Microsoft Considering Rebranding Internet Explorer

CommanderFrank

CommanderFrank

Cat Can't Scratch It
Joined
May 9, 2000
Messages
75,399
What’s in a name anywho? A rose is a rose and all that, but it still hasn’t daunted the intrepid Microsoft team into looking into the possibility of rebranding Internet Explorer to something more warm and fuzzy. How about Netscape? :D

What is surprising is that the debate is still a fresh one. When quizzed, Sampson said, "The discussion I recall seeing was a very recent one (just a few weeks ago). Who knows what the future holds".
Click to expand...
 
hmm IE11 is actually pretty good, IE has come a long way thanks to all the alternative browsers.
 
I do hope they do. I'm tired of asking people to open (Windows) Explorer and them opening Internet Explorer.
 
Microsoft should probably just rebrand Microsoft at this point.
 
"Microsoft Blisters"


That way it reminds you of all the protections you need.
 
Internet Explorer's problem is that when Microsoft won the browser wars they kinda just rolled over and gave up on improving their web browser, much like how they gave up on Windows Mobile. Then suddenly out of nowhere FireFox appeared, with less viruses and more control over the internet. Then a few years later Chrome appears. IE evolved as fast as the Tasmanian tiger, but oddly it still lives. I guess that's what you get for included it with the most popular OS on earth.

Microsoft doesn't improve things as fast as their competitors, and changing the name won't change that. Look what happened with Windows Mobile, which was technically a smart phone OS but suddenly Apple comes out of nowhere with actual modern improvements. Very little has changed with that OS from the late 90's.

While IE isn't a bad web browser today, FireFox and Chrome has too many good points over IE. For one I can use them on Linux, Android, iOS, and basically anything else that isn't made by Microsoft. IE though is still limited to Windows only. To be honest I swap OS's faster than I swap my breakfast cereal brand. There's no good reason to stick with IE unless you work for Microsoft, at which point you're essentially paid to use it, which does justify using it.
 
The reason IE has a bad reputation is because for the longest time it was a horrible browser. Changing the name won't change anything. If they continue making improvements, people will eventually get over the past.

I've already started pushing using IE 11 more at work because it's easier to maintain, configure, and upgrade due to being integrated with Windows. There are still some websites I visit that use scripting that brings even IE11 down, but otherwise it's gotten a lot better over the past few years.
 
There are pretty good reasons to rebrand. One is that a lot of websites don't do feature detection properly and go "Internet Explorer client? Deploy IE8 hack mode!" It's worse for IE mobile, because for the same reason sites will serve it crappy desktop experiences.
 
Internet Explorer may not have been popular among customers, but it has solid support from business. I remember when MS changed MSN search to Bing. It didn't change the market share of the search engine.
 
Ashbringer said:
While IE isn't a bad web browser today, FireFox and Chrome has too many good points over IE. For one I can use them on Linux, Android, iOS, and basically anything else that isn't made by Microsoft. IE though is still limited to Windows only.
Click to expand...

IE being Windows only kind of makes sense from Microsoft's perspective as a way to support Windows specific features that other browsers, being cross platform, aren't as concerned with. IE is still the only solid touch capable browser for Windows, though FF and Chrome have improved in that area.
 
As long as it doesn't have the old talking papers clip :)

I tend to stay away from IE myself I guess.
 
They're rebranding everything these days. How about you just make it "Explorer". It's hip, still recognizable, and won't take much time.
 
heatlesssun said:
IE being Windows only kind of makes sense from Microsoft's perspective as a way to support Windows specific features that other browsers, being cross platform, aren't as concerned with. IE is still the only solid touch capable browser for Windows, though FF and Chrome have improved in that area.
Click to expand...

Really? I wouldn't know about that since Windows 8 would probably be required for touch screens to work properly. Also my Android devices with FireFox seem to work just fine. Maybe the problem was Windows 8?
 
They can name it whatever they want, but I will know the dirty truth.
 
Will the same Committee of Awkwardly Naming Things who came up with the name "Windows 8.1 Update 1" be the ones responsible for renaming Internet Explorer? If so, I imagine they might come up with something like OpenCloud Expeditioneer.
 
This is just like the Metro and Surface RT renaming nonsense. They're just trying to fool consumers who don't like their products; it didn't work before and it won't work now.
 
Yeah IE is a better browser then Chrome these days. Personalty I use firefox, much better memory management.
 
How about...

Professional Internet Exploiter (PIE)?

gatespie.gif


Regardless of what they change the name to I'm not reliving the open door to drive-by malware.
 
BryanSTG said:
This is just like the Metro and Surface RT renaming nonsense. They're just trying to fool consumers who don't like their products; it didn't work before and it won't work now.
Click to expand...

Funny you should say that, but did you know that Windows 7 is really just Vista with a different name? Sad truth is it worked. Even though informed tech people know the truth, it didn't stop people from buying it in troves. As long as you have Vista with the latest service pack, it's technically Windows 7.

In other news the Radeon R7 cards are really just renamed HD 7000 cards. They keep doing it because it's effective at getting you to buy the product.
 
leaving its name as it is, is fine with me, maybe just shorten it to "Explorer" as one member mentioned. it really has improved a lot IMHO in ie11.
 
