets, I'll do a little dance.
We have to keep supporting IE11 because Java Applets continue to be used for intranet corporate and government stuff. No other browser officially supports them except IE11.
We have to keep supporting IE11 because Java Applets continue to be used for intranet corporate and government stuff. No other browser officially supports them except IE11.
Will IE mode be available on the other platforms? OSX?
Testing IE on non-windows devices is a pain in the unmentionables, maybe this can make it easier.
Pretty sure this will be a Windows only feature... the IE Active X (COM) engine is already running on windows, this is just a relatively small feature that uses it.
What will happen to the embedded webbrowser control? Will it continue to be IE, will it be Chromium or will it disappear from Windows?
I'm really confused by the fact that both IE and Edge exist. It seems so contrary to the move towards convergence (having Xbox on Windows, Linux kernel on Windows, Windows on ARM...). Why the need for two brands?
I'm hoping this means they are going to strip IE from Windows entirely now.
Pretty sure they can't because Trident is still being used in rendering a lot of stuff inside Windows, not mention the 3rd-party programs
We migrated from the age of IE shells (2000s) to the age of Blink shells...
Will "IE Mode" support "Compatibility View"?
Sounds like a security nightmare. I assume IE mode is vulnerable to XSS attacks that the normal Chromium mode protects against. So a user might be duped into thinking they are safe when they visit a random site that forces IE mode. Because it's "totally seamless" they won't notice. Better yet, it only affects business users, the prime target for XSS.