It's trash until they uncouple it from the OS. Removing or installing a new version of IE is always 20x the pain in the ass of any other popular browser. People hate that shit, but they like things like Chrome that happily updates itself without any concerns.
 
Ashbringer said:
Really? I wouldn't know about that since Windows 8 would probably be required for touch screens to work properly. Also my Android devices with FireFox seem to work just fine. Maybe the problem was Windows 8?
Click to expand...

A native web browser for Windows 8 that supports both the desktop and modern environment is considerably more complex than a browser for Android. Does FF for Android support Flash, keyboard and mouse, touch and desktop extensions?

Ashbringer said:
Funny you should say that, but did you know that Windows 7 is really just Vista with a different name? Sad truth is it worked. Even though informed tech people know the truth, it didn't stop people from buying it in troves. As long as you have Vista with the latest service pack, it's technically Windows 7.
Click to expand...

So usual complaint that many make of a Windows OS that doesn't sell a bazillion copies is that Microsoft doesn't listen. Ok, fair enough. Does listening mean that you have to scrap everything and completely do everything over and make everything totally different? Or can you listen by simply addressing the weak spots in a product while keeping its core? Indeed, we've found out from the Windows 8 debate that radical change isn't all that welcome and that subtle, optional changes are what a lot of Windows users have asked for when it comes to Windows 8.

Basically, you're slamming Microsoft for doing EXACTLY what people are asking of it to do regarding Windows.
 
Flyboat said:
Internet Explorer may not have been popular among customers, but it has solid support from business.
Click to expand...

"Solid support from business" is a bit disingenuous since business only uses it because its built into Windows, and having to install Firefox or Chrome would be another thing to have to maintain. Its like saying calc.exe has "solid support" from business. They tolerate because its there and its simpler.
 
[UPS] Sorce;1041029854 said:
I think he's refering to the fact that Win7 is Kernel v6.1 to Vista's 6.0.
Click to expand...
Even if he is using an inappropriately narrow analysis, 6.0 != 6.1, and therefore his statement would still be incorrect.
 
heatlesssun said:
IE being Windows only kind of makes sense from Microsoft's perspective as a way to support Windows specific features that other browsers, being cross platform, aren't as concerned with. IE is still the only solid touch capable browser for Windows, though FF and Chrome have improved in that area.
Click to expand...
It was necessary to attempt to force standards onto the internet to require windows like ActiveX. And implementations just different enough to break competing browsers. Then throw a ton of money and free tools at people to adopt those broken standard and proprietary windows only widgets.

Microsoft did a good job of fucking up the web standards to the point only 'Money to burn' Google could come up with web based, OS agnostic, office suite with Google Docs. something that should have happened 10 years ago from dozen different services.
 
jpm100 said:
It was necessary to attempt to force standards onto the internet to require windows like ActiveX. And implementations just different enough to break competing browsers. Then throw a ton of money and free tools at people to adopt those broken standard and proprietary windows only widgets.

Microsoft did a good job of fucking up the web standards to the point only 'Money to burn' Google could come up with web based, OS agnostic, office suite with Google Docs. something that should have happened 10 years ago from dozen different services.
Click to expand...

No google only came up with that when they had no OS its just basic moves, pretend to be about cross platform. see if it stays that way if google takes over the OS game. It wont. Look at how they have pushed chrome, google plus, etc.... With the EXACT same tactics that MS did with IE and their products. Google is exactly the same as MS, they are starting to break compatibility too. Remember when google talk was based on jabber, an open standard.
 
rudy said:
No google only came up with that when they had no OS its just basic moves, pretend to be about cross platform. see if it stays that way if google takes over the OS game. It wont. Look at how they have pushed chrome, google plus, etc.... With the EXACT same tactics that MS did with IE and their products. Google is exactly the same as MS, they are starting to break compatibility too. Remember when google talk was based on jabber, an open standard.
Click to expand...

Google has been doing a hell of a job wrecking Android as well. Remember when when Android could us SD cards and relied Webkit?
 
Microsoft is still woefully behind on HTML5 support even in IE11. Seriously, what is the difficulty?
 
Eisenblut said:
Microsoft is still woefully behind on HTML5 support even in IE11. Seriously, what is the difficulty?
Click to expand...

I agree with this and other issues, however they are ahead on others. For a desktop browser they implemented word autocomplete faster than the others, do others even have it yet? If MS wants to make IE better then need to just step up the game people will not waste time switching browsers if the default one works with little to no problems. Rebranding will do nothing but cause massive confusion.
 
Eisenblut said:
Microsoft is still woefully behind on HTML5 support even in IE11. Seriously, what is the difficulty?
Click to expand...

As usual, Microsoft was late to the party at the very beginning, and Microsoft waged a big battle with Google over the video standards in HTML5.

I want to think that Microsoft's reluctance for HTML5 is tied in with the whole OOXML vs ODF battle, but I can't quite draw the pieces together. Maybe it just shows that Microsoft has a bad habit of polluting standards to bolster their in-house products.

In summary, I think Microsoft is being slow on HTML5 because they weren't able to coerce... oops, I mean it's not going the way they wanted it to.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top